On Grace

On rare occasions we see a human being, steeped in confusion and misery, suddenly undergo an unaccountable and almost miraculous transformation, an awakening, followed by a fundamental purification which sweeps away all unwholesomeness from the mind. 

Those who do not understand the essential things in life talk about “grace” when they see this happen to others–in the sense of some magic dispensation of suffering given by an outside Authority or Intelligence.  And of course there is “grace”, as it appears to the ignorant mind, but the phenomenon has nothing to do with favoritism or a benign act on the part of some personal God, but is the result of the inexorable laws of nature relating to individual consciousness.  To put it a different way: until there is Freedom, everything–which includes the moment of awakening as well as that of final and total liberation–is determined, because the individual is still bound within time and so dependent upon the law of cause and effect.  Because the mechanism of enlightenment is not understood, it is thought that the attainment of Freedom falls outside causality!

It is interesting to note how the modern, so-called civilized mind, whenever it lacks proper understanding, reverts to irrational thought which belongs to the pre-scientific era.  For however much Ignorance may change its face, essentially it does not evolve, it always remains Ignorance; for the mind is always seeking an explanation, some certainty, and it will cling to any belief, any form of irrationality whereby it can avoid facing Uncertainty, Nothingness.  This aspect of Ignorance may be seen as mental laziness, sloth, a shirking of the arduous work of facing the real world; and this human quality had, of course, been well exploited by all the various priests of that pseudo-religion which goes under the name of “organized religion”.

The problem of irrationality is a rather important one to clear our minds about, because there exists a common misconception that reason and science on the one hand, and religion on the other, necessarily stand in opposition to each other.  It has often been said, for instance, that Zen is anti-intellectual and irrational–affording a good example how a thing half understood is a thing not-understood.  Krishnamurti once stated that the religious mind comprises the scientific mind, but the scientific mind is not a religious mind.   The religious mind must be capable of astonishingly clear and accurate thought; it must be sharp as a razor blade–for only then will it be able to penetrate what lies beyond thought.

The pseudo-religious mind is an irrational, stupid mind; when for instance it indulges in prayer which is petitioning, it expects an answer, a reward.  Is there any difference between this attitude and a belief in magic?  In both cases there is the expectancy of a dispensation of the laws of nature, an elimination of cause-and-effect for the benefit of the petitioner who, obviously, must consider himself of some importance in the scheme of things.  This attitude of mind is therefore the very antithesis of the truly religious mind, for it strengthens the illusion of the unreal self, and that of the outside world as being different, being opposed to it. 

Then out of despair, from its isolation, the self projects its own antipode, 

The personal Diety.  Being miserable, petty, ignorant, helpless, the “I” invests its God with all that it lacks itself; therefore God is Love, All-Powerful, All-Knowing, All-Present, and so on.  And once Man has created this God he cajoles him into some kind of religious protection racked, courting everlasting favoritism by such tricks as prayer, good works, etc.  The reasoning behind this pseudo-religion is really something like this: “Never mind about the other chap, as long as my prayer is heard and my desire gratified, I shall worship thee . . . “

   The invention of this God who is Perfection is also very convenient from another point of view.  It becomes a marvelous excuse for complacency since man now absolves himself from any responsibility for his own imperfection; for the argument is that no mere man can be perfect, only God can be so (“by definition”, one would almost add . . . ).  Thus, blinded by this stupid playing about with meaningless words, concepts, when the ignorant man does meet an unmistakably perfect man, such as a Christ, a Buddha, a Krishnamurti or  a Ramana Maharshi, he immediately claims divinity for him, which of course he must do to justify his preconceived idea.

    The truly religious mind, on the other hand, is really a supra-rational mind.  Having pushed logic to the utmost limit, it no longer thinks in terms of “things” and “ideas”.  Only such a mind can look deeply into the miracle of “grace”.  For grace results neither from human action nor from divine action on human beings; it springs from neither the action of the human will that prays, worships, etc., nor the will of an outside Authority, a God, that doles out favors, rewards.  Grace is the action of Reality itself–not the action of Reality on something–for Reality is all-comprehensive, non-dual, indivisible.  It is therefore simply the manifestation, the play of God–if one likes to use that word.  When it is perceived by human beings howthis “pay” can fundamentally transform individual consciousness, it is called by them the mystery of “grace”--and which, for as long as consciousness dwells in duality, will always be considered a mystery.  Only when the mind itself has become part of this Reality, part of this play, will there be the end of this whole process of asking the wrong questions and being satisfied with the same old meaningless answers.  Instead of the helpless victim with whom Fate plays, the victim and Fate will then have merged, to become the Play.