Hans
10-30-2002, 05:10 PM
Beyond Padgett
7. Faith vs. deeds?
You can tell them by their fruits. Do you pick a bunch of grapes from a thorn-bush or figs from a clump of thistles?
Matthew 7:16
When Paul’s doubts were “the thorn in his flesh,” Martin Luther’s thorn, undoubtedly, was the Epistle of James. “We should throw the Epistle of James out of this school [the University of Wittenberg]”, he stated, hurling flaming speeches against this scripture, which had been acknowledged as inspired and integrated into the canon of the church. Despite his efforts, the protestant churches continue considering James epistle as inspired and forming part of the New Testament.
Luther’s indignation rose from the fact that he preached justification through faith, as Paul had explained it in various places, e.g. in Romans 1:17, “ I see in it God’s plan for making men right in his sight, a process begun and continued by their faith. For, as the scripture says: The righteous shall live by faith.”
But James downright contradicted Paul
Later, in a writing to James Padgett, Luther tried to set his teachings right.
“Faith without works is not sufficient. Works without faith will not bring about the great results desired; and both faith and works without the New Birth or the acquiring of the Divine Love of the Father, are not sufficient to bring salvation to mankind.”
Martin Luther, one time monk and reformer: Faith and works - the vicarious atonement - the importance of obtaining the New Birth. His beliefs have changed since he became a spirit. Affirms Jesus writing through Mr. Padgett (Vol. I)
Interestingly, the question of the value of works had also been dealt with extensively in the “Hindu Bible,” the Bhagavad Gita. Krishna, the incarnation of God, imparts the following instructions upon Arjuna (I am adding Gandhi’s interpretations):
3. The Blessed Lord said: In this world twofold is the self-application of the soul (by which it enters into the Brahmic condition), as I before said, O sinless one: that of the Sankhyas by the Yoga of knowledge, that of the Yogins by the Yoga of works.
4. Not by abstention from works does a man enjoy actionlessness, nor by mere renunciation (of works) does he attain to his perfection (to siddhi, the accomplishment of the aims of his self-discipline by Yoga).
Mahatma Gandhi explains that “actionlessness” (freedom from action) is freedom from the slavery of actions. This freedom is not achieved simply by abstaining from any activity. Besides, such abstention is impossible because of the nature of things How, then, can such freedom be accomplished? The following verses give the explanation.
5. For none stands even for a moment not doing work, everyone is made to do action helplessly by the modes born of Prakriti.
(Prakriti = matter. According to the Samkhya philosophy, all that exists can be reduced to two fundamental principles: spirit (Purusha) and matter (Prakriti). These two categories of existence are eternal and not created. Purusha is the conscious and inactive principle; Prakriti is unconscious, although it is the active principle of all manifestation.
Prakriti is constituted of three elementary substances: Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. These are the Gunas, inseparable elements which combine in different proportions in order to form the material objects. Sattva corresponds to the principle of intelligence, Rajas is the principle of energy, Tamas the principle of mass or inertia. The three Gunas are always active, each one trying to win predominance over the others; the nature of things is determined by the ascendancy of one over the other of the Gunas.)
6. Who controls the organs of action, but continues in his mind to remember and dwell upon the objects of sense, such a man has bewildered himself with false notions of self-discipline.
Gandhi comments that a man who restrains his tongue, but mentally does not act correspondingly, is a hypocrite. But this does not mean that we should give way to the organs of action, when the mind can be controlled. The physical control must be wholly self-imposed and not imposed from outside, such as in the case of fear.
This verse refers to the man who restrains his body, because he has no other choice, but gives way to his mind; and if he could give way to his body, too, he would do so. The following verse inverts things.
7. He who controlling the senses by the mind, O Arjuna, without attachment engages with the organs of action in Yoga of action, he excels.
Mind and body must go in unison, explains Gandhi. Even when the mind is controlled, the body will be active in one way or another. But he whose mind is truly controlled, will close his eyes, for example, to idle conversations, and will open them only to the praises of God and to men of good. He will not indulge in sensual pleasures and will always stay occupied in activities that refine (=develop) his soul. This is the way of action. Karma Yoga (Karma = action) is the means to free the soul from the slavery of the body, and in it there is no place for satisfying desires.
8. Do thou do controlled action. For action is greater than inaction; even the maintenance of thy physical life cannot be effected without action.
9. By doing works otherwise than for sacrifice, this world of men is in bondage to works; for sacrifice practice works, O son of Kunti (=Arjuna), becoming free from all attachment.
Gandhi explains that “works for sacrifice” means works in the selfless service dedicated to God.
The way to God, by means of Karma Yoga, therefore, is by stripping our deeds from all selfish motives.
James’ Epistle is one of the books of the Bible I love most. In that part, which so awfully bothered Luther, James had written:
If you obey the royal Law, expressed by the scriptures, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself", all is well. But once you allow any invidious distinctions to creep in, you are sinning, you stand condemned by that Law.
Remember that a man who keeps the whole Law but for a single exception is none-the-less a law-breaker.
(The King James Version reads: “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.” This is a most interesting point, which I will discuss in continuation.)
The one who said, "Thou shalt not commit adultery" also said, "Thou shalt do no murder". If you were to keep clear of adultery but were to murder a man you would have become a breaker of the whole Law.
Anyway, you should speak and act as men who will be judged by the law of freedom.
The man who makes no allowances for others will find none made for him. Mercy may laugh in the face of judgment.
Now what use is it, my brothers, for a man to say he "has faith" if his actions do not correspond with it? Could that sort of faith save anyone’s soul?
(Luther surely was steaming with rage when reading this…)
If a fellow man or woman has no clothes to wear and nothing to eat, and one of you says "Good luck to you I hope you’ll keep warm and find enough to eat", and yet give them nothing to meet their physical needs, what on earth is the good of that?
Yet that is exactly what a bare faith without a corresponding life is like—quite dead.
A man could challenge us by saying, "You have faith and I have merely good actions. Well, all you can do is to show me a faith without corresponding actions, but I can show you by my actions that I have faith as well. So you believe that there is one God? That’s fine. So do all the devils in hell, and shudder in terror!”
For, my dear shortsighted man, can’t you see far enough to realize that faith without the light actions is dead and useless?
Think of Abraham, our ancestor. Wasn’t it his action which really justified him in God’s sight when his faith led him to offer his son Isaac on the altar?
Can’t you see that his faith and his actions were, so to speak, partners—that his faith was implemented by his deed?
That is what the scripture means when it says: And Abraham believed God, And it was reckoned onto him for righteousness; And he was called the friend of God.
A man is justified before God by what he does as well as by what he believes.
Rahab, who was a prostitute, has been quoted as an example of faith, yet surely it was her action that pleased God, when she welcomed Joshua’s reconnoitering party and sent them safely back by a different route.
Yes, faith without action is as dead as a body without a soul.
(And having come to this point, Luther surely was close to a nervous breakdown.)
Now, as to the intriguing phrase, “Remember that a man who keeps the whole Law but for a single exception is none-the-less a law-breaker,” which has given rise to a variety of attempts to interpret it, here is my opinion:
All spiritual laws, all laws concerning our souls, can be summarized in one single, supreme law: The Law of Love. And the love governed by this law is an unselfish love. Whatever sin a man commits, implicitly he infringes the supreme law. And once again, the presence of love or the lack of love in our thinking or acting determines its moral, ethical and religious value.
Imagine a car accident, where a whole family dies. Only the mother survives. But you know that she, too, will die within hours, because her injuries are too severe. In a lucid moment she asks: “And my children?” What would you answer? Would you say, “They are dead?” Or would you rather say, “Don’t worry, they are all right, all will be fine….?” I think I would choose the second answer. It is an outright lie, but is uttered for unselfish reasons, out of compassion or love. Is this lie, this untruth, a sin? My categorical answer is: No!
As the Bhagavid Gita has stated correctly, a life of inaction is impossible. And if we have faith, that is, apart form our basic small faith, an additional portion of higher knowledge obtained through the Divine Love in our souls, this Love must express itself correspondingly, that is, through loving actions.
Is it possible, then, to obtain Divine Love and not to act correspondingly? Yes, it is.
Divine Love can be obtained when we pray for it, when true longings leave our soul and “soar high” to the Father (not so “high,” in fact, as the Father is always close to us). But this is only half of the story. The other half is that, once we have acquired Divine Love, we must supply adequate conditions for its growth inside us, and for developing its supreme actions.
Do we possess Divine Love or does Divine Love possess us? Well, in some way, we can “possess” Divine Love, but this possession in itself is void and sterile. Additionally, we have to surrender to this Love, and to permit that it take control. In other words, we have to actively calm down our material mind and pay attention to the promptings of our soul. Only then, this Love may manifest itself in all its glory, and only then, we may serve as living examples of this Love in our world.
We must not forget that there is a twofold way for increasing Divine Love in our souls. Firstly, we may always obtain it from outside, through our prayer, and secondly, we are able to provide our “warmth” for the fermentation of our souls, for the transforming action of Divine Love, which may multiply in our souls as the leaven does in the batch of dough.
When this Love enters the soul of man it increases like the leaven in the dough and continues in its work until the whole soul is impregnated with it, and everything of sin or error is wholly eradicated.
Samuel – Prophet of Old - Happiness and peace that passeth all understanding comes to the possessor of the Divine Love (Vol. I)
When we acquire Divine Love from time to time, or when we acquire it once, because in some moment of anguish we have cried out the Father, who in turn sends us His Love, and we do not react actively on this bestowal, then we simply store these portions of Divine Substance in the refrigerator of our soul, where it will survive, of course, but remains inactive and wasted during many years.
Yes, we may possess Divine Love, but the idea is to surrender to it and allow it to possess us. This is what the so-called detachment from the material is referring to. This is what Karma Yoga (and Bhakti Yoga, the Yoga of Devotion or Love for God) is referring to.
The discussion of faith versus deeds is useless and absurd. True faith and active Divine Love cannot exist without corresponding deeds. Life is activity. And selfless deeds cannot exist when the soul is not in command, because the material ego is, by definition, selfish. Even natural love is, in the bottom, nothing but a nobler form of desire.
To be continued…
7. Faith vs. deeds?
You can tell them by their fruits. Do you pick a bunch of grapes from a thorn-bush or figs from a clump of thistles?
Matthew 7:16
When Paul’s doubts were “the thorn in his flesh,” Martin Luther’s thorn, undoubtedly, was the Epistle of James. “We should throw the Epistle of James out of this school [the University of Wittenberg]”, he stated, hurling flaming speeches against this scripture, which had been acknowledged as inspired and integrated into the canon of the church. Despite his efforts, the protestant churches continue considering James epistle as inspired and forming part of the New Testament.
Luther’s indignation rose from the fact that he preached justification through faith, as Paul had explained it in various places, e.g. in Romans 1:17, “ I see in it God’s plan for making men right in his sight, a process begun and continued by their faith. For, as the scripture says: The righteous shall live by faith.”
But James downright contradicted Paul
Later, in a writing to James Padgett, Luther tried to set his teachings right.
“Faith without works is not sufficient. Works without faith will not bring about the great results desired; and both faith and works without the New Birth or the acquiring of the Divine Love of the Father, are not sufficient to bring salvation to mankind.”
Martin Luther, one time monk and reformer: Faith and works - the vicarious atonement - the importance of obtaining the New Birth. His beliefs have changed since he became a spirit. Affirms Jesus writing through Mr. Padgett (Vol. I)
Interestingly, the question of the value of works had also been dealt with extensively in the “Hindu Bible,” the Bhagavad Gita. Krishna, the incarnation of God, imparts the following instructions upon Arjuna (I am adding Gandhi’s interpretations):
3. The Blessed Lord said: In this world twofold is the self-application of the soul (by which it enters into the Brahmic condition), as I before said, O sinless one: that of the Sankhyas by the Yoga of knowledge, that of the Yogins by the Yoga of works.
4. Not by abstention from works does a man enjoy actionlessness, nor by mere renunciation (of works) does he attain to his perfection (to siddhi, the accomplishment of the aims of his self-discipline by Yoga).
Mahatma Gandhi explains that “actionlessness” (freedom from action) is freedom from the slavery of actions. This freedom is not achieved simply by abstaining from any activity. Besides, such abstention is impossible because of the nature of things How, then, can such freedom be accomplished? The following verses give the explanation.
5. For none stands even for a moment not doing work, everyone is made to do action helplessly by the modes born of Prakriti.
(Prakriti = matter. According to the Samkhya philosophy, all that exists can be reduced to two fundamental principles: spirit (Purusha) and matter (Prakriti). These two categories of existence are eternal and not created. Purusha is the conscious and inactive principle; Prakriti is unconscious, although it is the active principle of all manifestation.
Prakriti is constituted of three elementary substances: Sattva, Rajas and Tamas. These are the Gunas, inseparable elements which combine in different proportions in order to form the material objects. Sattva corresponds to the principle of intelligence, Rajas is the principle of energy, Tamas the principle of mass or inertia. The three Gunas are always active, each one trying to win predominance over the others; the nature of things is determined by the ascendancy of one over the other of the Gunas.)
6. Who controls the organs of action, but continues in his mind to remember and dwell upon the objects of sense, such a man has bewildered himself with false notions of self-discipline.
Gandhi comments that a man who restrains his tongue, but mentally does not act correspondingly, is a hypocrite. But this does not mean that we should give way to the organs of action, when the mind can be controlled. The physical control must be wholly self-imposed and not imposed from outside, such as in the case of fear.
This verse refers to the man who restrains his body, because he has no other choice, but gives way to his mind; and if he could give way to his body, too, he would do so. The following verse inverts things.
7. He who controlling the senses by the mind, O Arjuna, without attachment engages with the organs of action in Yoga of action, he excels.
Mind and body must go in unison, explains Gandhi. Even when the mind is controlled, the body will be active in one way or another. But he whose mind is truly controlled, will close his eyes, for example, to idle conversations, and will open them only to the praises of God and to men of good. He will not indulge in sensual pleasures and will always stay occupied in activities that refine (=develop) his soul. This is the way of action. Karma Yoga (Karma = action) is the means to free the soul from the slavery of the body, and in it there is no place for satisfying desires.
8. Do thou do controlled action. For action is greater than inaction; even the maintenance of thy physical life cannot be effected without action.
9. By doing works otherwise than for sacrifice, this world of men is in bondage to works; for sacrifice practice works, O son of Kunti (=Arjuna), becoming free from all attachment.
Gandhi explains that “works for sacrifice” means works in the selfless service dedicated to God.
The way to God, by means of Karma Yoga, therefore, is by stripping our deeds from all selfish motives.
James’ Epistle is one of the books of the Bible I love most. In that part, which so awfully bothered Luther, James had written:
If you obey the royal Law, expressed by the scriptures, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself", all is well. But once you allow any invidious distinctions to creep in, you are sinning, you stand condemned by that Law.
Remember that a man who keeps the whole Law but for a single exception is none-the-less a law-breaker.
(The King James Version reads: “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.” This is a most interesting point, which I will discuss in continuation.)
The one who said, "Thou shalt not commit adultery" also said, "Thou shalt do no murder". If you were to keep clear of adultery but were to murder a man you would have become a breaker of the whole Law.
Anyway, you should speak and act as men who will be judged by the law of freedom.
The man who makes no allowances for others will find none made for him. Mercy may laugh in the face of judgment.
Now what use is it, my brothers, for a man to say he "has faith" if his actions do not correspond with it? Could that sort of faith save anyone’s soul?
(Luther surely was steaming with rage when reading this…)
If a fellow man or woman has no clothes to wear and nothing to eat, and one of you says "Good luck to you I hope you’ll keep warm and find enough to eat", and yet give them nothing to meet their physical needs, what on earth is the good of that?
Yet that is exactly what a bare faith without a corresponding life is like—quite dead.
A man could challenge us by saying, "You have faith and I have merely good actions. Well, all you can do is to show me a faith without corresponding actions, but I can show you by my actions that I have faith as well. So you believe that there is one God? That’s fine. So do all the devils in hell, and shudder in terror!”
For, my dear shortsighted man, can’t you see far enough to realize that faith without the light actions is dead and useless?
Think of Abraham, our ancestor. Wasn’t it his action which really justified him in God’s sight when his faith led him to offer his son Isaac on the altar?
Can’t you see that his faith and his actions were, so to speak, partners—that his faith was implemented by his deed?
That is what the scripture means when it says: And Abraham believed God, And it was reckoned onto him for righteousness; And he was called the friend of God.
A man is justified before God by what he does as well as by what he believes.
Rahab, who was a prostitute, has been quoted as an example of faith, yet surely it was her action that pleased God, when she welcomed Joshua’s reconnoitering party and sent them safely back by a different route.
Yes, faith without action is as dead as a body without a soul.
(And having come to this point, Luther surely was close to a nervous breakdown.)
Now, as to the intriguing phrase, “Remember that a man who keeps the whole Law but for a single exception is none-the-less a law-breaker,” which has given rise to a variety of attempts to interpret it, here is my opinion:
All spiritual laws, all laws concerning our souls, can be summarized in one single, supreme law: The Law of Love. And the love governed by this law is an unselfish love. Whatever sin a man commits, implicitly he infringes the supreme law. And once again, the presence of love or the lack of love in our thinking or acting determines its moral, ethical and religious value.
Imagine a car accident, where a whole family dies. Only the mother survives. But you know that she, too, will die within hours, because her injuries are too severe. In a lucid moment she asks: “And my children?” What would you answer? Would you say, “They are dead?” Or would you rather say, “Don’t worry, they are all right, all will be fine….?” I think I would choose the second answer. It is an outright lie, but is uttered for unselfish reasons, out of compassion or love. Is this lie, this untruth, a sin? My categorical answer is: No!
As the Bhagavid Gita has stated correctly, a life of inaction is impossible. And if we have faith, that is, apart form our basic small faith, an additional portion of higher knowledge obtained through the Divine Love in our souls, this Love must express itself correspondingly, that is, through loving actions.
Is it possible, then, to obtain Divine Love and not to act correspondingly? Yes, it is.
Divine Love can be obtained when we pray for it, when true longings leave our soul and “soar high” to the Father (not so “high,” in fact, as the Father is always close to us). But this is only half of the story. The other half is that, once we have acquired Divine Love, we must supply adequate conditions for its growth inside us, and for developing its supreme actions.
Do we possess Divine Love or does Divine Love possess us? Well, in some way, we can “possess” Divine Love, but this possession in itself is void and sterile. Additionally, we have to surrender to this Love, and to permit that it take control. In other words, we have to actively calm down our material mind and pay attention to the promptings of our soul. Only then, this Love may manifest itself in all its glory, and only then, we may serve as living examples of this Love in our world.
We must not forget that there is a twofold way for increasing Divine Love in our souls. Firstly, we may always obtain it from outside, through our prayer, and secondly, we are able to provide our “warmth” for the fermentation of our souls, for the transforming action of Divine Love, which may multiply in our souls as the leaven does in the batch of dough.
When this Love enters the soul of man it increases like the leaven in the dough and continues in its work until the whole soul is impregnated with it, and everything of sin or error is wholly eradicated.
Samuel – Prophet of Old - Happiness and peace that passeth all understanding comes to the possessor of the Divine Love (Vol. I)
When we acquire Divine Love from time to time, or when we acquire it once, because in some moment of anguish we have cried out the Father, who in turn sends us His Love, and we do not react actively on this bestowal, then we simply store these portions of Divine Substance in the refrigerator of our soul, where it will survive, of course, but remains inactive and wasted during many years.
Yes, we may possess Divine Love, but the idea is to surrender to it and allow it to possess us. This is what the so-called detachment from the material is referring to. This is what Karma Yoga (and Bhakti Yoga, the Yoga of Devotion or Love for God) is referring to.
The discussion of faith versus deeds is useless and absurd. True faith and active Divine Love cannot exist without corresponding deeds. Life is activity. And selfless deeds cannot exist when the soul is not in command, because the material ego is, by definition, selfish. Even natural love is, in the bottom, nothing but a nobler form of desire.
To be continued…