St. Augustine's roadblocks in his Confessions

[White_Tree]

We are given the Commandments and the Law as instructive tools to help us learn how to obey God, because our spiritual vision is so clouded that we have difficulty discerning God’s will. As we have discussed, it is far too easy for us to commit harmful acts believing them to be good. But God is not bound by that Law, and someone who is advanced enough to be able to clearly discern the will of God may be called on (as Jesus and many of the prophets were) to do things that appear to an outsider to be “immoral.”

The laws are given to teach us. But if we mistakenly believe that obedience to the Law is obedience to God, then we will be incapable of truly performing God’s will when he demands something of us that is outside the bounds of the narrow framework of behavior prescribed by that Law.

Even a cursory reading of the Old Testament tells us that God sometimes demands such things (e.g. He demanded Abraham sacrifice his own son, and don’t forget about all the killing). Many people read such things and come to the conclusion that God is somehow a hypocrite, or as one recent CAF thread put it, a “moral monster.” That sort of conclusion naturally arises when one becomes stuck at the level of Nietzsche’s camel. It becomes a stumbling block for many people in their spiritual journey, when they are forced to reconcile an idea of “goodness” based upon the narrow definition given by the Law, with the notion of a “good” God who seems to so flagrantly disregard that Law.

But as Jesus taught us, true religion (union with God) is not about loving the Law, but about loving God. And so there is a stage, after we have learned to obey the law, when we have to learn how to act in a way that is free from that law, in order that we may be free of our own inhibitions that would prevent us from truly obeying the will of God. This is becoming Nietzsche’s lion.

And now to finally tie all that back to Augustine.

As I’ve pointed out, true spiritual maturity requires being willing to engage in a type of rebelliousness. God put those elements in us, that drive us to seek freedom from the restrictions of codes of conduct, because they are necessary for us to grow. Otherwise we would remain camels forever.

Some people follow that rebelliousness into the abyss. Others allow forces of scrupulosity to trap them in an equally dark prison. The process of growth involves learning how to balance rebelliousness with obedience, so we can truly become active participants in fulfilling the will of God.

 

[EugeneCharles]

I just love to sing one of his poems: Beauty ever ancient, ever new. It reminds me not only of God but of the beauty of the Church. It made me cry sometimes because I can feel his emotions in it and because of a connection with God.

“Late have I loved you, O Beauty ever ancient, ever new, late have I loved you! You were within me, but I was outside, and it was there that I searched for you. In my unloveliness, I plunged into the lovely things which you created. You were with me, but I was not with you. Created things kept me from you; yet if they had not been in you they would have not been at all. You called, you shouted, and you broke through my deafness. You flashed, you shone, and you dispelled my blindness. You breathed your fragrance on me; I drew in a breath and now I pant for you. I have tasted you, now I hunger and thirst for more. You touched me, and I burned for your peace.” —St. Augustine of Hippo

 

[Magnanimity]

From where comes the want to “not be good” as a teenager?

It’s a solid question. I still have teenagers in the house. Idk if you saw the recent Marvel movies wherein major characters’ storylines were all intertwined, but I have to say that my kids (and I happen to agree with them) believed that the character Iron Man is much more interesting than the goody two shoes Captain America. And Thor really only became palatable in his 3rd film (Ragnarok) and Endgame. If these references mean nothing to you if you haven’t seen the films, then disregard.

The point I and my teens are driving at is that there is something fundamentally banal about being goody-goody. It basically misses the drama of the human experience, and we are drawn toward drama—even the heartache/loss within drama.

I’m wondering if the “balance” has mostly to do with obedience vs. disobedience,

So I’m thinking that the desire for balance is a little more transcendent than the obedience vs disobedience motif (even if the individual is unaware of the reasons underlying the transcendent tug).

 

[OneSheep]

I think Augustine is keying into something here that is present in all of us (as expressed centuries later in that song), a sense of exhilaration that arises out of feeling our own destruction

I get the impression, though, that the OneRepublic writer is reflecting on a prior act. Are you perhaps reading into Augustine that he is intending a feeling of his own destruction? In the moment of the act?

To create new values—that, even the lion cannot yet accomplish: but to create itself freedom for new creating—that can the might of the lion do.

To create itself freedom, and give a holy Nay even unto duty: for that, my brethren, there is need of the lion.

What Nietzsche is getting at here is that spiritual growth requires something more of us than blind obedience to the law.

Thank you for the eloquent lines. I remember trying reading Nietzsche a few decades ago, but as a less flowery-literature-type reader, I abandoned it. (I gravitate toward writing that is less work to understand what the author is trying to say, which eliminates others, such as Kant )

I definitely think you have identified something nondestructive that might have been what motivated Augustine to steal the pears. However, we can see spiritual growth as the result of the actions that the person is somehow compelled to do. Are you also seeing what specifically compels people in the lines of Zarathustra I selected? No need to answer here, see questions at the end.

The laws are given to teach us. But if we mistakenly believe that obedience to the Law is obedience to God, then we will be incapable of truly performing God’s will when he demands something of us that is outside the bounds of the narrow framework of behavior prescribed by that Law.

I’m seeing these as the benefits of spiritual maturity also. It is a bit saddening when a mature adult thinks that all there is to spirituality is avoidance of designated sins.

It becomes a stumbling block for many people in their spiritual journey

For me, it was never a stumbling block. I had the blessing of having knowledgeable catechists who told me that much of the OT is to be read allegorically. I recognize that there is a part of myself that is capable of destroying others. That part has its good intent, but is only capable of carrying out evil when it is disconnected from Love. Those writers of the OT who equate that part of ourselves with God, I believe are in error. Their intent in the equating was good, but not inspired (if reading in a literal way)

 

[OneSheep]

we have to learn how to act in a way that is free from that law , in order that we may be free of our own inhibitions that would prevent us from truly obeying the will of God

Again I am seeing this as more of a positive outcome rather than what actually compelled the teenage Augustine.

As I’ve pointed out, true spiritual maturity requires being willing to engage in a type of rebelliousness. God put those elements in us, that drive us to seek freedom from the restrictions of codes of conduct, because they are necessary for us to grow.

Yea, Augustine, all teens, are more than simply willing! I do like the way that you have framed this in terms of growth, and I definitely think that if Augustine was able to do the same later in life, he might not have been so hard on the teenage kid that stole the pears, and come to see the outcome as good. But you see, I think what bothered him most was what his mindset was in the moment, because he certainly wasn’t thinking “I’m going to grow spiritually from this wasting of pears”!

If we simply ask the question, “What did the kid want?”, the selection from Zarathustra mentions the word a couple times, but I’m thinking that there were actually two (at least) God-given motives active in mind of the teenage Augustine. So what do you think about what he wanted in the moment?

 

[OneSheep]

I just love to sing one of his poems: Beauty ever ancient, ever new. It reminds me not only of God but of the beauty of the Church. It made me cry sometimes because I can feel his emotions in it and because of a connection with God.

“Late have I loved you, O Beauty ever ancient, ever new, late have I loved you! You were within me, but I was outside, and it was there that I searched for you. In my unloveliness, I plunged into the lovely things which you created. You were with me, but I was not with you. Created things kept me from you; yet if they had not been in you they would have not been at all. You called, you shouted, and you broke through my deafness. You flashed, you shone, and you dispelled my blindness. You breathed your fragrance on me; I drew in a breath and now I pant for you. I have tasted you, now I hunger and thirst for more. You touched me, and I burned for your peace.” —St. Augustine of Hippo

Thank you so much for sharing this! The man was so talented and prolific. What a beautiful passage.

 

[OneSheep]

The point I and my teens are driving at is that there is something fundamentally banal about being goody-goody. It basically misses the drama of the human experience, and we are drawn toward drama—even the heartache/loss within drama.

I love it. “The banality of the goody-goody”. Curiously, I think it might have some connection to Arendt’s theme. But ya know, teenagers who have the unfortunate circumstance of being born into families with plenty of drama certainly do not seek it. I remember one 14 year old student in particular, a girl who was getting into trouble with the law. I remember her telling me how much she didn’t need drama.

The teen who resists goody-goodyness. What do they want?

So I’m thinking that the desire for balance is a little more transcendent than the obedience vs disobedience motif (even if the individual is unaware of the reasons underlying the transcendent tug).

I agree, but I don’t think that “balance” is much of what is involved. I attended an interesting talk a couple weeks ago about the adolescent mind. I’m not one to remember which brain part does what, but the “taking the risks” part of the brain in teens, up until we are aged 25 is not well-myelinated (connected) to the “this is right, this is wrong” part of the brain. There is actually a physical explanation as to why teens are so subject to making poor choices than people over 25.

What do teens want, that might lead them to do what Augustine did?

 

[White_Tree]

I get the impression, though, that the OneRepublic writer is reflecting on a prior act . Are you perhaps reading into Augustine that he is intending a feeling of his own destruction? In the moment of the act?

I don’t know. I viewed the OneRepublic writer as speaking about acts in general, including future ones. Right before the lines I quoted, he says, “I don’t think the world is sold on just doing what we’re told.”

And I think something like that might have been going on with Augustine too. I agree with what you said here:

But you see, I think what bothered him most was what his mindset was in the moment , because he certainly wasn’t thinking “I’m going to grow spiritually from this wasting of pears”!

I certainly don’t think he stole those pears because he was seeking to grow in virtue. I think he did it for the thrill of it, for the exhilaration of doing something “wrong.” Whether he equated that with his own destruction is anyone’s guess. I’m guessing he didn’t, but the relationship between sin and our own destruction is there, whether we see it or not.

There’s also a social aspect to this. He didn’t sneak out and steal the pears by himself. He did it with his buddies. He said himself that he liked the companionship of the activity. He wanted to feel connected to someone. (I suspect this yearning might have been driving many of his sexual adventures as well.)

I don’t think we can necessarily justify Augustine’s stealing of the pears. He shouldn’t have done that, and he knows it. But he learned something from the event.

God plants the seeds of what we need inside of us, but it’s up to us to learn how to tend those seeds. Augustine allowed these particular seeds to grow in an unruly fashion, but he learned something about how they ought to be tended.

 

[OneSheep]

Right before the lines I quoted, he says, “I don’t think the world is sold on just doing what we’re told.”

Excellent. Yes, I think this is very much in line with what was going on in the young Augustine.

I certainly don’t think he stole those pears because he was seeking to grow in virtue. I think he did it for the thrill of it, for the exhilaration of doing something “wrong.” Whether he equated that with his own destruction is anyone’s guess. I’m guessing he didn’t, but the relationship between sin and our own destruction is there, whether we see it or not.

What I’m thinking is that much of this is tied up in the development of conscience. His mother certainly impressed upon the preteen Augustine what is right and wrong, but formation eventually has to involve ownership once the teenager comes to a point where autonomy is what is desired. So, if autonomy means sort of rejecting all the confines of What Mom Wants, the teen is rather self-propelled into the world where authority is to be rejected, and now conscience has to be developed in an way that ownership is key; the alternative is mayhem.

But what I think goes on inside is that conscience, when developed, leads to discipline. Discipline is an effort, and to some degree is confining, so during the process of conscience development (in a real deeply formative way) there is some internal resistance. We want freedom, and there is some resistance to discipline. It must have felt wonderful to waste those pears!

In addition, it was so classic to be doing it with peers going through the same stuff, because as we already thoroughly discussed, we do have a tribal compulsion. So yes, membership of the tribe can definitely involve “seeking shame”, as defiance of authority itself already is so cool for the teenager! I grant that the adult Augustine looking back denied caring about friendship with those co-thieves, but in the moment, his own mindset may have been much different.

There was something unspecific that Augustine wanted to do, and the group gave him permission to do it.

Does this reflect what you are also seeing?

There’s also a social aspect to this. He didn’t sneak out and steal the pears by himself. He did it with his buddies. He said himself that he liked the companionship of the activity. He wanted to feel connected to someone.

Yes, my thoughts too, as I rambled above. It’s a tribal compulsion, correct?

 

[OneSheep]

I don’t think we can necessarily justify Augustine’s stealing of the pears. He shouldn’t have done that, and he knows it.

Yes, but understanding isn’t the same effort as justification. That effort to “justify” takes us to a different place than actually seeking what was going on in his/our minds and finding a means to integrate aspects of our nature. As soon as we use the word “justify” we jump from what does occur to what “should” occur, our consciences have kick into gear. I think you can see in my observations above about what I think goes on in the mind of a teenager is not guided by what “should” occur, but what does occur. We can find beauty in all of it, right?

God plants the seeds of what we need inside of us, but it’s up to us to learn how to tend those seeds. Augustine allowed these particular seeds to grow in an unruly fashion, but he learned something about how they ought to be tended.

Yes, I am seeing that we are basically saying the same thing. God planted the seeds of conscience through Monica (and life experience, and from the Spirit within), and Augustine was struggling with that growth, allowing freedom to “have its way” once in awhile, but settling into an eventual discipline.

An added thought: I’m wondering if denial of wanting to be friends with the co-thieves was in part because the co-thieves were likely also in the mode of defying authority. Defiance is part of seeking autonomy, and I am thinking that desire for autonomy in itself was probably a big roadblock for Augustine. It’s such a major theme in his whole life, as his turn to Manichaeism was certainly defiant, and even his incorporation of platonic thought was “pushing it”, to some degree. Augustine by his own words was his own person, and there might have been an internal voice (in his shadow) pointing a finger and accusing him of disobedience. This is certainly material for a roadblock.

 

[White_Tree]

Does this reflect what you are also seeing?

Yes, very well described, by the way.

It’s a tribal compulsion, correct?

Haha. Yes. I was thinking the same thing as I was writing my post last night. “Here we are back at tribalism again.”

There is something powerful that overtakes us when we are part of crowds. I think that tendency is driving a lot of the behavior we are seeing on the news lately. People feel as if they can do things that, when sitting alone, they would never contemplate doing. It’s very sad…

We can find beauty in all of it, right?

With the right mindset, and maybe a little help along the way.

Defiance is part of seeking autonomy, and I am thinking that desire for autonomy in itself was probably a big roadblock for Augustine.

Yes, you might be right here. It’s difficult to know. And it could be a similar sense of defiance that led him to ultimately abandon the Manichees, who had become a new type of spiritual authority in his life.

I don’t have a good grasp of what the attitude of the religious authorities was like during his time. Often, religious institutions are keen to help us with the “camel” stage of our spiritual growth, but don’t look too favorably on the lion or the child. If we are taught to believe that seeking autonomy is “wrong,” that could create issues (roadblocks) for us when the necessity of having that autonomy naturally arises.

 

[OneSheep]

There is something powerful that overtakes us when we are part of crowds. I think that tendency is driving a lot of the behavior we are seeing on the news lately. People feel as if they can do things that, when sitting alone, they would never contemplate doing. It’s very sad…

I respect the sadness, but the crowd behavior is understandable, I think, in light of our evolutionary history. In competition for resources and other situations, there has to be a tribal behavior that supersedes individual hesitation due to conscience or empathy. It’s requires blindness, but it has (had) its purpose. There is truly a time for war, that is the sad part, and if the tribe without innate capacity for conscience or empathy always wins, then it is the inherited traits for conscience and empathy that are in themselves defeated, leading to the certain ruin of our ability to form societies or tribes that can work together for a better ability to survive. IOW, blindness has its own evolutionary benefit in saving us.

OneSheep:

We can find beauty in all of it, right?

With the right mindset, and maybe a little help along the way.

When I took calculus, my instructor would do complicated derivatives on the board, stand back and look at the mess, and turn to the class, “Isn’t that beautiful?” It took a knowing eye to see it, but it truly was.

I don’t have a good grasp of what the attitude of the religious authorities was like during his time. Often, religious institutions are keen to help us with the “camel” stage of our spiritual growth, but don’t look too favorably on the lion or the child. If we are taught to believe that seeking autonomy is “wrong,” that could create issues (roadblocks) for us when the necessity of having that autonomy naturally arises

Yes, and that need for autonomy arises or we remain with the maturity of children. It would have to be an extremely insecure individual to successfully push back their own desire for autonomy, right?

I think we have this roadblock covered. Shall we move on? I won’t have my book or original notes with me until next weekend, but I might be able to just read ahead in the online version to find the next possible roadblock.

 

[White_Tree]

IOW, blindness has its own evolutionary benefit in saving us.

Yes, you may be right, at least in a physical sense. Maybe this is one of the reasons Jesus said, “My kingdom is not of this world.”

When I took calculus, my instructor would do complicated derivatives on the board, stand back and look at the mess, and turn to the class, “Isn’t that beautiful?” It took a knowing eye to see it, but it truly was.

I felt the same way when I first learned it. I explained the beauty behind one particular equation to my religion teacher once, and he took it as evidence there is a God. I tend to agree. Many people say Creation itself is the evidence, but I think it paints a clearer picture not just to say, “Creation exists” but also “there is an intelligent structure to it, and the laws that govern it have an elegance and a beauty that transcends anything that could be designed (or even fully grasped) by the human mind.”

It would have to be an extremely insecure individual to successfully push back their own desire for autonomy, right?

Hmm… perhaps, though I wonder if this is a Western way of thinking. With the pandemic highlighting the consequences of American ideas about “independence” and “freedom,” it’s gotten me to wonder a lot lately about how many of our ideas about what is “right” or “good” are based on objective reality, and how many are simply cultural.

There have been a number of studies that have shown that Easterners and Westerners view themselves and the world in fundamentally different ways. Westerners tend to view themselves as individuals, Easterners as parts of a collective. Some scientists have identified that this can be attributed to the staple crop that traditionally sustained those societies.

Rice requires a lot more cooperation, and so those societies tend to be more collectively-minded, while wheat tends to foster independence. Even in the East, those areas that historically have grown wheat tend to be more individualistic than those that grew rice.

This piece from the New York Times summarizes some of the consequences of these differences, and has links to several of the studies:

Opinion | Why Are Some Cultures More Individualistic Than Others? - The New York Times

I think we have this roadblock covered. Shall we move on? I won’t have my book or original notes with me until next weekend, but I might be able to just read ahead in the online version to find the next possible roadblock.

Sure. And no rush. I might be a little slow in replying myself. I have to give a lecture on psychology and religion in a few weeks so I won’t have as much time to post on the forums while I prepare. I’ll try to stop by when I get the chance, though.

 

[Magnanimity]

teenagers who have the unfortunate circumstance of being born into families with plenty of drama certainly do not seek it.

True enough, and yet drama invariably comes our way no matter how much time we spend organizing our lives to thwart it. The world will “get” each one of us through some twist of fate. And how many movies have been made that explore the boring, predictable life of someone who has hedged himself in, only to have an outsider see what is really going on—and pushing the one hedged and overprotected out into the world of the unknown. Risk is built in. And the overprotected person leads a sad, lonely life that must be overturned by putting oneself out there again.

The teen who resists goody-goodyness. What do they want?

I think they want what Chesterton saw. And they are afraid that a life without drama will end up looking like Sisyphus.
One of my favorite passages from Chesterton’s Orthodoxy goes,

The modern world has far too little understanding of the art of keeping young. Its notion of progress has been to pile one thing on top of another, without caring if each thing was crushed in turn. People forgot that the human soul can enjoy a thing most when there is time to think about it and be thankful for it. And by crowding things together they lost the sense of surprise; and surprise is the secret of joy.

There is banality in evil, quite right. But also, perhaps ironically, there can be banality in being the goody-goody. That life can become far too predictable. And if, on Chesterton’s insight, surprise is lost, joy becomes unattainable.

If I apply these insights to the stealing of the fruit, that act could be interpreted as an artificial way for building surprise into your life. When you steal, you don’t know if someone will see you, you don’t know if you’ll be chased and you don’t know if you’ll be caught. But you do know there are consequences that follow if any of those things obtain. And the thrill, I think, derives from the possibility of being surprised at being chased or seen or caught. Why would a youth do something so risky? He has too little joy (with surprise as a key ingredient) in his life.

What do teens want, that might lead them to do what Augustine did?

If a youth finds himself with too little surprise in his life, he may be at risk of manufacturing it for himself. He refuses to be (as we all do) Sisyphus forever rolling the Boulder up the hill and forever frustrated that he can’t get it to the top. Not that a youth has this level of awareness. It takes wisdom derived from years of experience to reflect back and see. St Augustine was not always generous enough with himself to fully analyze his youthful behavior. So, here we are trying to apply generosity and do the work for him.

 

[OneSheep]

“there is an intelligent structure to it, and the laws that govern it have an elegance and a beauty that transcends anything that could be designed (or even fully grasped) by the human mind.”

I do agree completely!

There have been a number of studies that have shown that Easterners and Westerners view themselves and the world in fundamentally different ways. Westerners tend to view themselves as individuals, Easterners as parts of a collective. Some scientists have identified that this can be attributed to the staple crop that traditionally sustained those societies.

Yes, and while there are cultural differences, the desire for autonomy is still present in everyone. Buddhism, for example, does not conflict with Eastern culture, but provides the person with a means to freedom when attachment to the collective is too enslaving.

 

[OneSheep]

OneSheep:

The teen who resists goody-goodyness. What do they want?

I think they want what Chesterton saw. And they are afraid that a life without drama will end up looking like Sisyphus.
One of my favorite passages from Chesterton’s Orthodoxy goes,

The modern world has far too little understanding of the art of keeping young. Its notion of progress has been to pile one thing on top of another, without caring if each thing was crushed in turn. People forgot that the human soul can enjoy a thing most when there is time to think about it and be thankful for it. And by crowding things together they lost the sense of surprise; and surprise is the secret of joy.

Well, Sisyphus was a slave, and the teen who remains wanting to be goody-goody to please authority is to some degree enslaved, so there is a definite analogy. Did you see what I wrote above?:

What I’m thinking is that much of this is tied up in the development of conscience. His mother certainly impressed upon the preteen Augustine what is right and wrong, but formation eventually has to involve ownership once the teenager comes to a point where autonomy is what is desired. So, if autonomy means sort of rejecting all the confines of What Mom Wants, the teen is rather self-propelled into the world where authority is to be rejected, and now conscience has to be developed in an way that ownership is key; the alternative is mayhem.

But what I think goes on inside is that conscience, when developed, leads to discipline. Discipline is an effort, and to some degree is confining , so during the process of conscience development (in a real deeply formative way) there is some internal resistance. We want freedom, and there is some resistance to discipline. It must have felt wonderful to waste those pears!

I guess what I am saying is that the drama and thrill-seeking (surprise-seeking) are tied with defiance that is part of discovering and distinguishing one’s autonomy. I’m seeing the desire for autonomy as one of those “baseline” innate desires, and the “joy” is in getting that desire met in some way, at least in Augustine’s adolescence. Thrill-seeking has it’s own impetus, but I’m not sure that is what Augustine resented about his act of stealing pears.

 

[OneSheep]

If a youth finds himself with too little surprise in his life, he may be at risk of manufacturing it for himself. He refuses to be (as we all do) Sisyphus forever rolling the Boulder up the hill and forever frustrated that he can’t get it to the top. Not that a youth has this level of awareness. It takes wisdom derived from years of experience to reflect back and see. St Augustine was not always generous enough with himself to fully analyze his youthful behavior. So, here we are trying to apply generosity and do the work for him.

Yes, there must have been some degree of thrill-seeking going on. But Augustine did not identify that, and he did ruminate about what did bother him, which was specifically that he stole and found joy in that. Do you think that the reason that theft itself was thrilling was because of the reasons I stated above?

I am wondering if such a minor want, the seeking of surprise or thrill, would rise to the level of desire for sex, power, status as well as anger in blinding us to the conscience. What do you think?

 

[OneSheep]

Okay, @Magnanimity and @White_Tree, I think I found the next one. It is a little odd, in that many people will not be able to relate to his possible self-condemnation about this. But the reason why I like this one is because it shows that people will self-condemn for many seemingly random things that make sense only in the context of the individual’s experience.

But at that time, in my wretchedness, I loved to grieve; and I sought for things to grieve about. In another man’s misery, even though it was feigned and impersonated on the stage, that performance of the actor pleased me best and attracted me most powerfully which moved me to tears.

Confessions, Book 3, chapter 2

He follows this with mention of a sickness. I’m wondering how we could see, through the Spirit that even his desire to see such shows was something good, coming from a good place?

 

[White_Tree]

It is a little odd, in that many people will not be able to relate to his possible self-condemnation about this.

I’m not so sure about that. Personally, I can totally see where he is coming from here. He’s describing the 4th Century equivalent of getting wrapped in a movie or TV show. I do that, as do most people I know. But there is a part of me that knows that it’s at least a little bit wrong.

Jesus said,

The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single (ἁπλοῦς, “haplous”), thy whole body shall be full of light. But if thine eye be evil, thy whole body shall be full of darkness. If therefore the light that is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness!
– Matthew 6:22-23

The Greek haplous here is probably better translated as “simple” or “pure.” Part of the spiritual journey is learning how to cut through our personal delusions in order to come to the awareness and experience of the Truth.

Typically, our identification with the various circumstances of our life is the main source of our delusion. However, the same subconscious tendencies that cause us to be identified with the real circumstances of our life can also cause us to be identified with what we see projected on a screen (or on a stage, in Augustine’s case).

When that happens, we are not seeing what is really there, but are instead buying into the illusion, expending our mental and emotional energy on a fantasy, and creating impressions in the mind that obscure our perception of Truth. St. Paul tells us,

Do not conform yourself to this age but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and pleasing and perfect. – Romans 12:2

As the Apostle tells us, our mind, in its current state, has difficulty discerning the will of God, or what is good and pleasing and perfect. Our mind needs to be changed, or renewed, in order to develop that discernment. If we cannot see clearly the physical reality in front of us right now, how can we hope to clearly see heavenly things (cf. John 3:12)?

 

[White_Tree]

Samael Aun Weor talked about one aspect of this delusion related to comedy in response to a question he received during a lecture once:

Attendee: Teacher, I always like what makes me happy and fun, and your teachings, frankly, neither distract me nor amuse me. Because, if I want to laugh, I go to the cinema to see a movie of Cantinflas; if I want to know the information of the moment, I read the newspaper; if I want erudition, I read the Encyclopedic Dictionary. So, I get distracted, I inform myself and get erudition. So why would I want your teachings?

Samael Aun Weor: Gentleman, I understand that what interests you is to have fun; yet, regarding amusements, I see that you are not an expert, because if you were an expert in entertainment, you would have already discovered the trick behind all those comedic poses; consequently, you would no longer laugh, but rather feel compassion for the person delivering the antics. You would have discovered that in the soul of that comedian is enclosed the pain that accompanies every human being, and the poses that he gives you has no other objective than the profit that the actor seeks, God knows, to solve how many problems and how many tragedies of his private life.

He had a point there. Following Robin Williams’ suicide, many news and psychology outlets talked about how his circumstance was not unique. There seems to be a systematic relationship between comedic success and depression. The comedy is merely the comedians’ way of dealing with the difficult emotions they carry within. Here’s a few articles for reference:

https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/01/health/sad-clown-standup-comedy-mental-health/index.html

The Tragic Side of Comedy, Where the Pain Lives | Psychology Today

None of that is meant to condemn TV shows, or plays, or comedy. I enjoy those things as much as the next guy. I’m merely pointing out that I can see where Augustine is coming from. When I watch them, there is a part of me that “feels” something is “off” or “wrong.” I’m not seeing what’s really there, or I’m refusing to acknowledge it. Maybe that’s one of my roadblocks. Augustine was a lot holier than I am, so I suspect that part may have been quite a bit bigger or louder in him, so I can see where he’s coming from.