One of the most popular EnlightenNext magazine issues of all-time was our Spring/Summer 2000 edition (#17), which we lovingly call “the Ego Issue.” For it, the editorial team interviewed a wide mix of Buddhist monks, contemporary spiritual teachers, orthodox priests, transpersonal psychologists, and even a movie producer, asking them to weigh in on the question, “What is ego? Friend or foe?“ Their answers were so compelling that after fermenting them in our editorial think tank, we ended up producing our largest issue ever—192 pages—and the inquiry didn’t stop there. Since 2000, we’ve written several more articles on the subject of ego, some that made it into the magazine and some that didn’t. One of the most significant of these unpublished gems was the article “True Jihad,” written by Elizabeth Debold in 2002, about the warrior spirit that is required to defeat the perennial arch-enemy of true spiritual liberation. Now, thanks to our new Editors’ Blog, we have a way to share this nearly-forgotten piece with a much wider audience. . . enjoy!
TRUE JIHAD
by Elizabeth Debold
Upon returning from the Battle of Badr, our prophet, Muhammad (peace be upon him) said, “We have returned from the lesser jihad [holy war] to the greater jihad.” They asked, “O Prophet of God, which is the greater jihad?” He replied, “The struggle against the nafs [ego].” —Hadith
When the first of the two World Trade towers crumpled and fell in on itself like a hollow toy, I watched, as millions did, in disbelief and horror as jihad exploded on American soil. Jihad, the holy war, born with Islam when the Roman Empire became “holy” by adopting Christianity, took a burning leap into the 21st Century, leaving behind ancient images of swords clashing in the desert for television coverage of jets igniting modern monoliths. Struggling to recognize the reality of what it was I was seeing, I asked what so many of us were asking—how could human beings do such a thing?—and met in myself the stark recognition that I actually knew how it could happen. No, I don’t have a secret life as an arsonist or a history of violent crime. You see, “jihad” doesn’t just refer to Islamic fundamentalists’ war upon the infidels. The truer, greater meaning of jihad refers to the battle for the utter liberation of the spirit from the tyrannical nafs—the unconscious motivation in the human psyche that insists on separation and division. The nafs—or ego—is the ultimate terrorist, changing disguises with shape-shifting ease, scurrying within the labyrinth of the mind, setting off explosions of fear and rage, never quite visible until war has been declared and a warrant for its capture, dead or alive, has been issued.
Sound improbable? Believe me, I had no idea that such an entity existed within the human psyche—let alone my very own psyche. Even though I nodded at the appropriate moments whenever my teacher or anyone else spoke about the ego’s evil ways, frankly, I didn’t really take seriously the fact that I had an ego. Such is human pride: no matter that Muhammad and every major religious tradition, or and even my own teacher, warned of the ego’s wiles and the necessity to wield a sword, I knew better. From Lord Krishna commanding Arjuna in battle in the Bhagavad-Gita to the fierce Zen masters of Japan and China, from Zoroaster’s inner struggle between good and evil to Christianity’s version of the same, from St. Theresa of Avila to Carlos Castaneda’s Don Juan, the metaphorical battlefield is rife with the images, injunctions, and inspirations of a rich legacy of spiritual warriors who have left their mythic mark on the pages of our religious history. Each of these teachings and legends makes it perfectly clear that the spiritual life is a fight to the death, a war between good and evil, a true and bloody battle that takes place in the soul of the aspirant. I dismissed these stories as archaic, merely metaphoric, speaking in a language appropriate to medieval times, perhaps, but hardly relevant to our psychologically savvy world. Or my own situation.
But why would every major religious tradition describe the spiritual quest in such violent and stark terms? In my postmodern arrogance, I assumed that the great traditions lacked the sophistication of our modern psychological understanding. But, increasingly, I am coming to understand that it is our contemporary view that lacks depth because, so often, it blunts the sharpness of distinctions that give dignity to the human struggle. Andrew Delbanco writes in The Death of Satan: How Americans Have Lost the Sense of Evil that eliminating the devil, or evil, from language, philosophy, and metaphor means simultaneously the loss of God and goodness: “If evil . . . escapes the reach of our imagination, it will have established dominion over us all.” The concept and experience of “evil” as a moral judgment has been replaced by an endless list of pathologies that rationalize destructive behavior as the result of victimization, not choice. “What does it mean to say that the inventor of the concentration camps, or of the Gulag, was subject to a ‘disorder’?” asks Delbanco, “Why can we no longer call them evil?” The point that the religious traditions make—and illustrate through the wild images of Tibetan demons, Satanic spirits, and the personification of the Seven Deadly Sins—is that there is something fundamental within each of us that must be named, faced, and conquered in order to free the human spirit. The sins of our forefathers weren’t simply an inventory of human darkness; they pointed to what needed to be transcended, moved beyond, in order to realize the glory of God ringing through the beauty and goodness of creation.
Living in a contemporary spiritual culture where “compassion” often is an excuse to avoid realness and intimacy and where hurting someone’s feelings is a greater sin than lying through your teeth, it is no small wonder that there is so little talk of the true jihad and the grit necessary to engage in spiritual battle for the liberation of the human soul. Such polite lying between us so often masks how much we lie to ourselves. Somehow, in our collective loss of faith in traditional authority and our desire to cast a wider net of inclusion in society, the sharp contrast between good and evil has been lost, as truth has increasingly become a relative matter. Not wanting to offend those whose cultural contexts differ from our own, we have avoided taking up the challenge to go deeper into the human experience and grapple with the true universals of what it means to be human. The reality of the human condition has not changed even as we have blurred to gray, the black-and-white distinctions that traditionally sharpened the perception and experience of life.
No tradition seems to make clearer distinctions than Islamic mysticism regarding the inner foe that holds the spirit captive. In WIE Issue 17, “What Is Ego?” Sheikh Ragip Frager told us that traditional Sufi wisdom explains the agenda of the ego, or nafs, as two-fold: “One [aspect] is self-survival. The ego is scared of change, scared to death of deep mystical experience and transformation, because, from its point of view, that kind of change is death. . . . It is the part of all of us that wants to stay the same, a kind of inertial component in all of us that says, ‘Don’t change.’ Another aspect is that the ego is often talked about by the Sufis as connected to Satan, to the devil. . . . And no one likes to talk about this. It’s not real popular. . . . It also seems like it’s not inaccurate to occasionally refer to the nafs almost as though it is motivated, like a person.” Because the nafs is a fundamental motivation—the motivation to be separate, to hold out from the wholeness and perfection of Life.
The always devious nafs only reveals itself under conditions of war, when one is willing to engage in true jihad, to declare allegiance to the heart’s desire for liberation rather than the ego’s desperate self-preservation. Only when one is fully determined to know and face one’s deepest motivations, does the blinding rage and defiance of ego unleash itself, unmasked, in consciousness. 
Sheikh Ragip Frager tells us that as we begin to lure the nafs from its caves, it takes on different guises—each with the intent to keep us from the love that moves creation. The first glimpses of the “tyrannical nafs” that unconsciously motivates our psychological self-protection and separation come when we seriously begin to seek greater wholeness, to live a more profound truth. Like all terrorists, fear is its major stratagem. But the ego also disguises itself in the desire to be right, to win or to lose, to fit in or to stand out, to know for sure or to play dumb, to be a special case, to have a problem, any problem . . . in short, the ego lurks in any and every means by which the human mind can perceive itself as separate. And most shocking—the ego fully revealed—is that this psychological illusion of uniqueness has such momentum in the human psyche that it will do anything to survive—even if it literally risks destruction. Truly the ultimate kamikaze terrorist, the ego, when pushed to the wall and forced to give up its games of separation, actually does not even care about our own survival.
And yet, even knowing what the Sufis say, even agreeing that it makes sense logically, or recognizing that there is something within us that keeps the awesome explosion of liberation at a distance, it is hard to believe that the nafs is for real until it reveals itself for real. For myself, while the terror of dissolution was familiar from sitting in meditation retreats, it was only when I was faced by my teacher with the absolute demand to choose—freedom or ego—that my own war on terrorism actually began. Face to face with my blazing teacher and his demand for freedom from limitation, suddenly, I felt myself split down the middle: there was a raging scream from my heart for liberation, while, at the same time, my ego-ruled mind began to warn me that expressing my heart was wrong, dangerous, untrue. As Islamic scholar Charles Upton notes in his article The Doctrine of the Nafs, “When God has become the conscious center of one’s life, then—as in a time of civil war—the various citizens of the psyche are forced to take sides. The commanding nafs only reveals itself as ‘commanding’ when we have begun to disobey it.” Pushed by my teacher to choose, to take sides, I chose to pay attention to the ego ventriloquizing the voice of reason rather than to sing out the heart’s always unreasonable cry for freedom. In that crucial moment, I gave myself to the enemy, became hostage to the terrorist within. Months of siege followed. But even in losing this first big battle, I made a deeper commitment to winning the war.
How do we arm ourselves against such a devious and dangerous terrorist? What do we carry into battle? Nothing. The inner jihad demands that we be empty-handed. This is a war fought with only the courage of our very being to lead us through the minefield created by the ego-driven mind. We can only bring our best Muslim selves—the meaning of “muslim” is one who surrenders. So, oddly enough, this is a war that can only be won through surrender. Yes, surrender means to give up—but, constantly, actively—to turn our minds over to our hearts. In surrendering to the longing of our own hearts, choosing the pull that leads us beyond self, a current begins to take us into the truth of who we are beyond ego. Letting go, letting go, leaning into a trust so vast it is beyond comprehension, a whole possibility for human life calls us to leave behind the pettiness of self-concern for the thrill of the unknown that manifests only as we step forward.
True jihad demands an ever-deepening resolve, a commitment to never run from battle, to get up when shot down and move ever onward. Life transforms in knowing how much glory and goodness are truly at stake, and knowing that the responsibility for human freedom is ours alone. In taking up this responsibility, and only in this, the true heart of liberation comes to life and pulls us forward. The realization of the power of our choices—for good or evil, creation or destruction—calls forth a warrior’s vigilance, an alertness that is the current of life itself. Standing ready on the battlefield of the human predicament, the gap between self and Life closes. Here the terrorism of separation and destruction ends in the true creative fire of human potential bursting into being as ourselves.
Andrew Cohen, Editor in Chief
Carter Phipps, Executive Editor
Elizabeth Debold, Senior Editor
Ross Robertson, Senior Assoc. Editor
Tom Huston, Senior Assoc. Editor
Joel Pitney, Associate Editor
Megan Cater, Assistant Editor
What an impressive discussion on the subject, everything one might want to know, bringing up points not usually associated with jihad. What occurs to me is how the two aspects ( true jihad fought internally against personal demons vs. the kind of jihad waged against outside forces perceived as the foe) represent two aspects of human nature. With the former, one sees onself as where work is to be done. With the latter, it can be both positive and negative, where injustice is being addressed (though with violence) or where desperation is reached and the source of discontent is being confronted violently. Would that nonviolent means could be adopted with talk rather than violence. But when discontent and injustice are allowed to fester, violence will be brought against the perpetrators, perhaps justifiably or can be seen as karmic retribution. Was 9/11 without cause or karmic pushback for what “Muslims” perceived as long-suffered injustices and evil perpetrated by Western capitalists?
Ego and Alter Ego develop in parallel. Enlightenment is not Ego eradication but is the participation of Ego in communion with the Alter Ego.
One model which advocates this view is Platonic. Ego is an Idea Form that comes and goes autonomously. Like any other Idea Form it can possess an individual mind or brain mind. It does not possess the Universal mind or Nous.
As the Ego develops it can be experienced as the Other or the Non Ego. A dialogue begins on the ground of Universal Mind and potentially in the Soul which in turn can be experienced as World Soul.
Fichte and Hegel are helpful. Also F. H. Hallett. Respectfully yours.
Thanks for the references, Alastair.
Sorry, that’s H. F. Hallett.
When we as individuals can treat each other lovingly and help produce a safe physical environment for individuals, then we can forgo the defensive ego. We can work for change and lets do that. But the ego can’t go away until it is safe to do so. Lets promote both – a defensive ego when needed and a colaborative move to enlightenment with the ego, not as against the ego and thus creating a conflict with the ego. I think I can decide to modify my ego in order to have it move with me towards enlightment through education of the ego of the reality of connectiveness. I know this comment gets into the discussion of the meaning of “ego”. But I think there is a need to do exactly that – be more precise in what we are against – the idea there we are separate and need to work separately for our own good. Love is the greatest commandment – care for and help one another.
I’ll defer to Ramakrishna on the subject: “Exist in the ordinary structures of family, religion, and society as the mudfish lives in the soft mud at the bottom of the lake. The fish does not consider this mud distasteful, and is also never confined there, being capable at any time of swimming into the spacious, crystal-clear water, without even a particle of mud adhering to its body. To cultivate love for Truth, one must come forth from the conventional environment into spaciousness and clarity, and swim peacefully through clear waters of solitude, illuminated by its inherent sunlight. Then one can return with authentic compassion for self and others, to the denser realms of social responsibility, etc., without becoming disoriented by them.
The mudfish never gets lost in the mud, which is simply part of the natural environment. The body of the mudfish is never stained by mud. Certainly one can live at home, surrounded by extended family members, and attending their place of business daily. Simply maintain the sense of perfect freedom, clarity, and expansiveness – moment to moment, under every condition. Who cares if the world is strewn with thorns? Simply put on sandals and walk over them. The sandals are the realization that God alone exists.”
Beautiful relpy, JP. The mudfish example is really relevant. Let me add that the ego can be ‘conquered’ more effectively with knowledge, of the inner self as well as of the world-how it works and what are the rules of engagement with the world. The greatest achievement would lie in understanding then mastering the forces of good and evil, and of historical change; and the evolution of inner consciousness through self-knowledge and self-discipline.
one cannot be disengaged from the temporal reality rather one should use it to achieve greater spiritual enlightenment. What is needed is the evolution of the ego towards self-understanding and self-mastery-vanquishing the base desires and motivations to evolve towards transcendent thinking and right action, from goodness experienced in the immediate sphere of existence to connection with the universal Mind or Soul. Prayer is the vehicle of that evolution and service to humanity essential to gaining real humility. Goodness must always be proactive and ever evolving. The human self can not remain complete without the existence of the ego, if by ego we mean the expressive vehicle of human self. the real question is about the quality of that ego and how to achieve that quality through self-reflection and faith. so that our ego can serve God instead of our puny worldliness.
The ego must gain strength by overcoming its baseness and move to a higher level by purging itself of worldly needs. The true strength of the ego would take it closer to the highest manifestation of human self. As the great poet Iqbal said, “raise your ego to a level so high/that even God asks your will before His Command.” So the highest ego is the purest ego totally in conjunction with God’s Will and hence always manifested for the good of humanity whether in war or peace, in society or alone.
“To say of that which is, is to speak the truth. To say of that which is,
that it is not, is to speak falsely. To say of that which is not, that it is
not, is to speak truthfully. To say of that which is not, that it is, is to speak falsely. = Socrates definition of truth. But – How do we know
what is? – what has been called SIN – is in the eye of the beholder.
Monotheistic Sin (seven virtues) is merely the opposite of the
Polytheistic (seven deadly sins). In order for the Monotheistic belief
systems to become operational on our planet it was necessary to remove the Polytheistic belief system (which is slowly occurring around the world). The so-called Seven Deadly Sins are simply the
prevailing value system of Polytheism – the way of life by which
human beings survived during the time period when Polytheistic
belief system were (are) dominant in the thinking of human beings. What is “fundamentally within each of us that must be named, faced, and conquered in order the ‘free the human spirit” is the transition from Polytheism to Monotheism. “The sins of our forefathers” is an illusion – a form of “cultural self-hypnosis” – it simply does not exist except in the cultural belief systems in the minds of many Monotheistic believers. While I have not addressed the “true Jihad” in this article, movement through life is an unfolding from within in which human beings are confronted each moment of their lives with problems that must be solved. Solving problems is a form of overcoming that which we percieve to be a problem . . .and moving on. Human beings have, since they first appeared on this earth and developed language, been confronted by the problem of explaining to themselves and to others – as to Why DoThings Happen As They Do? Historically, many human beings have confronted (solved and moved beyond) in their efforts to answer this eternal question of Why do things happen as they do? – through Animistic thinking, then through Polytheistic thinking. then through Monotheistic thinking. Today we are now dealing primarily with Scientific/Industrial/Technological thinking as our belief systems have changed over time. This “True Jihad” article is written from a monotheistic belief system point of view and does not take into consideration the long Journey that human beings have been on and are still going through in their efforts to understand the What-When-Where-and-Why of their lives. May you continue to enjoy the excitement of being alive and solving whatever problems of existence you are now dealing with and those problems
which await you around the next bend on your road of life. CAN DO!
Thanks, William. Yes, these are ongoing questions with changing answers depending on where our culture/selves are in the evolutionary journey. My use of the Muslim faith was to make a point about certain timeless aspects of the spiritual quest–that define good and evil–that our postmodern culture ignores or psychologizes away.
Know thyself, that seems to be the most helpful expression at the moment that I can think of after attending the Becoming retreat with Andrew Cohen. To know intimately, the different parts of this same one self, is to be armed for Jihad it seems. Armed with knowledge of what makes us up, the ego and our cultural ego, the authentic self and the timeless formless empty ground of all being, then we have choices and then and only then when that moment comes, what choice will be made based on undeniable knowledge of who we are and which part are we choosing for.
Thanks, Joanna. And you see that in choosing, we have to be grounded in a powerful intention to want to be free.
Elizabeth … I trust you can feel the quality of the responses in this blog … are a measure of the pristine quality of your offering. My congratulations to the entire editorial team for being a lone voice at the front. I have just returned from a jihad that did infact take most of my sap. The results were humbling and a pinnacle moment for my work as a global shaman.
I relish that we in the west can have a voice as clarion as this magazine you create. A deeply healing move you just made with this jihad piece.
aloha nui loa
Jim Channon
First Earth Battalion
Thanks so much, Jim. Wish you well in your work and true jihad.
Nafs call to mind Jung’s notion of the Shadow which consists of those parts of both the individual and collective True Self that have been disowned.
Disowned but still existing, they reside in that part of the unconscious Jung called the Shadow waiting to mainfest themselves in individual and collective actions.
These manifestions are almost always violent, harmful, destructive and many would say evil.
The human Shadow, both individually and collectively, one’s evil self if you will,must be faced, named and integrated. If one talks about conquering the Shadow or the Nafs it keeps the struggle in a war like mind set. The focus is on “winning over them, rather than winning them over.” Jung pointed out that “there is gold in the Shadow.” If the Shadow or Nafs are integrated the gold will be minded, Oneness will follow. If the goal is to conquer there will be War, divisions will continue.
It is a subtle process, I agree. You have to, as you say, face, name, and integrate these forces as part of your self so that you no longer act out of them. But that is quite a struggle, because the Nafs are very wiley! For a time, in my experience, one has to see these parts of self as the enemy, just to flush them out into the open.
In my experience the nafs actually cause physical damage to the vehicle. I dont know how to stop this, but i suppose bringing the light of consciousness to that part of ourselves is half the cure.
Debold writes…
“But why would every major religious tradition describe the spiritual quest in such violent and stark terms?”
It starts with your own thinking. You make ideas and judgements: this is good, that is evil. Rather then questioning such thinking, you hold the ideas as if they were a substantial truth.
What you notice in the world is a reflection of your own thinking, of the ideas you choose to hold. So for instance, if you hold particular ideas about good and evil, then this leads to ideas that a violent and stark “spiritual quest” is necessary.
You can find support for such notions, in books etc. That is, there are so many traditions that you could call “religious,” and each of them has produced a wide array of conflicting ideas. (Consider just one book, The Bible, and how it’s possible to justify just about any belief or dogma by picking and choosing quotes.)
When you claim that a viewpoint is supported by “every major religious tradition,” it means that it’s a viewpoint that you’ve made and held with your own thinking, then found (perhaps unconsciously) words and ideas from this or that tradition that help rationalize that view, so you can hold it still more tightly. You can rationalize ANY dogma by finding those particular people who think the way you do, and ignoring anything that threatens the view.
I don’t think of these descriptions of the “enemy within” as dogma, but as very profound observations of deeper structures in the human psyche. Most of us never really encounter them until you REALLY decide to change, not in small ways but fundamentally. Until then, as I wrote, you would never know that these forces–forces that make up the Kosmos–are what you are made of.
The problem with most, if not all, ancient religious documents is that they seem to cause a fair amount of confusion and misinterpretations to occur. So even if someone scholarly comes up with the “correct” interpretation of a word like “Jihad” the problem is that a very large number of people seem to have gotten it wrong over time. This is the frustrating part of religion to me, that it seems to be so easily perverted and used in ways in which the authors might not have intended.
So when someone goes back and points out these interpretative mistakes, that’s all well and good, but the damage has already been done. Which leads me to my real complaint … that communication is always tricky, even more so when you’re talking about documents that are thousands of years old, but anyone who is attempting to tell others “this is how reality and the universe works” … you better be REAL clear about it, or some wingnut is going to misconstrue your words and end up causing a lot of damage to others, all in the name of God.
/end rant/ … please return to your normally scheduled discussion.
oh p.s. …. great article.
Thanks, Kurt! What you say points to the importance of understanding cultural evolution. Ancient religious documents were based on revelation, certainly, and a heck of a lot of stuff that was about that time and era. Which was quite a mess! Check out Robert Wright’s The Evolution of God. He does a really good job of revealing how human beings have interpreted “God” differently dependent on their life circumstances.
As Debold describes, War, whether with our neighbor a relative or between nations, is an externalization of inner conflict. This deeper understanding of jihad is essential to peace in the middle east.
Man’s ways are not God’s ways. God is unconditional love. All the problems in the world today are caused by man because God gave him free will. John
I came upon a similar understanding of Jihad after speaking with a person marching in the streets of NYC prior to the US invasion of Iraq. Simply put, what is evil but some condition (person, place, or thing) interpreted and perceived as not meeting our ego’s needs? What is ego but a self-referential directory (an “Operating System” of “Mode of Operation” / M.O.) constructed by an entity with a central nervous system and cortex to mediate the experience of energy-in-formation processing? For Homo Sapiens, this is experienced as a sensory-perceptual (/motor)-cognitive phenomenon.
One of many cortical (executive?) functions may be characterized as differentiation, discrimination, or discernment. Since these functions simultaneously co-arise with the idea of separation within the context of relativity and space-time consciousness, as Homo Sapiens, we literally share a double-bind as a result, in that much of our pleasure, as well as pain, is addicted to this mechanism for creating a interconnected sense of “knowing”, and thus “self”, be it pleasurable or otherwise. …. Thus, as previously referenced in a comment preceding this one, the wise admonition to “Know Thy Self” as opposed to “your” self…. A “knowing” that can only be intellectually understood with a cortex and/or empathically understood within a body or field saturated with sensory reception and a certain degree of integrating (intellectual?) capacity.
If we endeavor to “lose our mind (in order) to come to our senses”, what of those who seek to observe that which exists prior to (the creation of) sensation? Freedom, or “liberation” from such a mechanism has existential and nihilistic consequences because of the Self-configuring nature of energy and information reflected in such “self” creating, Self-Fulfilling Enterprises.
But what of those who seek to maintain fidelity within the influence and confluence of co-arising energy-in-formation? What is one’s capacity for intentionality? Is all intelligence predestined to reveal itself to ultimately be technological in its nature? Is revelation an evolution of consciousness; a pattern-recognition calculus applied to determining the comprehensive capacity of holons?
Just a quick thought: I don’t think that the evolution of consciousness is simply “a pattern-recognition calculus.” There are theories of development that focus only, or mostly, on the increased complexity of thought, which is about increasing pattern recognition. But there is a depth beyond the mind that is both the source of freedom and can be the ground of a new orientation to life that I would call a true evolution of consciousness.
The trouble is that fanatics sometimes read sacred texts literally. I wish they had used different metaphors to convey the issue on the inner struggle. Perhaps we might have been spared so much war against the infidels and heretics!
True, and you have to consider when these texts were written, in what context. War and conflict were even more the constant in life than they are now. Humanity was experiencing the struggle of going from warring tribes into larger collectives identified around one’s religious or spiritual path. It was a huge leap in human consciousness–from a sense of belonging just to a tribe or kin group to being able to identify with a diverse group of people in different places who identify as a religion. Now our task is to move beyond that religious identification to an identification with humanity as a whole.
I appreciate Angie’s comment. And what does that inner conflict offer us if not the opportunity for the spiritual practice of reconciling the “balance of powers” within (the idea of) one’s self? As is our (human) nature, these powers, or energies, seek homeostasis, within and without “us”, in order to maintain life as we know it. Within humans, they present themselves as emerging urges, drives, feelings, needs, values, and emotions (energy in motion?). How are we in relationship with these energies that “make up” our experience of “self”, of others, and the world? How consciously may we choose our posture or attitude of mind? How intentionally may we orient our consciousness in order to realize the potential of what we value and who we are?
I have recently been reflecting on what it takes to say no to “the nafs” or ego. Having had a lot of spiritual experience on meditation retreats and with an enlightened master, I know what it is to say yes to the deeper life force. However living in the world and saying no to this other force can be much more of an immediate challenge because it can be the larger booming force in the everyday world. No to the ego then simultaneously means yes to life, however the warrior spirit is definitely required for making such distinctions and taking such action.
what jihad means to you will depend on who you are. it will depend on your world view. it will depend which side of the fence you stand on. it will depend on your values as to what is right or wrong, good or evil.
so which is the right veiw ? or which is the best veiw ? well again, won’t that depend on where you are looking from ?? we tend to assume the right veiw (ours of course) is blatantly obvious when pointed out.
true jihad would creat stability an harmony between people. it would creat a climate in which individuals and society could develop and prosper. so would that be the external or the internal jihad ? well – depending on the circumstances whichever worked best of course !
This is ‘what appears to be occurring’:
There is no ‘entity’ in the human psyche. The ‘ego’ or ‘naf’ is a collection of confused (incoherent) ‘abstract thoughts’. One aspect of this collection of abstract thoughts is the abstract idea of “I am a separate person”. But again, this is all ‘abstract thought’, a.k.a. ‘images in the psyche’.
‘Thought’ has created the idea of a separate self, a ’self-image’. This ‘image’ only exists ‘in thought’, and all the ideas associated with this self-image are just ‘abstract images’ stored in the memory of the human psyche. Ex: “I’m a doctor.” “I’m a nice person.” “I’m enlightened.” All these ‘things’ only exist as ‘abstract thought’.
There is no separate ‘entity’ to be liberated.
Realization is ‘realizing that there is no-thing separate that needs to get enlightened’, as the imagined ’separate thing’ was a ‘false division in thought’…a concocted image.
There is no separate self to go on a jihad.
The so-called ‘demon in the psyche’ is merely ‘confused thought’. Confused thought like: “I’m separate” & “I’m a Muslim, Christian, Jew, whatever.” These are all ‘incoherent concoctions of thought’.
The point of ‘knowing thyself’ is to discover that this ’seeking self’ is merely a concoction of thought.
Humans are killing one another, and thrashing the ecosystem, because the thought that drives human behavior is confused and incoherent.
And here the word ‘thought’ is being used in the same manner that the late quantum physicist David Bohm often used it:
“What I mean by ‘thought’ is the whole thing – thought, ‘felt’, the body, the whole society sharing thoughts – it’s all one process.” It is essential for me not to break that up, because it’s all one process; somebody else’s thoughts become my thoughts, and vice versa. Therefore it would be misleading to break it up into my thought, your thought, my feelings, these feelings, those feelings.” – David Bohm, Thought As A System
Yes, humanity is doing all sorts of horrendous things. But it’s not a bunch of ’separate things’ that need to get liberated. The ‘incoherence in thought’ is a ’systemic reality’, and the central incoherence is this: ‘confusing thought for the actuality’.
All of the following quotes are attempting to convey this same point:
The Map is not the Territory – Koryzybski
Whatever you say it is, it isn’t – Wittgenstein
The word is not the thing – J. Krishnamurti
The tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao – Tao Te Ching
And of course, all of these words are also ‘abstract thought’, which may or may not point to what actually seems to be unfolding…..
Glad you are thinking hard about it all!
Amazing that someone finally understands that propaganda is the essence of an external Jihad!
I love the room where all paths meet. Jihad seems to correspond with Kundalini energy (if used to clear your path); also with the Fire Within as described by Don Juan in Casteneda’s book; or maybe the holy spirit in Christianity. The room is a room of non-judgment where preconceptions are left behind and the very best action at times of decision is more often than not to Do Nothing.
That’s an interesting take on it! You are saying that Jihad itself is a force, a fire, a desire for liberation. I hadn’t thought of it that way, but the awakening of that longing for liberation from all that is false and untrue is the first critical step. In Evolutionary Enlightenment, we call that motive force “the evolutionary impulse.”
Thank you Elizabeth. What an amazing piece. This idea of battling the forces that require separation vs. the truth of union is unfolding yesterday and today between acupuncturists. It is my contention that the experience of separation is necessary only to the extent that we truly wake up to the truth that we are always whole, always one. When the ego decides again and again to separate this becomes the root of disease in the body. The closing down of this expression of the true heart gives ego its residence in the body, then medicine is side-tracked from its true purpose of purifying the vehicle and must instead have jihad with disease.
Thankyou very much Elizabeth, that is very helpful about choosing from the different parts of ourself, what you said about being grounded in having a powerful intention of wanting to be free, I can see is vital. This is not a game, it is very serious and for real, so that I see the cultivation and need for powerful and clear intention is essential, and the doubtless strength to back it up.
Joanna
Very thought provoking article.
The mention of ‘postmodern arrogance’ is key to understanding why myth has been lost or ignored. Postmodernism’s slippery slide into the superficiality of narcisistic tendencies and dangerous pastiche has rendered it fearful of anything which has a capacity for depth and timeless potency. Myth is a threat to postmodernism’s unimaginitive play. Fortunately, events such as the GFC are symptoms of the demise of postmodernism’s love of simulation, pastiche and deliberate complexity.
Ideas of ego and letting go are also fascinating. As an artist I have had experiences, via conversations stimulated by my paintings, which have made me realise I do not complete my work. In fact, conversations people have with others or with themselves complete my work. Thus, a painting has the potential to have multiple completions. Letting go, I realised, had to be a consious decision albeit somewhat scarey. Maybe this was a sign of the warrior with me?!
I suspect myth’s timeless potency is its capacity to stimulate multiple interpretations and thus multiple pathways to spiritual discoveries. Art’s agency is its capacity to be an outpicturing, albeit possibly only glimpses, of myth’s perceptions.
Kathryn
You are so right, Kathryn, that postmodernity is allergic to depth!
Its only in finding out our True Reality in context to our Values, inquiring into it and understanding It , one can find the meaning n purpose of Living the values.Thanks , Elizabeth , for beautifully bringing up the clarity on this subject.
Thanks for responding, Neena.
I agree, but should encompess all religions; namely to transcend.
Interpretation of religious texts is the main problem and handicap for a balanced view and tolerance. A transcend realm would clear the view that religions are many, religion is one. In the chaos of this busy uncontrolled world, we invented a “ready made” God whom we
interpreted according to our selfish ego. We returned back to mythologies where so many Gods are a persponifications of ourselves.
Thank you for your illuminating on the interpretation of “True Jihad”
A very interesting and thought provoking article and indepth comments from various enlightened souls.Ego is necessary and instead of conquering the ego if we use the same for positive constructive purpose without an iota of selfishness then that will be true Jihad.As Swami Sivananda says we must Give,Serve,Love,Purify and Meditate so that we can Realise.
The real lies which are perceived by the beholder vanishes when we realise.We are all spiritual beings on a human journey.
Let us make this Universe a peaceful place by postive thoughts irrespective of terrorism and calamities which are only corrective measures to keep us in balance.
May the light of truth shine in the hearts of all.
Om tat sat
Jignasu Yoga Sharan
About “The Inner Jihad” « Soraj’s Weblog // Aug 22, 2009 at 5:52 am
[...] “The Inner Jihad” I just read a very interesting article on “The True Jihad” on the Enlightennext.org website, and here is my response. Please read the article first before [...]
Inspiring writing Elizabeth. This whole take on the power of ego takes me back to my first encounter with Wilber in Up FRom Eden where he brilliantly argues that the emergence of ego in human evolution corresponds to the ‘fall” from Eden and signifies our emergence from pre personal consciousnes into the ‘ pandemonium ‘ of ‘personal’ consciousness which is plagued by the separation anxiety that arise with self conscious awareness. The message is clear however. It is a stage we have to go through in order to attain transpersonal consciousness. When this manifests as a stage and not a state, the ego is not destroyed but is placed in the service of the Higher SElf or the Evolutionary Impulse or whatever you chose to call the Divine Source within. The big question is of course how does that come about? In brief I think it is where our psychological work has to come in to aid our spiritual evolution . We have to find some process that helps to take us into our unconscious entanglements-(samskaras ) or energy blockages . That is where the battle that you speak of comes in. Only then can we hope to achieve a state of mind that allows the Light of the Divine to shine through us .
Dear Gillian, you might want to check out my interview with Aliya Haeri, a Sufi teacher, in our latest issue. She notes how the nafs, or ego, evolves along with us. Ego began to come into existence as a structure in consciousness at a certain point in the human trajectory, but it has very much stayed with us and developed–in many ways becoming a more formidable foe as we go. You are so right that we have to take these blockages and this force on for higher development to happen.
For a long time I have not been able to explain JIHAD to those who asked me: how is being a Muslim a good thing when Jihad is the core of your religion?
In fact, I have felt confusion and doubt myself because my religion has been hijacked a very long time ago. It is not only Muslims who have negatively portrayed the true depth of Jihad, but it is in all religions that we now see ugly interpretations floating on the surface of a sea of liberating truth.
“It is the part of all of us that wants to stay the same, a kind of inertial component in all of us that says, ‘Don’t change.’ ”
Maybe those of us with hard heads who refuse to listen to anything but their own voice should at least give some credit to mere psychology or intellectual scholars who have pin-pointed human nature in all its complexity and all its simplicity.
The “ego” and the subject of “inner-change” is not only discussed in Islam, not only in other religions, but also in Yoga, Reiki, Crystal Therapy. It is common sense. It has become a biological fact that is now explained scientifically and backed up by evidence.
“True jihad demands an ever-deepening resolve, a commitment to never run from battle, to get up when shot down and move ever onward. Life transforms in knowing how much glory and goodness are truly at stake, and knowing that the responsibility for human freedom is ours alone. In taking up this responsibility, and only in this, the true heart of liberation comes to life and pulls us forward”
What is more comforting than this? It is in all religions that this is true. You can perhaps find such energy from self-help books as well.
We should stop categorizing and labeling political events, and instead, help in educating people in reaching their ‘inner-self”, and struggle against the contaminated “nafs”.
Thank you so much, Beisan. Any discipline that has truly tackled the complexity of human experience has run into these forces within the self. Wouldn’t it be remarkable if we lived in a culture that valued reaching the “inner self”?
Elizabeth – regarding your response to William; was ‘good and evil’ what you really meant to say?
Yes, Manitou, I did mean good and evil. In postmodern culture, good is considered only what is good for me, what feels good, what I want. There are no real principles that define a moral context.
Seems like good is always seemingly good and evil is always seemingly evil. The words evoke a judgment, a separateness. Maybe it just all ‘is’ with no labels attached.
Thank you for illuminating a term that could be unifying and healing for all of humanity, even while it is leading to the ugliest divisions today. For me personally, jihad is a process that connects me to the greater whole and that also unites my personal divisions within me as an American Muslim, a woman from the Subcontinent, a career woman, etc. etc. It serves as a process of harmonization and creating content and peace. I wish everyone much peace as I begin my fasting today for the month of Ramadan, another example of transcending my lesser needs to appreciate the greater wholeness of all of us and beyond. Salam.
Have a good month of Ramadan!
“How can I make today an Act of Beauty?”
Terrible idea to start using the word Jihad in this way despite whatever its original meaning was.
The real problem is when unenlightened people make false attempts to destroy the ego in other people. Unenlightened people should never be trusted with other peoples’ spiritual development.
The following quote is a contradiction of the simplicity of liberating action:
“But even in losing this first big battle, I made a deeper commitment to winning the war.”
since we are all addicted to ego perhaps AA’s first step would be a simple way to learn how to surrender to god and in so doing liberate the soul for service,joy and love…….then what happens to the ego?…….well it vanishes? the less we worry about ego the sooner we find the key that unlocks the door to paradise lost.
Good points Will.
The human mind seems to habitually avoid asking such things as: ‘Who’ is it that is going to go on this Jihad?
Here’s a relevant quote from Andrew:
“When the mind is busy we always want something.”
So here the busy mind wants to go on a Jihad.
The problem is that all movements to ‘get somewhere’ are a movement away from what is.
Here’s another relevant quote from Andrew:
“The answer is found by giving up all temptation to struggle, by letting absolutely everything be as it is.”
:-) ! You are quoting from part of Andrew’s teaching–the part that relates to traditional enlightenment–not the part that explores what it means to engage in the process of evolving.
Beautiful article. There is a deeper wisdom in the spirit of Jihad which can be expressed in the beauty of poetry. I’m no expert in poetry but I would say Unity is the Key to Eternal Bliss, You and Me as one in Unity, no more division, true liberation that is the beauty of Unity. No more liberation of taking arms in words of You, Me, I, Them, Us the list is long.
Simply put when illusion disappears the Beloved/The Way/Aloha Appears, You and I simply cease to exist. When the drop embraces the ocean there is no more of You and I.
Aloha Mahalo, Peace in Unity
Lulu
Elisabeth,
Thank you so much for talking about the greater and the true jihad. I am a Muslim and I believe that we have to struggle against all that separates us from getting closer to God, whether it is our base desires, our philosphical musings, our attachments to other people, etc.
We admit that we did not make ourselves, God did. Therefore God also endowed us with the ability to discern right from wrong. Our ego, our desires, our weaknesses from paying attention to and implementing the whispers of the Satan and his minions clouds our perception of right and wrong. We need help from the messages and teachings from the prophets sent by God to discern right from wrong in order to transcend our ego. University scholars of all religions and secular scholars would largely say that the religous books of the past has been compromised over the centuries for many reasons, with the sole exception being the Qur’an.
The Qur’an has been memorized word for word for each generation from the time of the last Prophet, Prophet Muhammed. The Qur’an was revealed down in the month of Ramadan. This Ramadan, I am trying to read the whole Qur’an in english, it is available online.
May we all succeed in transcending our attachments and to thus get closer to the source of all, God. Peace and thanks again.
Peace to you,
Why do you say the “true” jihad, or “the truer meaning” of the word jihad? If Islamic sources might define the “true” or “truer” meaning of the word, then please bring all the references in Qur’an and Hadith that use the word jihad, and look at what they’re really about.
The most reliable of all Hadith collections is that of Bukhari. The word ‘jihad’ is mentioned over 200 times in reference to the words of Muhammad and virtually each one is a clear connotation to holy war: killing and dismembering people in the name of submitting the world to Islamic rule.
Example:
A man asked the Prophet: What is Jihad? He (s.a.w.) replied: “To fight against the disbelievers when you meet them (on the battlefield).” The man asked: “What kind of Jihad is the highest?” He (s.a.w) replied: “The person who is killed whilst spilling the last of his blood.”
Jihad, without a Western, postmodern spiritual lense, means killing in the name of Islam, and it started with Muhammad himself. Muhammad raided towns without any previous warning, killed unarmed men who had gone to the fields and markets after their daily business, captured their wives and children and distributed the younger women among his soldiers while always keeping the prettiest ones for himself and raping them on the same day he murdered their fathers, husbands and loved ones. These are not fables but historic facts recorded and preserved by Muslims themselves. Look at Qur’an and Hadith!
The Hadith you’re relying on (‘the greater jihad is struggle against the nafs’), is at best weak, according to classical commentators and scholars. Many say that the author of this quote forged many Hadith, and therefore all of his collection must be rejected. If it were a true Hadith, it would appear in the more prominent collections.
It’s curious how the gullible postmodern intellect works so hard to ignore or spiritualize, or even cover up, Islamic violence–both historical and contemporary. But then again, as Muhammad said, “War is deception.” The cover up works, and the war for Islamic rule continues.
I’m sorry to say Mr. Ahmed that you have no idea about the history of “Islam” when you declare the Bukhari collection as the “most authentic” although Bukhari himself never claimed it as such, as he had collected whatever hadith he could gather at the time (200 years after the death of Prophet Muhammad) and he never vetted the ‘true’ from ‘false’ hadith. besides, the highly political nature of the Hadith collections due to the dictatorial regime of the time is also underrated by most Muslims. so many hadith were concocted or quoted out of context to discredit the Prophet and his true mission to distract the public and dampen public resistance to the autocratic ‘khilafat’ system of the time. Later collections of hadith contained many true hadith also, rather some of them may be more authentic than Bukhari, such as those by Qandozi and Hakim Nishapur when they had more political freedom to say the truth.
Elizabeth’s article is reflective of the true mystic tradition initiated by Prophet Muhammad which incorporates purification of the self with right action including self-defence to counter conspiracies of the enemies of Islam, when he had to wage uphill struggle against the deeply entrenched vested interests of the Quraish tribes to propagate his highly radical message of human equality, social justice and belief in One God. how does one react when your life work is constantly being undermined by enemy spies and double agents, who left no leaf unturned to instigate trouble amongst/between Muslims and Quraish? war was sometimes the only necessary choice available. Islam is the religion of action-always positive but also aggressive if necessary, but only in self- defence.
Very interesting discussion. At issue is not so much the issue of the ego, which runs off of the collective consciousness and uses close loop energies which form its perception. So called heart energy, and I am assuming the author is referring to using or adhering or gating universal energy which is expansive and abundant. The distinguishing characteristic is that one runs off of the collective consciousness and the other runs off of universal energy. One should attempt to spiritualize the ego. The nature of the ego is not so much with the issues that it presumes or the feelings it engenders or the energies that it seems to produce but the energy that it runs off of. Ego centered perception is based on re channeling energy that in and of itself is self limiting. The approach should be to switch gears or to realign the energies that the so called ego constellations run off of. To use another analogy one should switch channels, or switch stations. Meditative practice attempt to switch channels or ignore the signal till the frequency shifts, however there is no attempt to convert the signal to more universal frequencies. Individuality is not necessarily the issue or symptomatic of separation. what is more compelling is the nature of the energies that the individual is drawing off of. Attachment is just a function of still utilizing old frequencies. There is no true separation just the energies that the person is drawing off of. Send heart centered or universal energy to ones ego centered centers and see what happens. Why would anyone want to run off of repetitive, self limiting energies. If you have to fill up your tank would it not be preferable to run off of universal energy, than the self limiting energies of the collective consciousness.
Spritiualize the ego. Surrendering is as much as imbibing the universal energy versus living off of energy of the collective consciousness which is self limited in its perception. The constructs of the ego or collective are non abundant in and of them self and reflect primarily the issues central to separation which are the need to dominate and gain power. why not run ones ego off of universal energy than replaying the old tapes of the collective. Attachment is just a reflection of the energies that one is running off of.
Dear Elizabeth,
In the recent Being retreat, I was able to see the ego more clearly than ever before and it was truely the evil entity that you describe on this article. If it wasn’t inventing excuses (pain, sleepiness or imminent heart attack!) it was telling me stories that my elderly mother or one of my children was sick or injured and needed my immediate phone call….
ANYTHING to prevent me from sitting still and having no relationship to the content of consciousness. I believe it was because I was trying to push in meditation further than before that the ego rose up in equal measure to try and thwart my efforts. The sense of victory is wonderful when we maintain our intention!
I take this as only a partial truth. We must be careful that, in making distinctions, we do not fall into the dualistic illusion and take separation or ego as Real. Is war or battle the ultimate vocabulary? Has war ever really solved anything, ever brought real peace? War on poverty, war on drugs, and so on, only mired us more in the problem. And so too when we turn that battle within.
Yes, it is helpful to name the ego as the deep motivation for, and belief in, separation, but we must be careful here not to truly believe in ego, for that only maintains the sense of separation. And battling against it only serves to deepen our sense of its reality.
I understand that the mystical or nondual stance can be taken wrongly as a sort of denial, an artificial paradise. That is certainly one extreme stance, while the for-real battling against the ego or devil is another.
Yes, throw light on the ego to be able to recognize it, but recognize too that it is not who we truly are. And then release the belief in it, the belief in separation. That is the very essence or heart of the true jihad–not struggling against ourselves, not battling, not efforting. This only serves to carry forth the drama, the suffering.
The notion that the only alternative to battle and struggle is the seemingly easy way of denial that keeps us stuck and unconscious serves to maintain the battle and the belief that we are doing the real work. But it is only one extreme against another, both of which misses the real Way.
It has been said, “There is no way to peace. Peace is the way.” Not battle.
Peace.
There are a lot of misunderstandings about the true nature of Islam. Mohammad was NOT a messenger from GOD!! Did you know that he ordered killing more than 700 men who were taken as prisoners in just one single day? And what a bout taking a 9 year old child as a wife when Mohammad was about 54 years old?
Sufism and some other mild and human faces of Islam was a “smart” way for Iranians in order to make Islam tolerable. Iranians did not open their arms toward Muslim intruders. They were forced to accept Islam. Either you are with us or against us! Thousands of Iranian people were taken as slaves and sold as such in Medina slave marked. And Mohammad himself made a lot of money by selling slaves! Why did he not band slavery? Selling human beings was alright, but drinking a glass of wine was a big sin!
A grate book I can recommend if you want to know more historical facts about Islam: “Why I Am Not a Muslim” by Ibn Warraq.
Table of contents of the book:
* Chapter 1 The Rushdie Affair
* Chapter 2 The Origins of Islam
* Chapter 3 The Problem of Sources
* Chapter 4 Muhammad and His Message
* Chapter 5 The Koran
* Chapter 6 The Totalitarian Nature of Islam
* Chapter 7 Is Islam Compatible with Democracy and Human Rights?
* Chapter 8 Arab Imperialism, Islamic Colonialism
* Chapter 9 The Arab Conquests and the Position of Non-Muslim Subjects
* Chapter 10 Heretics and Heterodoxy, Atheism and Freethought, Reason and Revelation
* Chapter 11 Greek Philosophy and Science and Their Influence on Islam
* Chapter 12 Sufism or Islamic Mysticism
* Chapter 13 Al-Ma’arri
* Chapter 14 Women and Islam
* Chapter 15 Taboos: Wine, Pigs, and Homosexuality
* Chapter 16 Final Assessment of Muhammad
* Chapter 17 Islam in the West
With greetings David .
Again the same cliched arguments about the ‘reality’ of Islam based on questionable sources which have unfortunately been present amongst Islamic canon itself due to political interests of the dictatorial regimes which were captured after his death by the same tribes who opposed Muhammad’s original message. these very dictatorial regimes propagated their own essentially anti-Islamic versions of ‘Islamic’ history to kill the original humane essence of Islam given by the Prophet. i feel sorry for the blind prejudice based on ignorance exhibited by some people. they don’t know how badly they are discrediting a great resource for enlightenment which by the way has come as Confirmation of all previous divine messages and messengers amongst all nations.
Dear Elizabeth,
I have a question – in your article you mention that you were faced with a choice at one crucial point before your spiritual teacher and you said you made the choice for ego, which was followed by months of turmoil and confusion. I wondered now if you have felt that you have conquered the nafs to the degree that faced with the same choice you either have done or would make a different one for freedom instead?
Love, Joanna
I have listened to most of the comments on jihad on this site and they all have a valid point. In the beginning was the word but the word needed interpretation.If you take the Christian Bible not all christians [all christian denominations] agree on the written word in the bible. Man’s inhumanity to man are littered with the weapons of destruction in the sands of time, from the very first wooden club to modern day guided missile systems. We have forgotten who fired the first shot but the tit for tat or retaliation still goes on. Forgiveness is an easy word to say but very hard to put into practice. If we done unto others as we would like done unto ourselves and our loved ones there would not be any wars or conflicts.Therefore man [incorporating woman] must raise himself above the notion that conflict is the answer to solving the worlds problems.When you have to resort to violence it only breeds more violence.To quote a well known saying [ Before Governments change people must change].
Dear Elizabeth, you mentioned the process of involving but how do people who don’t know that the basic meaning of Greater Jihad/Struggle means the Ego know about evolving? Somehow they are in the majority.
There needs to be global/collective efforts to define what does Literal Knowledge of religion mean. For example a lot of people are caught with the Sharia Law which specifies literal knowledge. There are people who are caught up with this knowledge hence all the problems we have with internal/tribal/ divisions and wars.
For people to transcend that level of knowledge their needs to be available knowledge on how to deal with the greater struggle to control our ego. Let us not forget that the Ego is a built in program kind of in which we all share. To take an example the song of ‘Man in the Mirror’ by Michael Jackson bless his soul says it all. Look at yourself in the Mirror and what do you see. This level will take one to look at beyond what is manifested which is your inner soul.
One has to learn so many wisdom around the globe to appreciate how the Ego manifests and how can each person reflect on that from his/her own staion/religion/faith/ethics and so on.
I think we need new conscious/thinking based on collective wisdom of Humanity to appreciate the beauty of the wisdom of the Ego. We basically need to move from the manifested to the Hidden/Eternal/Mystical Knowledge. I guess this will mean ‘One should Know thyself’.
Thank you.
Peace/Aloha-Mahalo
Here we all are again, patronizing the muslims. I stand with their critics. I stand with those they oppress and threaten, (Rushdie). It is no accident that they are as bloodthirsty as they are. Read the Koran. That’s all I can say. Read it. It is a cookbook for crimes against humanity with only enough mysticism thrown in to keep it from becoming a grindhouse epic.
Trying to make it the center of a spiritual discussion is a pointless exercise.
Dear Larry i wonder if you have ever read the Koran, and if so, ever understood the meanings. as the great Indian mystic Osho said very wisely that the aggressiveness of the man of awareness is always constructive and meaningful unlike the aggressiveness of the ignorant man.
violence and aggression against any idea that overturns the status quo is the norm in every society. but those propagating the radical idea can never afford to turn the other cheek and let their message go down the drain. every situation demands a different response according to the need of the time. war was the norm in all religions especially Judaism when the Prophets’ messages were opposed by their enemies to annihilate the very foundations of the messages they had been entrusted with by God. the Prophets in countering their enemies in the same coin were acting on the commands of God to protect His religion. even Christ beat up the money lenders and overturned their tables in the bazaar- albeit single handedly.
Hello Elizabeth – You are correct of course that the Andrew quotes I used were not about the process of evolving. But if the language being used tends to reinforce more of the same ‘divisive evolving’ associated with belief in a ’separate self’, then it seems important to raise these points. Especially in an ‘Enlightenment forum’.
For example, here’s a quote from the article: “I had no idea that such an entity existed within the human psyche—let alone my very own psyche. ”
The ‘language’ here suggests there’s an ‘entity’ in the psyche, which, as written, is something ‘different than me’, as it’s some sort of ‘thing’ that ‘I’ wasn’t aware of.
The importance of the ‘enlightenment quotes’ is to call attention to the importance of the ‘first step’. If the first step is off-track’, then all of the following ‘evolution steps’ are also off-track. And it’s not really an evolving if it’s of this nature, but rather more of the same incoherence.
So what is likely to ‘evolve’ when reading such language is a looking (maybe) for a ’separate’ entity, by an ‘assumed me’. I suggest ‘maybe’ because humans often assume a suggestion like this is true rather than looking for themselves.
The point is to start from ‘what is actually unfolding’ rather than starting from all the assorted ideologies that the human psyche has concocted, which is basically a confusing of the ‘mental maps’ for the ‘actuality’. Imagining oneself to be some separate thing going on a Jihad is just more of the same confusing of the mental map for the territory.
To talk about ‘evolution’ in a manner which doesn’t tend to reinforce the existing divisive mythologies seems to require using language in a new ‘less misleading’ manner.
I suggest that there is no entity in the psyche. There are however, lots of incoherent beliefs in the psyche that tend to avoid questioning due to the existing nature of the thought. And the incoherent thoughts do indeed lead humans to behave incoherently as a result. As David Bohm used to suggest, we lack a Proprioception of ‘what thought is doing’.
If the intent is to evolve in a less divisive manner, than promoting the same divisive assumptions is not going to produce the intended results.
The first-step can’t be from the same divisive mythology if the intent is to evolve in a healthier, less divisive manner.
At least, that’s what seems to be the nature of life.
Regards – Howard
The ego, the sense of durational self in metric time, cannot be conquered.
Ego develops and defines that which is more than itself, so that through integration with the alter ego, the ego gains strength and is capable of greater perception.
Ego and alter ego in tandem aspire to non-consecutive discrete time participation. History, hesitatingly, begins to hold hands with the future.
It is very interesting to share wisdom about the beginning/journey of Humanity. John’s two comments are worthwhile reflecting on. The first one he says that ‘The Word’ needed interpretation, how true. The second point he mentioned is the ‘quote about people changing before governments’. That is also true and a golden rule to follow.
Coming back to interpretations if we think of the ‘Word’ as ‘Divine Breath’ it could have similar effect. We are all nourished by the ‘Divine Breath’ with each heart beat we can feel the presence of the ‘Divine Breath’.
We can then say that the ‘Ego’ is like an engine or a theatre where the states of one’s heart beat manifests in our mind/psyche. These states create some sort of a centre where conflict of the Ego manifests. This creates a need for conflict management tools. How we adopt these tools to advance Unity of Humanity is the key question here. Amazingly when one is Union with the Divine Breath one is at peace. Only in such state can one serve humanity. The challenge is that it is not easy for many of us to stay in that state for a long period of time. With so many heart beats that are not in tune I guess one needs special conflict management tools for controlling the manifestation states of the Ego. These tools can only come from the wisdom of sages of Humanity both old, current and 21st century seekers of wisdom people like myself who somehow feel that we need some sort of change for humanity to shift consciously together as One.
Peace/Aloha-Mahalo
It’s evidently true, what you say, about there being a deeper sense of the word jihad than is meant by the more commonly thought of term that is often associated with fanatic fundamentalist political islam-ism.
Certainly there is a very large task involved in unmasking our own self deception and unwillingness to change which, at least for me, has been the core task for us as humans. The network of thought is like a mine filed with many dangerous traps and misconceptions. As our minds are distorting awareness to begin with it is our situation to be somewhat like the example of the ‘blind leading the blind’ and there are many ditches to stumble into.
The notion that a battle, struggle or great quest of valiant warrior like
effort and epic crusades of spiritual striving are needed, seem to me likely to be another misapprehension along the way. The way people constantly battle with themselves trying to improve themselves etc. can really give continuity to our fragmented way of handling things and keep us from coming upon a dawning of a more comprehensive and gentle approach. We can waste a lot of energy in trying to be something that we are not, now and hoping to become something better in the future. The better can be the enemy of the good. I sit and question the whole viewpoint of what I said, as self distrust does serve as my helpful machete in the jungle of the mind and heart. What feels more healthier and whole to me is not to fight with myself but just be aware of the wonderful spectacle of my stupidity. That, rather than a formula or slogan might be the best chance at wholeness and a way of living that is not fettered by an idealism that seems to age us, stress us and leave us with a handful of regrets and excuses. Yes we are faced with danger as human beings and a radically different response is crucial. We have to tread gently in that arena however as the tendancy of our psychological makeup is very much prone to utilitarian attempts to control awakening which can lead to all kinds of mischief. JKL
In the shocked aftermath of 9/11, most Americans were at a loss to explain the motive for the attack. A Colorado professor was severely criticized for proferring that it was an understandable response by Muslims for their perception of American hegemony in world affairs and for our invasion of Iraq, an opinion that now seems more acceptable to the public, though the terrorist attack was way over the top to Americans.
On the other hand, the terrorists have highjacked Muslimism, claiming to be acting as Muslims but disclaimed by true Believers, who point to the peaceful message of the Koran. Terrorism is the act of desperation of those who have given up on any other measures. President Obama has hinted on rapprochement in meeting with Bin Laden and Al Queda, which seems to me a hopeful step toward coming to terms with terrorists and quelling their faux “jihad”.
Hi, Lulu,
May I ask, apropos your using (Aloha-Mahalo) in closing your posts?
Are you from Hawaii, what is your Hawaiian connection? Even our president now uses the shaka sign and aloha and mahalo are becoming more commonly used by the public.
I like to spread the meaning of aloha other than the touristy connotation, that I understand it corresponds to the E. Indian (namaste), to mean “I acknowledge and honor your spirit”.
Aloha, Palani
Hi, Frank.
You’ve asked me a big question, but I will try to answer you in a simple way if I can. I found some sort of connection through these words from spiritual point of view. I try to take life as a journey that helps me to reflect on how we are all connected so words of spirituality is some kind of magnet for me that I not only use but try to reflect on at the same time. I enjoy Sufi/Mystic wisdom and feel connection with the wisdom of the spiritual heritage of Hawaii as well that of the American Native Indians and Taoism.
Call it life’s small encounters but right now that is something I can relate to. If I watch a movie it is about Hawaii, my favourite stars/personalities somehow have a link with Hawaii and this season I would just simply put it down to embracing the spirit of Aloha. You can correct me if I’m misusing it but it is something I will keep in my heart.
I’m not sure if I’m allowed to post links on this blog but if you google for ‘aloha mahalo’ you will find a geocities web that has got beautiful explanation of these two divine words. These divine words have beautiful and powerful wisdom that can only be felt I guess. But then I’m reflecting within the beauty of the Sufi Wisdom. That is why I use the term ‘Divine Breath’.
Please do spread the meaning of Aloha, I actually did not know that it had a tourist connotation as I did not learn about it that way. I seek and search words of wisdom from spiritual point of view. Imagine how powerful it is to say to someone ‘May the presence of the Divine Breath embrace us all’. You can rephrase this sentence using the term ‘Aloha’ as I’m not qualified to do that since I’ve little knowledge and just started learning about these divine words.
I hope that helps and thanks.
Peace/Aloha-Mahalo
Elizabeth,
Going to war on ego sounds a little like trying to put out a fire with gasoline. It’s not possible to function as a human among other humans without some sense of ‘I’ as a separate self. Surely ego is not the problem. It’s an exclusive identity with ego that keeps us trapped. Spiritual practice helps us to transcend and include ego. We don’t want to kill the beast. We just want to house-train it. It’s not such a bad puppy when it learns its place.
Rhetorical question: the question I asked Elizabeth about given the same choice again ultimately comes back to myself, how would I respond faced in a crucial and critical moment between wether to choose ego or authentic self. Well when I am in the authentic self, there is an Absolute YES, it is fearlessly, doubtlessly and absolutely, passionately and unstoppably determined to go all the way. When the mind and ego gets in the way, well then it is riddled with confusion and self doubt, lack of clarity. This is night and day. Even to be able to see and be inspired by the pure positivity of the authentic self is a gift, so thanks for this forum to explore and really look at it. Definitely absolutely worth fighting a true jihad for!!!
For bringing the ego down to size, there’s nothing like working the 12 steps of Alcoholics Anonymous. Even if it’s done at the surface, the process of self-examination continues to greater depths throughout one’s lifetime.
I am doing an interesting exercise to broaden my perspectives through a lens other than ego. I haven’t looked at my reflection in a mirror for 2 weeks. I did it after reading one of Ken Eagle Feather’s books (of the Castaneda line). This seems to be shaking me at a fundamental level. If you think about, it seems like the simple act of acknowledging one’s self in the mirror is an affirmation of our separateness. I’m trying to undo that mindset into my physical world, not just the mental knowledge. There seems to be a fundamental integration, a balance, that I can feel emerging. It is very subtle, but the difference is sufficient enough that I think I’ll extend the experiment for a while longer (today is the day 2 weeks are up). I feel like I’m on to a little something.
Asalaamu ‘alaykum, Mehnaz.
It comes as no surprise that you would skirt around the issue of perpetual Islamic violence. I understand your motivation, because to admit it would mean the collapse of your spiritual faith, opinion, and worldview. But then again, it would mean the killing of ego, and that’s what is being preached here.
“…war was sometimes the only necessary choice available.”
Yes, you’re right. This is the only way to validate war and killing. And killing people is definitely necessary according to Qur’an and Hadith, and the mullahs and the “faithful”.
“…but only in self-defence.”
This is another necessary clause, used by murderers everywhere. Completely annihilating other communities, systematically raping their women, ignoring peace treaties, and spilling untold gallons of blood, etc. This is all considered “self-defense” for Islam. So is 9/11/01 and all the hundreds of thousands of innocent people who have since been murdered, executed, tortured, and raped in the name (and tradition) of Islam. Look at history.
Forgive me if I have irritated you by revealing what a “believer” is not allowed to reveal.
Ahmed (who deserves, by Islamic Law, capital punishment for defecting from the so-called “religion of peace”.)
Mr. Ahmed I would suggest that you should just read other religious histories as well. Also read the ‘Islamic’ history with open eyes, who was waging war against whom, and when, and whether they were actually representative of true Islam. No women were ever raped by the Prophet’s fighters in his lifetime, neither did he wage any war of offense, all the wars were started by the powerful Quraish/Jewish tribes who feared the end to their social and economic hegemony by a man with an army comprised of the most economically deprived and socially downtrodden people, freed slaves and women victimized by powerful Quraish leaders. rather the Prophet forgave even his worst enemies after coming back to Makkah from where he and his companions had been forced to flee due to excessive torture by Quraish (including a three year exile to Valley of Shaib near Makkah without food and essential supplies). and the wives you mentioned were all widows and divorcees above 30 yrs of age except for Ayesha who was 18 and whom he sent home later.
rather in the same Bukhari collection there are various hadith which tell us his most beloved wife was Khadija, his first wife who was 15 years older than him, he loved her so much that Ayesha used to get jealous of his crying with tears for the ‘old, toothless’ woman and not seeing the better ‘alternative’ in Ayesha’s beauty!
as far as wars after his death are concerned, they were waged by those who wanted to divert people’s attention from their power grabs/political corruption and they were the same people who disobeyed the Prophet even in his lifetime. but even they were careful not to go against the peace treaties he signed with the Jews and other groups, or to violate basic human rights of conquered people. rather the Islamic empire has been the most multicultural in human history with Jewish/Hindu scholars, ministers and governors.
as far as i know the Prophet never ordered any killing of an apostate from Islam. so we’ll leave the matter of your faith upto God, just as the Prophet did–as he said he had come to warn and give good tidings to people, and he was not the punisher or giver of reward, it is only God’s prerogative.
I know there is a lot of confusion even among Muslims about the ‘reality’ of Prophet Muhammad’s life and message. Like all other prophets of God who came with the mission to reveal the transcendental reality behind the imperfect material world, he was also misunderstood and reviled by the social/economic elite of his time (including hsi own uncles etc) and those who hated him for trampling upon their dreams of permanent superiority and hegemony over the ‘lesser’ humans never stopped hating him after his ‘victory’ over them. the same groups grabbed political power immediately after his death and even the Quran was not spared from omissions and changes of text to suit poiltical purposes. as the Prophet himself had predicted in a famous authentic hadith in Bukhari the Muslims would follow every inch and every cubit the way of the previous prophets’ nations in tampering with the original religion to suit their nefarious political and hegemonic interests. so whatever ‘official history’ is fed to us hapless ignoramuses is mostly false and anti-Islam in nature, which downgrades the actual high spiritual status of the Prophet of Islam and introduces notions having nothing to do with the actual religion. but the truth as the Quran says can never be hidden or blown out by the untruthful, it will come out even from within the huge structure of lies built seemingly so meticulouly by its enemies. we just have to keep our minds open.
this is an extraordinary collection of intellectual DELUSION. yes, it is MY opinion tht i stand with before G-D and everybody. JiHad… to slaughter in the name of allah (yes, "little" A) is NOT an intellectual concept to be debated and discussed to be "understood" or even accepted. Jihad is delusion mentally or physically – be it terrorism, slaughter or internal struggle for what is "true". what sophomoric crap – WAKE UP, PEOPLE. the unsubtleties of the soft sell to accept the illusion of righteousness of Jihad in the Koran, written by a lunatic in cave, is so wrong on so many levels and you readers are ALL buying into it to "understand". WHAT'S to understand? lunacy, terrorism, murder, beheading, eye-for-an-eye but YOUR eye first ? remember, boys and girls, "Stupid IS and stupid DOES" and NOT knowing what is true for you is…. how shall i say it, STOOPID. you know the right thing to do……. so DO IT and stop searching for a truth in a lie.
Geraldo you mean to say that ’struggle’-internal or external, is a delusion? one should live like a snail and be crushed, socially and militarily under big feet of people like you; and spiritually give up on ones’ useless motivations and inordinate desires to achieve what in the end–a meaningless, animalistic life and equally inane death. after all there has to be a difference between an animal and human. struggle is what makes us human. lazy minds can’t grasp the concept anyway. so why struggle against them! one can only give up. as Christ said, there’s a cure for everything in the world except foolishness. if you can’t see the subtlety of something how can it be drummed into your head?
Any religion founded on violence and agression is false and dangerous and will fail.
Religions founded on unconditional love for all humanity are truth, and truth will triumph because God is unconditional love.
I'd like to add a nuance to the subject of 'nafs' by sharing this quote from an Indonesian teacher and mystic (Muhammad Subuh Sumohadiwidjojo) who uses the same term 'nafsu' to denote the lower forces that we need in order to live in this world. In his experience nafsu are indeed dangerous, but are only a threat to human beings if they are allowed to be in control. Indeed, rather than being evil, their existence is necessary for us to live. However, in the majority of cases, these forces have taken the driving seat in the human spirit, thus causing all sorts of havoc. The only way to set this state of affairs right according to Sumohadiwidjojo is through active worship and surrender to God. To this end he created a practice called the 'latihan' (literally 'exercise' in Indonesian), which allows each person to surrender his will to the universal life force and to invite physical and spiritual movements of purification.
Here is the quote, from one of his talks (in 1967):
"If you want to know how demons manifest in their exposed state, look outside you, in the world. Here are the demons, right here in your glittering clothes. Money has demons in it. There are demons in your shiny shoes and demons own this beautiful building. How can you put them aside, how can you avoid them, since you need them while you are living in this world? Therefore do not be afraid of demons or hate them, because you need them. If they avoid you and are not close to you, you will not find your fortune nor make money. So you need to be close to demons, because what is most important for you is to be able to use them. When you are looking for money you need to take them with you and have them close to you. When you worship God you put them aside. When you worship God, there is nothing but Almighty God.
Therefore do not be afraid of demons or hate them, for they are your servants. If you are not supported by the satanic, by the vegetable forces – by plants – and by animal forces, you cannot live in this world. That is confirmed in medical science. If you do not have the disease within you, that is when you can catch the disease. If you have it within you, you will not get it. That is why you are inoculated against the disease. You will not catch smallpox if you already have it within your body. You are inoculated against smallpox so that you should not catch it. When something is absent, there is a lack of balance, with the result that you are very easily affected. In the same way, if there are no demons within you, you will be in trouble: you cannot survive, you cannot earn a living and you cannot make money. So you need demons, but you must be able to manage them."
I think what he has to say about inoculation as a metaphor is very interesting with regard to the article above.
Laurenceshorter has made a valid point when he mentions disease within ourselves.For what is disease? It is dis- ease with ourselves. The physical world is made up of opposites: good and bad, sweet and sour, light and dark : etc etc. If there was no evil you would not know good. If there was no dark you would not know light etc etc. If we are to believe in reincarnation then whatever we sow, sow shall we reap. We are our own Judge Jury and Executioner by what we say and do.God has given us free will. Earth is the school of learning.The physical hell. The soul or higher self [the very core of us ] is already perfect. It is the instinctive mind that [if it is not kept in check ] can cause a lot of pain and sorrow for ourselves and others. It is part of the learning process for the young or immature soul.The older wiser and more mature soul has been through all the trials and tribulations through many many lifetimes and learned the lessons it came to earth for. The reason we are here on earth is to raise our awareness level to a point where we become self realized[Knowing who we really are ] and eventually becoming god realized[Knowing and becoming one with the source].We have then gone full circle[from leaving god to finally merging with the source again] The ignorance and strangle hold that the instinctive mind and ego has on us is finally broken and the truth comes shining through.
Elizabeth I want to congratulate you on bringing so many religions together here on this forum, but what i have noticed is that at the highest spiritual level all religions talk about the same thing–going back to God, purified of the imperfections of this world.
in the Quran, the soul has been described as the ‘Amr’ or “Command” of God. in other words, the soul emanates from the creative power of God and is pure in its essence. however, it is surrounded by demons of greed, lust and avarice because it has to survive in a tough environment on earth, where space/time put limitations on every action, and realization of every desire and dream. these demons are meant to motivate us to survive against all odds. but when they overwhelm us and make us unjust and arrogant, they become sins. Muhammad Subuh’s concept of inoculation can be very handy here. we contain the disease by getting to know it within ourselves.
so the argument comes full circle–how to achieve purity of self by knowledge and self-discipline. this is the test of life: how to achieve self-purification by thought and action; and the spiritual masters like Moses, Christ, Buddha and Muhammad teach us how to overcome demons by love and right action.
by the way, there are no ‘religions’ but only one religion–religion of God, which has been interpreted in different ways by varied mindsets. i wouldn’t even call it ‘religion’ for its connotations of human manipulation and lust for power, i would rather call it ‘the way of God,’ which is the way of Love and Acceptance of the Other not rejection, inequality, meanness, contempt and hatred.
It occurs to me that others fear what they can’t understand, therefore the inclincation to separate creates fear. If we find trust, we find a mode of healing where we separate off for awhile, but come back to share of others ask. If not we must find a way to connect rather than isolate and brew our negative emotions.
During stated of separation—inevitable—a true state of jihad can be found, a scourging, a revealing of the self to ones sense of self, not always available within our relationships. The psychological task it this—to make clear what is not—to express and find what is relevant to the whole. If we are vulnerable to criticism, we find strength, patience and eventually love.
By allowing the intellect to teach, even though we suffer ego trips, we can find connections we may not otherwise come to grips with and learn about the universe. Letting go of this again we can just be together in our daily pratice of choice. Neti, neti….yes,yes, yes.
I think it’s important to remember that the ego is not who we are – it’s who we THINK we are. The image we see when we look in the mirror is nothing more than a cheap imitation of our real selves. We must struggle not for power over others, but for power over ourselves – an this struggle is not a struggle to destroy, but simply to see ourselves as we really are, the person we’ve always been . The most difficult task in the world is to see our own noses.
Dear Joel,
When I read your article, which is not only a brave look some eternal issues we face as human beings, but also explores multiple views upon a subject which not only interest me personally, but which deservingly, too, may engender some wider public interest.
Of course, suffice to say that the topic, like most topics dealt with by EnlightenNext, does not lye on the borderland of the knowable, as it stands today, a theme which each of us, scientists or spiritual leaders or otherwise, might approach from his or her own angle, though setting out from different premises.
Thus I hope you accept my small critic with the same enthusiasm that I have written it: in the hopes of further elaborating on this never ending question of the Ego.
I have some doubts on your approach as it relates to your timeline/historical perspective on this piece: “it is our contemporary view that lacks depth because, so often, it blunts the sharpness of distinctions that give dignity to the human struggle.” That may or may not be true for you/someone/many, but how can one write it with such conviction?
I am, given my nature, always scared of the discourse that tries to convince me there is something of a blindfold ( I interpret that as ignorance) in our contemporary (western) culture relative to other periods-and I would bold those last four words if I could-: there has been human suffering (you can call that Jihad, in terms of the inner war we face) since as long back as we can go; isn’t that what Buddha based all of his teachings on? Human suffering. And of course, in suffering there is an internal struggle, and this agony, I think, in most of our contemporary culture is placed before us left, right and center: just turn on the news. You will see we have that ability to sense right from wrong, evil from good, war/peace and that our journalists will never let us forget it.
I’m afraid that from your point of view we are victimizing and rationalizing good and evil, to make it less obvious, perhaps, easier to digest. How do you go from that to conclude that we have lost dignity in the face of our human struggles?
But, you begin with the relations between Good and Evil, and this is assuredly the proper starting point for your enquiry. For the term “Evil,” I would substitute a tougher and more telling-less abstract, if you will- word: “Violence.” In evil and violence we have today an obvious antinomy. It is easy to prove that one has evolved from the other, and, when we go back to origins and examine primitive conditions, the solution of the problem follows easily enough.
Conflicts of interest between Ego and God/Good/Truth are resolved, in principle, by the recourse to violence. It is the same in the animal kingdom, from which man cannot claim exclusion.
This is true in groups. Perhaps the key most important element that your article is missing, and I say this because you have written of the Twin Towers and then dwindle back to inner conflicts without elaborating once again on the collective act of “evil” or, more rightfully “violence.”
If we explore this further, our contemporary psychoanalysts , starting with Freud, established two kinds of human instincts: those that conserve and unify, which we call “erotic” (from Eros) and instincts to destroy and kill, which we assimilate as to aggressive or destructive instincts.
These are, as you perceive, the well known opposites, Love and Hate, transformed into theoretical entities: perhaps eternal polarities, perhaps attraction and repulsions, for the scientists reading this.
But we cannot be haste in passing these notions of good and evil.
Each of these instincts is as indispensable as their opposite: working together to create the phenomena of life. It appears that an instincts of either category can operate but rarely in isolation; it is always blended with a certain dosage of its opposite.
Thus the instinct of self-preservation is certainly of an erotic nature, but to gain its ends this very instinct necessitates aggressive action. In the same way the love-instincts, when directed to a specific object, calls for an admixture of the acquisitive instinct if it is to enter into effective possession of that object.
It is the difficulty of isolating the two kinds of instinct in their manifestations that h as so long prevented us from recognizing them.
If you allow me to travel a little further down this path, you’ll find human affairs are complicated on yet another level.
Only very exceptionally does an action follow on the stimulus of a single instinct, which is per se a blend of Eros and destruction. As a rule, several motives of a single composition concur to bring about an act.
This was noted not only by Freud, but by physicists (Lichtenberg) as well, all of which are, historically speaking, our contemporaries rather than not: all that to say, sometimes, some of your readers are also critical thinkers. If you are to write and butcher us in two halves that seem simple with words, do not forget that we are but humble human beings reading your words. We are not only Good and Evil, Ego or God, but a multitude of all of these concepts and never forget: it is our contemporary view which allows you to write this, so as your contemporary, please stop lowering me and my spirit so far as to say that I, and my contemporaries, lack any depth.
On the contrary.
Best.
Dear Sanita,
Just to be clear, even though I posted this blog, the article was written by Elizabeth Debold, our senior editor.
Thanks,
Joel