
Back in the Sixties, I first came across some mysterious expressions from the other side of the Atlantic. I was working for a British company whose main rival was IBM. Both companies had built up a customer base selling punched-card equipment based on the nineteenth-century inventions of Herman Hollerith and his one-time colleague James Powers. The trick now was to persuade our customers that punched-card tabulating was out of date, and they should upgrade to computers. These still depended on punched cards for input and output (visual display units being not yet available), but stored their data on giant tape decks. Computers were hugely expensive and needed air-conditioned dust-proof rooms. There were no silicon-chip memories: what we had was magnetic cores hand-threaded by ladies with good eyesight and hairnets in clean-rooms. The municipal authority of Birmingham (England) could only afford 192kb of internal memory when it moved to digital computing in 1964. We thought this was a big machine, and so it was, in physical size.
Anyhow, I learned some mysterious expressions, for example one day I was asked to give a ballpark estimate. I knew how to do
rough estimates, but nothing about
ballparks. This put me on rather a sticky wicket, an expression I understood instinctively because it was derived from cricket.
Sticky,
adj. c.
Racing and
Cricket. Of a course, a wicket: Having a yielding surface owing to wet. Also
fig., esp. in phr.
to bat (or
be)
on a sticky wicket: to contend with great difficulties
(colloq.) [Oxford English Dictionary]
But it was a different expression which aroused me with a start from an ale-induced stupor during one afternoon meeting of the sales team. Someone mentioned “motherhood and apple pie”. Had I missed something? It was no use asking for explanations. It was years later that I understood it was a reference to an American proverb: “No one ever speaks against motherhood and apple pie”---symbols of intrinsic goodness. If you could attach these symbols to your sales activities, then you could successfully deal in landmines, napalm, or a data processing upgrade that left the user worse than before. (There was another American proverb: “Nobody gets fired for buying IBM”, but it was never uttered in our office, since we were IBM’s biggest competitor in the UK.)
It’s less proverbial but generally true that no one speaks against spirituality, for it too seems to exude intrinsic goodness, even to those who deal in landmines and napalm. At any rate such persons hastened to donate to the saintly Mother Theresa, or so I gather from Christopher Hitchens’ book on Mother Theresa,
The Missionary Position which commences thus:
“Who would be so base as to pick on a wizened, shrivelled old lady, well stricken in years, who has consecrated her entire life to the needy and destitute?”
The answer to this rhetorical question is of course Hitchens himself, a brave speaker-out against spirituality, who labelled the late Mother Theresa a menace to Calcutta and the entire world.
And he’s written a book called
God Is Not Great.
There are those who make a distinction between religion and spirituality: the one being more problematic than the other. Spirituality is the pure essence, they seem to imply, while religion is the uncut diamond, or the unrefined ore.
I may have been one of those who make the distinction, whether or not I can claim to have thought clearly on the subject, which seems to have vast ramifications. I have never been happy with the word “Spirituality”, handling it only with quotation marks as if it were hot and the inverted commas were tongs. Though not fond of the word, I remained in favour of the thing it signified; or at least had more in common with spiritual persons than with simple egotists and materialists. So we must be birds of a feather! In any case, one of my recent blog posts was selected for
Network: a journal for all women interested in spirituality, theology, ministry and liturgy, a Catholic periodical. Admittedly, it was put in the “Other Perspectives” section of an issue devoted to Spirituality. Perhaps that was their quarantine section for dubious heresies.
I’d been a spiritual seeker since the age of fifteen: at least that is what my maths teacher called me one day in the street. I had just emerged from the public library. He demanded to see my books and it was deeply embarrassing, for I was carrying the
Yoga Sutras of Patanjali, the
Analects of Confucius, and a commentary on St John’s Gospel. It's only the memory of blushing shame that preserves this vignette in such detail. Perhaps I was a seeker already without being conscious of it: just went to the library and picked three books that looked interesting, without any sense that they might have a common classification “Spirituality”.
Later I took up sitting-meditation and actually did it for thirty years, an hour a day. Did it do any good? I must have thought so at the time, or at any rate feared the consequences if I stopped. Ah, but did it do any good? How do I know? I Would not recommend it to anyone. All I know is that it felt wonderful when I finally stopped. But that's what the madman said, when he stopped banging his head against the wall.
But here is the funny thing. In the last few days, just as it felt good to stop meditation several years ago, now it feels good to drop spirituality altogether. I suddenly feel the air fresher and purer, the colours brighter, my own self more in tune with the All. I could break into poetry, not my own, but Browning’s:
“The year's at the spring,
And day's at the morn;
Morning's at seven;
The hill-side's dew-pearled;
The lark's on the wing;
The snail's on the thorn;
God's in his Heaven -
All's right with the world!”
Yes, I can still say “God’s in his Heaven”. That’s not preaching, that’s an expression of joy. I renounce preaching: to others and especially to myself. I might read someone’s sermons. I will probably continue my habitual fantasy-reverence for cloistered nuns who spend their days praying for the world and their nights in spiritual embrace with the Son of God.
I’m not spiritual. I dwell in my body. My joy is inspired by nothing more holy than ordinary life. To hang washing on the line is my worship. I compare the blues of the damp garments with the blue of the sky; the clear dewdrops hanging from the line with the translucence of the line’s plastic coating; the row of brick chimney-pots with the glowing sky; the freshness of the outside air with the bland atmosphere indoors; the feeling of my own body---and here I don’t know what words can convey the exquisiteness of being alive.
It seems to me you don’t need spirituality to appreciate the simple things in life. No theory, no practice is required, just living. Perhaps spirituality is a desired ladder to reach a height, higher than things of the world. Perhaps it is a sense of impatience to get closer to what we already know.
What if I were well-born, well-bred, endowed with land and horses, young and handsome in features and physique; admired by all; skilled in hawking, archery, poesy; magnanimous and devout? Would that have been enough to stop me setting out on a spiritual adventure? Or would I, like Prince Gautama, feel something missing, and become a spiritual seeker at the age of fifteen anyway?
“Before I had studied Zen for thirty years, I saw mountains as mountains, and waters as waters. When I arrived at a more intimate knowledge, I came to the point where I saw that mountains are not mountains, and waters are not waters. But now I have got its very substance I am at rest. For it’s just that I see mountains once again as mountains and waters once again as waters.” (Ch’ing-yüan Wei-hsin)