Last week I wrote about the First Question of the Simple Path.

To recap, the first question is “What do you believe is the truth of this life?”

To provide some preliminary guidance, I think there are six general views a person can offer as a response to this question. If you think there are other possible answers please send them along in a comment.

1) I am sure God exists.

2) I am not sure God exists but I believe God, or “something” or “universal energy”, may exist. And, I am willing to see if I can find a way to believe for sure some “higher power” is the foundation of all life including my personal life.

3) I am sure God does not exist.

4) I am not sure that there is no God or “universal energy”,  but I am willing to see if I can find a way to commit to a truly atheistic view that there is no such thing as God or “universal energy.”

5) I am quite confused about the question and I am not sure what to believe about God or atheism, or universal life. What I am willing to do is to make careful search if I can get a few pointers as to where and how to look and assuming no one is trying to tell me what I “should” believe.

6) I don’t think about such questions, and I don’t care what the answer is one way or the other. If this last answer is your answer there is no need for you to give any further thought to this blog or my approach to meditation. No doubt there are other ways you prefer to spend your time and I wish you all the best with your activities and personal goals.

If however, the answer you come up with to the question “What do you believe is the truth of this life?” is one of the first five answers listed above then read on.

Regardless of which of the first five answers you feel best describes your current views, your answer is where you are now and is your starting place of the Simple Path. What you can be sure of is that at no time on the Simple Path will I say or imply that you are supposed to come up with this or that answer to the question. The goal is not to see if you can accept some official doctrine. The first goal is to help you think carefully about what you do believe and to help you gently but firmly set aside any beliefs or dogmas that you either do not understand or feel are simply not true.

The second goal is to help you explore the essential questions and practices of meditation in a clear and realistic way without a lot of extreme views, overly complex ideas, or vague and sugary language.

As you find realistic ways to work with anger, fear, guilt, excessive desire, vanity, and illusion your mind will settle into deeper and deeper states of peace in meditation.

As this happens these experiences of peace will give rise to intuitions during meditation or when you have returned to the active hours of your life. These experiences and intuitions will help you proceed to whatever is the next level of understanding and peace available to you.

So please allow me to ask again?

“What do you believe is the truth of this life?”

Please see the free workshop “What do I believe” on this web site. There is one version for those who believe or are trying to believe, one version for atheists or those trying to become atheists, and those who are not sure one way or the other.

Let me know what you are looking for.

Let me know what you have found.

Will Raymond  Author of “The Simple Path of Holiness” Host of MeditationPractice.com

will@meditationpractice.com    774-232-0884

 (Thanks again to Sister Anonymous who patiently does my proof reading for me. I often get a draft posted before she gets to it, so any mistakes are mine.)

Those who are familiar with my writing know I am just as glad to teach meditation to people who believe in God, those who do not, and those who are just plain confused.

I remain committed to this approach to teaching meditation for several reasons.

The first is, no one can prove through reason or science that God does exist or that God does not exist. So why should a meditation teacher proceed as though they somehow know for sure one way or the other?

Another reason I work with people of all manners of belief is this:

It is better to help a person find out what they do believe rather than to try to convince them what they should believe or that they should agree with what you believe.

It always takes a while, but if you keep asking someone what they do believe is the truth of this life, you will help them discover some very important things about themselves. Some will realize their faith in God is nowhere near as certain as they first said it was. Some will realize they really don’t know what to believe. Others will tell you they no longer believe in “The Old Man in the sky with a beard”, but neither are they atheists either. This helps them discern what they do not believe so they can clear the ground to discover what it is they do believe. Some will tell you they are atheists or agnostics but upon further questioning you will often find they are no more certain about this than those who say they believe in God.

Many will tell you they feel God exists but because of their sins they feel God wants nothing to do with them. Many others will tell you of complex imagery they have of Jesus or Buddha, Allah or Krishna or some other manifestation of God or some great teacher. Another popular response is that many people will tell you about Reincarnation and how the soul decided or was directed to their present life and path. Many will talk of heaven and hell, many will go into vivid images of purgatory, or that life is a class room where our trials are the teachers presenting us with critical lessons we need to learn in this life before we can go on to some other more exalted realm or heaven. For others they do not want to use the “God” word but prefer “energy” or “universal spirit” to describe their “higher power”.

Many will say there is no God and that once you are dead, that is it. They will say the universe is some big place without any reason or purpose for existing and that our life in suburbia or some academic sinscure or lab is all we really have to work with.

What is important is to give people the freedom to discover what it is they do believe without telling them what they are supposed to believe is true. Once a person has articulated either their faith or their doubts, their answers or their questions, the images of angels or demons they have, that God exists or does not exist, then they are primed for further study. They can reflect on their beliefs as they turn to more basic issues of working with anger, guilt, fear, excessive desire, or vanity and see how to work with these issues in the context of the primary truths or doubts they have.

I am not saying all paths are true. I am saying that the first effort, other than to bind up bleeding wounds or to feed the starving, is to help a person discover what path they are on and to help them to more clearly describe the destination they hope to reach.

What do you believe is the truth of this life? If you believe in God, then how do you describe the way God created the universe? If you are a total atheist then how do you describe who or what created the material that exploded in the “Big Bang?”

Checkout the free workshop on this web site “What Do I Believe”

Or, send in a comment. Tell me the story of your beliefs. Tell me this, “What are you looking for?” “How can we create a more peaceful and just world?”

Will

Author of “The Simple Path of Holiness” host of MeditationPractice.com

774-232-0884   will@meditationpractice.com

In my workshop at Central Mass Yoga yesterday I discussed some of the basic choices new meditation students make as they begin their meditation practice.

One of those choices is to decide what one will use as the focus of their attention during meditation. Does one prefer to focus on the breath as it passes in and out of the body? Or does one prefer a sacred word or phrase that is simple yet which is especially poignant and relevant to the journey they are on.

For those who feel a sacred word or phrase is better for them the question arises, “What word or phrase shall I choose and how will I decide?” As one woman noted, in TM many years ago she was given a mantra, but it really did not suit her that well.

But in the tradition of the Simple Path, the teacher does not give someone a mantra. Rather the teacher helps a person search in a creative way for the mantra that is best for them.

The decision of what mantra to use does not need to be made quickly but it is good to settle on a choice when one feels comfortable doing so. While it is recommended one not move from mantra to mantra once one has made their initial choice, it certainly is OK to experiment and reflect on different mantras as one narrows in on a choice that works.

For those who believe God exists or may exist, here are some choices:

In the Sufi tradition of the Muslim faith there is a practice called “Remembering the Names of God”. Googling this search term or “The 99 names of God” will bring up a lot of references. The great strength of this tradition is that these names are very general as Muslins tend to not draw upon specific images when thinking of divine life.

In the Roman Catholic Carmelite tradition a good choice is to choose a phrase from the Lord’s Prayer that is meaningful to you or to simply repeat the Lord’s Prayer very slowly silently within yourself. Another Catholic Mantra from the ancient Eastern Mediterranean is to simple recite “Al-le” on the in breath and “lu-ia” on the out breath as a quiet reverent expression of praise and devotional love. One that came to me is “God (or O Holy Spirit) draw me ever closer unto you.”

From the Hindu tradition there is the sacred syllable “Aum.” Another popular mantra is “Om Namaha Shivaya” translated as “Adoration to Siva.”

From the Navajo tradition “Beauty all around me” or “I walk in beauty.”

A popular mantra from Tibetan Buddhism is “Om Mani Padme OM” related to a practice of deep compassion for all life.

If you search the web for Popular Mantras or Christian or Hindu or New Age Mantras and similar terms you will find a lot of information.

For atheists it probably is best to choose the breath as a mantra as any word or phrase may be too closely tied to a God centered view of life. But from the non-theistic Vipassana Buddhist tradition there is the mantra “Buddho” on the in breath and “Buddho” on the out breath. But that may smack too much of avatar worship for some atheists.

Here are some other choices I thought may help atheists develop their own mantra.

“Life, love, and beauty” or “May all beings be free” or “May I be true to my search.”

Taking the time to think carefully about what you believe, and creatively reflecting on the images or words that come to mind when you think of your beliefs is more difficult and time consuming that simply accepting a mantra someone gives you. But as we learn again and again, it is best to help people search for truth in ways that allow them to embrace the more difficult work of being free to choose.

Ask others, do your own research, and reflect quietly on the important moments of your life when it felt as though you have had a deeply meaningful experience of what is the truth of this life.

Then, over time, let your mantra come to you.

If you find a traditional mantra that works for you, or come up with your own creative mantra as a believer, or as a non-believer, please write in a comment and share it with the rest of us. Your choice may be of great help to others walking a similar path.

Please feel free to call or email me. I am glad to help where I can.

Peace,

Will Raymond Author of “The Simple Path of Holiness” host of MeditationPractice.com

774-232-0884  will@meditationpractice.com

Last week I wrote about two of the general themes of my meditation workshop at Central Mass Yoga, March 1st at 10am to noon at 45 Sterling Street West Boylston, MA 01583 (2nd floor).

The title of the workshop is “Seven Questions for Meditation Students.”

Here is another one.

When discussing meditation many people say they meditate while jogging, or gardening or some other solitary endeavor. When people make this comment, I feel they are saying, “So I don’t need to meditate in stillness and silence.”

My response is this. “If this is all you want from meditation then there is no need to sit in stillness and silence the way people do when one usually thinks about meditation.” And, “Certainly anyone who practices meditation in stillness and silence needs to also extend their practice into the active moments of their life.”

But if you are willing to explore the practice of sitting in stillness and silence as another way to experience life, as another way to explore faith and search for truth and insight, as a richer way to give and accept love, as another way to further cultivate the fullness of human potential, then I encourage you do that.

Here are the benefits.

When the body is in motion there is a greater amount of stimulus pouring into the brain and mind than there is when you are still and silent. If you are running or gardening or knitting or reading or baking bread there are the sensory stimuli such as the sights, sounds, and touch sensations arising from your actions. These streams of stimuli are pouring into the brain. All this added activity by definition will noticeably impede the level of interior quiet you will be able to attain when you are in motion and focused on external phenomena as compared to times of real stillness and silence. Furthermore, when meditating while in action one is by definition focusing at least partially on external phenomena. But, when you are sitting still and maintaining sacred silence there are simply less stimuli coming into the brain. This is especially true if you are in a quiet environment and have your eyes closed, or focused on some plain object before you.

Even more importantly, with less stimuli and activity in stillness and silence you can turn your attention from external objects to the interior of your mind and body. You will be able to get a much clearer idea and make far more detailed observations of the general conditions of your mind and body.

When you withdraw your attention from the external to a time of observing your interior experience you have a chance to do something challenging. You can find out what catches up with you when you stop running.

Meditation in stillness and silence is both an opportunity for greater insight and intimacy. It is also a chance, if done well, for a greater confrontation with who you are and what issues are driving any experiences of stress and lack of fulfillment in your life.

Meditation is also a kind of calisthenics for the mind. As you sit in stillness and silence you are literally strengthening your powers of concentration to stay in the moment, moment by moment, for extended periods of time. Strengthening this mindful awareness and ability to see what is happening in “real time” will be of great benefit when you get up from the cushion. You will be able to see more clearly what is happening in every action you take, every thought and emotion you experience, and every decision you are faced with in the active hours of your life. You will be able to remember to remember the need to be more compassionate and patient with yourself. You will be able to remember to remember your commitments to be a better listener and to be more compassionate and patient with others than you sometimes are.

Conversely, as you practice mindful awareness in the active hours of life this will in turn strengthen your ability to be more mindful when you are in stillness and silence. You will begin to see how much of your inner life you have been missing when the mind was more clouded, stressed, and undisciplined. You will be able to see more of the ways you are unintentionally adding to the suffering of your life and you can begin to reduce the amount of your suffering you are causing to yourself and others.

For a well rounded practice both meditation in silence and stillness and the practice of being mindfully aware throughout the active hours of your life are needed.

Each form of practice strengthens the other.

Please let me know your thoughts. All constructive comments will be posted.

Will Raymond Author of “The Simple Path of Holiness” host of MeditationPractice.com

774-232-0884  will@meditationpractice.com

I am grateful that Central Mass Yoga will host one of my meditation workshops March 1st at 10am to noon at 45 Sterling Street West Boylston, MA 01583 (2nd floor).

The title of the workshop is “Seven Questions for Meditation Students.”

One key point of this workshop is to encourage people to be patient as they seek to establish a daily practice of meditation. Given all the work and family responsibilities so many people have, it is genuinely difficult to find time for a daily practice of Yoga or meditation let alone both. Cultivating a sincere desire that one wants to have more time for practice and study is a good beginning. Embracing realistic expectations about how quickly one will actually be able to make the changes that will help them simplify their life will also help. Finding new ways to practice mindful awareness in the midst of family and work life will also help people make the transition to setting up their schedule so they have more time for silent meditation. For those people who already have an established daily practice of meditation, there will be insights offered in the workshop about how to go more deeply into their chosen path.

Another key point of this workshop is to encourage people to reflect with greater care on what they really believe is the truth of this life.

For example: do you have a strong faith that God does exist? Or do you think God exists but are not really sure? Do you have a strong conviction that God does not exist? Or do you think it is likely God does not exist but are not sure? Is it possible that you are quite genuinely confused about what to believe?

Some people have asked why I emphasize these questions as much as I do. It is for this reason. What you believe will determine a great deal about the nature and specific techniques of your meditation practice. If you believe in God and that the goal of prayer and spiritual practice is to attain the fullness of communion with God, your practice will be very different from someone who feels there is no God.

Many people who practice Yoga prefer to not use the “G” word, but think of divine life in more general terms as energy or spirit. The questions I ask are these:”What is the nature of this energy or spirit? Are there any specific images that come to mind when you think of universal life?” Depending on how a person answers these questions I can craft an approach to meditation practice for them. On the other hand if a person perceives God in a specific image such as Jesus, or God the father, or Aphrodite, or Allah, then it is helpful and important to match their practice of meditation with the images, language, and tone of their beliefs. Those who are committed atheists or agnostics will pursue their search for enlightenment in accordance with their core beliefs.

For those who are genuinely confused about what to believe, their practice will proceed by still other means. For example, learning to let genuine confusion be both acceptable and valuable is a technique I wish I had heard about when I was younger.

The beauty of this general method is that it works just as well for believers and non-believers and those who are just plain confused.

The foundation of this method is this. There are essential practices and values one needs to embrace if they wish to attain the deepest degrees of interior peace and wisdom in this life. But these practices and values are general enough they can be adapted to the beliefs and way of life of any decent and sincere person who reflects carefully on the moral compass of their life.

Please call or email me for registration instruction for the March 1st workshop at Central Mass Yoga in West Boylston. Or contact them directly at info@centralmassyoga.com

If you cannot make it this time, then perhaps some other time.

 Will Raymond Author of “the Simple Path of Holiness” host of MeditationPractice.com

774-232-0884   will@meditationpractice.com

Two weeks ago I started a series on the best ideas and primary mistakes of Richard Dawkins.

For those not familiar with his work Richard Dawkins is an English scientist specializing in evolutionary biology. He is also a committed atheist, one of the most high profile and outspoken atheists in the world.

As someone who is committed to the idea that people are free to pursue those beliefs they feel most deeply called to explore and embrace, I have no desire to try to persuade him or any other atheist that they should change their views.

But, (that famous word) while I acknowledge the possibility that atheists are correct, I do believe they may well be wrong. In either case my view is this. To the degree that humans are able to find an answer to this question, I would dearly like to know which of these two views of life is correct. Is there a unifying life and consciousness in the universe that is the foundation of all existence? Or is the universe essentially a dead, lifeless place filled with random explosions, equations, atoms, molecules and various types of radiation?  As Shakespeare put it so well, “…a tale full of sound and fury told by an idiot signifying nothing.”

To Dawkins’ credit, he acknowledges there is no way to prove that God does or does not exist. While he feels he has made the case the God probably does not exist in the way most believers say he does, Dawkins acknowledges the question of whether God exists or not is still an open question worthy of serious reflection.

In that context, let the exploration continue.

Here is one of the primary mistakes I feel scientists like Dawkins are making. First they focus on conservative and mainstream/progressive Christian preachers and their doctrines. Sadly for these preachers and teachers it is fairly easy for Dawkins and his fellow atheists to pick apart their beliefs. While some conservative Christians fully understand how formidable a challenge Evolution and natural selection represents to their creed, unfortunately for them their response of Intelligent Design is so ridiculous they lose all credibility from any but the most ignorant and atavistic members of society. For a critique of Intelligent Design by an evangelical Christian and a leading Scientist please see the work of Frances Collins in “The Language of God.” Chapter Nine.

Mainstream and progressive Catholics and Protestants have yet to fully appreciate how devastating a challenge Evolution and Natural Selection represents to their core belief that a loving God created the earth. One only needs to see the intense conflict between species and within species. Look carefully at the kill or be killed, eat or be eaten struggles played out millions of times every hour on earth as mammals, reptiles, and insects, fight kill and devour weaker beings. Look carefully at the infants born with deadly birth defects that consume their life in blind terror and pain in a few hours or years. Look carefully at the terror of paranoid schizophrenics and other mentally ill individuals as their malfunctioning brain, the result of random mutations in the gene code, leaves them crippled sometimes for life. Look at these phenomena without blinders. You will see why the vast majority of evolutionary scientists reject not only the conservative Christians views but those of progressive Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindu and others who claim a loving God created the earth.

It is not a mark against Dawkins and other atheists that they miss the fact there are a few researchers working independently on the question of whether God exist. The work of such researchers, such as that of mine and others, is still undeveloped and largely unknown. But in this work important questions are being asked and important new ways of searching and measuring are being developed. The most important is this. 

Quite understandably Dawkins and others focus their research on living organisms with simple to ultra-complex biological structures. Looking at the suffering of many of these life forms it is not difficult to conclude there is no loving God creating and directing life on this world. But the mistake they make is to direct their focus only on living organisms and complex molecules. The focus needs to be on the sub-atomic realm that makes up all these molecules and living organisms and the rest of matter and energy as well.

More specifically one focus of research needs to be directed at discerning the nature of the energy that is the motive power of all sub-atomic actual and virtual particles. A second is to further probe the mystery of how mass is created in particles.

Quite understandably our senses and our instincts drive us to observe what we call the people, places, and things of matter. But energy at the sub-atomic level  is the life of all atoms and molecules and therefore the life of all that we call living organisms. This energy that is the foundation of all people, places, and things constitutes a different reference frame from complex molecules.

It is the failure or unwillingness to explore more fully this reference frame, and in particular to explore in what ways the nature of energy may be a form of consciousness or thought, that is the primary mistake of Dawkins and other scientists and non-scientist atheists. Perhaps it is not a mistake as it is something they have overlooked.

In the final analysis I feel the critical mistake of atheists is their tendency to conclude prematurely they are not overlooking anything important.

To put it in the language of empirical scientists, the following is my hypothesis even if I admit I am not at all sure how to test or investigate this hypothesis.

Energy is the true nature of what we call matter. God is the true nature of all energy.  

What we call God is the reality of infinite life somehow conscious of being infinite life however limited terms such as consciousness and life prove to be. We mortals get lost in the illusion of thinking we are separate finite chunks of reality. This is not the case.

As the ego is diffused and deactivated, in healthy ways, it becomes possible to understand there is a much deeper personality and consciousness to life. It becomes possible to experience the life within us that St. Paul alluded to when he wrote, “In whom we live and have our being.”

Of course I could be wrong. The atheists could be right. But I don’t think so.

Let me know your thoughts. All constructive comments will be posted.

Will Raymond Author of “the Simple Path of Holiness” host of MeditationPractice.com

774-232-0884   will@meditationpractice.com

Last week I wrote about Richard Dawkin’s best idea. For those not familiar with his work Richard Dawkins is an English scientist specializing in evolutionary biology. He is also a committed atheist, one of the most high profile and outspoken atheists in the world.

As someone who is committed to the idea that people are free to pursue those beliefs they feel most deeply called to explore and embrace, I have no desire to try to persuade him or any other atheist that they should change their views.

However, to state my strong conviction that atheists are fully entitled to their beliefs does not mean I feel their beliefs are necessarily correct. More importantly I do not feel their beliefs can be called “good science.” The reason I feel their beliefs should not be considered good science can be seen in the response by some atheists and scientists to the following scientific study.

A study was conducted at Duke University over a three year period to see what effect prayer had on the recovery rates of heart patients.

The data from this study showed there was no discernible improvement to groups of heart patients who were prayed for by devout Christians, Muslims and Buddhists as compared to other groups of heart patients that were not prayed for. This highly competent 3 year study was a real blow for those who believe that God hears the intercessory prayers of the faithful. Please see “God: the Failed Hypothesis” by Victor Stenger, page 99-100 for the details.

While various religious and spiritual people have tried and will continue to try to say the study was flawed, a careful review of the facts will show this study was conducted by sincerely religious people, funded by sincerely religious people, and that the pray-ors were well respected people of a wide variety of faiths. Does God somehow need more than that to respond to the prayers of the faithful? Do pray-ors have to be people with some kind of super-duper faith under only the exact perfect conditions to get God’s attentions and for the study to have had different results?

Understandably, folks like Richard Dawkins, and his fellow sympathizer Victor Stenger, pounce on this information to basically say, “See we told you all talk of God and prayer is a bunch of hooey.”

Quite understandably they assume that since prayers of very devout and sincere people did not help people recover from their heart disease at better rates than did those patients who had no prayers they assume the only possible conclusion is that there is no such thing as God.

Certainly the results of this study are very challenging to traditional Christians and other God centered believers who believe that intercessory prayers are effective. In the interest of “good science” it has to be admitted that the conclusions atheists and scientists draw from this study may prove to be accurate assessments that there is no God and faith in the effects of prayer is a significant delusion.

But the reason I believe their conclusions do not qualify as “good science” is there are other interpretations of this study that indicate other lines of inquiry that need to be considered before the conclusions of atheists can be seen as definitive.

It is possible that all the study by Duke University may reveal is that we just do not know as much about the nature of divine life as many think we do. It may be it is only the old descriptions of how God relates to human life that need to be significantly revised rather than that we need to discard the whole idea that God exists.

In short this study may indicate that rather than jump to the conclusion there is no God, we need to be open to the possibility there are different understandings of what God’s nature is and the relationship between God, prayer, and human suffering. We may need to realize that other more effective ways to work with contemplative prayer need to be found as we seek to draw upon God’s life to support the process of healing the sick.

Certainly, the possibility exists that the way we search for “proof” of divine life can be significantly refined. I do not mean to say, as many religious people do, that the scientific method is useless or irrelevant in this search. What I am saying is that it is possible we can find significant expansions or enhancements in both scientific and faith based ways of searching for proof. We may also need to expand the range of what are perceived to be valid forms of proof. And, we may yet find empirical data which is confirmed by repeated experiments that does illustrate God exists and that prayer for others does reliably diminish their suffering.

Atheists and scientists may rightly scoff at this as some form of wishful thinking that there is a different reference frame that would ultimately prove God does exist and that a personal relationship with God is possible after all.

They may be right.

But it is worth remembering two simple facts. The first is this: the scientific method, as we know it now, was only dimly perceived by a few people as recently as seven hundred years ago. Who knows what other methods of human searching and understanding may be possible seven hundred years from now?  Who knows what other forms of “proof” may be found that can justly be deemed as valid?

The second fact is even more compelling. The discovery that there are other galaxies in the universe besides our own Milky Way was not made until 1924. Yes, that is right. The discovery there are at least a hundred billion galaxies in the observable universe is less than 100 years old.

Who knows what other realms and forms of being and existence we may yet discover and what processes we may discern that allow us to make contact with these realms and forms of being? Who knows what other spiritual and scientific discoveries are yet to be made to help people prevent or recover from heart disease?

In short the atheists and scientists are coming to their conclusions while there are still too many legitimate questions. That is why their views are not “good science” however compelling and impressive their credentials and education may be. In short they have the same challenge that most priests and ministers have. Just because they have convinced themselves they are right does not mean they are.

Please let me know your thoughts. All constructive comments will be posted.

Will Raymond   Author of “The Simple Path of Holiness” Host of MeditationPractice.com .

774-232-0884   will@meditationpractice.com

Richard Dawkins is a well known scientist in the field of evolutionary biology. He is a committed atheist and a published author. One of his best known works is “The God Delusion.”

As a scientist he takes particular offense at Christian Fundamentalists who harass and seek to censor scientists who teach evolution in high school. It is easy to understand why his attack on most aspects of religious beliefs are so relentless given the ignorant comments and beliefs of many Christian fundamentalists on the subject of evolution and their attempts to block evolution from being taught in public schools. He sees many Christian Fundamentalists as the mean-spirited bullies they are. Like any good Englishman he knows it is important to stand up to bullies and to take the fight to them and also like any good Englishman he knows how to throw a punch. Unfortunately it is also true that he belittles his cause and displays certain weaknesses of character with an over-fondness of sarcasm and ridicule. Sadly, in his efforts to fight bullies he also reveals that at times he too is a bully. O well- as any serious religious person knows, we all have our faults to work on. Richard Dawkins is no exception to that rule. Certainly neither am I.

Yet as a scientist he candidly admits he cannot prove God does not exist. What he does say is that he can make the case that the likelihood of God existing is very, very small.

In his various comments on the subject he does make one statement that is a very valuable contribution to the dialogue between believers and atheists.

That is his belief that the existence or non-existence of God is a legitimate question for natural science to work with. I paraphrase, and at some point will find the exact quote, “A universe that has an infinite conscious being as the foundation of all existence is a very different universe that does not have an infinite conscious being as the foundation of all existence.” 

I could not agree with him more. I believe the following thought experiment goes to the heart of the matter.

Is the universe dead or alive?

Does the universe exist as a random heap of sub-atomic particles and radiation mixed in with gravity and related forces such as electro-magnetism and the strong and weak nuclear forces?

Or does the universe somehow have an experience of being the universe?

However limited the word consciousness may be, is the universe conscious somehow of being an infinite reality?

It is true we may not be able to answer such questions. Or, if we can find an answer it may be a very long time before a satisfactory answer is found.

What is known is this. We may be able to measure gravity’s effect, but no one really knows what gravity is. Tell me Mr. Dawkins, exactly how is it that all objects in the universe exert a pull on all other objects? Also, we may be able to posit that our present universe began with a “big bang” 13 billion years ago. But can anyone say they can really imagine they understand how 100 Billion galaxies were once compressed into a tiny single spec of existence? Do we really have to endure the obduracy of most physicists who refuse to deal with the unsolved question of where the tiny spec came from?

Can anyone really explain how light can travel hundreds, even thousands, of trillions of miles across the universe?

Can anyone explain how the Higgs field gives particles to mass?

Can anyone listen to the speculations of even the most sober strong theorists without realizing how incredibly far we continue to be from any “Unified Theory of Everything?”

Can anyone even explain something as basic as what is mass?

Mr Dawkins makes the same mistake that most religious fundamentalists make. He and they convince themselves they are right. They convince themselves they know enough to speak with definite answers about the great questions of life even though it is clear that what any of us does not know exceeds what we do know by at least a thousand to one.

Many of the critiques that Mr Dawkins and others make of traditional views about God and human existence will prove to be lasting contributions to human knowledge. But the most important contribution Mr. Dawkins has made is his insistence that the question of whether God exists or not is a legitimate field of inquiry for natural scientists.

I do believe Mr. Dawkins and the vast majority of scientists who are atheists, and those atheists who are not scientists are in for a bit of a surprise.

I believe someday the knowledge that the universe is an infinite and conscious living being will be as common as the fact that the earth is not the center of the universe.

I believe the answer to the great questions of current physics will be only be found by exploring the hypothesis that human consciousness is not the only form of consciousness in the universe.

Look at the night sky sometime when you are far from the cities and towns of the earth.

And ask yourself “Is the universe alive and somehow conscious, or is the universe like some dead lifeless brick?”

I pose this question in the tradition of thought experiments such as Schrodinger’s Cat and Einstein’s musings of what happens to a body if were to approach the speed of light.

If it turns out that the atheists are right, then so be it. If it turns out the spiritualists are right well then…so be that as well. In fact, I believe it will turn out that a revised understanding of God’s nature will prove to be the “Unified Theory of Everything.”

Even if you are not a scientist, there is a way that you can explore this question for yourself. That way it is to learn the skills of offering love to all who live as a centerpiece of your daily life and reflections.

For love shall open the doors to truth.

Let me know what you think.

All constructive comments will be posted.

Will Raymond  

Author of “The Simple Path of Holiness”  & Host of MeditationPractice.com

774-232-0884  will@meditationpractice.com

A general theme of this web site is to support people’s choices as to whether they believe in God or not and to help people realize that if they are not sure what to believe that this is OK and valuable too.

In some ways I have painted myself into a corner with this very open minded approach. I am wary of writing practice tips about God centered meditation for fear a new reader struggling with faith will assume they are supposed to follow this line of practice when they really are not sure what to believe is the truth of this life.

I am wary of writing practice tips about atheist approaches to meditation for fear a new reader will think I personally am committed to saying there is no God.

Neither do I want to write about how people should approach meditation if they are genuinely and quite completely confused about whether God exists or not. My concern is that a new reader might think this perspective is the sole focus of this web site.

Generally, I have tried to work with this dilemma by referencing all three of these beliefs in everything I write. I am reasonably convinced this is not the right way to go either as I have found no way to fully develop any one of these views without it sounding like the view in question is the only one.

Going forward, as soon as time and budget allow, I am going to restructure the home page and supporting articles and workshops. While I will keep the theme of giving people the real freedom to search out their own beliefs, I will create a section for those who believe in God, those who do not, and a section for those not sure what to believe. This way people will be able to focus on any one belief, or bounce back and forth between different sections of the web site as they wish to.

With this as a prelude please allow me to proceed to a few comments for those who either believe in God or are at least willing to try to find out for themselves whether they might yet find a way to believe that God is the foundation of all life.

As most people know, learning to offer love and kindness to all people is a foundation of practice that can be shared by people who believe in God and those who do not. As I have written many times, those people who are still not at a point where they are willing to engage this practice should not force themselves to try to love anyone they are really angry at. For more on this please see the chapter on Affirmation in my book “The Simple Path of Holiness.”

But now I want to write for those who have found a way to be comfortable forgiving all offenses and offering love to all who live.

There is a fork in the road in this practice of offering love to all who live. Those who believe in God can adapt the practice in this way.

After spending a suitable amount of time silently, graciously, and tenderly offering love to the four directions, they can narrow their focus and offer their love to those teachers and saints they are drawn to venerate.

They can further narrow their focus to offering their love silently, graciously, and tenderly to God. It is one thing to pray to God. It is another to praise God should one be moved to do so. It is a slightly different practice to stream love and devotion to God.

Some will find that while doing this practice there is a sensation in the center of their chest where this love is silently arising and offered as a gift.

This love of God awakens communion with God in the silent chambers of the heart. You can call these chambers the secret, hidden chambers of the heart or the secret, hidden depths of the soul as you feel called to do so.

For Catholics and Greek and Russian Orthodox mystics this experience may unfold this way. A general sense, or interior vision, of the glory of Christ may arise in the heart or mind. The subtle yet profound image of the glory of Christ radiant in the center of heaven arising in the center of the heart or mind draws the “gaze of the heart” and holds it there.

Love is given. Love is felt. Love is shared in silent, intimate communion.

For me it is like the light of my heart is touching the light of God. It seems the light of mortal and immortal life and love mingle and intertwine in the round mandala in the hidden chambers of heart. The question of whether this experience is an empirically “real” phenomena or a comforting delusion is a question for another time. What I can tell you is that in the throes of the experience such questions seem to be a bit superfluous.

The giving of love and worship gives way to the single wordless act of being joined in a communion of mutual holding. This communion arises from a deeply held trust, however irrational such trust may seem to be.  This trust awakens revelation and the trust becomes further emboldened by clear confirmation that the old tales of living forever in immortal grace and beauty are actually true, however irrational such a belief may be.

There are deeper states of meditation than these, but I cannot speak to them as I have only read about them. What I am reasonably sure of is that both God centered believers, committed atheists, and even those who are not sure what to believe can attain to experiences of deep communion through a willingness to perfect the purity of the love they offer to all.

Be angry at whoever you are angry at, until you perceive the value of forgiving them.

Wrestle with each and every doubt you have until you perceive the value of taking the reckless and foolish choice of exploring the radical dimensions of living in trust and faith in those mature beliefs you feel called to explore most deeply.

Clear the mind. Open the heart. Let your love stream forth from the unguarded fountain of your heart.

Please let me know your experiences, pleasant or difficult, with communion and the “Prayer of the Heart.”

All constructive comments will be posted.

Will Raymond

Author of “The Simple Path of Holiness” Host of www.MeditationPractice.com.  will@meditationpractice.com    1-774-232-0884

Over Christmas and New Years I spent ten days in a renovated farmhouse in the Catskills on a self-directed silent retreat.

I chose this locale because in 2011 I had done a long retreat in silence at a nearby convent “The Monastery of Bethlehem” in Livingston Manor New York. 

Unfortunately this year I had waited too long to register for one of the hermitages on the convent grounds. As an improvisation, I reached out to a local realtor to see if I could rent a space nearby. That way at least I could go back and forth to enjoy the offices and mass at the convent as part of my retreat experience.

I did find a beautiful spot in a building on a farm on top of one of the countless hills in this part of the country.

But I found that not being on the convent grounds was a different experience. I was one large step removed from the community environment. Even though the retreat in 2011 was in silence, there was the sense that I and the other retreatants were still part of an extended community, a community with a very dedicated focus and intention to the contemplative life. I found that simply being alone in the midst of a mainstream society was different from being alone in the midst of a dedicated contemplative community. I learned again how important community and high quality shared litrugy is to sustain the discipline needed for serious contemplative efforts.

When all around you are engaged in a similar effort of silence, devotion, bright joy, and honest struggle, it is more possible, at least for me, to maintain my focus on the labors at hand.

In addition to being a few miles away and needing to “commute” back and forth, I also underestimated how difficult it can be to travel in a mountainous area in the dead of winter. As a consequence, I was only able to get to the convent for an occasional service and mass. This too was instructive. Being on the premises and being able to walk back and forth to the chapel allowed me to be carried along by the rhythym of the daily schedule of the community. Being able to walk back and forth without needing to climb in and out of a car allowed me to be able to drift back into the many centuries when there were no cars and no machines, into the time and rhythyms of life of the desert fathers and mothers and the medieval and early modern saints and mystics.

For in a sense all monastic life is from pre-industrial times. While I am not one to reflexively disparage the benefits of modern science and industry, I gained a fresh sense as to how different life was in the long generations and centuries before life began to accelerate to the ever faster tempos of modern times. This too was instructive.

I could see how much slower life used to be. I could see how much different life was without electricity and modern plumbing. Once again I am not saying the conveniences of modern life do not have their attractions. What I am saying is I could see how different life was in older times. I could see how different prayer and meditation were when they were not juxtaposed with countless forms of electronic media and the non-stop global news cycle.

But there is a reason why I have drifted off into living a semi-reclusive lifestyle, one that is not too closely affiliated with any community. That is because all of the communities I have known had their oppressive and stultifying attributes along side their positive attributes. Rather than being caught up with the old errors that I sense are intertwined with the beauty of the ancient truths, I decided I was better off in the margins of society where I could be free to partake of the ancient ways without having to be stymied by the limits and dysfunction of the ancient ways. I could also engage without fetter, my love of free and open thought about how to reform both ancient and modern traditions. I have known for a while this is at best a precarious solution, but it was better than the alternatives.

But this retreat in solitude and silence alone on a farmhouse among the frozen hilltops of the Catskills in the dead of winter was an eye opener. I was unable to take full advantage of the great freedom I had. And, I could see how much I had lost by stepping back from any kind of community life and liturgy.

The retreat was painfully difficult at times. Yet there were many real benefits, most of which only became apparent after I returned to regular living.

One of the most important benefits was the need to try again to find, or to start, a community where people have the right balance between solitude and times when the community comes together for liturgy, support, and the simple joys of fellowship and art.

Have you chosen a semi-eremitical lifestyle in either the Catholic or Buddhist tradition?

If so, please send in your notes and stories.

While there are not a lot of us out there, I know there are quite a few. I would like to, if possible, to get an informal network going that is similar to what the folks at Raven’s Bread have developed.

Peace,

Will Raymond Author of The Simple Path of Holiness”  will@meditationpractice.com

Host of MeditationPractice.com

774-232-0884