God became man that man might become God.
-Athanasius
Recently I’ve been revisiting my Christian roots and felt that it might be helpful for others who share a common religious past to hear a few of my thoughts on nonduality and Christianity. At first glance it’s rather odd to even consider the possibility of Christianity meeting a nondual understanding of reality. In most of the west and a good portion of the world Christianity is cast in a dualistic mold that posits no final identity between God and man. That is, there is an unbridgeable gap between the Christian God and man. Even as we pronounce Christ as mediator between God and fallen man we always maintain an ontological division between them; God’s being or existence and mine are irreconcilably separate. Christianity in its formal display is basically a theology of relationship. There is no possibility of identity between a perfect God and his creation in man. The doctrine of union with Christ for example as nondualistic as it sounds will be qualified by most theologians as never loosing any distinction between Christ and Christian. In one sense this of course true, but from the nondual perspective when all limiting factors are removed there remains nothing but God.
Anyone who has read the Christian scriptures or the mystics of Christianity can readily intuit there is something much deeper going on than the mere salvation of sinners from an ultimate damnation to hell. Union with Christ must means something more than merely a relationship, right? If not what’s the point of such a mystical word “union”? The message of Christ must be far more than simply bringing man to a saving relationship with God through Christ. Not to deny the qualification that this saving relationship is not valid on its own level for persons not inclined to a mystical understanding of Christianity. I will even say this is the beauty of Christ: the unique incarnation of the God-man Jesus Christ meets every human disposition from the mentally handicapped to the purely heart oriented even to the wholly intellectual man, at his or her level. Christianity is a universal message of salvation…is this not a fundamental hint at its metaphysical transcendence?
The opening quote relates something of the miracle of God becoming man. “God became man that man might become God.” This is Athanasius’ oft quoted line from his “On the Incarnation”. We see here something of the mystery of the need for God to enter into his creation on behalf of mankind. In the book of Genesis we learn that God created man in his own image, and it is on this point that I see a meeting place for nonduality and the Gospel. Man as the image of God is analogous to God’s perfect reflection in Christ. Man, by sinning, essentially takes himself not as a reflection similar to that of the Son to the Father, but rather as an independent entity with his own will. The fundamental original sin was pride. Man’s shame in nakedness was the truth in his heart that he was utterly dependent upon God but chose to take himself as his own master. Here enters conscience as Paul in his Epistles declares that the Law of Moses convicts us in our hearts that we have sinned against God. Thus in Christ we have a Savior who enters into fallen humanity and restores the perfect image of God by taking sin upon himself and restoring man to his rightful relationship with God i.e. the image of God. It is Christ that brings the prodigal son home.
Consider the following short excerpt on Meister Eckhart and his thought on the analogy of the image.
Meister Eckhart specifies the nature of the image by stating that an image does not originate in itself or belong to itself, but “originates in the object of which it is an image, and owes to it absolutely every-thing it is. It does not belong to that which is foreign to the object whose image it is, nor is it alien matter. An image receives its being in direct fashion only from the object whose image it is; it has one being with it and is the same being.”[2] This definition of the nature of the image as being the same as, and one with, its object is illustrated by Meister Eckhart in his description of the reflection of an object in a mirror. “The question is asked where the being of an image most truly resides, in the mirror, or in the object from which it proceeds? It is more properly in the object from which it proceeds. The image is in me, from me; it is mine. As long as the mirror stands straight opposite my face my image is in it; if the mirror fell down, the image would disappear.”[3] God, however, remains essentially untouched by any disintegration or decay.
- Roland Pietsch, “The Spiritual Vision…” Article Here
Eckhart puts the utmost stress on the analogy of image here. We find the same stress in the theology of Eastern Orthodoxy which places great emphasis on the incarnation. This analogy can also be found in one form or another in most Christian mystics. In the western Christian world we usually see stress placed on the cross of Christ and what His death on the cross meant for man. But in a fuller theology we come to see the incarnation as a main factor in that it not only makes possible the coming of God in Christ, in order that He might die for sinners, but also that creation depends upon Christ. Man as an image of God is a microcosmic reflection of God’s reflection of Himself in Christ. Hence we hear in both Genesis and the Gospel of John that “in the beginning was the Word”, The Word signifying the Logos or Christ.
In trinitarian thought the triunity of Father – Son – Holy Spirit is analogous to the Absolute – Reflection – Infinity. That is, we Have the Absolute nondual God who as it were “thinks” of Himself and this thought is the Word. We might say the Word is God’s image of Himself. As Eckhart notes the image receives its being from the original. So theologically we say that the Son is the “only begotten of the Father.” His being is the same as God’s being. Not to digress to far into trinitarian theology I will simply say that the Christian God is three-in-one, both triune and One, yet paradoxically not in a numerical fashion. This paradox comes into view when we see that the reflection is none other than the original. It is the medium of the analogy, the ontology of being, and the ultimate fundamental metaphysics that draws us away from the truth of Oneness as we attempt to contemplate the Reality.
In a macrocosmic way we can see how the analogy of the image tells us something of the mystery of the Trinity as well as the miracle of creation, and the Word’s role in it. With this in mind we can return to the Garden of Eden and consider the microcosm of man as a reflection of the Trinity. Much importance in Christianity is laid upon the believers imitation of Christ. In fact Christian morality is cast in the image of Christ-likeness. In the garden man was created in the image of God. But this image was provisional since man was made in God’s image he was endowed with the freedom of will, he could choose to will wrongly. God alone possesses absolute freedom and as a reflection of divinity man possesses a derivative freedom of will. Righteousness for man is to will what God wills and therefore sin is to will what man desires. Thus man’s pride is to will himself as an independent reality apart from God. Christ on the other hand enters into humanity without sin for He is God actually not merely potentially. He is the perfect image of God. Man is therefore most free when he most perfectly wills the Will of God.
Jesus Christ in whom creation itself has its fullest expression comes into the world to right the reflection. It’s as if Christ is the perfect spotless mirror. Man is also a mirror but because of sin his mirror is stained with pride, selfishness, etc. In coming to know Christ the sinner’s mirror is cleansed of its iniquity, it is restored to that perfect likeness of his Creator. In Eastern Orthodox thought we see a distinction between the image on the one hand and the likeness on the other. Man is made in the image of God but only obtains the likeness of God or the perfect reflection through Christ.
Going back to the passage I quoted by Eckhart he says that “The image is in me, from me; it is mine. As long as the mirror stands straight opposite my face my image is in it; if the mirror fell down, the image would disappear.” That is God is the original Object reflected in the mirror. Christ is the perfect mirror. From the Absolute perspective, that of God, there is ultimately no reflection, no mirror, there is only Himself in absolute purity. But from the perspective of man there is the knowledge of God as Trinity (and unity, hence the mystery) and it is God’s work in Christ that man comes to the knowledge of his nature as a reflection of God, an image like Christ. It is only, for the Christian, in Christ that the possibility of this reality comes into view. This is why Athanasius speaks so clearly to our soul when he says “God became man that man might become God.”
I’ve been attempting to draw a parallel between nonduality as such and Christianity as an expression of nonduality. Perhaps it’s not yet clear unless we draw from other non-Christian sources. Firstly Sri Nisargadatta clearly points to this same reality when speaking of the Absolute when he says “The image in the mirror is of the face beyond the mirror.” What he means is that the Absolute in itself as pure Awareness reflects itself in the mirror of consciousness. Man is none other than the consciousness “I am”. When he says “I am this” or “I am that” he is effectually a sinner in the Christian sense. But as a perfect reflection of the Absolute he is only “I am” the reflection in the mirror or consciousness of existence. He says that the only thing you can truly say about yourself is that you are, no proof is needed for this. Liberation in dwelling in that “I am-ness” until it to falls away and there is nothing other than Awareness itself, the Absolute. Similarly Rumi says something ever so poetically:
Sunlight fell upon the wall; the wall received a borrowed splendor. Why set your heart on a piece of earth, O simple one? Seek out the source which shines forever.
He is using a related analogy, that of the sun. Here the sun is the Absolute reflecting upon the wall or the medium of Consciousness. He aptly suggests that we ought to set our hearts upon the source of the light we enjoy as conscious beings. We should look inward to the ground of Awareness that shines as consciousness and not to the earth or creation as such. To further elaborate the sun is light itself. Its rays can’t be separated from it. To conceive of the sun we can’t truly see the sun apart from its illumination or its heat. They are qualities of the sun and are not other than it, in the same way that water is wet. Water can’t be separated from its essential quality of wetness. Likewise the Absolute is in Vedantic terms Existence – Consciousness – Bliss. The Absolute or Brahman is of the nature of Being – Awareness – bliss. But to conceive of it as such is not it. It can be seen this way but in the last analysis this is even neti, neti. The Absolute is not not these qualities but it is not in any way limited by them, it is altogether transcendent. So when we approach the Absolute in its purity ultimately words fall back as Shankara says.
In conclusion what I’m trying to relate is simply that even within traditional Christianity it is possible to approach the Absolute, the nondual Reality. In today’s heavily dualistic expression of Christianity especially in the west its rather difficult to see this. In my personal search for truth I ditched the gospel message precisely because it seemed so far from approaching the reality of nonduality as I’ve come to know it. This isn’t the place to criticize Protestantism but it can’t be overlooked that for many of us it effectively alienated us from the true message of Jesus Christ. We all have different reasons, those of us raised in the shallow pool of a weak gospel, but we searched for truth elsewhere. I eventually found what I was looking for in the Advaita Vedanta of Shankara and the Upanishads and most brilliantly of late in the words of Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj. It has been through Vedanta that I went back to Christianity and met Meister Eckhart and other Christian mystics for the first time in a new way.
Perhaps in the near future a sage will come along in the Christian tradition and reclaim the original message of Jesus Christ and transform the whole image that the modern church has of its faith. I hope that one day we Christians will find no need to go out to other traditions to find what we’ve always been seeking. For it is truly right here under our noses right in the very Bible we put on the bottom of our bookshelves in order to make room for works on Advaita, Buddhism, Sufism, etc. Maybe for someone out there they met their innermost self in the Bhagavad Gita, or in Buddhist meditation but for some reason there seems to be some missing link precluding the falling away of ignorance and the realization of the Absolute. Might I suggest that it could be fruitful to return to Christ? Not the Christ you walked away from long ago but the living Christ who is none other than the perfect reflection of the Absolute. The same reflection that lies in the depths of your heart. Beyond the limitations of your sense of separateness lies a pure mirror, a Christ-like mirror. The face in that mirror is none other than the face of the original, the absolute, nondual, infinite, Existence – Awarenes – Bliss.
