"For me this is a practical matter. Instead of having
the answer
about
God
like some
guy
or some thing or some explanation or some anything, I have a space of
possibility
like an
openness,
like a place for
God
to
show up
in my life."
...
speaking with Reverend Terry Cole-Whittaker about
God
The context for
Werner's quote
which introduces this essay, is this: Werner is speaking with Reverend
Terry Cole-Whittaker about God. Werner speaks God as a question rather
than as an answer, as a possibility rather than as a thing. He declares
he has the space for God to
show up
in his life.
This is streets removed from simply wishing for and hoping
for ie from simply imploring God to
show up
in one's life. There's a relationship with God here which indicates a
completion with God as a possibility, a standing with God
as a question, a relationship with God such that that which
is is allowed to be.
In fact, if you totally get what he's speaking, you can tell with one
bold stroke Werner completely
recontextualizesprayer.
It's understandable when religious people first entertain Werner's
possibility of standing with God as a question, there's a moment
of hesitancy, a moment of drawing back. What exactly is it
to stand with God as a question? The hesitancy, the
drawing back comes from the (in this case, mistaken) association of
questioning with doubting. In the ordinary course of events, if
I say "I question God", the implication is I doubt God.
This isn't that. Standing with God as a question implies
neither doubt nor agnosticism not atheism. Some people doubt God.
Others don't. Some people profess to be agnostics. Others profess to be
atheists. Still others profess to be neither. Standing with God as a
question has no particular allegiance to any of those camps,
and neither does it have any particular allegiance to any
religion, although it may be entertained by some or all of the
above. Standing with God as a question is a new
distinction entirely.
If you ask the most decent religious people whether or not they believe
in God, they'll say "Yes" - by definition. And that's the pitfall right
there. It's a trap actually. Indeed, there's not only one
trap. There are two.
The first trap is this: belief in God stops far short,
waaay too short in fact, of the living, thrilling
experience of God. The second is this: until God is
questioned (I don't mean questioned like
doubted - I mean questioned like inquired into,
like gotten to know), what people regard as God is simply their
concept of God. That renders believing in God a bit like
going into the local Denny's restaurant, and ordering the
photograph of the Grand Slam
breakfast
from the menu rather than ordering the Grand Slam
breakfast
itself.
These two pitfalls, these two traps are the twin barriers
between people and standing with God.
Here's my personal declaration about God, coming as it does about
halfway through my own ongoing spiritual
hejira:
I love God. I love God absolutely. I'm
moved to tears
by God. And I also have my considerations that without first getting
clear about the twin barriers to God (belief in God rather
than the experience of God, and the unquestioned
concept of God), even the most decent, pious believers and
faithful practitioners of religion are eating photographs of the Grand
Slam
breakfast
rather than eating the Grand Slam
breakfast
itself.
It's arguably the essential distinction to master - this
distinction belief as opposed to direct
experience - if you intend to move the throttle of your life
out of the idle position, then into drive, then into
overdrive, then into cruise, and eventually into warp
speed.
It's not arguably the essential distinction merely in the
world of transformation. It's not arguably the essential
distinction merely in the world of religion, worship, and relationship
with God. It's arguably the essential distinction in Life
- across the board. People who haven't cleared themselves on the
distinction belief as opposed to direct
experience have troubled, hungry, malnourished
looks on their faces. In spite of their professed
preferences and cherished beliefs, it's clear there's
little nourishment to be derived from eating photographs of the Grand
Slam
breakfast.
Furthermore, it's a basic tenet of
Zen
that any belief in the existence of something, carries
implicitly within it that very something's non-existence. If
belief in God is inspired by the intention to bring the
presence of God forth, belief in God is also likely to bring the
non-presence of God forth ie it's also likely to bring the
absence of
God
forth (as
Mother Teresa,
much to her own chagrin, may have said).
Now, one way to listen what I just said is that I negate the value of
belief, that I diminish the value of belief, in other words that I
demean believers. This isn't that, and that's not what I'm
saying. Up to a certain point, belief is the foundation of faith. But
beyond that point, the ladder is too short to reach the
top of the steeple. Belief isn't discarded as much as it's
re-evaluated against a more potent distinction - direct
experience - at the appropriate time.
Some people re-evaluate belief for
direct experience
sooner than others. As for why some people become aware of
the power of the distinction
direct experience
as opposed to belief sooner than others, this could be ascribed to the
same quality - plain intentionality - that has some people work
out regularly more than others. Or it could simply be
ascribed to a less powerful ethereal quality I call grace.
It's useful when inquiring into any area in your life which requires
coming up with a real experience rather than coming up with merely
another belief, to pre-consider inquiries or questions, the
answers to which will point to new distinctions, and which are weighed
up not against an already well established belief system, but
rather against something new, against something
beyond or prior to (notice it's accessible at
both ends of the continuum) the well established belief
system, against something from the realm of
direct experience.
To do this, it's useful to set up a laboratory, so to speak, in
which your research ie in which your inquiry, in which your
questioning takes you beyond that with which you're
already familiar.
Werner
Erhard
established the project he titled Breakthough Racing as a
laboratory in which to research breaking himself up and reinventing
himself as team. He chose driving race cars because it was an
arena in which he had no prior experience.
When I researched
keeping my
word
and what it takes to
keep my word,
inspired by the Breakthough Racing project, I established
a project in which I chose skydiving as a laboratory - also an arena in
which I had no prior experience.
At the start of the project, all I knew to be true about
keeping my word
was what I believed to be true about
keeping my word.
All I knew to be true about
keeping my word
I believed made me right and better for
keeping my word.
I wanted a project which would break through the barrier
and limitation of my belief. I wanted a project which would break
through into a new realm of possibility for
keeping my word
(as a
Landmark Forum Leader
may have said), a new realm of possibility in which
keeping my word
would transform, in which
keeping my word
would come forth as an experience rather than merely as
something else I believe in, rather than merely as
something which I consider to be the good and the right
thing to do.
I titled the project
BREAKTHROUGH SKYDIVING.
The first edition was published on June 8, 1983. Since then, four more
editions have been published, the fifth and most recent of which was
published on November 2, 2002.
BREAKTHROUGH SKYDIVING,
in addition to creating an experience of the distinction
"What does
keeping my word
literally imply?", pointed me from then on in the direction of direct
experience as distinct from belief. It pointed me from then on in the
direction of creating a space, in the direction of creating a
context, in the direction of inventing a possibility for
Life rather than simply adding to my impressive (in my mind, at least)
repertoire of beliefs about Life.
In this new space, in this new
clearing,
without any pre-definitions or pre-restrictions or
beliefs or
ego
or righteousness, I'm able to entertain an experience of God. I'm able
to entertain an inquiry into God ie an inquiry into that
which, until now, I was only able to believe in and / or
conceptualize God to be. Into this new space, into this new
clearing,
the unfiltered presence of God can
show up
in my life.
I'm less concerned with being dependent on God to help me
do what I want to do. I'm less concerned with being dependent on God to
provide me with what I need. That is to say, I'm less concerned with
being able to direct the presence of God to
show up
in my life at will, as much as I'm concerned with allowing it
to be - not as a belief, not as a concept, not as a
memory, but rather as an experience of something
powerful, of something reliable, of something count-on-able
which completely supports and nurtures Life and my life and everyone
and everything in it with no one and nothing left out.
In the ordinary course of events when we pray, we're asking God for
help. In the ordinary course of events when we pray, we're asking God
to provide what we need. I'm no longer concerned with either. That is
to say, I'm no longer concerned with manipulating God. In
the ordinary course of events when we pray, we're
imploring God to
show up
in our lives. What I've observed from within the question
God is when I prayed, I wasn't intentionally creating
myself as a
clearinglike a possibility so God can
show up
in the space I bring forth. What I've observed from within the
question God is in the ordinary course of events, I live
with God the answer. In the ordinary course of events, I'm not
living in the question God. Yet it's unavoidable: it's living in
the question God which opens up the space for God to be
present in my life.
Stay with this even though it doesn'tmakesense. It doesn't make sense that the possibility of God in
our lives isGod in our lives. Stay with this
even though it's risky territory. Stay with this even though
entertaining God like a possibility in our lives is to
walk on thin ice. If you can't stay with the risk of
entertaining God as a question, if you can't stay with the risk of
entertaining God like a possibility, an automatic response to
alleviating the risk is to come up with answers. Once God is
reduced to answers, that is to say once God is reduced to concepts and
beliefs, it'snotGod. It's merely the
photograph of the Grand Slam
breakfast
from the menu. It's not the Grand Slam
breakfast
itself.
Observations from within the question God allow for being
responsible for creating the space in your life in which God can
show up.
In other words, observations from within the question God
allow for being responsible for being the creator of the space in your
life in which "The Creator of Life" can
show up.
That's both ironic as well as deeply profound at the same time:
who you are
is the creator of the space in your life in which "The Creator of
Life" can
show up.
If you can let go of God as a belief, if you can let go of God as a
concept, and instead allow God to
show up
in your life as a presence, as an experience, as a
question, then you can truly stand up and be
counted with God (as Meister Eckhart may have said), rather
than merely asking God (ie God the belief, God the concept) for help.
Standing up and being counted with God not only allows the presence of
God to come into my life, but it also completes and fulfills any
beliefs I have about God as well as my concepts of God by allowing them
to be present as well, yet transformed within this entirely new
context.
* * *
It's Werner's conversation about God like a possibility, it's
Werner's conversation about God as a question rather than
as "the answer", and your resulting observations from within the
question God which completely
recontextualizesprayer,
and which creates the space for God to
show up
in your life.
This essay,
Observations From Within The Question,
broadens the
source
perspective of my
thesisBREAKTHROUGH SKYDIVING
of which there are five editions - so far. The entire
thesis
with all five forewords, incidents, abstracts, observations, and
conclusions is available at