God in Nature - Paragraph 8
We will continue with another example where Roberts acknowledges Omnipresence. Last time we looked at her example of the Tao and today we will be looking at her example of Stoicism. Here is our text:
“The second example that comes to mind is the central belief of the Greek Stoics. Though regarded as a philosophy rather than a religion, within the stoic enclaves their goal, doctrines and practices were as religious as any cult today. Their name for this Omnipresence was the “Logos” - which today might translate as the “Intelligent Designer” of the universe.
The Logos was not some intelligence standing above or behind the universe, however, but was immanent in the universe and in each person as its intelligent, generative or creative power. The Stoics’ goal was to establish themselves in unity with the Logos by achieving a state of “apatheia,” a profound interior state of imperturbability where reason (intelligence or Logos) could run the show instead of their passions. With research, I’m sure other religions could be found where the revelation of God’s Omnipresence was its key or founding revelation.”
I have to admit that when I first read that Roberts identified Stoicism as a place where Omnipresence is identified I was surprised. I’m not really sure why because religions don’t have the market on revelations, I know this. Despite the surprise I really liked that she used Stoicism for her example for that exact reason; God is not relegated to the religious sphere alone. She is also forthcoming in acknowledging that Stoicism is “regarded as a philosophy” so that we are clear she understands it as philosophy not religion.
The caveat, which she makes clear, is that Omnipresence was the “central belief of the Greek Stoics,” which contrasts to the entirety of Stoic philosophy to date. She has a very specific time-and-place Stoicism in mind here (say 300 BCE to 300 CE) and not the revival of Stoicism in the 16th century. This is an important detail we must not lose sight of because she is not speaking about all Stoic philosophy through the centuries, but a slice of Stoic philosophy founded on its founding Fathers. According to Wikipedia the early stoics “believed that the universe operated according to reason, i.e. by a God which is immersed in nature itself….the Universe is a material reasoning substance (logos)....divided into two classes; the active and the passive….the passive substance is matter itself, while the active substance is an intelligent aether or primordial fire, which acts on the passive matter.”
Now with that brief description of Stoicism what I would like to focus on today is the phrase that caught my attention, which was this idea of a “profound interior state of imperturbability where reason (intelligence or Logos) could run the show.” This profound state is contrasted to the passions and let’s define the word passion as understood in the early centuries. A very good, and straightforward definition can be found in Cynthia Bourgeault’s book The Heart of Centering Prayer where, in her chapter “The Way of the Heart,” she unpacks that passion refers to the “mechanical aspect of being “grabbed” that leads to suffering.” In other words, we become “stuck, grabbed, and blindly reactive,” which is how this word was understood and used in Stoic times.
We find here then that the traditional or contemporary understanding of passion was not being “passionate,” as in passionate about life, but instead being reactive and on autopilot when met with life’s disruptions. We are all aware of such situations, of being “grabbed,” say, during a conflict. That frenzied state where we are not really in our right mind, but instead filled with thought loops and imagery that won’t stop. When one is still, one can actually feel and sense the difference between imperturbability and frenzy. When we are calm the rational state appears with ease than when we are worked up and in a frenetic state.
For myself, the two pieces of the text that come together to make some sense is that when I remain or abide at the stillpoint, the center, imperturbability arises, and from this arising Omnipresence can be sensed. One of the definitions for imperturbable is being incapable of being disconnected, which is exactly true. That I am separate from you, or anything for that matter, is an untruth so it makes sense that when abiding at center the opportunity has been created to glimpse or participate in the connection, the intelligence that is already existing.
The impact and invitation this has for me is to continue, like the Stoics, to practice releasing those passions, distractions, and thought patterns that cloud the center. Those mechanical, and dare I say even maniacal, ways of being that grab all my attention away from the center. These attention grabbers need to be seen through and dealt with. Some of these attention grabbers are easy to let go of while others are very difficult, so ingrained our habitual patterns are. For these tougher cases therapy, spiritual direction, or some help, care and compassion of another is needed in order for us to face and breathe through the release.
As it turns out I wasn’t sure how much I would have in common with the Stoics, but if their “goal” was to come to stillness then we have much in common. And while I might not use the word goal, instead opting for something like intending, I do believe the sentiment behind the practice of stillness is the same for Stoics as it is for me. Here’s to another day of tending towards stillness, even in the midst of chaos and what we might call the everyday life. Every moment offers us the opportunity to practice!
