OK, but that's not what it says on the tin, is it? They asserted that it was to do with getting closer to God, not about getting their rocks off. Were they just wrong? Was it just John-Smythe-ry run rampant over Christianity (and other religions too?) over a period of multiple centuries?
I think that's an overly-harsh reading of something that wasn't actually critical of those in question, much less comparing them to abusers. I don't see why it couldn't be both, and I would also not reduce it to "getting their rocks off". Masochism and other associated behaviours are not necessarily sexual in nature.
Oh OK sorry I misunderstood. So... in this reading of it there was perhaps something satisfying or even enjoyable in the ascetic's voluntary suffering? But in what sense is it then "mortification" i.e. putting to death one's worldly desires? Is it not then actually indulging worldly desires albeit some slightly unusual ones? In what way (if any) would it be spiritually beneficial?
I mean given that nobody in this conversation is doing this kind of thing, I'm not sure that's a question we can really answer. I don't personally know what strangers get out of their own behaviour! Certainly the view that this is indulging desires is part of why the RCC has disowned mortification as a practice (although some groups like Opus Dei do still partake).
Depending on what “this kind of thing” means, some of us may be. There’s a whole thread on the old Ship I started about that.
I mean given that nobody in this conversation is doing this kind of thing, I'm not sure that's a question we can really answer. I don't personally know what strangers get out of their own behaviour! Certainly the view that this is indulging desires is part of why the RCC has disowned mortification as a practice (although some groups like Opus Dei do still partake).
I think it's fair enough not to make windows into souls or judge any particular person's practice. On the other hand the OP is asking about asceticism in a religious context and I'm trying therefore to ask what it is "supposed" to be for in that context and whether it could ever actually work in that way.
OK, but that's not what it says on the tin, is it? They asserted that it was to do with getting closer to God, not about getting their rocks off. Were they just wrong? Was it just John-Smythe-ry run rampant over Christianity (and other religions too?) over a period of multiple centuries?
I think that's an overly-harsh reading of something that wasn't actually critical of those in question, much less comparing them to abusers. I don't see why it couldn't be both, and I would also not reduce it to "getting their rocks off". Masochism and other associated behaviours are not necessarily sexual in nature.
Oh OK sorry I misunderstood. So... in this reading of it there was perhaps something satisfying or even enjoyable in the ascetic's voluntary suffering? But in what sense is it then "mortification" i.e. putting to death one's worldly desires? Is it not then actually indulging worldly desires albeit some slightly unusual ones? In what way (if any) would it be spiritually beneficial?
Okay, this may or may not be helpful. But it comes from experience--one person's experience--and some extrapolation.
Suppose you have a Christian with a strong thirst to get closer to God. That's not unusual, that's pretty common in fact. And said person is asking how that can happen.
Well, they're going to look around them and see what the options are. And the whole concept of "leaving the world" is widespread across human cultures, not just Christianity. The world-as-spiritual-danger is a concept found in the New Testament, though it's not univocal (we also get the world-as-good-gift-of-God, and the world-as-mission-field-and-place-of-service). It's not a long step from "flee temptation" to "flee the world itself."
But having done so (if you've done so--I haven't), you will certainly find that you've brought the world along with you in the form of internal human brokenness. You will experience temptations to sin even if you're the only person around--it's entirely possible to be proud, resentful, lazy, and so forth, even if you're a hermit. And if you're facing that, and you think it's holding you back from knowing God better, well...
Some folks will try to deal with it by main force. (I don't recommend this, I generally take the issue to the Lord and ask him to deal with it, but whatever.) They will attempt to discipline the issues out of themselves, just as they've seen parents disciplining children. And they may have (or think they have!) some success. So they keep on with it. There's doubtless an endorphin thing going on with the more extreme practices, which could reinforce them.
Now whether this actually amounts to a hill of beans in the eyes of God, that's a matter of argument between various Christian groups. I personally think it's better to take the desire to be close to him and hand it over to him, asking him to bring it about in his own way. But I'm not everybody.
And there is this well-known human desire to "make progress" in whatever we do--to feel like we're accomplishing something, to actually take control of our own spiritual maturity (as if!). And having set practices, especially unpleasant ones, is one way of satisfying that desire. Me, I think it's a mistake. But I would say that, being a Lutheran!
I see it as detachment from ego, and I guess is found in many religions. But then this is very tricky, as some heavy practices might reinforce ego, look how well I'm doing, it hurts so much. It's also quite subtle.
If a friend pushed me aggressively about whether buying some brand of paper plates was bad for the environment, I’d not take it well.
We use paper plates from time to time, but we always try to get compostable ones, or at least ones without coatings. There is a company that makes a wide variety of environmentally-friendly paper products that can be found in stores around here. The brand is called “If You Care.” I will admit that I pass on buying their products solely because of that name. It just sounds so . . . sanctimonious. That is perhaps shallow of me, but I have a visceral reaction every time I see their products.
If a friend pushed me aggressively about whether buying some brand of paper plates was bad for the environment, I’d not take it well.
We use paper plates from time to time, but we always try to get compostable ones, or at least ones without coatings. There is a company that makes a wide variety of environmentally-friendly paper products that can be found in stores around here. The brand is called “If You Care.” I will admit that I pass on buying their products solely because of that name. It just sounds so . . . sanctimonious. That is perhaps shallow of me, but I have a visceral reaction every time I see their products.
Also given that paper plates are biodegradable I'm not sure why they would be a problem . . . .
Coatings on paper plates can affect how long it takes them to biodegrade, though.
I will say that I found some compostable/biodegradable straws on Amazon a few years ago (I haven't gotten through the box all the way yet) and was very happy to, and that's the general kind I would get if I ever run out of them and need more--it's more the sense of being pushed that I don't like. (I'll make use of whatever straws the restaurant gives me when I drink a soda there.) I get the coated kind of plates and bowls because I don't want stuff to soak through, especially cat food.
(And again I know that's not what @Pomona was talking about.)
OK, but that's not what it says on the tin, is it? They asserted that it was to do with getting closer to God, not about getting their rocks off. Were they just wrong? Was it just John-Smythe-ry run rampant over Christianity (and other religions too?) over a period of multiple centuries?
I think that's an overly-harsh reading of something that wasn't actually critical of those in question, much less comparing them to abusers. I don't see why it couldn't be both, and I would also not reduce it to "getting their rocks off". Masochism and other associated behaviours are not necessarily sexual in nature.
Oh OK sorry I misunderstood. So... in this reading of it there was perhaps something satisfying or even enjoyable in the ascetic's voluntary suffering? But in what sense is it then "mortification" i.e. putting to death one's worldly desires? Is it not then actually indulging worldly desires albeit some slightly unusual ones? In what way (if any) would it be spiritually beneficial?
I mean given that nobody in this conversation is doing this kind of thing, I'm not sure that's a question we can really answer. I don't personally know what strangers get out of their own behaviour! Certainly the view that this is indulging desires is part of why the RCC has disowned mortification as a practice (although some groups like Opus Dei do still partake).
Depending on what “this kind of thing” means, some of us may be. There’s a whole thread on the old Ship I started about that.
I see it as detachment from ego, and I guess is found in many religions. But then this is very tricky, as some heavy practices might reinforce ego, look how well I'm doing, it hurts so much. It's also quite subtle.
Also we do need some degree of ego. A healthy sense of self-esteem is, well, healthy.
I see it as detachment from ego, and I guess is found in many religions. But then this is very tricky, as some heavy practices might reinforce ego, look how well I'm doing, it hurts so much. It's also quite subtle.
Also we do need some degree of ego. A healthy sense of self-esteem is, well, healthy.
But in many moments, or split seconds, where is self-esteem? Well, where is anything?
OK, but that's not what it says on the tin, is it? They asserted that it was to do with getting closer to God, not about getting their rocks off. Were they just wrong? Was it just John-Smythe-ry run rampant over Christianity (and other religions too?) over a period of multiple centuries?
I think that's an overly-harsh reading of something that wasn't actually critical of those in question, much less comparing them to abusers. I don't see why it couldn't be both, and I would also not reduce it to "getting their rocks off". Masochism and other associated behaviours are not necessarily sexual in nature.
Oh OK sorry I misunderstood. So... in this reading of it there was perhaps something satisfying or even enjoyable in the ascetic's voluntary suffering? But in what sense is it then "mortification" i.e. putting to death one's worldly desires? Is it not then actually indulging worldly desires albeit some slightly unusual ones? In what way (if any) would it be spiritually beneficial?
I mean given that nobody in this conversation is doing this kind of thing, I'm not sure that's a question we can really answer. I don't personally know what strangers get out of their own behaviour! Certainly the view that this is indulging desires is part of why the RCC has disowned mortification as a practice (although some groups like Opus Dei do still partake).
Depending on what “this kind of thing” means, some of us may be. There’s a whole thread on the old Ship I started about that.
Ah, spiritual aspects of fasting and such rather than of BDSM or related practices? But I think there’s some (quite positive) connection, at least in some areas. And I thought some things, like flagellation, were certainly relevant here. (Not that one can’t direct one’s submission in these practices, or indeed all sorts of practices, to different things. “Intermittent fasting” for health reasons has become popular recently, for example.)
Well, there's ascetic practice that you choose for yourself, and there's ascetic practice that the Lord (or life, as you please) forces on you... I tend to think the latter more useful when it comes to spiritual growth. I mean things like where you have to cut back on stuff because a brother-in-law has lost his job and come to live with you, or where you're giving $ to people in disaster, or so on. I get pain quite a bit as a result of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, and I do think the Lord makes some use of it, though I think there has to be some willingness to LET him make a good use of it, or nothing will come of it after all.
Well, there's ascetic practice that you choose for yourself, and there's ascetic practice that the Lord (or life, as you please) forces on you... I tend to think the latter more useful when it comes to spiritual growth. I mean things like where you have to cut back on stuff because a brother-in-law has lost his job and come to live with you, or where you're giving $ to people in disaster, or so on. I get pain quite a bit as a result of Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, and I do think the Lord makes some use of it, though I think there has to be some willingness to LET him make a good use of it, or nothing will come of it after all.
Indeed. One of the criticisms of the hermit lifestyle, including solitary asceticism, is not just that it could go into unhealthy extremes, but that it didn’t really help anyone else—and so we got monasteries, which both moderated extreme asceticism and benefited the community, the needy, etc. It gave the monks someone to be accountable to as well.
That's a very interesting thought @ChastMastr - the idea that monasteries are a manifestation of asceticism that has been harnesses to a stronger idea of community or corporate identity...
Since this thread has morphed into a discussion on how to be responsible in our consumerism with few side comments on disposable plates, I came across this video on how to reuse disposable items. Of course, he throws in a commercial about midway through the video.
I've not got time to share them now but I'm getting some insights, thoughts and ideas on issues related to the OP as I'm on a pilgrimage/conference at a well known site associated with early monasticism in these islands.
Not that any of us are being particularly ascetic.
One of things that's been said in the talks is that fasting, for instance, has less to do with buffeting the body, as it were, and more to do with transforming the mind.
FWIW, I do believe that a degree of asceticism is of value but not as an end in itself, and certainly not as a means of 'earning' one's salvation or as a source of spiritual pride or virtue-signalling.
If I was starting a TikTok-style hygiene room (a whole room just to store your toiletries because you have bought so many) I would *hope* that someone I knew would stage an intervention! Is any kind of criticism "being rude"?
A whole room just to store your books is ok, though, isn't it? 4000 books isn't excessive consumption, is it, especially if many of them were bought in the Oxfam bookshop, or at the annual Christian Aid book sale? And some of them are books you've owned since childhood, or have been gifts?
If I was starting a TikTok-style hygiene room (a whole room just to store your toiletries because you have bought so many) I would *hope* that someone I knew would stage an intervention! Is any kind of criticism "being rude"?
A whole room just to store your books is ok, though, isn't it? 4000 books isn't excessive consumption, is it, especially if many of them were bought in the Oxfam bookshop, or at the annual Christian Aid book sale? And some of them are books you've owned since childhood, or have been gifts?
Asking for a friend.
I mean I wouldn't consider secondhand books to be a source of waste in the same way as say, shower gel (using the hygiene room example).
Any question of the ascetic life involves the Martha and Mary question. Should people be praying in caves when the world is such a mess?Or should they be feeding and caring for the poor, as did St Theresa of Calcutta, even when her faith was tested many times to its limit? There is room for both. Many of my favourite mystics and theologians such as Meister Eckhart and George MacDonald lived busy lives in the world, Eckhart as a Dominican Friar, teacher, and academic. Macdonald as a pastor and family man. Yet some people need the space of the desert, especially early on in their spiritual life. Perhaps one needs an almost Christlike integrity to life fully in the world without being corrupted by it. Even the Lord Himself withdrew to lonely places many times.
When Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire and descended rapidly into political corruption, the Desert Fathers and Mothers fled to quiet places to pursue their communion with the Lord away from all that. The writings we have from the Desert Fathers are a treasure. I love St John Cassian. St Isaac the Syrian is probably my favourite theologian. The ascetic of the Desert gave us the Jesus Prayer, which I am working on integrating into my life.
We can't all go out into the desert, but we can bring some desert into our own lives by simple living, study of Scripture and holy writings, and prayer. I have found "Letters from the Desert" and The Desert in the City" by 20th century Italian Brother Carlo Caretto most helpful. I have led a life that has been far from ascetic, but now as a senior citizen, I feel strongly drawn to it. I'm planning my first monastic retreat for September. Perhaps we don't all get the right balance between the active and the contemplative, but the question goes back at least to the time of Jesus.
I learned the hard way that, if I was going to lend books, I should buy two copies - one that I didn't part with, and one that could go out into the world and maybe come back eventually.
I moved house recently with 25 boxes of books. Some are from childhood, others are favourite authors that I go back to occasionally, some are non-fiction that I refer to (mostly local history) and some are new authors that I'm starting to collect.
Those are indeed helpful thoughts @Lamb Chopped especially on "bringing the world along with you". It certainly makes sense to me.
It would also be really interesting to hear from someone with a positive view of ascetic practice. I guess they are thin on the ground!
Depending exactly what is meant by ascetic practice, I would say it can be a positive thing, for the reasons I was talking about in my previous post on this thread. Simplifying one's life, resisting accumulation (even accumulation of books!) can help with streamlining focus on God, on sorting priorities of what matters most to you. We have a lot of physical and mental clutter in today's society.
I find fasting helpful (obviously being mindful of my body, and not doing it to a harmful extent) for focus on God, for clarity of mind, and for being mindful in general. By not automatically giving in to cravings or eating mindlessly, a wider mindfulness happens, for me, and it also has a positive effect on my health, calming my body as well as my mind.
I wouldn't find it helpful to deliberately deny myself of sleep as a way to focus on God - that would impact badly on my health. But equally, I do wake up in the early hours and don't fall back to sleep immediately, so I might as well use that time to pray. Not that I usually do - I find it very easy to use the time to worry, or to mindlessly scroll social media, which of course isn't helpful - but if I choose the mindfulness of stopping these impulses and using the time to focus on God, this would be a constructive way to use an unchosen deprivation.
To me, the difference between those two types of asceticism (fasting and staying awake over night time) is that fasting, while difficult, has a really positive impact on my body, on my physical health, while sleep deprivation has a really negative impact. So fasting is a deprivation that I choose, but lack of sleep is a deprivation that I don't choose, but would like to use for good if it happens.
Equally, as I mentioned in my other post, people can and do use asceticism in negative ways, to develop a focus for harm, for gaining and abusing power, or simply as a way to defer wealth. For myself, I see it as important to be flexible, humble, open to God's guidance, rather than it being a rigid attempt to seek control over one's body, as a power thing.
In terms of impact on the world, I find mindful people, who can quiet their mind, have a single, positive focus, do not give in to every impulse, and are not full of mental clutter, can have a very positive impact on others. They can give people their full attention, people feel listened to, valued, and then they in turn are happier, kinder, slow down more. So I do very much see a positive place in today's world for monastic types who seek simpler lives, spending significant time in solitude, if they are genuinely seeking good, and being real and open with themselves and God.
I learned the hard way that, if I was going to lend books, I should buy two copies - one that I didn't part with, and one that could go out into the world and maybe come back eventually.
I moved house recently with 25 boxes of books. Some are from childhood, others are favourite authors that I go back to occasionally, some are non-fiction that I refer to (mostly local history) and some are new authors that I'm starting to collect.
I have started a thread in Heaven about this extraordinary concept.
I think there's value in asceticism because I don't like a surplus of stuff. In fact, I think I turn into an accidental packrat because I quickly start reifying and just plain ignoring things that I don't use, resulting in both mental and physical clutter, and it's nice to get rid of things that get in the way of my daily functioning.
And I suppose in a society that promotes indulgence and excess, that might seem like asceticism.
Years ago I watched, and even led a post-viewing discussion about the movie "Into Great Silence." I haven't seen that film for a long time, but this thread has reminded me of it, and I'm going to give it another go sometime soon. Thanks.
I find the current concept of raw dogging (not the sexual meaning!) interesting, and as a deliberate choice, it could be seen as a modern form of asceticism - and/or an attempt to escape constant busy-ness and constant checking one's phone. A desire to resist the impulse for instant gratification that is so common now. It's used for train journeys too, not just plane journeys.
Simply the idea of doing nothing on the journey - not reading or talking or working or sleeping or eating - which of course is something many of us who didn't grow up with smartphones are used to anyway, at least in its less extreme version (but as with religious asceticism, there are people who take it to unhealthy extremes).
Though I would say it was generally a natural thing for us, not a deliberate decision. And whether or not something is a deliberate decision is significant. In a culture where smartphones have become the norm, where constant instant gratification is the norm, and where society values and pushes being constantly productive, people develop new ways of spending down time. And literally doing nothing and not checking one's phone can be a lot more difficult.
One extreme version of raw dogging is wall sitting, found in some Buddhist practices. It means just that, sitting facing a wall. People get different reactions, including obviously boredom, but also fear, hysterical laughter, sleepiness, etc. Of course, one keeps going, and eventually you might relax!
I learned the hard way that, if I was going to lend books, I should buy two copies - one that I didn't part with, and one that could go out into the world and maybe come back eventually.
I moved house recently with 25 boxes of books. Some are from childhood, others are favourite authors that I go back to occasionally, some are non-fiction that I refer to (mostly local history) and some are new authors that I'm starting to collect.
I have started a thread in Heaven about this extraordinary concept.
Gosh, I don't think I've ever started a thread on the Ship before! Thanks, Nenya!
The concept of deliberate boredom interests me, as I've been forced to learn how to cope with it myself for the last 40 years. It's because I got caught up into the Vietnamese culture 40 years ago--and have (God forgive me) never managed to learn the language well enough to completely ward off boredom (this is because I simply can't learn by ear; and no other methods have been available to me where we live until last year, so I'm making up for lost time now). Anyway.
If you can't understand what's being said around you, and you are involved in a ministry that means you're making visits to people several times a week (with Mr. Lamb along to do the talking!), AND that culture requires even the simplest visit to be at least two hours long, and more like an afternoon, really...
Why then, you learn to find things inside your own head to amuse yourself with. Because pulling out a book or a phone is going to be rude.
So yeah, I got really, really good at plotting out my writing inside my head, or pondering some Bible passage, or working through some philosophical or ethical tangle. It's all I had to do. And now that I'm finally learning the language, I still have the habits I developed in the days where I had to sit and look pleasant while I was waiting to do whatever tiny thing I was brought along to do (paperwork, generally).
Hermits were heading off into the desert long before Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire @pablito1954.
Arguably, there were Jewish antecedents such as the Essenes and from the NT we see examples in Jesus's day of people living what we might call a 'consecrated' life - such as the elderly Anna the prophetess (should we drop the 'ess' as we have in 'actress'?) in Luke's Gospel.
I've read that some early Christians deliberately adopted a simple lifestyle on the edge of towns, which were where the poorer people lived in a way that evolved into the forms of monasticism we are familiar with.
They gradually moved further out until the trend to go off and live it was in caves started.
It was already an established practice by the time Christianity became the official religion of the Empire.
These days monasticism has largely become associated with retreats and so on.
I get that but also think there is a role for it creative ways of developing community. I think there could be some interesting models we could explore that way particularly as rents and house prices are beyond many people's reach.
Raw dogging does remind me of Zen Buddhism. And I'm still kind of tickled by the story of how Zen (Chinese, Chan) Buddhism originated, as I understand it. I feel like it has some parallels in Christianity.
And this is very sloppy memory from undergrad, as I'm reading around online I realize that my recollection of this historical figure is anemic, but I'll provide because it's not inaccurate for the bits that I recall and I think it does capture an essence:
Supposedly, Buddhism had thrived in China, and done so well that it sprouted entire libraries of sutras, complex schools of thought, techniques, and belief systems that were so elaborate that nobody could keep them all straight anymore. It was overwhelming and led to a phase that I think some called map'po, the decline of the dharma. The religion had become so baroque that it was inaccessible to beginners.
On reflection, this reminds me of certain modern video games.
So, this monk, a very simple, rustic man remembered as Bodhidharma, at some point took it upon himself to just go in a cave and sit, staring at a wall, for a nine years.
By legend, that's what he did. Didn't chant, didn't think. Just sat, stared at a wall.
And so this became his teaching, and the basis (as I understand it) of a lot of Zen Buddhism. It's all very simple. You sit, and you stare at a wall. There is nothing else to it. Just be. There is no you. There is no wall. There just is.
I remember watching a video of Zen monks in Japan who'd do this, sitting in a row while another monk paced behind them with a switch, to whack them if it looked like their concentration or posture were flagging.
Oddly, I think the practice has actually taught me a few things. And even when taking communion I find the Zen hand posture* a convenient way to set my hands while I'm waiting. Meditation is a good exercise.
* Basically, hands turned palm up, left over right with thumbs very gently touching, relaxed.
However, to get to a place where there is no wall and no you, takes long practice, unless you are very intuitive. And then to get to a place where there is the wall, and there is you, takes long practice!
The concept of deliberate boredom interests me, as I've been forced to learn how to cope with it myself for the last 40 years. It's because I got caught up into the Vietnamese culture 40 years ago--and have (God forgive me) never managed to learn the language well enough to completely ward off boredom (this is because I simply can't learn by ear; and no other methods have been available to me where we live until last year, so I'm making up for lost time now). Anyway.
If you can't understand what's being said around you, and you are involved in a ministry that means you're making visits to people several times a week (with Mr. Lamb along to do the talking!), AND that culture requires even the simplest visit to be at least two hours long, and more like an afternoon, really...
Why then, you learn to find things inside your own head to amuse yourself with. Because pulling out a book or a phone is going to be rude.
So yeah, I got really, really good at plotting out my writing inside my head, or pondering some Bible passage, or working through some philosophical or ethical tangle. It's all I had to do. And now that I'm finally learning the language, I still have the habits I developed in the days where I had to sit and look pleasant while I was waiting to do whatever tiny thing I was brought along to do (paperwork, generally).
That reminds me of the ability that some spouses develop to make precisely the correct sound or comment at the appropriate time while their other half is speaking, meanwhile they are thinking about other things and not really listening at all.
I think there's value in asceticism because I don't like a surplus of stuff. In fact, I think I turn into an accidental packrat because I quickly start reifying and just plain ignoring things that I don't use, resulting in both mental and physical clutter, and it's nice to get rid of things that get in the way of my daily functioning.
If your reifying results in mental clutter, doesn't that mean you're reifying your reification?
The concept of deliberate boredom interests me, as I've been forced to learn how to cope with it myself for the last 40 years. It's because I got caught up into the Vietnamese culture 40 years ago--and have (God forgive me) never managed to learn the language well enough to completely ward off boredom (this is because I simply can't learn by ear; and no other methods have been available to me where we live until last year, so I'm making up for lost time now). Anyway.
If you can't understand what's being said around you, and you are involved in a ministry that means you're making visits to people several times a week (with Mr. Lamb along to do the talking!), AND that culture requires even the simplest visit to be at least two hours long, and more like an afternoon, really...
Why then, you learn to find things inside your own head to amuse yourself with. Because pulling out a book or a phone is going to be rude.
So yeah, I got really, really good at plotting out my writing inside my head, or pondering some Bible passage, or working through some philosophical or ethical tangle. It's all I had to do. And now that I'm finally learning the language, I still have the habits I developed in the days where I had to sit and look pleasant while I was waiting to do whatever tiny thing I was brought along to do (paperwork, generally).
That reminds me of the ability that some spouses develop to make precisely the correct sound or comment at the appropriate time while their other half is speaking, meanwhile they are thinking about other things and not really listening at all.
I think you do listen—I was certainly paying attention to body language etc even if I couldn’t follow the words—and yeah, you do get good enough that your responses sometimes look like mind reading. It’s like your mind is working on two levels at once.
On the subject of wall sitting, discussed above, as well as experiences of no wall and no self, there is that experienced by some very intuitive people, I am the wall. The implications of this are scary.
Do we think of ascetism as a long-term pursuit (or experience) or can one have an ascetic weekend or evening?
In the Bible, some people would do it for a particular purpose, like repentance or supplication about something very specific. If I want to simplify and declutter my mind (which is more the wording I would use, rather than asceticism), although it is a longterm pursuit, I might have a retreat weekend where I focus more on this.
However, to get to a place where there is no wall and no you, takes long practice, unless you are very intuitive. And then to get to a place where there is the wall, and there is you, takes long practice!
Yep! I think there is a "build, then break, the rebuild" cyclic pedagogy to it. I rather enjoy it.
I think there's value in asceticism because I don't like a surplus of stuff. In fact, I think I turn into an accidental packrat because I quickly start reifying and just plain ignoring things that I don't use, resulting in both mental and physical clutter, and it's nice to get rid of things that get in the way of my daily functioning.
If your reifying results in mental clutter, doesn't that mean you're reifying your reification?
I think what happens is you shrink your sense of self so that the clutter is like an atrophying limb or a withering branch. One early lesson that still sticks to me is to treat your thinking brain like a monkey. You just let it run around, but you don't pay too much attention to it or to the things it's chasing. You're not the monkey. Freud might have some thoughts about that...
The physical clutter, sadly, doesn't go away so easily.
* Basically, hands turned palm up, left over right with thumbs very gently touching, relaxed.
I did this with my hands and immediately saw the impression of a soaring bird, possibly an eagle. Is that the intention?
(Tangent it also reminded me of shadow puppetry -which seems to have demised now that people don't have projectors for photographic slides?)
I'm not really sure. Zen, in my subjective amateur half trained sense, is very distrustful of metaphors in a positive sense. Usually you're supposed to break them down. I think the hand posture is simply a way to have your hands on your lap at rest and not have to think about them. It might be more of a flattened circle, or a circuit. It's probably important that there's contact but no serious pressure between the thumbs. Not pushing, not straining, just sitting.
I think meditation is supposed to be a non-intentional thing. Just be. Per Yoda, no try. I'm not sure there's even "try" or "do." Just be.
Again, I'm not an expert on this stuff, just spent some time with it years ago and bits of it stuck to me.
On the subject of wall sitting, discussed above, as well as experiences of no wall and no self, there is that experienced by some very intuitive people, I am the wall. The implications of this are scary.
So, some folks who know me from back in the day know I had Morihei Ueshiba for an avatar, because I used to train in Aikido for years and it left a mark, it's also where I picked up a lot of Zen. There's a lot of Zen in Japanese martial arts, of course.
And I was reflecting on his totally bonkers statement often translated as "I am the universe."
Googling back, I realize that the Japanese version probably had some more nuance in it, but I think that at higher echelons of awareness, there's a blurring of self that goes on in intensive training that...yeah. It's weird, and it's really powerful. And I've met a few people who seem capable of pulling that kind of thing off. As in your so in tune with yourself and your training partner that you know exactly how to move to bring them to ground without them even noticing what you're doing. Powerful stuff.
And it makes a fine cross cultural joke with Midsummer Night's Dream.
Comments
Depending on what “this kind of thing” means, some of us may be. There’s a whole thread on the old Ship I started about that.
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=11;t=001087;p=1
I think it's fair enough not to make windows into souls or judge any particular person's practice. On the other hand the OP is asking about asceticism in a religious context and I'm trying therefore to ask what it is "supposed" to be for in that context and whether it could ever actually work in that way.
Okay, this may or may not be helpful. But it comes from experience--one person's experience--and some extrapolation.
Suppose you have a Christian with a strong thirst to get closer to God. That's not unusual, that's pretty common in fact. And said person is asking how that can happen.
Well, they're going to look around them and see what the options are. And the whole concept of "leaving the world" is widespread across human cultures, not just Christianity. The world-as-spiritual-danger is a concept found in the New Testament, though it's not univocal (we also get the world-as-good-gift-of-God, and the world-as-mission-field-and-place-of-service). It's not a long step from "flee temptation" to "flee the world itself."
But having done so (if you've done so--I haven't), you will certainly find that you've brought the world along with you in the form of internal human brokenness. You will experience temptations to sin even if you're the only person around--it's entirely possible to be proud, resentful, lazy, and so forth, even if you're a hermit. And if you're facing that, and you think it's holding you back from knowing God better, well...
Some folks will try to deal with it by main force. (I don't recommend this, I generally take the issue to the Lord and ask him to deal with it, but whatever.) They will attempt to discipline the issues out of themselves, just as they've seen parents disciplining children. And they may have (or think they have!) some success. So they keep on with it. There's doubtless an endorphin thing going on with the more extreme practices, which could reinforce them.
Now whether this actually amounts to a hill of beans in the eyes of God, that's a matter of argument between various Christian groups. I personally think it's better to take the desire to be close to him and hand it over to him, asking him to bring it about in his own way. But I'm not everybody.
And there is this well-known human desire to "make progress" in whatever we do--to feel like we're accomplishing something, to actually take control of our own spiritual maturity (as if!). And having set practices, especially unpleasant ones, is one way of satisfying that desire. Me, I think it's a mistake. But I would say that, being a Lutheran!
Coatings on paper plates can affect how long it takes them to biodegrade, though.
It would also be really interesting to hear from someone with a positive view of ascetic practice. I guess they are thin on the ground!
I will say that I found some compostable/biodegradable straws on Amazon a few years ago (I haven't gotten through the box all the way yet) and was very happy to, and that's the general kind I would get if I ever run out of them and need more--it's more the sense of being pushed that I don't like. (I'll make use of whatever straws the restaurant gives me when I drink a soda there.) I get the coated kind of plates and bowls because I don't want stuff to soak through, especially cat food.
(And again I know that's not what @Pomona was talking about.)
I meant mortification.
Also we do need some degree of ego. A healthy sense of self-esteem is, well, healthy.
But in many moments, or split seconds, where is self-esteem? Well, where is anything?
Ah, spiritual aspects of fasting and such rather than of BDSM or related practices? But I think there’s some (quite positive) connection, at least in some areas. And I thought some things, like flagellation, were certainly relevant here. (Not that one can’t direct one’s submission in these practices, or indeed all sorts of practices, to different things. “Intermittent fasting” for health reasons has become popular recently, for example.)
Indeed. One of the criticisms of the hermit lifestyle, including solitary asceticism, is not just that it could go into unhealthy extremes, but that it didn’t really help anyone else—and so we got monasteries, which both moderated extreme asceticism and benefited the community, the needy, etc. It gave the monks someone to be accountable to as well.
And 🕯 for your EDS.
I thought it was more down to people seeking the eremites, either for spiritual advice or because they were just curious.
Yeah that too, it wasn't just a case of the desert being full.
Not that any of us are being particularly ascetic.
One of things that's been said in the talks is that fasting, for instance, has less to do with buffeting the body, as it were, and more to do with transforming the mind.
FWIW, I do believe that a degree of asceticism is of value but not as an end in itself, and certainly not as a means of 'earning' one's salvation or as a source of spiritual pride or virtue-signalling.
If I was starting a TikTok-style hygiene room (a whole room just to store your toiletries because you have bought so many) I would *hope* that someone I knew would stage an intervention! Is any kind of criticism "being rude"?
A whole room just to store your books is ok, though, isn't it? 4000 books isn't excessive consumption, is it, especially if many of them were bought in the Oxfam bookshop, or at the annual Christian Aid book sale? And some of them are books you've owned since childhood, or have been gifts?
Asking for a friend.
If the answer is yes, yes, and maybe, i reckon you’re fine.
I mean I wouldn't consider secondhand books to be a source of waste in the same way as say, shower gel (using the hygiene room example).
When Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire and descended rapidly into political corruption, the Desert Fathers and Mothers fled to quiet places to pursue their communion with the Lord away from all that. The writings we have from the Desert Fathers are a treasure. I love St John Cassian. St Isaac the Syrian is probably my favourite theologian. The ascetic of the Desert gave us the Jesus Prayer, which I am working on integrating into my life.
We can't all go out into the desert, but we can bring some desert into our own lives by simple living, study of Scripture and holy writings, and prayer. I have found "Letters from the Desert" and The Desert in the City" by 20th century Italian Brother Carlo Caretto most helpful. I have led a life that has been far from ascetic, but now as a senior citizen, I feel strongly drawn to it. I'm planning my first monastic retreat for September. Perhaps we don't all get the right balance between the active and the contemplative, but the question goes back at least to the time of Jesus.
[tangent]
Lend books???? What sorcery is this?
[/tangent]
I moved house recently with 25 boxes of books. Some are from childhood, others are favourite authors that I go back to occasionally, some are non-fiction that I refer to (mostly local history) and some are new authors that I'm starting to collect.
Depending exactly what is meant by ascetic practice, I would say it can be a positive thing, for the reasons I was talking about in my previous post on this thread. Simplifying one's life, resisting accumulation (even accumulation of books!) can help with streamlining focus on God, on sorting priorities of what matters most to you. We have a lot of physical and mental clutter in today's society.
I find fasting helpful (obviously being mindful of my body, and not doing it to a harmful extent) for focus on God, for clarity of mind, and for being mindful in general. By not automatically giving in to cravings or eating mindlessly, a wider mindfulness happens, for me, and it also has a positive effect on my health, calming my body as well as my mind.
I wouldn't find it helpful to deliberately deny myself of sleep as a way to focus on God - that would impact badly on my health. But equally, I do wake up in the early hours and don't fall back to sleep immediately, so I might as well use that time to pray. Not that I usually do - I find it very easy to use the time to worry, or to mindlessly scroll social media, which of course isn't helpful - but if I choose the mindfulness of stopping these impulses and using the time to focus on God, this would be a constructive way to use an unchosen deprivation.
To me, the difference between those two types of asceticism (fasting and staying awake over night time) is that fasting, while difficult, has a really positive impact on my body, on my physical health, while sleep deprivation has a really negative impact. So fasting is a deprivation that I choose, but lack of sleep is a deprivation that I don't choose, but would like to use for good if it happens.
Equally, as I mentioned in my other post, people can and do use asceticism in negative ways, to develop a focus for harm, for gaining and abusing power, or simply as a way to defer wealth. For myself, I see it as important to be flexible, humble, open to God's guidance, rather than it being a rigid attempt to seek control over one's body, as a power thing.
In terms of impact on the world, I find mindful people, who can quiet their mind, have a single, positive focus, do not give in to every impulse, and are not full of mental clutter, can have a very positive impact on others. They can give people their full attention, people feel listened to, valued, and then they in turn are happier, kinder, slow down more. So I do very much see a positive place in today's world for monastic types who seek simpler lives, spending significant time in solitude, if they are genuinely seeking good, and being real and open with themselves and God.
I have started a thread in Heaven about this extraordinary concept.
And I suppose in a society that promotes indulgence and excess, that might seem like asceticism.
Simply the idea of doing nothing on the journey - not reading or talking or working or sleeping or eating - which of course is something many of us who didn't grow up with smartphones are used to anyway, at least in its less extreme version (but as with religious asceticism, there are people who take it to unhealthy extremes).
Though I would say it was generally a natural thing for us, not a deliberate decision. And whether or not something is a deliberate decision is significant. In a culture where smartphones have become the norm, where constant instant gratification is the norm, and where society values and pushes being constantly productive, people develop new ways of spending down time. And literally doing nothing and not checking one's phone can be a lot more difficult.
Gosh, I don't think I've ever started a thread on the Ship before! Thanks, Nenya!
If you can't understand what's being said around you, and you are involved in a ministry that means you're making visits to people several times a week (with Mr. Lamb along to do the talking!), AND that culture requires even the simplest visit to be at least two hours long, and more like an afternoon, really...
Why then, you learn to find things inside your own head to amuse yourself with. Because pulling out a book or a phone is going to be rude.
So yeah, I got really, really good at plotting out my writing inside my head, or pondering some Bible passage, or working through some philosophical or ethical tangle. It's all I had to do. And now that I'm finally learning the language, I still have the habits I developed in the days where I had to sit and look pleasant while I was waiting to do whatever tiny thing I was brought along to do (paperwork, generally).
Arguably, there were Jewish antecedents such as the Essenes and from the NT we see examples in Jesus's day of people living what we might call a 'consecrated' life - such as the elderly Anna the prophetess (should we drop the 'ess' as we have in 'actress'?) in Luke's Gospel.
I've read that some early Christians deliberately adopted a simple lifestyle on the edge of towns, which were where the poorer people lived in a way that evolved into the forms of monasticism we are familiar with.
They gradually moved further out until the trend to go off and live it was in caves started.
It was already an established practice by the time Christianity became the official religion of the Empire.
These days monasticism has largely become associated with retreats and so on.
I get that but also think there is a role for it creative ways of developing community. I think there could be some interesting models we could explore that way particularly as rents and house prices are beyond many people's reach.
And this is very sloppy memory from undergrad, as I'm reading around online I realize that my recollection of this historical figure is anemic, but I'll provide because it's not inaccurate for the bits that I recall and I think it does capture an essence:
Supposedly, Buddhism had thrived in China, and done so well that it sprouted entire libraries of sutras, complex schools of thought, techniques, and belief systems that were so elaborate that nobody could keep them all straight anymore. It was overwhelming and led to a phase that I think some called map'po, the decline of the dharma. The religion had become so baroque that it was inaccessible to beginners.
On reflection, this reminds me of certain modern video games.
So, this monk, a very simple, rustic man remembered as Bodhidharma, at some point took it upon himself to just go in a cave and sit, staring at a wall, for a nine years.
By legend, that's what he did. Didn't chant, didn't think. Just sat, stared at a wall.
And so this became his teaching, and the basis (as I understand it) of a lot of Zen Buddhism. It's all very simple. You sit, and you stare at a wall. There is nothing else to it. Just be. There is no you. There is no wall. There just is.
I remember watching a video of Zen monks in Japan who'd do this, sitting in a row while another monk paced behind them with a switch, to whack them if it looked like their concentration or posture were flagging.
Oddly, I think the practice has actually taught me a few things. And even when taking communion I find the Zen hand posture* a convenient way to set my hands while I'm waiting. Meditation is a good exercise.
* Basically, hands turned palm up, left over right with thumbs very gently touching, relaxed.
That reminds me of the ability that some spouses develop to make precisely the correct sound or comment at the appropriate time while their other half is speaking, meanwhile they are thinking about other things and not really listening at all.
I think you do listen—I was certainly paying attention to body language etc even if I couldn’t follow the words—and yeah, you do get good enough that your responses sometimes look like mind reading. It’s like your mind is working on two levels at once.
I did this with my hands and immediately saw the impression of a soaring bird, possibly an eagle. Is that the intention?
(Tangent it also reminded me of shadow puppetry -which seems to have demised now that people don't have projectors for photographic slides?)
In the Bible, some people would do it for a particular purpose, like repentance or supplication about something very specific. If I want to simplify and declutter my mind (which is more the wording I would use, rather than asceticism), although it is a longterm pursuit, I might have a retreat weekend where I focus more on this.
Yep! I think there is a "build, then break, the rebuild" cyclic pedagogy to it. I rather enjoy it.
I think what happens is you shrink your sense of self so that the clutter is like an atrophying limb or a withering branch. One early lesson that still sticks to me is to treat your thinking brain like a monkey. You just let it run around, but you don't pay too much attention to it or to the things it's chasing. You're not the monkey. Freud might have some thoughts about that...
The physical clutter, sadly, doesn't go away so easily.
I'm not really sure. Zen, in my subjective amateur half trained sense, is very distrustful of metaphors in a positive sense. Usually you're supposed to break them down. I think the hand posture is simply a way to have your hands on your lap at rest and not have to think about them. It might be more of a flattened circle, or a circuit. It's probably important that there's contact but no serious pressure between the thumbs. Not pushing, not straining, just sitting.
I think meditation is supposed to be a non-intentional thing. Just be. Per Yoda, no try. I'm not sure there's even "try" or "do." Just be.
Again, I'm not an expert on this stuff, just spent some time with it years ago and bits of it stuck to me.
So, some folks who know me from back in the day know I had Morihei Ueshiba for an avatar, because I used to train in Aikido for years and it left a mark, it's also where I picked up a lot of Zen. There's a lot of Zen in Japanese martial arts, of course.
And I was reflecting on his totally bonkers statement often translated as "I am the universe."
Googling back, I realize that the Japanese version probably had some more nuance in it, but I think that at higher echelons of awareness, there's a blurring of self that goes on in intensive training that...yeah. It's weird, and it's really powerful. And I've met a few people who seem capable of pulling that kind of thing off. As in your so in tune with yourself and your training partner that you know exactly how to move to bring them to ground without them even noticing what you're doing. Powerful stuff.
And it makes a fine cross cultural joke with Midsummer Night's Dream.
Here's a link with further commentary.