My father is a huge fan of Joseph Campbell, the famous mythologist and Jungian psychologist who wrote The Hero with a Thousand Faces, Masks of God, and The Power of Myth. He (my father) designed and facilitated summer-camps for kids aged 10-12 based on Campbell’s work, and as a kid I was a participant (and later assistant) at several of these impactful and inspiring fortnight-long events, so Campbell’s concept of the monomyth as a map of the spiritual journey was an influence on my still-forming brain.
Campbell also followed in the footsteps of his Indology professor, the great Heinrich Zimmer in closely studying the spiritual traditions of India (though he did not master Sanskrit as Zimmer did). In contemplative meditation on the Vedantic phrase saccidānanda (a compound of sat [being], cit [consciousness], and ānanda [bliss or rapture]), Campbell realised that he didn’t know the true nature of his being or his consciousness, but he knew what rapture was, so he decided to follow that. In this moment of insight, he intuited correctly that an accurate experience of any one of the three, if followed, would lead to the other two.
As a result, he coined the phrase “follow your bliss” which, in his usage, diverged from the original Vedantic contemplation and came to mean something like “do what you love,” in a sense more influenced by Carl Jung and Walter Pater than by the 1960s hippie movement. By the spiritual injunction “follow your bliss,” Campbell never meant “do whatever feels good,” but rather was suggesting that we follow the thread of our passion wherever it leads, much as Vincent van Gogh did, despite much heartache along the way. A story circulates that, late in life, Campbell joked “I should have said ‘follow your blisters!’” While it seems that this story is apocryphal, there is a good reason for its fabrication: given the context of the Western audience to which it was given, Campbell’s phrase would have been less misunderstood had he said “pursue your passion”, since the word passion in English connotes suffering almost as much as it connotes love, or an object of ardent desire, or a favorite avocation. <SNIP>
TO READ THE REST OF THIS BLOG POST, PLEASE BUY THE SOON-TO-BE-RELEASED BOOK Near Enemies of the Truth, in which it appears in a much-improved form.
~ ~ ~
What are ‘near enemies to the truth’? Borrowing this phrase from Buddhism, I use it to refer to slightly distorted versions of spiritual teachings—statements that are close to a profound and subtle truth, but are distorted just enough to make a big difference over time. When we’re talking about deep and fundamental truths, getting it a little bit wrong doesn’t matter in the short run, but it does in the long run, just like a tiny adjustment to the rudder of your boat makes little difference at first, but after 1000 miles, it lands you on a different continent.
Now, some people object to the use of the word ‘wrong’ in the previous sentence, subscribing as they do to the idea that the only necessary criterion for truth is it feels true to me. This view is as dangerous in spirituality as it is in politics, because it usually means I want it to be true, so I'm going to believe it, regardless of the facts. If you don't see how dangerous this is, or if you doubt whether there really are facts or universal truths, please read the second half of the first blog post in this series.
Understanding the Near Enemies to the Truth, and why they are near enemies and not the truth itself, is hugely important for any spiritual seeker who wants to get past the beginner stages and into the deep (and deeply fulfilling) spiritual work. Having said that, it’s important to note that if a Near Enemy is near enough, it can be a Temporary Ally for a beginner. But as the stakes get higher in spiritual practice, there is no such thing as ‘close enough’ anymore, and your comforting affirmations must be sacrificed on the altar of truth, or else your spiritual progress stalls.
~Join me at Tantra Illuminated for more teachings~
Buy the Near Enemies of the Truth Webinar Series