Of spiritual experience and the experience of taste

It is interesting to explore what happens when someone tries to communicate a spiritual experience he/she has had to another person. Often, such communication attempts fail - in terms of making the other person understand what exactly was experienced. This happens mainly because of two reasons. First, spiritual experiences are highly personal. Second, language is an inadequate (or even inappropriate) tool to communicate such experiences. 

A similar argument can be made, to a large extent, in the case of religious experiences also -even when the experience happens in the context of a religious ritual that both the parties (the sender and the receiver of the communication) participated at the same time/place. Whole the ritual or ceremony is exactly the same, each person experiences it in his/her own way. Yes, the mechanics or the outer shell of the experience can be described - but it misses the essence of the experience. 

This brings to mind two stories. 

The first one is a Zen story - about the so called 'first principle of Zen' - the understanding of which leads to 'satori' or enlightenment. Once, a beginner asked a Zen master, "Master, What is the first principle?". "If I were to tell you, it would become the second principle", replied the Zen master. 

The second story is about a 'failed scientific experiment' that I had conducted many years ago. I come from Kerala and I, like many other Keralites, am very fond of eating fish-based dishes. 'Karimeen' or 'Pearl Spot' is often considered to be most tasty fish in Kerala. In a way, what Karimeen is to Keralites is what Illish (Hilsa fish) is to Bengalis (West Bengal is another Indian state where most people are fond of eating fish based dishes). I had an argument with a Bengali colleague of mine on whether Hilsa fish is tastier than Karimeen. We tried to resolve this dispute experimentally by having lunch together at Bengali and Kerala restaurants on alternate days and eating the Illish and Karimeen dishes. To make the experiment more 'scientific', we did try to control for the possible variation because of preparation by picking the top 3 preparations for both Hilsa (Shorshe Illish, Bhappa Illish, Illish Bhaja) and Karimeen (Karimeen Fry, Karimeen Mappas, Karimeen Pollichathu). The dispute remained unresolved even after both of us had put on quite a bit of weight because of this experiment (and the experiment had to be discontinued for health reasons)! Then I came to realize that 'the experience of a Bengali eating Hilsa can't be replicated by a non-Bengali eating Hilsa'. The same can be said about 'the experience of a Keralite eating Karimeen'.

Any comments/thoughts?

Of rituals, culture and spirituality

This post was triggered by a discussion based on an article that spoke about the decreasing importance given by the young generation to rituals and how that could impact our culture and spirituality.

My immediate response was that rituals becomes more meaningful when we know the meaning behind the rituals. We tend to be not so enthusiastic about those rituals that we feel are 'empty'(of meaning).

Sense-making is a function of place and time, and, it happens within the prevailing worldview, culture and the intellectual atmosphere. In the case of some rituals, original meaning/intent just has to be explained to make the rituals meaningful to a new group of people (e.g. the young generation). In the case of some other rituals, a significant reinterpretation is required. In a modern society, with more choice and awareness at the individual level (as compared to earlier times), expecting everyone to follow the rituals without evaluating them is a bit unrealistic.

 Yes, in the case of many of the rituals, the meaning is not in the rituals itself, but it is in the state of mind and the connect (to oneself, others and to the divine) that the ritual (if performed 'properly') helps to attain!

 Let me try to illustrate this with two examples, the first from Christianity and the next from Hinduism:  

During the holy communion,  when the bread and wine are blessed, they 'become' (in the subjective reality of the communicant) the body and blood of Christ. Now, this transformation in the subjective reality can't take place without tuning fully into the ritual by means of prayers, singing etc. 

Let me also add a personal perspective here. When it comes to the meaning of holy communion, some sort of 'U-Curve-like' phenomenon happened in my case. At first, I didn't think too much about the meaning and implications of holy communion, beyond taking it a way to remember Jesus. Later, I did a lot of thinking about the meaning of holy communion and and I became a bit uncomfortable, as I interpreted it to be some sort of 'ritualistic cannibalism' - till I realized that in many ancient societies, the main motive behind ritualistic cannibalism was not shortage of meat - it was to get the powers of the person who passed away. 

In the case of holy communion, this is explicitly affirmed in the prayers that prepares one for holy communion. For example, "so that you can be in us and we can be in you" in the prayer of humble access. To me, the main objective of Christianity is to become more like Jesus Christ - fully human and fully divine  at the same time (please see 'Miracle' for more details) and to become one with Him. From that perspective, the ritual of holy communion, if done properly with understanding, can be a great enabler! We can also say that the ritual of holy communion becomes meaningful, only in the context of the religious/spiritual experience that allows one to feel the oneness with Christ.   

Now, let's come to the second example. I grew up in Kerala. In many of the temples in Kerala, there is the ritual of 'pradakshinam', that involves circumambulating the (sanctum sanctorum of the) temple. These days, you will see many people running around the temple at 'breakneck speed' which takes away meaning of the ritual. The original idea was that you should do the 'pradakshinam' with your mind focused on the deity- and your speed of walking should be only as much as that of a nine-months pregnant woman who is walking with a jar of full of oil balanced on her head (without spilling it, of course). So, if it is done properly, this ritual definitely becomes a great mindfulness exercise and a great way to focus on the divine. Yes, if one just runs around the temple at 'breakneck speed', just to observe the form of the ritual (without bothering about the spirit behind it), the ritual becomes meaningless indeed! 

Where does this leave us? Rituals are useful when they are done properly and with adequate understanding of  (and resonance with) their intent (underlying meaning/purpose) Yes, we should not 'de-ritualize' our society. Rituals can bring in a 'sense of the sacred' and that of profoundness to our lives. They can also help in facilitating psychological transitions (see 'accelerated learning and rites of passage') and in attaining altered states of awareness/higher levels of consciousness. Rituals can also encode, amplify and reinforce cultural elements. Yes, 'de-ritualization is a move towards 'de-spiritualization' and hence towards alienation'!

Any comments?