Towards the Spiritual Convergence of America and Russia: American Mind and Russian Soul, American Individuality and Russian Community, and the Potent Alchemy of National Characteristics
- Автор: Lapeyrouse Stephen Ludger
- Год: 1990
- Язык: английский
- ISBN: 0-9628048-0-0
- Жанр: История
Электронная книга - «Towards the Spiritual Convergence of America and Russia: American Mind and Russian Soul, American Individuality and Russian Community, and the Potent Alchemy of National Characteristics». Краткое содержание книги:
“If my efforts in this work are adequate to the task, I wish to make substantial intellectual contributions towards a clear description of how essential and profound a spiritual, philosophical and psychological relation exists, between characteristic highest (“vertical”) conceptions and aspirations — and tasks — of Mankind in America and Russia. The hope is that such understanding could contribute, essentially, towards a clearer, creative, and mutually-beneficial spiritual orientation — in thoughtful and heartful individuals of both nationalities — which might lead to a more conscious spiritual meeting of “Russian” and “American”; and thereby, possibly, promote an alchemical blending of the American Mind and Russian Soul, American Individuality and Russian Community. Such a greater clarity towards a greater spiritual realization, and more complete wholeness, in some men and women of each country, and thereby, perhaps, in portions of Mankind as a whole.” — the Author
While now, and certainly for much time to come, the identity and “nationality” (natio, nasci nat — be born) of the majority of each countries’ populace shall remain earthly, “horizontal”; those who rise up to complete the highest spiritual, the highest “vertical” call, extant in both of their lands, thereby seek a birth, a nationality, a citizenship, which transcends the earthly — being born of spirit into a higher community. Such “otherworldly” citizenship certainly requires real inner renunciation and redemption; and, as such, shall remain, unpopular in thought, and rare in deed. Nonetheless, such constitutes the highest ideals towards which each nation, in their respective spiritual histories — and highest “national” identities — would have men and women strive. [212]
In regards to the spiritual life of the individual in the American Dream, as this was conceived and expressed by James Truslow Adams, he wrote:
[Emerson’s] insistence on values in life, culminating in the spiritual, is (me sorely needed in the America of our day as of his. We are, perhaps, further from the ideal he drew of the “American Scholar” than were the men of his own time. [213]
And in regard to Russia, Vladimir S. Soloviev said it simply:
Holy Russia demands holy work. [214]
And while all of this is, and shall be, seldom enough; it is only when individuals and communities, of Americans and Russians (and other nationalities), consciously recognize, and realize, their essential, common, spiritual heritage — back historically to their deepest common spiritual sources [215] -, and lineage — through deep Christianity, and all the deeper currents of the philosophia perennis [216] -, as well as their shared potential spiritual nationality, that a future spiritual convergence [217] shall begin to be possible.
Such ideas and ideals, in our secular, “horizontal” time, are rarely known, poorly recognized, and seldom clearly voiced; especially since they ultimately require a birth, a “nationalism,” — indeed, rather, a laborious rebirth, a self-wrought renascence (re-nasci, rebirth), to a “nationality” (natio, birth) which is, essentially, “not of this world”. This is a “vertical”, not a “horizontal” citizenship; not an earthly, but a spiritual nationality.
If “the quintessential American” Emerson be true, in America, this higher spiritual nationality must occur in the sovereign individual. In Russia, through the voice of the Slavophile Khomyakov, this can only occur in a community of individuals. But for both, it is a higher, “vertical”, spiritual nationality. (Perhaps, in the greater scale of time, this will seem less “dreamy” a conception.)
Egoism, Communism and Philadelphia
For those whose hearts and minds are satisfied with an earthly, material, or simply skeptical, agnostic view and explanation of the meaning of life, man, civilization and world; the ideas of this work, while perhaps interesting to historical curiosity, are essentially useless, and fictional. This essay was written for others. For those souls who yearn for, sincerely seek toward, believe in, or — perhaps even — know, of the inner “vertical”, spiritual life of Man; and who want clearer understanding of the world in which we live.
Once, at the conclusion of a private lecture on this theme in Moscow, the author was asked by a learned, astute member of those gathered, to what degree the ‘noble individuality’ which Emerson had summoned, had been realized amongst the people in America. The heart and soul, the mind and spirit of men and women of Mankind, are the arena for a spiritual struggle. And the blood and gore of human history makes unquestionably clear, that this inner war is not confined to soul and spirit: “man’s inhumanity to man”. Is the idea of a sovereign, noble individual — as “American Scholar” or “holy bard” — who faces God, life and world, in strength and solitude, a common idea, ideal, and condition in the United States of America? The answer is similar as to whether the highest ideals of human brotherhood, collectivism and communism have been realized in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.
Yet there still remains — in spite of the answers here — at the spiritual-intellectual core of each nation’s attempt to understand itself (and their relation to human history, civilization, culture, life, etc.), their respective ideals of man, which lead out of the “horizontal” into the “vertical”. Selfish egoism must be viewed in contrast to the ennobled, benevolent, spiritual individual; state communism should be considered in contrast to the ideal of spiritual community: sobornost. When the necessary renunciative inner attitude; when the needed suffering and the willingness to sacrifice; when the requisite love; when these are clearly recognized, understandingly accepted, and soulfully embraced by many more of mankind than a few; then indeed, general history may make some truthful record of a real period of earthly “philadelphia”…(Perhaps one might describe such a possible time, using Russian terms, as a period of the “conscious ‘mir’”.) When many more sovereign individuals strive more for God, Truth, Knowledge, Wisdom and Purity, than for “land and money, place and name”. [218] When many strive inwardly, for communities of spirit, to be the voice and life of God in mankind… As Dostoyevsky described it in The Brothers Karamazov,
“…Believe me [said “the mysterious visitor”], this dream, as you call it, [of the Kingdom of Heaven]…will come to pass without doubt. It will come, but not now, for every process has its law. It’s a spiritual, psychological process. To transform the world, to recreate it afresh, men must turn into another path psychologically. Until you have become really, in actual fact, a brother to everyone, brotherhood will not come to pass.” [219]
“It’s a spiritual, psychological process”. The individual and the community are both, essentially and ultimately, dependent on the inner life and activity of men and women of Mankind. At worst, the solitary individual may strive exclusively for the satisfaction of his own merely personal earthly, “horizontal” desires, needs, interests, whims, etc… At best the solitary individual may strive and suffer for Truth, Knowledge, Wisdom; for self-perfection; social justice; God, etc… In between, there is, of course, much variation; including the “horizontal” humanist, who may struggle, strive and suffer for noble causes of benefit to man and world. In what way, into what relationship, to what degree these two opposed strivings are realized in the individual, depends ultimately on the inner life of that single being. The highest goal conceived, is deification: the realization of the highest potential aspects of the human soul and spirit — even if this be in struggle with the wild beast [220] in human nature. The worst realization of individualism is the completely selfish egoist, who lives totally for his own exclusive self-satisfaction, with no benevolent inner or outer concern or care for the internal or external life and well-being of others. Human history provides enough examples of both the best and the worst in humanity, and of course all in-between.
[212] And in this they are kin to all those nations, peoples and cultures which have a common spiritual heritage; though it must be admitted, that those men and women of Mankind, who Saint Paul described as those of “psyche”, shall relate to these ideas differently — in whatever culture — than those of “pneuma”.
Similar thoughts to these can be found in the material (cited above) concerning the ecclesia spiritualis, from which a quote:
“But regardless of these distinctions in nomenclature, we can, without the least violence to the historical facts, recognize many forms of ecclesia spiritualis not only in the Orphic-Pythagorean communities but also in all other communities built on mystical religions. They all reveal the characteristic traits of that ecclesia spiritualis which has been the great historical reality throughout the centuries.
These are the communities and conclaves of men who recognize a solidarity unrelated to race, to nation, land, blood, politics, class, or caste; who, on the contrary, find the basis of their solidarity in a common belief in transcendental values and in their of in divine grace…”
“Today the ecclesia spiritualis needs for its foundation no geographically limited units, no official groups organized in accordance with ecclesiastical articles and rules. The ecclesia spiritualis comes into being when here and there, of their own free will but no less firmly and effectively, all those band together who have become aware that future salvation does not depend on the mechanical development of our industry and technology, or on any fixed regulation of our economic and social life, but solely on the revival of a world of mysterious values, which evade all empirical judgment, and reveal themselves only to faith and hope.” (See Ernesto Buonaiuti, “Ecclesia Spiritualis” in Spirit and Nature, Bollingen, XXX, p. 225, 245.) These “mysterious values” are much more closely akin to the “vertical”, and a vertically-sourcing morality, based on inner virtue, than the “horizontal”-secular criterion of “inalienable rights of man”, “universal human values”, or such. The later is a necessary secular equivalent of the former.
[213] From James Truslow Adams, “Emerson Re-Read”, in Atlantic Monthly, October, 1930, p. 487.
[214] Quotation in Paul M. Allen, Vladimir Soloviev: Russian Mystic, p. 189.
[215] Among which are the wisdom, the Sophia of the prophetic seer Zarathustra (See Note 154.) The history of the “Sophia” can be traced back, looking at one aspect of this theme — that of spiritual psychology of the human being -, as far as the “daena” of the essential Zarathustran conception. (On this nascent concept of “daena” see, for example, H. S. Nyberg, “Die Religionen des Alten Iran”, in Mitteil, der Vorderasiat.-Aegypt. Gesellschaft, Bd. 43, (1938), p. 114-120.) [In my lectures in Russia, and California, during 1987 and 1988, which were the original presentation of many of the ideas and insights of this essay, I went into much greater depth of consideration concerning the question and theme of the Sophia. The audience for this story was much more subtle, profound and deep in Russia, than in this West of the West. And it is a deep and important spiritual characterization of the West, that the idea and theme of the Sophia is so little, and poorly, known — even in communities of those in California who conceive themselves to be deeply involved in “spirituality”.]
[216] For an interesting introduction to the idea of the philosophia perennis, see for example, Charles B. Schmitt, “Perennial Philosophy: From Agostino Steuco to Leibniz”, in the Journal of the History of Ideas, vol. XXVII, no. 4, 1966; and Karl H. Dannenfeldt, “The Pseudo-Zoroastrian Oracles in the Renaissance”, in Studies in the Renaissance, vol. IV (1957).
[217] Political, economic, social, cultural and religious “convergence” shall surely be more popular, possible and pursued. Such are obvious dynamics of relation in a increasingly interactive, interdependent world. But are, for example, American plutocratic economic structures, corrupted political power, inadequate and insensitive social bureaucracies; IBM computers; ‘God-Almighty’ dollars; MacDonald gamburgers and management techniques; Billy Joel rock concerts (or worse), and “historical Christianity” (Emerson), all — and the best — that the USA can offer to the body, soul and spirit of Russia?
[218] See the fuller quote in “The Statue of Liberty’s Inner Light”, page 113.
[219] The fuller dialogue between “the mysterious visitor” and Father Zossima as a young man goes:
“And we are all responsible for all, apart from our own sins. You were quite right in thinking that. And it is wonderful how you could comprehend it in all its significance at once. And in truth, so soon as men understand that the Kingdom of Heaven will be for them not a dream, but a living reality.”
“And when?” I [The young “Father Zossima”] cried out to him bitterly. “When will that come to pass? Will it ever come to pass? Is it not simply a dream?”
“Then you don’t believe it?” he said. “You preach it and don’t believe it yourself. Believe me, this dream, as you call it, will come to pass without doubt. It will come, but not now, for every process has its law. It’s a spiritual, psychological process. To transform the world, to recreate it afresh, men must turn into another path psychologically. Until you have become really, in actual fact, a brother to everyone, brotherhood will not come to pass. No sort of scientific teaching, no kind of common interest, will ever teach men to share property and privileges with equal consideration for all.” The Brothers Karamazov, Part Two, Book VI, 1. (d).
[220] There is much appropriate talk in our society of the need for a renewal of “social values” — that neutered word for morality, which, presumably, was generally neutralized from our daily language, due to its direct associations with once-established religions of differing kinds. In a secular nation, with a legally-protected pluralism of ideas about “the ultimate questions of life;” some agreement must be had — some social common ground — about social morality. Though we have, indeed, our generic national “God”, in whom we trust; the cornucopia of views which fills this word, were they to be clearly and loudly voiced in their distinctiveness, might well lead us into some grand, anarchic, modern ‘holy wars’ of religion.
The name “God” can certainly be intimidating, even to those who have a diversity of religious views, or generally no religious views at all. But it is not necessarily adequate, to base a social morality, on a God which meets all of our societies human projections. Every society which we would call “civilized” — in some real sense or other, must have “law and order” to some minimal degree at least. But even a real “social morality” — ”social values” — which may or may not derive from a religious basis, does not necessarily engage the heart and soul of man. In other words, an outer social morality, while it is certainly essential for a sane, tolerable life in society, and may well be adequate and satisfactory for a society’s order, does not necessarily mean that there is morality present in the society. For there is outer morality — which can be like a sort of social law — and there is inner morality. If social renewal is based on outer social morality, this does not mean that the “dark side” of men and man — which reveals itself so dramatically in the current “immorality” of our civilization, which is so disturbing and shocking — is truly tamed. And the question is whether the attempt to revive outer social morality can ever really succeed. Laws can be instituted, prisons can be enumerated, police can be enhanced; calls for new values can be made by the leaders of our secular, political, intellectual and religious establishments. But these are all outer acts, not too different than trying to cage and control a wild beast. Such an animal can be made docile and governable; perhaps the wild beast can even be completely “tamed”. But if we control the latent and manifest “beast in man” by placing him in a “cage” of laws and punishments, social enculturation and pressure; are we not in essence treating the beast in man in the same way that we treat a wild animal? Certainly there are plenty of people, be they in religion, politics, psychology or anthropology, who have such a view of the reality of the inner life of the human being. Wild, dangerous animals — let there be no question — must be controlled; tamed, one way or other; but is this the reality for man as well? The call for a renewal of “social values” is as necessary for our civilizational order and social life, as it has been — in its preponderate content — inadequate to the reality of the problem. The beast — any period of human history, not only our bloody own, will show — must be controlled. But it is little more than “taming a wild animal”, the way man and his beast have been addressed concerning this problem. The only real, and lasting taming of the beast in man, must occur in the inner life, the heart and soul of man. If our best “role models”, our great or leading men and women, do not speak of this inner self-control? If all our talk, thought and worry focuses on the outer morality of society, and does not deeply address the true problem of inner morality; will the problem be solved in a way which recognizes and realizes man as greater than the beasts which we keep in physical, metal cages. Man, has an inner beast, which we allow, to freely walk the streets; that is, until some (outer) law is “broken”. But it is clearly impossible to govern all persons’ acts by laws, police and prisons, etc. Society rests upon a basis of presumed benevolent moral action by the majority. The problem is that the self-governance or social control of the beast in men and women of Man, seems to be inadequate to the task. Outer social morality is not adequate to the problem — though it is certainly necessary. The beast inside of man — even in the most “polite” of us — must be tamed by the individuals own self. It is manifestly inadequate to imagine that it is acceptable to allow an inner beast — wild and untamed — to roam loose and uncontrolled, inside of the private being of man; for the wild inner animal too obviously often escapes control…
If we do not recognize and teach, that the inner beast in man must ultimately be self-trained and tamed, we shall never come into a real lasting control of the wild beasts in man which roams our streets. The call for a renewal of “social values” is inadequate (as well as necessary — conditions being so bad) and superficial. It is based on an inadequate, and even shallow optimism as to the nature of the human being; and it does not go to the heart of the problem. For the problem is with the beast in man. How is he to be controlled? Is he to be governed by some political leader’s call for a renewal of “social values” (the very expression looks at men and women of mankind form the outside, on a mass social scale: it does not address itself to the inner life); or are we to be controlled by fear of our generic “God”, who blesses everything from our dollars to our football games? The beast in men and women of man — (homo sapiens) the allegedly thinking creature, presumably wiser than beasts — must be called to governance by the individual’s own self. This is a morality worthy of that creature which conceives itself distinguished in wisdom from the instinctual animals. We cannot avoid (conditions being what they are) a tremendous call for outer morality, but if we continue to ignore or deemphasize the necessity of an inner morality, we are naive to be surprised and frightened by anything but regular outbreaks of the wild and untamed beasts in men and women of man, out of the inner life, into our society. If “God” must put fear into the souls of our immoral and ungoverned, then we had better find a more intimidating God than the one in whom we currently imagine ourselves to have placed our trust. If man is to be treated as more than a wild animal needing caging; then we must start calling for a renewal of inner morality. This task of taming the inner beast in man is itself a great, arduous responsibility; but it is the core on which all social morality rests. And, in all of our leaders, be they political, social, literary or religious, this task is equally burdensome; for it is inherent in the human being as such. If we would have a renewal of social values in our troubled society and civilization, it must ultimately and essentially transpire inside the heart and soul of each of all of us — from the inner life of our nation’s political leaders, down to the dwellers of our “inner cities”. Ultimately the problem of “values” has to do with morality; and outer moral activity must be based on inner morality: the tamed, self-governed, ennobled beast in man.