(Response to 2.H.1 Mundaka, Upanishad (1.2.11-13), presented by Anantanand Rambachan)
Reading this text, I was immediately struck by one fact: there is nothing relational in this text. It discusses truth, reality, in a very impersonal way. When I think of entering the spiritual life, I think of it in personal terms, in terms of closeness to God, of relationship with Him. Often, one argues for the spiritual life, based on metaphysical concerns of truth, being, reality, etc. And yet, I believe that for many believers and for many faith traditions, or paths within diverse traditions, the approach is not towards an it, but towards a whom. I furthermore ask myself, whether the internal drive that impels us to go beyond – a drive that is portrayed in different ways by this text from the Upanishads and the text from Rav Kook – is a drive for truth, or is a drive for being met in a relational, or more personal way. Perhaps a middle ground might be suggested – it is a drive for a state of Being. That state of being would correspond to something fundamental in our nature. Accordingly, it can be conceived of as either personal – a relationship that touches that core state of being, or impersonal – the state that corresponds to it. The tension between these perspectives seems to me fruitful and constitutive of all traditions. If so, does it play out deeper dynamics of our psyche, torn between understanding itself in terms of being and in terms of relationships.
