-
Posts
-
Jesus makes it clear that his religion is not one of self-examination, self-contemplation, or religious introspection (140:8.27, 144:2.2, 144:4.6, 48:4.18, 53:1.3).
However, in other places, we are told that spiritual growth and true faith are predicated on profound reflection and sincere self-criticism (100:1.5, 132:3.5). And the soul is said to be self reflective (133:6.5).
Does anyone have ideas about the difference between self-examination and self-criticism? Why is one said to be harmful while the other is constructive?
Jesus makes it clear that his religion is not one of self-examination, self-contemplation, or religious introspection (140:8.27, 144:2.2, 144:4.6, 48:4.18, 53:1.3). However, in other places, we are told that spiritual growth and true faith are predicated on profound reflection and sincere self-criticism (100:1.5, 132:3.5). And the soul is said to be self reflective (133:6.5). Does anyone have ideas about the difference between self-examination and self-criticism? Why is one said to be harmful while the other is constructive?
Hello Mark,
Good questions. I can give you a plain-Jane reply. I think people know when they act off the rail, meaning they have reacted rather than acted. Since the act is ours (your acts are yours, my acts are mine – off the rail or not) and since we know the consequences are God’s, it behooves us to act rightly according to our highest ideals that we are shooting for. Bad habits of acting (like having a sharp temper for example) do need correction I think and that requires self-understanding.
Jesus in talking to Nabon was a Greek Jew said, among other things,
132:3.10 Universe progress is characterized by increasing personality freedom because it is associated with the progressive attainment of higher and higher levels of self-understanding and consequent voluntary self-restraint. The attainment of perfection of spiritual self-restraint equals completeness of universe freedom and personal liberty. Faith fosters and maintains man’s soul in the midst of the confusion of his early orientation in such a vast universe, whereas prayer becomes the great unifier of the various inspirations of the creative imagination and the faith urges of a soul trying to identify itself with the spirit ideals of the indwelling and associated divine presence.Everyone gets blurty from time to time, but I think self-resrtaint is a good thing in many areas of life. Jesus made no provision for spiritual self-examination…140:8.27 [Part IV]The three apostles were shocked this afternoon when they realized that their Master’s religion made no provision for spiritual self-examination. All religions before and after the times of Jesus, even Christianity, carefully provide for conscientious self-examination. But not so with the religion of Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus’ philosophy of life is without religious introspection. The carpenter’s son never taught character building; he taught character growth, declaring that the kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed. But Jesus said nothing which would proscribe self-analysis as a prevention of conceited egotism.Overmuch self-analysis, self-examination has drawbacks doesn’t it?Greetings Mark!!
It appears that 100:1.5 and 132:3.5 have a lot to do with conscience and idealism and how we measure ourselves to those self and social chosen ideals. Compare this to the risks of self loathing and self adoration and we can see the danger inherent in “self examination”. Conscience and idealism are really a form of internal comparison between ourselves and other selves/ideals.
We should also remember this transformation of self is a process…we must learn to be self forgetting and we only do so by growth and experiential wisdom attainment…a love of God which transforms us into a love of others by becoming most trusting and confident in our destiny and losing our anxieties and fears for ourselves and our future. Idealism helps launch us into this process of self forgetfulness and loving service??
What do you think?
Mark, you asked a fantastic question. There are so many ways to approach it, but when it comes to understanding TUB, context is everything. Looking at the first quote:
140:8.27 The three apostles were shocked this afternoon when they realized that their Master’s religion made no provision for spiritual self-examination. All religions before and after the times of Jesus, even Christianity, carefully provide for conscientious self-examination. But not so with the religion of Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus’ philosophy of life is without religious introspection. The carpenter’s son never taught character building; he taught character growth, declaring that the kingdom of heaven is like a mustard seed. But Jesus said nothing which would proscribe self-analysis as a prevention of conceited egotism.First off, note the two key words describing self-examination: spiritual and conscientious with the reference to religions. The quote is referring to evolutionary religion with its dogmas and creeds. All human evolutionary religions require their followers to study their own motivations and behaviors in order to make sure their thinking and acting stay within the lines drawn by those dogmas and creeds. The word conscientious not only means according to one’s conscience, but it also means to work hard at doing what’s right, but what’s right according to the rules of the religion.
The religion of Jesus has no dogmas and creeds, which means its followers are free. They do not have to worry themselves over whether or not they are following a strict set of rules. Followers of Jesus only need to concern themselves with doing God’s will. Self-analysis in Jesus’ religion means making sure your heart and mind are seeking to know and love God while serving others, that your inner self is consistently sharing with God and your outer self is looking for similar ways to share with others. It’s also about keeping your self small and humble in order to learn more about God’s will (insight), while maintaining a willingness to do it. It’s what you’re striving to do that counts.This next quote discusses the difference between harmful introspection and beneficial introspection.(1621.5) 144:4.6 Prayer is an antidote for harmful introspection. At least, prayer as the Master taught it is such a beneficent ministry to the soul. Jesus consistently employed the beneficial influence of praying for one’s fellows. The Master usually prayed in the plural, not in the singular. Only in the great crises of his earth life did Jesus ever pray for himself.
Harmful introspection is brooding, worrying, sulking, fretting, agonizing and eating away at one’s own heart. These are all potentially destructive attitudes of mind. Prayer reverses these attitudes, especially if prayer involves concern over other people and their welfare. It takes the mind off the self and onto, not only other people, but onto God. Such an attitude is re-aligning, it promotes the proper amount of humility and meekness to change the emphasis from self to “other-than-self,” which is the first step toward selflessness. Jesus taught the four faith attitudes to keep the mind healthy and prayer is an excellent way to achieve them.
Will look at those other quotes you mentioned later. Thanks for asking your question.
Thanks Mara, Bradley, and Bonita for your replies on this paradox.
Thanks, Mara, for that quote on self-understanding, although I admit, I am still a little unclear as to how to differentiate between self-examination and self-understanding, but I do understand the need to recognize and control undesirable personal traits through self-restraint.
Intellectually, I understand the notion of coming to a point where we only think of helping others, or doing our Father’s will, and thereby entering a state of self-forgetfulness. This state of mind seems best achieved when in actual service to others. However, even if we confine profound reflection and sincere self-criticism (upon which true faith is predicated 132:3.5), to issues related only to spiritual growth or matters of faith, I do not understand how these topics can be adequately explored in a state of self-forgetfulness.
I can accept the ideas suggested by Bradley and Bonita that spiritual self-examination needs to be redefined in the context of religious dogma and social context and is, therefore, not required as such if we dedicate our lives to following the will of God as best we understand it. Nonetheless, if we remove the modifiers “spiritual” and “conscientious” then how does self-examination differ from the process of self-criticism?
I appreciate Bonita’s differentiation between harmful and good introspection, and perhaps this is where profound reflection and sincere self-criticism come into play, simply because it takes a degree of personal sincerity and honesty to recognize and admit that one is brooding, worrying, etc.
As all of you imply, it may be that the process is simply one of recognizing those things about oneself that are in need of spiritual repair. Even though God knows what we need before we ask, this doesn’t imply that we know what we need. And perhaps knowing what we need through reflection and self-criticism is an important step in the process of self-realization.
“Spiritual growth is first an awakening to needs, next a discernment of meanings, and then a discovery of values.” (100:2.2).
From our recognition of needs, we could begin a conscious adjustment of faith attitudes and, from there, start up a chat with God about finding a way to correct these personal spiritual deficiencies. This could include, of course, a need to approach a mental state of selflessness.
But when all is said and done, I believe the average reader would find the use and application of such terms as “self-understanding, self-contemplation, self-examination, self-criticism, and self-reflection” to be a little confusing, even with the best dictionaries at hand.
I can accept the ideas suggested by Bradley and Bonita that spiritual self-examination needs to be redefined in the context of religious dogma and social context and is, therefore, not required as such if we dedicate our lives to following the will of God as best we understand it. Nonetheless, if we remove the modifiers “spiritual” and “conscientious” then how does self-examination differ from the process of self-criticism?
The point I was trying to make is when studying the text, the modifiers are critical to understanding its meaning. They shouldn’t be left out when studying, otherwise self-examination and self-criticism can mean a myriad of things. For instance, self-examination can mean a monthly breast cancer self-exam, checking one’s weight, looking for new wrinkles and gray hairs. Self-criticism can mean getting angry with yourself because you forgot someone’s birthday, left the garage door open overnight, forgot to turn off the stove burner. What I’m saying is that the modifiers help determine meaning, especially given the problems of the English language. At least that’s my opinion, for what it’s worth.
I think the key to meaning is the fact that we cannot cause our own spiritual growth. Spiritual growth isn’t something that can be constructed by looking at a blueprint and following the specs (orthodoxy). All growth is unconscious (100:3.7), including spiritual growth. All we can do is provide fertile soil. The natural question then becomes, what is fertile soil? The answer is faith and development of the spiritual reflex mentioned in 100:1.8.
Let’s just say that if you’re wholeheartedly focused on developing ” . . . religious predispositions toward favorable reaction to spiritual stimuli,. . . (100:1.8)” then you’re not focused on yourself. You’re focused on the spiritual stimuli; you’re focused on your relationships and cosmic problem solving, which leads me to one of the other quotes you listed.
(549.5) 48:4.18 Humor should function as an automatic safety valve to prevent the building up of excessive pressures due to the monotony of sustained and serious self-contemplation in association with the intense struggle for developmental progress and noble achievement. Humor also functions to lessen the shock of the unexpected impact of fact or of truth, rigid unyielding fact and flexible ever-living truth. The mortal personality, never sure as to which will next be encountered, through humor swiftly grasps — sees the point and achieves insight — the unexpected nature of the situation be it fact or be it truth.
This must be taken in context as well. Self-contemplation is referring to the issues surrounding cosmic problem solving with spiritual insight. Spiritual insight is something which requires effort. Since spiritual insight is a gift, you’d think it should be free, but it isn’t. The cost is faith, which happens to be another gift. So there’s the paradox. Why aren’t God’s gifts free? Why do they take effort? The answer is because we must exercise free will. No gift can be forced upon us and the act of accepting the gift and using it is the effort God requires. It’s the willingness to be in a relationship with him, sharing with him. Doing the will of God is nothing more than sharing the inner life with him (111:5.1). He supplies everything, our job is to choose.
The concept is simple, the execution is more difficult because of choice. What to choose? This or that? The answer depends wholly upon a desire for perfection, dedication to seeking it, willingness to recognize it and the loyalty required to live it. I’d say the only thing worth examining about yourself is whether or not you’re being a loyal son.
We all stray and sometimes we’re not even aware of it until the psychic conflicts make it obvious. Those conflicts are inevitable and most, if allowed into the realm of the Father-son relationship with honest sincerity, will bring genuine growth. Why? Because the conflict will open up new meanings which require new decisions and growth is dependent upon sincere decisions. But if conflicts do nothing more than eat away at your soul and turn you into a nasty bastard, then it’s safe to say you’ve gone astray. Realignment is in order. That’s about all the self-examination, self-criticism I think one needs, recognizing mental joylessness, a discontentment with your own miserable self along with the desire for something better.
(1097.6) 100:4.2 Religious perplexities are inevitable; there can be no growth without psychic conflict and spiritual agitation. The organization of a philosophic standard of living entails considerable commotion in the philosophic realms of the mind. Loyalties are not exercised in behalf of the great, the good, the true, and the noble without a struggle. Effort is attendant upon clarification of spiritual vision and enhancement of cosmic insight. And the human intellect protests against being weaned from subsisting upon the nonspiritual energies of temporal existence. The slothful animal mind rebels at the effort required to wrestle with cosmic problem solving.
TUB describes the mortal discontent of the unspiritualized mind which causes a consuming thirst and indescribable hunger (34:6.8). It’s an uncomfortable mental state for normal folks. But there are some folks who become inured or just take longer to become unhappy with themselves. Jesus mentioned this type of person to Ganid:
(1466.1) 132:7.1 Jesus, Gonod, and Ganid made five trips away from Rome to points of interest in the surrounding territory. On their visit to the northern Italian lakes Jesus had the long talk with Ganid concerning the impossibility of teaching a man about God if the man does not desire to know God. They had casually met a thoughtless pagan while on their journey up to the lakes, and Ganid was surprised that Jesus did not follow out his usual practice of enlisting the man in conversation which would naturally lead up to the discussion of spiritual questions. When Ganid asked his teacher why he evinced so little interest in this pagan, Jesus answered:
(1466.2) 132:7.2 “Ganid, the man was not hungry for truth. He was not dissatisfied with himself. He was not ready to ask for help, and the eyes of his mind were not open to receive light for the soul. That man was not ripe for the harvest of salvation; he must be allowed more time for the trials and difficulties of life to prepare him for the reception of wisdom and higher learning. Or, if we could have him live with us, we might by our lives show him the Father in heaven, and thus would he become so attracted by our lives as sons of God that he would be constrained to inquire about our Father. You cannot reveal God to those who do not seek for him; you cannot lead unwilling souls into the joys of salvation. Man must become hungry for truth as a result of the experiences of living, or he must desire to know God as the result of contact with the lives of those who are acquainted with the divine Father before another human being can act as the means of leading such a fellow mortal to the Father in heaven. If we know God, our real business on earth is so to live as to permit the Father to reveal himself in our lives, and thus will all God-seeking persons see the Father and ask for our help in finding out more about the God who in this manner finds expression in our lives.”
Not sure if all this gibber-jabber of mine is making any sense or helping. There are many different ways to approach the discussion of this issue, which is a critical one to contemplate, in my opinion.
Bonita wrote:
“Spiritual insight is something which requires effort. Since spiritual insight is a gift, you’d think it should be free, but it isn’t. The cost is faith, which happens to be another gift. So there’s the paradox. Why aren’t God’s gifts free? Why do they take effort? The answer is because we must exercise free will. No gift can be forced upon us and the act of accepting the gift and using it is the effort God requires. It’s the willingness to be in a relationship with him, sharing with him. Doing the will of God is nothing more than sharing the inner life with him (111:5.1). He supplies everything, our job is to choose.”
Nice! In one short paragraph, you expose the essence of the human condition, and opportunity.
Nigel
Thanks Nigel.
I woke up at 3:45am for some reason and found myself thinking about the self-contemplation issue. I realize the term is used only three times in TUB, and each time it has a slightly different meaning. I think there is a healthy form of self-contemplation, an unbalanced form of self-contemplation and a seriously unhealthy form. Obviously Lucifer’s self-contemplation was the latter which in his lifetime probably ran the gamut from healthy to unbalanced all the way to deadly. Why he had no stop-gap measures, I do not know.
I tried in my last post to describe my concept of healthy self-contemplation, self-analysis or self-criticism. In a nutshell I think it has to do with awareness of the fact that, despite one’s sincere desire for perfection, every effort seems to fall short. I think this is, as Mark points out, a basic recognition of need, a realization of the human condition of duality and the awareness of smallness (100:1.5). In a healthy mind this realization should encourage a greater effort to strive for one’s highest ideals, knowing that progress means there are always higher meanings and values to discover (103:5.7). It is said that what we strive to become is more important than what we are at any given point. (111:1.5)
Unbalanced self-contemplation covers a lot of ground between the extremes of self-absorption and being overly conscientiousness. All kinds of misery comes from a misguided conscious which makes one overly concerned about one’s performance (103:2.10), enough to freeze progress and even cause mental and physical injury from nervous anxiety (48:4.19). On the other extreme of self-contemplation, the one of self-absorption, there’s always the danger of succumbing to pride which can persuade a person to entertain the idea of self-importance. And that there is the slippery slope into the worst kind of self-contemplation, self-glorification and self-exaltation, the deadly kind that Lucifer succumbed to.
I do think it is important to recognize the difference between contemplation and self-contemplation. Contemplation, in terms of reflective thinking, prayer, meditative thought, deep thinking, etc., is not necessarily centered on the self. Human thought is primarily conversational (91:3.1). One naturally asks, who are humans talking to? I know most people claim they are talking to themselves, but it’s not possible to have a conversation with one person unless that person has a multiple personality disorder or schizophrenia. A conversation requires two persons, and fortunately for us, someone else besides ourselves lives within our minds, whether folks want to accept that or not is their business, but revelation reveals the truth of the matter.
So what am I saying? If thinking is a conversation, then contemplative thinking should be a conversation with God. Faith tells us he’s listening. Spiritual insight tells us he’s trying to answer. If you’re really attempting to contemplate, then your mind is not on yourself, it can’t be. It can’t be called self-contemplation if you’re conversing (which is what contemplative thought is) with the “other-than-self” entity who lives in your head. Such an exercise immediately becomes a sharing exercise, which is what doing God’s will is all about. (111:5.1) In a stable mind this is healthy and conducive to spiritual growth.
But there is danger here too in unstable minds or those which easily become unbalanced. This is why there are warnings in TUB not to take any of this too seriously. Sincerely, yes. Too seriously, no. It’s also why Jesus taught us to alternate between contemplation (prayer) and service. Both take the mind off the self and foster a healthy balance between the inner and outer life.
(1616.5) 143:7.3 Worship — contemplation of the spiritual — must alternate with service, contact with material reality. Work should alternate with play; religion should be balanced by humor. Profound philosophy should be relieved by rhythmic poetry. The strain of living — the time tension of personality — should be relaxed by the restfulness of worship. The feelings of insecurity arising from the fear of personality isolation in the universe should be antidoted by the faith contemplation of the Father and by the attempted realization of the Supreme.
Okay, I’m blathering again. Some call it preaching. Don’t mean to come off that way. Sorry. Let’s blame it on the caffeine.
Thanks Bonita. I think you explored the topic quite well. In essence, it seems we only need faith in the ability of the indwelling spirit to transform us, without having to think about ourselves too much.
“Your secret of the mastery of self is bound up with your faith in the indwelling spirit, which ever works by love.” 143:2.7
Another good reason for taking the mind off the self is to redirect it to the contemplation of the divine. We know Jesus spent a considerable amount of his time in communion, and we know that worship is divinely creative.
“…But what chance does the Father have to appear as a God of supreme loyalties and divine ideals in the souls of men who give little or no time to the thoughtful contemplation of such eternal realities?” 155:6.13
Having said this, we are still faced with some vigorous mental tasks which require a certain degree of self-assessment and personal effort.
“… But your unsteady and rapidly shifting mental attitudes often result in thwarting the plans and interrupting the work of the Adjusters. Their work is not only interfered with by the innate natures of the mortal races, but this ministry is also greatly retarded by your own preconceived opinions, settled ideas, and long-standing prejudices.” 109:5.3
So growth appears to be predicated on a balance between contemplation of the divine and constructive self-criticism .
I agree with everything you said Mark, but don’t leave out service. The Jesus message is to love God with all your heart and soul and to love one another as he loves you . . . the fatherhood of God and brotherhood of man thing. You can contemplate the divine and constructively criticize yourself from here to Timbuktu, but it won’t get you very far without the service component, without living the love in personality contact with other personalities, (socializing the personality as part of the power-personality synthesis of the Supreme).
Do you need the quotes? You probably already know them, right?
Login to reply to this topic.
Not registered? Sign up here.