Parables – Exploring the Unexpected & Liberating the Possible

Parables

Default World vs. Parable World

The default world is the world of procedural knowledge. It is composed of what we commonly accept, see, and operate in as the world at hand. Procedural knowledge is the assumed knowledge used daily in the default world. The parable world, however, is the world in contrast to the default world, and the knowledge needed to understand a parable is counter-intuitive to procedural knowledge.

Parables and the Anonymous Self

When reading a parable, we must necessarily free ourselves of procedural knowledge, but the most difficult part of this insight involves recognizing that procedural knowledge includes the habitual way we think about the self. To enter the parable world, I must overcome assumptions I hold about myself – assumptions such as my self-importance, my fixed identity, and my preoccupations with self-satisfaction. The act of getting into the parable world begins with seeing my self as a social construct. The self is my identity. It is constructed from my status in society: the amount of money I have, the class I belong to, the influence my status gives to my decisions, the reasons people know or want to know about me (or avoid me), the level of self-esteem gained in relationships with others or within social systems that become vital to the self because they signify to the self the importance (place, position, power) of the self.

In the world of procedural knowledge, the self can win or lose, can hold status or shame, can be satisfied or disappointed. The default world consists of the interactivity of the desires and the social positions of human selves. Yet, in the parable world, there is no self. Or, another way to imagine it, in relation to itself the self in parable is an anonymous self, a self without a name. The self in parable is not self-important or self-centered; it is not a self in need of a system of meaning to signify importance to itself.

The no-name self of the parable, the self that is anonymous to itself, is one that accepts itself merely and miraculously as a location of awareness, as a “happenstance” as the philosopher/theologian Don Cupitt says, born out of the history of coincidental human relationships on our planet. The anonymous self sees the fabrication of relationships that create default reality and can pierce through the fabric with a liberty of consciousness that accepts the self as a host of the coincidental history of relationships that have produced this one location of awareness. The anonymous self is a self that accepts itself anonymously as a location of awareness.

Clutching and grabbing, so essential to winning in the default world, are a loss in the parable world of the anonymous self. In the parable world, I celebrate winning by losing, gaining by letting go. In the default world, winning and losing create or harm my self-esteem, but in the parable world winning and losing are exactly what need to be pierced to in order to be free. In the parable world, there is no such thing as the power of God or the favor of God for a worldly, historical figure. These things in the parable are seen as the way the default world hides its emptiness from itself. They are the lights and the sound of importance that, in parable, distract from the joyfulness of authentic life. Indeed, in parable, ironically, the sounds of importance are the least important thing. When the values of success in the default world become that for which I clutch and grab, the “I” of myself has lost the parable’s gift of anonymity; the default reality has become who I am and how I think. In the world I may have won, but in parable I have lost.

To be in the “counter-intuitive” world of the parable is to be an “anonymous self,” a self who is not the consequent result of clutching and grabbing after life. In parable, everything in the world that is and that can be is already part of the whole story. Everything that is in the world is already the consequence of the total relationship of things that compose the world. Nothing exists in isolation; nothing is self-created; everything in this sense is anonymous, that is, without singular identity or without an absolute name.

Parables of Jesus – Liberation for the Possible

The quest to find a stable identity is not the point of the parables of Jesus. One’s name or occupation is no privilege. Of course, we need names and identities in order to build societies and to advance learning, but in the parable the emptiness of these default necessities is exposed in the larger vision of anonymity. Every “thing” in parable breaks across the line of singular identity to the other side of anonymity, where it can play host to a world liberated from the status quo. A vineyard worker who strains all day crosses over to anonymity when his co-worker who strains less than an hour is paid the same wage. The older brother of the prodigal son crosses over to anonymity when he cares less about his inheritance and joins the celebration of his younger brother’s return. In parable, the promise is that the world can be differently arranged and differently reasoned because its current default form is only one set of possibilities within an infinite set of possibilities. Parable is liberation for the possible.

Embracing the Human Jesus
Embracing the Human Jesus: A Wisdom Path for Contemporary Christianity
David Galston

 

 


David Galston
David Galston

David Galston is the Executive Director of the Westar Institute and the Ecumenical Chaplain at Brock University in St. Catharines, Ontario, where he is also an Adjunct Professor of Philosophy. He has a PhD in the Philosophy of Religion from McGill University.

Galston is a co-founder and Academic Advisor of the SnowStar Institute of Religion, a Fellow of the Jesus Seminar, and a United Church minister.  David has written several articles and led many workshops on the question of the historical Jesus, the future of Christianity, and the problems of Christian theology in light of the historical Jesus.

Books written by David Galston include:

 

 

Self or No Self? – Early Buddhist Teachings on the Question

Buddha’s Teaching

When the wanderer Vacchagotta asked whether there is a self, Buddha (480-400 BCE) remained silent. After Vacchagotta had gone away, Buddha explained to his disciple Ananda that to have affirmed or denied the existence of self would have led to a metaphysical dead end (from Samyutta Nikaya).

Buddha made and acted on decisions that made a profound difference in his life. Had he not believed this was possible for others, too, there would have been little point to spending forty-five years encouraging people to pursue a path of moral responsibility, contemplative practice, and philosophical reflection. The self may not be an aloof, independent “ruler” of the body and mind, but neither is it an illusory product of impersonal physical and mental forces. Buddha is interested in what people can do, not with what they are. The task he proposes entails distinguishing between what is to be accepted as the natural condition of life (the unfolding of experience) and what is to be let go of (reactivity).

Nagarjuna’s Teaching

The ambiguity and elusiveness of self is captured in a verse from Nagarjuna (150-250 CE) :

If the self were the bundles,
It would be something that arises and passes away;
If it were other than the bundles,
It would not bear their characteristics.

…..Mulamadhyamaka-karika

Were I reducible to my body, feelings, perceptions, inclinations, and consciousness, then, since they are constantly changing, I would be constantly changing. But, that is clearly not the case. Nagarjuna takes it for granted that to be a self means to have a perspective on experience that remains constant while the feelings, perceptions, and inclinations that make up one’s experience arise and pass away. At the same time he recognizes the absurdity of thinking of the self as something different from what makes up its experience. Why? Because the only way “I” or “you” can be known is through our features: our name, our physical appearance, our moods, our thoughts, our acts. Remove these features, and the self to whom they belong vanishes as well.

After Buddhism: Rethinking the Dharma for a Secular Age
After Buddhism: Rethinking the Dharma for a Secular Age
Stephen Batchelor

Background on Stephen Batchelor

 

Does Penetrating A Mystery Make It Any Less Mysterious?

A problem once solved ceases to be a problem; but the penetration of a mystery does not make it any less mysterious. The more intimate one is with a mystery, the greater shines the aura of its secret. The intensification of the mystery leads not to frustration (as does the increasing of a problem) but to release.

The Faith to Doubt: Glimpses of Buddhist Uncertainty
The Faith of Doubt: Glimpses of Buddhist Uncertainty
Stephen Batchelor

 

 


Stephen Batchelor
Stephen Batchelor

born 1953

. Wikipedia
Martine & Stephen Batchelor

Stephen Batchelor, along with his wife Martine, are Buddhist teachers and authors, who live in South West France and conduct meditation retreats and seminars worldwide. They both trained as monastics for ten years in traditional Buddhist centers in Asia, and now present a lay and secular approach to Buddhist practice, largely based on the early teachings of the Buddha as found in the Pali Canon.

Books written by Stephen Batchelor include:

 

How Do Ambiguity and Uncertainty Attract Us?

The mind state caused by ambiguity is called uncertainty, and it’s an emotional amplifier. It makes anxiety more agonizing, and pleasure especially enjoyable.

The delight of crossword puzzles, for example, comes from pondering and resolving ambiguous clues. Detective stories, among the most successful literary genres of all time, concoct their suspense by sustaining uncertainty about hints and culprits. Mind-bending modern art, the multiplicities of poetry, Lewis Carroll’s riddles, Marquez’s magical realism, Kafka’s existential satire – ambiguity saturates our art forms and masterpieces, suggesting its deeply emotional nature.

Goethe once said that “what we agree with leaves us inactive, but contradiction makes us productive.” So it is with ambiguity.

Nonsense: The Power of Not Knowing
Nonsense: The Power of Not Knowing

Jamie Holmes

What Can We Learn When Life Interrupts Our Most Cherished Plans?

Life can interrupt our most cherished plans, providing us a reminder that circumstances are indifferent to our ideals and intentions. And, sometimes the circumstances are inside us like buried mines waiting to explode. The main threats to the contented mind come from the mind itself. Enemies within, compulsions we did not know about, because our life did not come with a map of its inner topography enclosed, a guide to its psychic waves.

Leaving Alexandria
Leaving Alexandria: A Memoir of Faith and Doubt

Richard Holloway

Background on Richard Holloway