Shasha:

Yes, I know what you are talking about when you say His Glory cannot be faced. In my case, these were only angels, but as they drew near I fell to the ground and hid my face. But the Godhead, who created this vast universe with immeasurable power which is equaled in love, can only be seen through the grace which would protect us from being destroyed, soul and body.

quote:

Originally posted by w.c.:
[qb] It would be interesting to know if the non-dualists ever describe dilation of the heart. [/qb]

What is dilation of the heart?

Sometimes when I am with Jesus the sweetness of His presence within starts growing, and it feels like a balloon is being filled up inside of me, sometimes it feels like the balloon is so big that it envelopes me and I feel big! It's like my spirit is getting larger and larger and expanding... is this what you think dilation of the heart is? It is really enjoyable when He does this to me...

Caneman

Caneman:

Yes, that sounds similar. He knows just how to enter each of us.

Shasha:

I also suppose that being mean-spirited is not one of your temptations . Sure, I probably have my radar set on all the potential tensions between non-dual and Christian, so this might be my reading of your words only. You were writing about your own path and your own insight, so I shouldn't even have taken this universally or personally.

Because you and w.c. mentioned angels, perhaps we could say something about them as well? I'm interested in what you said w.c. about the angels' apparitions and the glory and so on. I have never had a vision of angel in which I'd be told that this is one of those spirits. But for a period of time my attention was drawn to angels because in times of psychological suffering I felt like something was descending on me from above, enfolding, protecting and liberating the higher part of the soul from the suffering of the lower part. I called this an "angel of consolation", like one of those who talked to Jesus in Gethsemani. It felt like a personal presence. Of course, it's my interpretation, and it could be Jesus/Holy Spirit as well helping me, but angels are "personified actions" of God, aren't they?
I also used to pray to the angels for protection in dangerous situations, like e.g. driving a car or sth. It just felt kinda appropriate at the moment.

I think it's interesting to wonder what is the function of the angels in our spiritual life. When the contemplative graces come we have a contact with the Beloved directly, so what is the function of the celestial spirits?
I think they might play a part in absorptions where we cease to experience our bodily awareness.

Speaking of angels, for the last couple of years our family has been seeing angelic orbs in some our family photos... they look like blobs of round light with differering levels of opacity and different sizes... at first I thought these angelic orbs were from sunlight or dust particles that were interacting with the flash and lens... but they seem to appear no matter the lighting conditions and can not be explained by any of the usual photographic anomolies...

Caneman

Argue wasn't the right word, Shasha, I just didn't want to seem like I was one-upping you by telling you about my experience, which I am not sure is even non-dual, but certainly seems contemplative. You had a clear message from God to not meditate, and I was writing that meditation was wonderful. There is a kind of spiritual one upmanship when it comes to contemplative prayer, and I don't buy into it, and I didn't mean to infer that I was being competitive. It is all so laughable -- except that lots of people have been told to stop the way they pray, or believe, and advance spiritually, and that is a big shame. All of us are on very individual journeys with God, but it is so good to share with one another.

Anyone here read "When the Well Runs Dry", by Thomas Green, SJ? The book is about "prayer beyond the beginnings", as he calls it... his premise is that once someone passes through the first dark night and begins to experience contemplation, there will be a day when this ends... he says that there will be a "honeymoon" period of several months to several years where one experiences the consolations of God in contemplative prayer, analgous to Teresa's 4th mansion and 2nd way of drawing water... once this honeymoon period ends the consolations of God begin to be interrupted with periods of dryness... he continues to explain that the periods of consolation start to be shorter, and period of dryness begins to get longer, until one day all that remains is dryness... this dryness remains as the permement state of one's contemplative prayer experience with God, so asserts Green... he goes on to say that this is the normal outcome of the contemplative life, and it is supported by his interpretation of Teresa and JOC, the personal experience of his own prayer life, and that of his directees... anyone shed light on this? I don't see his outcome from scripture, but I do see the consolations... ???

Thanks,

Caneman

Caneman:

You might Google Jim Arraj for a book he wrote on the early confusion St. John's early interpretors had re: the difference between infused and acquired contemplation. Add Thomas Green as a name to the google and you should pull up a link to Arraj's website innerexplorations. Arraj writes at length about how this basic and very old misunderstanding may have been taken up unknowingly by a number of widely read modern authors as well, including Green, Keating and Burrows. Not that these authors don't have their important offerings, but Arraj makes an important point. He seems to think, in the case of Green, that aridity has been misunderstood in light of this confusion of infused contemplation with acquired (which is really meditation).

Here's the bit Arraj writes re: Green, but to appreciate and really understand the excerpt it is best to read the entire, lengthy summary of his book:

__________________________

"The central problem is clear. Just as in the time of Tom�s de Jes�s, what is driving interpretations of John of the Cross like Ruth Burrows is what I have been calling the experience of the dark night in the wide sense of the term. It is much the same story with Thomas Green, S.J. In 1979 he wrote Drinking from a Dry Well which had its goal to help himself and others "understand and accept the challenge of living with dryness as the normal goal of a life of prayer." (44) And he received hundreds of letters in response from people who felt themselves to be in the predicament he described. This critical experience of dryness or darkness led him to reinterpret John of the Cross, as well. He tells us that at the beginning of the transition from meditation to contemplation, loving attentiveness is both easy and difficult. We are drawn to be still, but think we should be doing something. Later, the darkness becomes dry, "that is, when God seems to be absent � how can we be "lovingly attentive" to him? This question long tormented me in my own prayer life. John gives the same advice ("be content simply with a loving and peaceful attentiveness to God") when speaking of the aridity of the dry well (Dark Night I, 10, #4). To me at that time such advice seemed like a cruel joke. How could I be lovingly attentive to Someone who seemed to be completely absent?" (45)

As an interpretation of John of the Cross, it labors under the same difficulties we have been seeing, that is, loving attentiveness as an activity we exercise, the lack of contemplation, itself, and so forth. But Thomas Green�s grateful readers are not directly concerned with John of the Cross, but rather, the problem of the dark night and how to deal with it.

When we look at the attempts of Thomas Keating and Ruth Burrows � and they are not alone here � to renew the contemplative life we see that they have a practical grasp of the problem of the dark night of sense in the wide sense of the term, that is, the failure of most of us to arrive at infused contemplation. But their solutions are much like those proposed for nearly 400 years. What we need to do is to try to come to grips, not so much with the idea of contemplation, as if it could somehow be rehabilitated, but with the underlying principles and the concrete problems that have shaped this struggle from the beginning. It is only then we will have a chance to look at Christian mysticism afresh."

quote:

Originally posted by mateusz:
[qb] Shasha:

I also suppose that being mean-spirited is not one of your temptations
[/qb]

Actually, my boys would disagree.

Back to your point. Right, I wasn't picking on anyone else's journey, the way they pray or meditate. I did use some strong language in my post (the words NONSENSE and such) and so I do see how that can come across as harsh, resentful, and so on although I am simply matter-of-fact in my testimony...I gotta be more careful how I write, for sure.

I read back over your last posts and am wondering why you picked Christ over Zen if you felt that God would give Himself to you (presumably equally) as these were seemingly offered as equal, free gifts?

(So you lived in Ann Arbor three years ago?...I can't seem to get out of this frozen tundra!)

wc- I have that book at it is a good one� however, in reading Arraj�s comments regarding Green�s assertions, I think perhaps he has mischaracterized it, and lumped it in with all of his other examples in the book� i.e., Arraj wants to say that the aridity Green is describing is from someone who is still in the night of sense, and they are practicing �acquired contemplation� and wanting to call this infused contemplation�

If you read Green�s book carefully, I think what you see is that he is describing a situation where someone has passed through the night of sense, and is receiving infused contemplation from God� they are through the door step of the 4th mansion and regularly enjoying the consolations of God� they are not practicing acquired contemplation, they are indeed receiving infused graces of prayer as �the Holy Spirit is doing the praying for them�� Green then goes on to say that after a period of months or years one will enjoy these infused graces but then they start to experience oscillations: the Lord gives them periods of consolations and periods of dryness, a dryness that leaves them to only acquired contemplation until "the Lord comes back"� these oscillations continue, with the periods of consolations becoming shorter and shorter, and the periods of dryness becoming longer and longer until� until one day only dryness remains, that dryness, he asserts, is the outcome of a mature contemplative prayer life of the believer� forget the 5th, 6th, and 7th mansions and their rich experiences, these are cast aside by Green and we are to accept the dryness as from the Lord, and that this is indeed a form of �mature contemplative prayer��

I have no answers, as I myself am immature in my prayer journey with Jesus, pounding at the door of the 4th mansion ready to break it down , but after reading his book over the last two years I am wondering if this dryness is what is to be expected, or is it just unique to Green and some of his directees, or something that Green is misinterpreting all together� any thoughts?

Caneman

" . . . a dryness that leaves them to only acquired contemplation until "the Lord comes back"� these oscillations continue, with the periods of consolations becoming shorter and shorter, and the periods of dryness becoming longer and longer until� until one day only dryness remains, that dryness, he asserts, is the outcome of a mature contemplative prayer life of the believer� forget the 5th, 6th, and 7th mansions and their rich experiences, these are cast aside by Green and we are to accept the dryness as from the Lord, and that this is indeed a form of �mature contemplative prayer��


Caneman:

We'd both have to defer to somebody like Phil, as I also find the 3rd and 4th mansions descriptiive of my own growth. But in particular, note what Arraj says is most often confused in St. John by modern authors as being an expression of the acquired state, when in fact it is entirely infused:

" . . . be content simply with a loving and peaceful attentiveness to God."


Now, there may be a kind of acquired version of this, such as we're all familiar with when we deliberately dispose our attention and wills to Him. But this is apparently not what SJC is referring to. Our ability to be so very simple and loving, and peaceful, is itself an aspect of graced infusion. So while nada nada continues, where even peace and loving attentiveness are infusions but not Him as He is in Himself, this graced state sounds characteristic of SJC's understanding of dryness. As for where to place it re: Teresa's mansions, we should ask Phil. But SJC, as you know, was far more ascetical than STA, yet even he seems to have a more gentle understanding of dryness than do some of these modern authors.

Here is a curious passage from his "Drinking From a Dry Well":

"In giving directees this advice (re: how to deal with activities of the imagination during prayer), I am always reminded of my own boyhood.
My mother was quite a strict disciplinarian. We had a happy life at home, and the family was really the center of our lives. But she had two boys to raise, and the two of us, as is normal, battled our way through our early years. When things got out of control, punishment was swift and firm . . . several times friends or relatives said to me, "Your mother is the most serene, ladylike person we know. She never gets angry." I used to wonder if they were talking about the same woman I knew. As I grew older, though, I realized that they were. When we were out in public, she kept her composure(as far as humanely possible) and ignored our misbehavior. But she had a mind like a computer. Everything was filed away, and the time of reckoning came as soon as we arrived home, by which time my brother and I had forgotten the misdemeanors!"

"This seems to me a perfect parable for the way we should handle a distracted imagination or understanding in prayer. While praying it is best to ignore them . . . But if they are particularly demanding or obnoxious, discipline them outside of prayer. By means of some appropriate penance or mortification . . . make them pay the price for disrupting the prayer time. Gradually they will learn to behave better (pp. 110-111)."

I was just amazed to read this. Could such apparently harsh regard for psychological life show up in spiritual direction? And how could this relate to his understanding of dryness and consolations?

Caneman, I read Green's book years ago and was privileged to attend a workshop on contemplative spirituality he presented here in Wichita years ago. I think When the Well Runs Dry and Drinking from a Dry Well have much to offer, but agree with Arraj that the counsel he offers (especially in the Drinking book) only recycle some of the centuries-old tensions about acquired vs infused contemplation.

About the aridity, however . . . this needs to be qualified, I believe. It's been my experience, at least, that much of what is called consolation pertains to affectivity, and this is indeed purified during the Night of the Senses. Henceforth, one will no longer experience the emotional roller-coaster of previous years, but neither will one *feel* the sense of affective closeness to God that one did with consolations. The consequent affective equanimity can seem like aridity and dryness in comparison to what came before, but it's totally worth it. Lest aridity be equated with a kind of dispassionate "flatness," however, we should note that one enjoys the shalom or deep peace of Christ, along with spiritual love and joy, which can and do shine through the purified affective system (limbic region of the brain?). Green's books do not adequately convey this positive aspect, but it's been awhile since I've read them and maybe there's something there that I've forgotten.

wc - I think those are good points you bring up regarding dealing with emotional trauma from childhood... I agree that the ability to "rest" before Him without experiencing any emotions, sweetness, or consolation, no matter how weak or strong the feeling of rest is, is an experience of infused contemplation...

Phil - so perhaps what Green is calling consolations is really a form of our emotional affection toward the Lord while in the night of sense, and maybe we mistake that for being sweetness from Him (infused touches)? The Holy Spirit teaches us to even let those affective emotions go and wait to receive whatever it is the Lord chooses to give us, and meditate nondiscursively as we wait?

Caneman

Caneman:

You may be directing that question just to Phil, but I'll chime in here re: "The Holy Spirit teaches us to even let those affective emotions go and wait to receive whatever it is the Lord chooses to give us, and meditate nondiscursively as we wait?"

I'm not sure exactly what you mean here, but I've received what seems good spiritual direction on this matter (if I'm not too far from what you intend with the question). There may be nothing at all immature with emotional affection where it involves the experience of meditation that doesn't attempt to acquire contemplation, since the latter is a gift. The direction I've received is to keep on with meditation until a "touch" is given, and then rest in the rest given (which can be sweet), which is different than letting go of discursive/affective tendencies in an attempt to "contemplate." So I'm not so sure there is such a thing as "meditate nondiscursively." If you mean with simple affection, I'd be concerned that discursiveness is being treated as a problem when it is encouraged by both Teresa and John until a touch is given. Teresa doesn't seem to separate mental prayer/meditation from either affectivity or discursive tendencies, in my reading; neither does she describe contemplation as a process where we let go of affection to receive more of God.

And I'd question the notion of deliberately "resting" before Him without any emotions, sweetness or consolation as what SJC meant by contemplation; it wasn't what I meant. I think there has been an unfortunate and widespread error in "teaching" contemplation. It can't be taught, at least not in the Carmelite tradition. In fact, it would concern me if someone had the goal to rest without affection or sweetness, or in absence of any emotion at all, since this sounds like too much effort for what can't be subtly contrived. As Phil alludes, aridity isn't a state without purified affection, or receptivity allowing joy.

So I'm not understanding you perhaps. Are you saying that touches are devoid of emotion, sweetness and consolation? Or are you meaning infusions as Teresa describes in the 6th mansions, or SJC in the Night of the Spirit (now I'm certainly out of my element!)? "Touches," in my experience, still the emotions, but affect is still present as a felt receptivity that is held and directed and nourished by the Holy Spirit. As for Night of the Spirit, it seems Phil is saying that consolations disappear because the relationship is more permanently infused.

SJC speaks often of " . . . be content simply with a loving and peaceful attentiveness to God." This may not be as mystically anointed as Teresa's pattern, and although not acquired, is still described as sweet. Just look at his poems. Not just peaceful, but loving - still relational. SJC is describing in those words a state that is available only when contemplation is given, not how to meditate; his words are often misinterpreted as such (by myself too), if I understand Arraj correctly. SJC is trying to correct the harm done to souls who are graced with contemplation but directed, at that point, to keep on meditating; this is when discursiveness is harmful, but not before.

Phil can clarify, but this is my understanding of SJC. Hope I haven't distorted your questions.

wc � I am not really sure what I am trying to get at! I would like to make sense of what Arraj is saying of Green� Green seems to assert that the outcome of a mature contemplative prayer life with the Lord is a vast desert� I want to know if he is correct, in light of what Teresa and JOC are saying� and is Green somehow mistaking emotions for infused consolations of sweetness from the Lord�

One theme of Green�s book that I can relate to is that our journey with the Lord in prayer is something that becomes simpler as we move on, we do less and less �of the work� of prayer and He does more and more (and he uses Teresa�a four waters as an example of this, and I think this is what Romans 8:26-27 is saying as well)� I know for myself, I would call nondiscursive meditation a form of meditation that is very simple, with very little thought involved, perhaps slowly repeating of a short verse of scripture and letting the �word of Christ dwell in you richly�, and resting in that before the Lord� all of this is done with a loving look toward Him, so in the sense of emotions involved it would be to that extent, and even that would more be a combination of the will and affection� I can say that this is how I wait before the Lord when I am with Him, and if He decides to give me a touch then I let the meditation go and rest in whatever He decides to give� sometimes it is a faint sense of peace from Him, sometimes it is very emotional to the point of being a slobbering mess, but it is He who releases these emotions in me and not me stirring them up� it�s really up to Him and what He decides to do with the time I am with Him� I don�t know if this is correct in terms of contemplative saints throughout church history, but for me this is where I am at by faith�

I would agree with you, if I understand correctly, that our look toward the Lord must always be with relational affection/love, and if we are ever absent that in our time with the Lord then we are not on the right path�but just as thoughts can get in the way of perceiving what the Lord wants to do during our time with Him I think that emotions can do the same� that is what I meant regarding letting go of emotions as we wait before Him� anyone, please weigh in, as I have nobody else to discuss this with. I am part of a protestant flock and they have no idea or even desire these things so I rely on all of you!

Caneman

Shasha:

I believed God will give me Himself either way, but not in the same way. I chose relational, because it offers me sweetness and delight so deep that I can't compare it with anything, even with the fulness and stillness of enlightenment (although my enlightenment is rather shallow). And through the gift of contemplation I can experience a deeper intimacy with the One Whom I love.
Yeah, I stayed in Ann Arbor in 2006 for a month doing research at UM and visiting a friend. It's a bit colder than in Poland, though now we have about -10 centigrades!

Caneman and consortes:

your discussion on aridity arises so many questions in my mind...

1. A coherent model of John and Teresa is, as far as I understand, that periods of aridity are necessary, maybe they vary in time and depth, but the spiritual marriage leaves only bliss, glory and love, and happiness. The faculties are transformed into God, and God is not unhappy so...
But I think about those who had a period of "consolations" ("honeymoon") and then they started to experience aridity and IT NEVER CAME TO AN END. Mother Teresa of Calcutta, for example. Camille C., another one, but she was given the spiritual marriage few years before her death, after 20years of dark night of spirit.
Why would God leave someone in the state of abandonment? Is it often or common?

Phil, you say that aridity is accompanied by shalom and joy deep inside. can you tell what's the difference between your "shalom" experience and simple state of relaxed mind without tensions? The relational dimension, I suppose...but?
And why an experience of "abandonment and rejection" is reported?
JOC writes about great longing which is there, and Mother Teresa of Calcutta too. So this longing seems to be the only sign of "contemplation" in this kind of dark night. But that Belgian contemplative, Camille C., writes that she experienced aridity and dark night for 20 years, and she couldn't even long for God in that state...

2. If the mature state of contemplation is arid and without "feelings" of consolation, then why The Living Flame of Love describes the overflooding of love and glory which really doesn't sound arid at all? Why would someone in this state of bliss even care about some aridity at the level of emotions? And again, faculties are transformed into God.
Or maybe there are some people who are given illuminative purification without spiritual marriage, so they are left in the middle of the way, in aridity. But why?

3. W.C.:

I get your point when you talk about non-discursive meditation. Meditate until the touch comes and when it's gone, continue . Ok. But in my opinion simple meditation, about which Caneman seems to be talking, like e.g. repeating one phrase or even a word, need not to be seen as an obstacle just because JOC and STA meditated using faculties more richly. Wouldn't you agree that the key is to maintain a sense of relationship in a meditation, by whichever means? Jesus said we shouldn't be talkative like pagans, so perhaps a phrase or two will do just fine, won't they?

Yet, in my prayer life 4 years ago, when the graces became more powerful, I used to start with some lectio, so I employed my faculties. And I remember there were moments when I just managed to read the first sentence from the Song of Songs and it was entirely impossible for me to read more, or to think about anything, because my all activity was stopped in a kind of rapture. There were periods I couldn't even say vocal prayers at church. At other times I managed to read more, but with difficulty, being overcome by sweetness, and sometimes I'd read with no problems. And the inability to think was not like a Zen samadhi, but filled with much love and ecstasy.
So I guess I did it more like you W.C. described - "pray until the touch discourages you to do so". But I don't remember any place in JOC that would suggest such a method. Do you? It sounds like recollection in STA, 4th mansion, though.

4. The deeper states of aridity are also beyond my reach and expertise, so I can only be scared by their horrific descriptions
Aridity with an experience that God is absent or non-existent for the rest of my life seems like a hell on earth to me, not like a mature contemplation. So why God takes away initial consolations of active prayer to exchange it for the arid lack of infused contemplation about which Arraj writes?

I suppose it's possible to have an experience of God's touch in the depths of the soul, which is not accompanied by affection of love, which we seem to identify with consolations. The presence of God's love is not exactly a feeling, in my experience. It's something deeper or a different kind of feeling. It's like someone was touching me inside, it's more sensory-like, and this is more blissful than anything, and more sacred, and precious, and it ignites a sense of unsatiable longing and love. So perhaps there can be aridity in emotions, but a sense of contact in the depth.

5. I remember STA writing to her sisters that "most of you are in the 5th mansion". I always had an impression that it is not that rare, up to 5th mansion and up to the prayer of quiet, but gets more rare further on. But Arraj seems to suggest that a great number of praying people didn't even receive recollection or any grace of contemplation. Isn't it incompatible with this Teresa's statement and with her expressed conviction that God is very eager to give contemplation, but we are not willing enough to receive it? (I could look for textual support in the Interior Castle, I guess, or Way of Perfection).

Caneman, we "cross-posted" (if that's a correct phrase).

Now, I see I understood well what you were saying about non-discursive meditation and waiting for God. I can relate to much of what you are describing.
I fully support your love for Jesus and your life of prayer and contemplation (By the way are you male or female - I know this sounds very stupid, but I'm not an English native speaker, and it's hard for me to tell someone's sex by reading their words. In Polish a male would say a phrase "I would agree with you" using different Polish forms than a female, so the sex is always obvious . )

And in terms of protestant flock - I appreciate and like your often references to the Bible .

Hello WC. With reference to your posting,

"The experiential distinctions, for myself, boil down to simply knowing the difference between nondual states, or the wondrous present moment in which all created things reside, and contemplative grace, or the Eternal beyond consciousness that must be given in order to be known as it knows Itself."

I too have been pondering this experiential distinction for about 20 years now (yes, I have been in a whale that long having 'run' from the overwhelming aspect of the encounter).

Though words are inadequate here, my own conclusion is that the non-dual experience was 'like' experiencing the total connectedness of everything in time and in space, back to the very beginning (the big bang?), to the very door of the 'void'. There was no 'back' only 'now' (the eternal now?). There was no 'this or that', only one, all in all (holographic?)

The 'Holy Other' experience, as you say, '...that must be given in order to be known as it knows Itself" was of 'essence', that essence being 'Love' as expressed in and through the Word as 'in the beginning' (and as available and expressed through all 'revealed' world religions when the 'path' of love is chosen).

I suspect our 'experiential distinctions' are contingent upon our 'set and setting' (as they say in psychology) and our 'working on it' (reflecting)over time. There may be no 'higher' or 'lower' distinction here, nor good, better, best. One is structure, One is content. The structure is there to hold and 'express' the content and the content provides purpose for the structure, which is why the universe even 'is' in the first place.

Obviously, I am still pondering.

I'll get back to you all in response to some of your questions about aridity. Very busy times with limited mental energy.

Jonah:

Welcome to Shalom Place. I've seen your other post on another thread, and will respond to you there soon.

Yes, "Pondering" is a good thing all around. The metaphysical distinctions are a source of wonder when we consider the differences between non-duality and Divine Grace. And it does seem to me that non-dual awareness participates in the cosmic powers in subtle ways, activating kundalini, or arising from it. And this is just another way of seeing how it is different from uncreated grace.

Here's something I wrote a while back which further muddies the pond. I'll stick it here; it isn't meant as a particular response to Jonah or other posts:

"God knowing us from within His own uncreated Being, prior to our own creation and the appearance of consciousness, is a transcendental presence/supernatural grace (able to create out of nothing; hence our faculties cannot acquire that state of being as consciousness); as such, we can't see Him sustaining our being within His Being from His uncreated pov. So as our being inheres in what we cannot know, non-dual awareness can only see its sustained being as its own mirror, but not as being sustained by His uncreated Being."

Caneman:

It's good to remember what you point out: SJC and STA don't describe an endlessly arid landscape which Green apparently contends is the inevitable prospect of the contemplative life. Phil's nuancing seems to come closer to what the saints are telling us, it seems to me.

But perhaps I can relate to what you're saying by confessing a certain fear of my own: having struggled with abandonment issues from early childhood, the prospect of something like what Green describes and Mother Teresa of Calcuta endured, is a bit daunting, to say the least. Phil notes on another thread that we can't rule out impaired psychological development even among the saints; he describes this as more developement embodied in the 6th and 7th chakras, and less so below. This makes sense to me, as in Mother Teresa's era (the era of my own grandparents), there was simply little understanding of healthy parent-child attachment relationship. Much pain, often not recognized as such, can find its way into religious life and never really be dealt with in terms of conscious human intimacy. How God deals with that is a mystery of course, especially when comes to others. But there can be limitations of the will in each of us, perhaps even among saints who are deeply devoted to the hallowed memories of their own parents. IOW, it may be wrong to think of the saints as perfect, at least where that would be understood as a pure psychology. Profound sanctification doesn't overcome all aspects of fallenness in this life, it seems.


"I know for myself, I would call nondiscursive meditation a form of meditation that is very simple, with very little thought involved, perhaps slowly repeating of a short verse of scripture and letting the �word of Christ dwell in you richly�, and resting in that before the Lord� all of this is done with a loving look toward Him, so in the sense of emotions involved it would be to that extent, and even that would more be a combination of the will and affection� I can say that this is how I wait before the Lord when I am with Him, and if He decides to give me a touch then I let the meditation go and rest in whatever He decides to give� sometimes it is a faint sense of peace from Him, sometimes it is very emotional to the point of being a slobbering mess, but it is He who releases these emotions in me and not me stirring them up� it�s really up to Him and what He decides to do with the time I am with Him� I don�t know if this is correct in terms of contemplative saints throughout church history, but for me this is where I am at by faith�"


That sounds close to my own experience. Mateusa talks about not being able to get past a few words, at times when reading Scripture for Lectio Divina, when one is taken up by the Holy Spirit. And then, as you say, it can be barely perceptible, but ceasing the reading or active meditation is obviously important and a natural relational step in the moment. One can read of beauty, but when beauty comes calling. . . .

Maybe Phil can take a look at your descriptions and offer you his advice. He also provides spiritual direction by phone.

Have you read anything about "Soaking Prayer." It seems to have various sources/authorship, but comes from the Protestant churches. Not all are pleased with this development, at least as I've found on the internet. But it does seem to share some similarities with Catholic contemplative traditions. And there is Richard Foster's book "Prayer."

But you know, it seems like we will never be satisfied in looking to others - even the saints - for surety about prayer. Better to have good spiritual direction, it seems to me, and learn to trust ourselves, and also be open to not knowing. If we're open, surely God can make most of the corrections Himself.

bdb:

I've moved your last post, and my response, to the "Healing Toxic Shame and Cultivating Interiority" thread.

Caneman, you asked: Phil - so perhaps what Green is calling consolations is really a form of our emotional affection toward the Lord while in the night of sense, and maybe we mistake that for being sweetness from Him (infused touches)? The Holy Spirit teaches us to even let those affective emotions go and wait to receive whatever it is the Lord chooses to give us, and meditate nondiscursively as we wait?

I think what Green is calling consolation is more about how our emotions are positively stimulated by grace -- sense of closeness, sweetness, love, etc. I see no reason to let these go if they come of their own accord and we're not particularly looking for them or trying to hang onto them. It seems that God blesses most of us (especially in the beginning of a committed faith journey) with consolations to draw us toward Him and convince us of the reality of His love. This is the milk that the author of Hebrews tells us we will eventually be weaned off of, that we might enjoy a deeper and more fulfilling sense of union. Ditto, too, to w.c.'s response to your post.

And mateusz:
I suppose it's possible to have an experience of God's touch in the depths of the soul, which is not accompanied by affection of love, which we seem to identify with consolations. The presence of God's love is not exactly a feeling, in my experience. It's something deeper or a different kind of feeling. It's like someone was touching me inside, it's more sensory-like, and this is more blissful than anything, and more sacred, and precious, and it ignites a sense of unsatiable longing and love. So perhaps there can be aridity in emotions, but a sense of contact in the depth.

Exactly! That's what I meant by "shalom," which you inquired about. It's not simply silence or stillness of mind, but the deep-down sense of peace and "all-is-wellness" that holds us -- the peace that surpasses all understanding . . . that the world cannot take away.

wc - I am familiar with soaking prayer... this is probably the first widespread formalization of contemplative prayer in the protestant churches (started in the late 1990's at Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship, a Charismatic church with roots in the Vineyard fellowship of churches)... they have the right idea but they don't teach any structure or methods to get you started... literally, they just tell you to lay down, close your eyes, and "soak" before the Presence of the Lord... this is why I like Christian Meditation from John Main, and Centering Prayer from Thomas Keating, they provide a very practical way to get someone started on the journey to knowing the Lord...

I can relate to what mateusz says when at times you just have barely closed your eyes and the Presence of the Lord is like a magnet and pulls you inward to Him and He fixes your thoughts on Him and it is all very easy... but at other times its like chopping wood, lots of work with little to show for it! But it doesn't really matter, I know the Lord is trying to teach us to treat all of those experiences the same, and learn to be with Him by faith no matter what type or lack of experience He brings, and love Him all the same... the important point is to be faithful to stay on the journey with Him...

One thing I really value is desire that He alone gives to us... that is one thing I always keep in mind if He has brought me on a trip to the desert... just the desire to be with Him every day comes from Him, and there is no way I can sustain that type of desire over the years, only He can give me that and it acts like an anchor during the hard times and a sort of "proof" that He is working in me!

Another thing about the relationship in prayer with Him is that you never really know what He is going to do, could be the desert one day, the garden the next day, psychological root canal another... I really like Fr. Faricy's analogy that our prayer life with the Lord is like dancing... the Lord is our dance partner in prayer, we just follow His lead, and enjoy our time of dancing with Him...

Caneman

Another difference between metaphysical vs. relational or stillness vs. peace. I remember I was puzzled when I first experienced what Zen calls "non-seeking/non-grasping mind", because in that state you don't search for anything, you don't want anything and you don't need anything. You are just completely satisfied with what is and there is no motion deep inside. But Thomas Keating writes that the sign of our growth on the Christian path is growing hunger for God. And of course that's also in JOC, much of it. So I had a thought that Big Mind or non-seeking mind cannot be a Christian goal, because there's no desire in them, for God neither. But in my experience of contemplative prayer there's a lot of hunger and longing, which is sometimes painfully paradoxical, since Christ is very present and close, but there's a powerful longing and hunger at the same time. There's no such thing in Zen or non-dual, because there's no motion - like Wilber says "nothing pushes me, nothing pulls me".
So I think Keating is very much right about the "growing hunger for God". Perhaps eternally growing, according to "epektasis", Gregory of Nyssa following St. Paul's Letter to Phillipians.

Phil, thanks for explanation.