In
spite of very little contact between the West and the East in early human
history both regions developed similar spiritual ideals. One of those spiritual
ideals which is found in all groups of people is the concept of pride or the
‘Ego’. Some practices say it is necessary in order to succeed spiritually,
while others say it should be overcome. The five most populous religious groups
in the modern world[1]
say the ‘Ego’ should be overcome. Out of those five religions Islam and Judaism
have a legalistic path for overcoming the ‘Ego’. What is of interest in this
commentary is of the spiritually focused methods. Whether the goal is to be one
with a deity, the universe or to free one self from the cycle of life; it is
always recommended that you lose the ‘Ego’. For Christians it is the concept of
kenosis. The Hindus call their doctrine to deal with the ‘Ego’ atman. The
Buddhists say it is not atman but anatman. How did these major faiths develop
mystic beliefs that are so similar? These religions having such similar
processes might lead one to ask why are their goals so drastically different?
It is generally considered odd when similar processes are intended to create
dramatically different results. Perhaps there is a sub-goal that is the same
for these religions that should be
discussed. Then we may have a basis for discussing why their goals are so
different.
Kenosis
Kenosis[2]
is a Pauline doctrine derived from Paul’s
Epistle to the Phillipians 2:3-8. In the New International Version it reads
as follows:
Philippians 2:3-8 (New International
Version) 3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in
humility value others above yourselves, 4 not looking to your own interests but
each of you to the interests of the others. 5 In your relationships with one
another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus: 6 Who, being in very nature
God, did not consider equality with God something to be used to his own advantage;
7 rather, he made himself nothing by taking the very nature of a servant, being
made in human likeness. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, he humbled
himself by becoming obedient to death—even death on a cross!
This passage tells us that Jesus emptied
himself of his divine being and made himself a servant. Now the New Testament
Canon claims that the salvation that Christians seek is a gift of grace and
that there is no way of earning it.[3]
In this passage in Phillipians Paul
offers up an extra duty which is to mimic Jesus. But if the end goal of
Christianity cannot be earned but is a gift of grace then why should there be
any concern about one emptying themselves of the ‘Ego’? St. Augustine makes a
very astute observation that may answer this question. In St. Augustine’s Tractatus in Evangelium Ioannis he
speaks of a duality of personality in the spiritual struggle of the Christian.
While both are in receipt of salvation one is more aware of the blessing that
this salvation brings and dwells in that goodness. The other personality fights
the truth it knows and rationalizes its resistance to that final
transformation. St. Augustine observes the two results of one who continues to
retain their ‘Ego’ and one who embraces selflessness:
... the one therefore
is good - yet still in miseries, the other is better - and in Blessedness(sic).[4]
So while the Christian may not be
threatened with punishment after accepting the gift of grace he may not receive
a reward while maintaining his ‘Ego’. The Christian who is able to empty
themselves of the ‘Ego’ is free from punishment and is able to enter into joy.
Atman
Atman
is the concept of the soul or true self in Hinduism. Each individual’s Atman is
a part of ADHYATMAN who is better known as Brahma. Brahma is the eternal
existence that is. We are trapped here in this illusory world as jivas who are
distracted and unaware of our Atman. For the Hindu it is important to let go of
the illusory world and grasp hold of their Atman and be released from the cycle
of Samsara. In the section of the Baghavad-Gita titled the Aksharaparabrahmayog[5] it says:
I BRAHMA am! the
One Eternal GOD, and ADHYATMAN is My Being’s name, The Soul of Souls!.....
speaking with thee in this body here-- Am, thou embodied one! (for all the shrines
Flame unto Me!) And, at the hour of death, He that hath meditated Me alone, In
putting off his flesh, comes forth to Me, Enters into My Being-- doubt thou
not! But, if he meditated otherwise At hour of death, in putting off the flesh,
He goes to what he looked for, Kunti’s Son![6] Because the
Soul is fashioned to its like.[7]
The jiva is the physical body which
contains Atman while a person is alive on this Earth. In the aforementioned
portion of the Baghavad-Gita the
bodies are revealed as shrines for the Atman which yearns to be one with
Brahma. Hinduism seeks to abolish the illusion or exterior self and become more
aware of the interior self. Our earlier scripture verifies this. When we
meditate on the false self we are enslaved to Samsara. Kunti’s son Karna chose
to standby his belief in his own honor even when it meant maintaining loyalty
to an evil man. He did all this in spite of knowing the truth about his divine
origins. Essentially Karna denied his Atman by focusing importance on his
‘Ego’. Reflection and meditation on Atman allows the Hindu to achieve Moksha.[8]
Anatman
Guatama
Buddha taught that all things in this world were impermanent and that anything
that is impermanent causes suffering. In the Pāli Canon[9]
Samyutta Nikāya Buddha teaches that we are made up of ‘Five Aggregates’[10]
that are wrapped in a web of three delusions for the ignorant. These three
delusions say that the aggregates are permanent, a source of happiness, and are
the self. The wisdom that disproves the delusions can be found in the concepts
of impermanence, suffering, and non-self.[11] This
resulting wisdom allows us to know that there is no true self or anatman.
Buddha explains anatman in this way:
“Monks, form is
nonself. For if, monks, form were self, this form would not lead to affliction,
and it would be possible to determine form: ‘Let my form be thus; let my form
not be thus.’ But because form is nonself, form leads to affliction, and it is
not possible to determine form: ‘Let my form be thus; let my form not be
thus.’”[12]
For the Buddhist the ‘Ego’ is false and
illusory. Out of ignorance people embrace the false ‘Ego’ and believe that they have a source of
control in their life by doing so. The Buddha reveals the key truth in that no
one would cause themselves affliction and since our ‘Ego’ causes affliction it
cannot be beneficial or true.
Where
Spiritual Traditions Unite
Each
explanation is crafted in a way that is unique from all the others, but the
goal is eerily the same. All spiritual practices seek an emptiness that is a
relief from suffering. Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism all think that the
‘Ego’ causes that suffering. Each tradition sees this sub-goal as a
pre-requisite to their primary goal. Many of the processes for killing the
‘Ego’ have striking similarities. If the Christian Beattitudes[13]
and Pauline Doctrine of Love[14]
were put together and streamlined in one format they just might look like the
Buddha’s Eightfold Path.[15]
The Hindu tradition has its moral path set in the idea of Karma which comes in
both negative and positive forms. This of course implies a moral set of
behaviors is needed to travel on the path to reach enlightenment. While the
Hindu tradition for killing the ‘Ego’ is not as alike as the Buddhist and
Christian traditions it does have an aspect that is very like the Christian
tradition that you won’t find in traditional Buddhism. This would be Bakhti
which is the most popular form of practice in Hinduism. Bakhti is the path of
devotion to a deity. By devoting oneself to a deity they can deny the ‘Ego’ by
placing all energy into their devotion. Christianity also presumes that if you
should be in constant devotion to God then you would become selfless and think
on what God wills. While Christianity is in some agreement with both Hinduism
and Buddhism on what is appropriate when trying to kill the ‘Ego’ we see that
there is some disparaging points between Buddhism and Hinduism. It would make
sense to look at those differing points in this way. Christianity is rooted in
Judaism which is a faith that has a very legalistic approach. Christianity on
the other hand has a more redemptive quality. This same aspect can be seen in
the parent Hindu tradition in comparison to the newer Buddhist tradition. Newer
forms must have fundamental differences in the core doctrine in order to have a
unique space of their own.
Conclusion
So
what does this tell us about spirituality? Each of the spiritual traditions
discussed has a different final goal, however, one of the pivotal sub-goals is
the same. We could derive this point from it: If this is something that all
these faiths agree on then this must have a high likelihood of truth behind it.
If Christianity, Hinduism, and Buddhism believe that killing the ‘Ego’ is a
necessary step to reaching their ultimate goal then surely it is a universal
truth or something at least very trustworthy. The higher power of the universe
has revealed this truth to everyone. What we have to decide at this point is
not whether we should kill the ‘Ego’ but the purpose in killing the ‘Ego’. Whose
redemption is the true redemption?
[1]
Some organizations may list Non-Religious, Atheist, or varying sects in their
listings making this point debatable depending on who your source is.
[2]
kenosis: κένωσις Greek, translates as emptiness
[3]
Romans 3:23-24, 11:6 just to name a few verses pertinent on the subject.
[4]
Thomas Aquinas. On Prayer and the
Contemplative Life. Edited by McNabb Vincent R. & T. Washbourne, LTD.:
London, 1914. p. 178.
[5]
The Book of Religion by Devotion to the One Supreme God
[6]
Refers to Kunti’s first son Karna who is abandoned, is cursed and then is
killed for fighting against his brothers in the Kurukshetra War.
[7]
Arnold Edwin. Baghavad-Gita. Hanson
& Comba Ltd.: New York, 1900. p. 48.
[8]
Moksha is the release from the cycle of reincarnation whereby the individual
Atman is joined with Brahma
[9]
Earliest written documents of the Buddha’s teachings
[10]
form, feeling, perception, volitional formations, consciousness
[11]
Bhikku Bodhi. In the Buddha’s Words.
Wisdom Publications: Boston, 2005. p. 321.
[12]
Bhikku Bodhi, p. 355.
[13]
Matthew 5:3-12
[14]
1 Corinthians 13
[15]
Right View, Intention, Speech, Action, Livelihood, Effort, Mindfulness,
Concentration
Cited Sources
Livingston James c.. Anatomy of the Sacred. Pearson Prentice Hall: New Jersey, 2009.
Kornfield Jack, Goldstein Joseph. Seeking the Heart of Wisdom. Shambhala:
London, 2001.
Bodhi Bhikku. In the Buddha’s Words. Wisdom Publications: Boston, 2005.
Arnold Edwin. Baghavad - Gita. Hanson & Comba Ltd.: New York, 1900.
Zondervan NIV Study Bible. Fully
rev. ed. Kenneth L. Barker, gen. ed. Grand Rapids, MI:
Zondervan, 2002.
