Should Spiritual Language Be Simpler?
What is owed to today’s readers and listeners?
What is the role of spiritual language today? Many great figures in spiritual history have communicated in profoundly simple or parabolic terms, from Lao Tzu to Zen master DT Suzuki, while others, from philosophers Immanuel Kant to William James, have navigated the rapids of complexity.
What is owed to the 21st century seeker?
I recently excerpted a piece of a new talk on Instagram and a reader good-naturedly took me to task for overcomplexity of language. To explore the nature of what we need today in spiritual language, I am posting my original passage, my reader’s critique, and my reply — which, either in a sign of our times or of my verbosity, was too long to post on Instagram.
My excerpt:
“If I am right about ability of thought to concretize experience then it begs the question: what is mind causation for? If I accept the outlook of critics, is worldly ambition, is the wish to create, is the wish to produce, to earn, to generate, to be or live in a certain way, a worthy aim of the spiritual search?
“I’ve wrestled with that question for many years. The perspective that I’ve come to is ceasing to differentiate between what might be considered the eternal and…
