“In the Footsteps of Matteo Ricci”; The Legacy of Fr. Yves Raguin S.J.’
(Asian Catholic Prayer in Buddhist and Daoist dialogue).
The year 2010 marks a worldwide movement to celebrate the 400th anniversary of the legacy of Matteo Ricci, SJ, who passed away in Beijing, China, in 1610. Ricci is acclaimed by historians for introducing western science to China, and adapting Chinese cultural and spiritual values to Jesuit missionary work in Asia. During the ensuing 400 years, the Jesuits were “suppressed” (1762 to 1810) by those who opposed Ricci’s vision.
The work of Fr. Yves Raguin, SJ, and his quiet, less publicized movement to adapt Asian forms of prayer to Catholic/Christian spirituality, continues until today, transcending and going far beyond Ricci’s original “Confucian limited” vision.
A report on the “Monastic Interreligious Dialogue,” which occurred between Sep 18-22 1995, gives a concise account of the teachings of Fr. Yves Raguin, SJ, on Asian Catholic prayer. The following report on “Prayer of the Name and Prayer of Silence,” organized by the Commission of the Secretariat “Aide Inter-Monasteres,” took place at the abbey of Bec-Hellouin in France. ,” A special session, given the title “Dialogue Interreligieux Monastique was called, to study the question of “meditation without object.” The input of Fr Yves Raguin SJ was the core and main topic of this session.
The essence of Asian meditation, Fr. Raguin suggested, was: “meditation without object, without theme, without reflection, without image and frequently without rite.” It was Fr. Raguin’s life long mission to show that such meditation has a place in the spiritual, monastic, as well as Lay Christian tradition
The question is of even greater importance for Christian prayer when it comes into contact with other religions, particularly Buddhism and Daoism. The Catholic Church in Asia must face squarely the question of the relevance of pre-Christian Greek and Roman cultural “weltanschauung” (world view), when dialoguing with men and women versed in Asian forms of apophatic prayer. This can be seen as one of the benefits of dialogue with other Asian religions, Fr Raguin suggested.
I. The “Departure” of Christ
The 1995 conference was based on an earlier talk, given on October 15, 1978, when Father Raguin spoke at the Notre-Dame conference on prayer in Paris. The title was: “Ways of Contemplation—Encounters between East and West.” After the conference Raguin was assailed with multiple questions. One of the auditors objected “but, Father, it is necessary that we center on Christ and make Him the object of our meditations and contemplation.” Father Raguin spontaneously responded with the words of Christ: “It is expedient that I go away. If I do not depart, the Holy Spirit will not come to you” (John 16:7). The “departure” of Christ, and the “taking away of the presence of God the Father” is indeed an essential part of Christian spirituality, as seen in the 3rd week of St. Ignatius’ Spiritual Exercises, as those versed in the Ignatian way of prayer know well. He went on to say: “We no longer see Him before us as an object of thought. Henceforth it is He Himself who through His Holy Spirit turns our regard toward the Father and makes us cry: “Abba, Father.”
That is to say, only after “departing from us,” as seen in the Ignatian 3rd Week, can Christ invite us to share in the 4th Week of the Spiritual exercises, the “Via Unitiva,” which is indeed an attentiveness to the divine presence within us, an awareness that would have been impossible without experiencing Christ’s sense of abandonment in the Gospel. “Meditation without an object” is not a meditation. It is a pure attention which becomes awareness of who we are, children of God, made in His image, following in His footsteps, including the experience of apophasis, or “kenosis.”
Buddhist, Daoist, and Christian mystics agree that this attention is without object; it is pure attention, total silence, void of all thought. The organizers of the session at Bec-Hellouin posed to Father Raguin the question of whether this “meditation without object” has a place in the spiritual and monastic Christian tradition. The question almost totally overlooked the tradition of apophatic prayer in the western Church. It is precisely the mystical tradition of the Church, which offers the basis and the pathway for dialogue with other religions such as Buddhism and Daoism. Just as Buddhism refers its faithful to the experience of the Buddha, so it is necessary that Christians model their prayer on the experience of Christ.
II. The Spiritual Experience of Christ
Jesus’ awareness of His filiation and “Union with the Father” was affirmed as He grew. Again, paraphrasing Fr Raguin’s talk, “At the age of twelve, while in the temple, which was the place of the presence of His Father, He gained a new awareness of the fact that He was the Son of the Father. When His mother said to him: “my child, why have you done this to us? Your father and I have been searching for you (loss of a sense of Jesus’ presence) with concern,” Jesus responded very simply: “Did you not know that I must be in the house of my Father?” (Luke 2:48-49).
The years spent at Nazareth were a time of “increasing in wisdom and stature before God and men.” Just as He grew in awareness of Who He is, so the Christian too must grow in awareness that he/she must also experience Thabor, the ascent to Jerusalem, the agony in the Garden, the Cross, the Resurrection, the Ascension. Christian prayer is thus a growth in awareness that Christ Himself pursued throughout His whole life. And this growing awareness cannot happen without a “prayer without object,” an experience shared in all mystic forms of spiritual cultivation.
III. The Discovery of the Word
Again, quoting the words of Fr Raguin, “In this process of becoming aware of Himself, in this “prayer without object”, there surfaced “the Word”. Christ became aware that He is the “Word of the Father, the word in which the Father knows Himself.” He knew Himself as the Word of the Father and this Word of the Father was to inform and model His humanity. He became the perfect image of the Father. This is why He could say: “Whoever sees me, sees the Father” John 14:9).
When Christ is the wordless object of our contemplation, this contemplation “brings us into silence in the face of He who is. He reveals Himself as the source springing up within.” Fr Raguin suggested that this is what Christ wanted us to understand in the allegory of the vine. Seeing the fruit invites us to be aware of the flow of sap, which rises from the roots. In the same way the word invites us to become aware of the current of life, which rises from the depths of God. “But such a prayer is truly a prayer without object, for it flows out of a simple awareness that God, by His spirit, animates our whole life. In this way we join ourselves with the prayer of Christ as it was spoken of above.”
It is this kind of prayer which contemplatives share and live in Christian, Buddhist, and Daoist context, without even being aware of it, since attention is totally given to “presence” in itself. It is in mind and heart’s silence, whether through Zen contemplation, Daoist “centering” prayer, or Christian mystic experience, that one passes from prayer with object to prayer without object, the passage from self-expression to simple awareness.
(The above quotes are taken from an article entitled “Christian Spirituality and Spiritualities of Other Religions,” published in Bulletin of the Secretariatus pro non Christianis, Rome, 1988, XXIII/2 #68.
IV The Doctrine of No-Thought, No-Attachment in Ch’an (Zen) Buddhism and the Christian Experience.
(From a talk given by Fr. Raguin in October 1988, “Bulletin 33”)
“The Zen experience,” Father Raguin taught, “is based on a few very simple principles, which are quite well known:
1) The way to the ultimate experience of oneness with the Absolute Reality is not based on a relationship to God through a mediator. The way to this ultimate experience is through the realization of the oneness of our original nature with “the Buddha-nature” in Buddhist prayer, and with the “Absolute reality,” in the Christian mystic experience.
2) At the depth of our human being lies our “original nature,” which is absolutely pure. When the Zen monk, or Daoist Monk/nun sit in meditation, he/she become aware of Absolute presence in oneself, as well as in all of nature—in the Daoist sense as “gestating” or “birthing”, in the 3 western traditions (Judaic, Christian and Islamic) as “creating.”
3) We cannot reach, understand, or “will” the experience of Absolute presence. We can only wait for it to manifest itself and shine at the depth of our human being. This manifestation, which will be a real enlightenment, is beyond our power, because by our original nature we are in fact open to this awareness.
4) To arrive at this form of wordless, “apophatic” enlightenment, the best we can do is to sit in pure attentiveness to our original nature. We cannot think about it, and still less imagine it. This is the reason why the great masters of Zen and of Daoism teach the principles of the method: no thinking, no relying on, no attachment. This creates a real “emptying” of the “heart,” which becomes void. This does not mean that the Zen or Daoist contemplative faces “nothing.” He/she faces original nature through void mind and heart empty of selfish desire (心斋坐忘 “heart fasting, sit in forgetfulness,” in the words of the Zhuangzi, Ch. 4).
Again, we listen to Fr Raguin speaking: “From Zen practice, I learned not to search for a God on high, a transcendent level, but I turned toward my inner being, facing my human nature. Since my human nature is God’s image, I simply wait for this image of God to manifest itself to me. Being a child of the Father, I learned from Christ to be simply attentive to my inner mystery, knowing that I cannot see myself as God’s child, unless the Father enlightened me by His Spirit.
The practice of Zen, as well as Daoist meditation can teach all who practice it, Christian as well as other faiths, to stay in pure attentiveness before the inner mystery. “No judgment, no thought” makes one realize this inner mystery. Buddhist, Daoist, and Christian mystics agree that one cannot rely on any thought, any desire, to reach this presence of “God within me.”
In Father Raguin’s words (from a private letter written to a Nun in Macao): “When I was told not to think, not to rely on anything, I was a little disturbed. I was not allowed to think of Christ. Then I realized, after some years, that the last step of the Gospel was not only to follow Christ, but to imitate him.” These are necessary steps, but the last step of the Gospel is taken when Christ says: “It is good for you that I go.” We would comment: “You will not see me any more before you, you will not be able to rely on my external presence, but I will be in you.”
In the book of an anonymous 14th Century Benedictine, The Cloud of Unknowing, Christ is not seen as an object of contemplation, but as the one who, living in us, stirs in us this intent of love which turns our attention toward God Himself, the God which cannot be known by knowing, but only by unknowing.
The way of prayer of Jesus when he was alone was of the “Zen” or Daoist type. He was simply aware that all his life was filled with the awareness of sharing the life of his Father. “This is why I dare to say that the practice of Zen led me to a deeper understanding of God’s presence in me and of Christ’s way of prayer.”
(The above quotes are based on a series of lectures first given at the Institute of East Asian Spirituality, Taipei, from 1977 to 1982, and later published in a four-volume series called Ways of Contemplation East and West).
In 1976 the Archbishop of Taipei invited Fr. Raguin to teach a course at the Institute of East Asian Spirituality. He was asked to teach “the method which emphasizes sitting,” i.e., not sitting physically but “any attitude of prayer in which one does not face a person or object.”
Fr Raguin explains his method as follows:
“In my development of the topic I decided to make East and West meet but not in a syncretic manner; Christ would be the center and way from start to finish. The whole course began to appear to me as a highway leading to God. The central experience would be Christian, but as I moved ahead I would meet Buddhists, Taoists, Yogists and many others. Christ would help me understand them, while their experience would help me deepen my understanding of Christ. To my amazement, this is what actually happened.”
The course, comprising four parts, has been published. Its basic outline is as follows: 1) The Structure of the Spiritual World; 2) Methods and Powers; 3) Spiritual Writers and Works: A Parallel between East and West; 4) Chinese Spirituality: Important Authors and Works.
The work of Father Raguin has had a profound influence on nuns, lay people, and members of varying faiths in Asia, who are on a spiritual path. Fr. Raguin hoped that his legacy would encourage and assist all those eager to participate in inter-religious dialogue on spirituality and inner contemplative practice. In celebrating the legacy of Matteo Ricci over the past 400 years, surely Fr Yves Raguin must rank as one of those who furthered and expanded, even transcended the impressive work of the early Jesuits in China, truly one of those whom Fr George Dunne SJ would rank as “A Generation of Giants.” (University of Notre Dame Press, 1962).
For a continuation of this theme, please see the recent work of Thierry Meynard, SJ, “Following the Footsteps of the Jesuits in Beijing,” (St Louis: 2006)
Inter-religious dialogue
To carry on inter-religious dialogue in Asian and other contexts, we may perhaps be as profoundly and deeply moved by including the writings of “real” spiritual masters, in other than Greco-Roman contexts – e.g., Daoist, Buddhist, and Confucian philosophers of East Asia, for instance, whom early Jesuits felt were as appropriate for China, as Plato and Aristotle were for Rome, are crucial to inter-religious understanding.
We would like to suggest other than pre-Christian Greek thinkers, i.e., the works of Asian teachers, Confucius, Lao-tzu, Zhuang-tzu, and the various Buddhist masters of spiritual cultivation, are relevant to inner cultivation as well as to inter-religious dialogue. Ricci was all for Confucius, but other great Jesuits wanted Daoist and Buddhist philosophers included, as relevant to Christian, as well as other inner cultivation practices.
The “catholic” (.e., universal) mind is the mind open to everything true. In the words of Thomas Aquinas (& Aristotle, Jewish Maimonidies, Islamic Avicenna), “Omne ens est verum” “Every being is true.” It is the very nature of mind as such to recognize the “true” (ie factual existence) of all nature/creation. Augustine was particularly concerned with those philosophers who resonate with the “koan” found in Christianity. “Everything that is true,” is precisely the point for inter-religious dialogue. Daoist Lao-tzu, Zhuangzi, as well as the I-ching follow Ignatius’ and Gregory of Nyssa’s 4 steps to unitive experience. Spring’s 元 primordial purifying/ ploughing, is the purgative way; summer’s heng 亨nourishing with sacred image, is the kataphatic illuminative way; “li” 利 autumn cutting is apopathic emptying way; winter’s zhen 貞 unitive way, is when God/Dao writes on the soul in flaming characters.
Anyone concerned with inter-religious dialogue must, I think, begin with finding what is common to all religions as a point from which to initiate discussion. This common point is, we propose, the “3rd” was of apophatic emptying (kenosis).
In most of Asia, for instance, “religion” does not mean a belief system with a creed, but rather, the rites of passage (the “7 sacraments”) and the annual festivals and customs. 3 forms of teachings, Confucian for human-to-human relations/ethics, Buddhism for compassion, and Daoism for human relationships to Transcendent (*Wuwei) Dao gestated nature, are taken as 3 teachings (not religions) that comprise one culture. The philosophers of these 3 systems were seen by the early Jesuits as teachers, like Plato and Aristotle, providing a fertile field ready for the seeds of faith, compatible with Christian spirituality. It is not necessary for Asians of any religious system to read Plato or Aristotle to be “true” Christians, Confucians, or Muslims, except when taking university level philosophy courses.
The obvious starting point for all inter-religious dialogue is a universal spiritual experience. The via apophatica, a no-judgment, no concept, no image of the Transcendent, is a common starting point for Daoist, Buddhist, Christian, Islamic, and Judaic dialogue. “Noche Oscura”, the Agony in the Garden, “why hast thou forsaken me”, are shared aspects of Transcendent God awareness, from Jesus’ own prayer experience, in Christian teaching.
The famous quote from Augustine, “Our minds were made for Thee O Lord, and will not rest until they rest in thee,” suggests that our minds “rest”/cease in God’s presence. The common point for dialogue here is the “heart fasting, sitting in forgetfulness” of the Chuang-tzu (Zhuangzi, Ch. 4), and the 3rd step “annihilation” of selfish focus of Buddha’s 4 noble truths. Theresa de Avila, Zohar’s Kabala, Attar’s “Conference of the Birds,” further describe a seven stage process through the experience of apophasis.
Modern “western” philosophers tend to see Aristotle’s Metaphysics as portraying a “god” who does not “need” human love or worship. Our dialogue might perhaps suggest that this may be a misreading of Aristotle’s text; the meaning in the Greek version of Meta.12/6-9 is simply that God’s gestation-creation can only be motivated by “love”, not “being alone,” since the transcendent ultimate Act already has “absolutely” all that Absolute Itself needs – to exist, “tw `eivai” is a verb,” as the Zohar, and Sufi Attar assure us.
Another point for dialogue, from human-ethology (and other modern scholar’s view) is the data, which shows that the very brain structure of the atheist and the religious believer are different, ie location in the brain of atheist, vs believer activity are different. The apophatic way would suggest that the cessation of all sense-derived negative judgment in the mind is necessary before the human psyche can evolve to a stage where Divine or Absolute Presence can be recognized, for believer or atheist, a state also known as “wisdom,” or “belly centered” rather than heart (selfish) or judgment-mind focused, in Daoist cultivation.
One of the best sources for dialogue is the Spiritual Exercises of St. Ignatius de Loyola. In the 1st and 2nd week of the Exercises, conceptual imaging is required for spiritual cultivation. In the Via Kataphatica image and word are crucial, ie, special to each religious tradition, and therefore not open to dialogue. In the 3rd an 4th week, the Via Apophatica, ie, the cessation of judgment and desire, leads to union. Thus reason is sublimated in the 3rd and 4th week. Please look at the illustration that Juan de la Cruz puts at the beginning of his work, “not” philosophy, “not” theology, for direct contemplation of Divine Presence. We must read and do the Spiritual Exercises again, for dialogue in this context. Teresa de Avila said explicitly that only those trained in the Sp. Exercises could be adequate spiritual advisors in prayer.
Another point for common discussion is that a “Trinity” aspect of the Absolute is an essential part of all spiritual traditions, ie God/Dao as gestating, mediating and indwelling is basic to all spiritual cultivation experience. The Incarnation is also one of the most easily understood doctrines to ordinary people, not involved in the Neo-platonic and Gnostic heresies of the 4th-10th centuries. Thank God for Francis of Assissi, who saw how easy it was to Love Jesus as a child, or feel the suffering of Mary holding her crucified son. Renaissance art is one of the greatest vehicles for dialogue in Asia. “Art as Sacred Image Encounter,” is the very foundation of the 2nd, and 3rd weeks of the Exercises.
Another point for discussion: Greco-Roman influence on Christianity is enhanced and complimented by the Asian prayer of “total body” experience. Intellect knows, heart loves, belly is for intuitive awareness of presence, “gut” feeling; God is here, right now, creating me, every largest and smallest thing in nature, given to me, — again found in the “Contemplatio ad Amorem” of Inigo de Loyola – a Spanish spiritual context where Kabala, Sufi, and Catholic mysticism flourished in proximity to each other. The whole point of Ignatius’ exercises is that the WHOLE BODY, all the senses are used to pray, not just the intellect.
Could we not say, as well, that faith does not need reason to believe, ie, “blessed are you because you have not seen, and still believe.” Reason diminishes the spiritual experience of immediate “now” awareness of presence. In this sense, what is in the intellect is essentially always in ”past” tense, having passed from the sound emitted by the speaker, or written word seen by the eye, through the senses of the hearer/seer, into the brain and then into intellect judging and storing, ie the “idea” itself is irretrievably in past tense, just as the heart/will is always in future tense (until the willed object is attained and contemplated). Thus wisdom as “now” experience of Divine Presence cannot happen as long as the intellect and will are active. All Christian mystics, including Paul 1st Cor., assure us of this. “The eye cannot see, the ear cannot hear, the mind cannot conceive,… the Divine Image.”
Professor Jim Schall SJ, Georgetown University scholar observes: “Much modern rationalism, under the guise of method, wants to limit reason to what is now called “scientific” reasoning. This step narrows the meaning of reason and excludes large portions of reality that the method cannot touch because it limits itself to the measurable in terms of quantity. If God and the soul are not `quantities,’ this method cannot deal with them.” This is, indeed, very true! Could we not then say that both science and reason in the presence of God, Divine Love, Beauty, are both irrelevant? God as Love, or living presence, felt interiorly, totally renders useless the use of mind or reason; it is equally out of the range of observed measurement that defines science, as well as “Christian” reasoning that judges ill of all others who disagree with one or another interpretation of biblical meaning.
In this sense, modern atheism is a phenomenon especially dominant in European thinkers, tired by centuries of “matter and body hating” neo-platonic clericalism, which condemns all bodily feelings as impure, even when directed towards prayer experience. As Nietzsche predicted, (confirmed by Marx, Feuerbach, and today’s science based agnostics), “if God is dead – Christians (and immoral clergy) have killed Him.”
A phenomenon found universally in inter-religious dialogue includes this physical experience of Divine or Absolute presence. Margeurite de Porete’ was burned at the stake in Paris in 1310 by “dogma” minded Dominicans, because she wrote a book called “A Mirror for Simple Souls” in which she paraphrased John’s epistles on Divine Love as something that all Catholics should physically experience. Ignatius was jailed when he first taught the physically seeing, feeling, sensing, touching the mysteries of Christ’s life in the Exercises. Plato’s seeing of the material body as somehow “evil” or to be separated from the body at death to return to the “spiritual” realm, negates one of the basic Christian doctrines, ie, the body is also going to heaven (found in the late 1st Century “Apostle’s Creed”).
Thus, the physical feeling of “devotion” in the presence of sacred image, followed by “apophasis” or the emptying of all image and desire, and then the experience of “union” as immediate presence, are common phenomena that act as the basis for dialogue with religions that at one time or a other were “at war” with each other. It is the apophatic (no word) rather than the kataphatic (faith prescribed word-image) that must define peace bringing dialogue between the World’s great, and less known religious systems.
Michael Saso. Nov. 27, 2009
Copyright, Mystic, Shaman, Oracle, Priest: 2009
Follow me on Twitter 
Recent Comments