[Gymnfacymoota]

LAYERS OF INVISIBLE

Lee Worley, excerpt of “On sacredness”, chapter from Coming from nothing: the sacred art of acting

[...] the essential thing is to recognize that there is an invisible world which needs to be made visible. There are several layers of invisible. In the twentieth century we know only too well the psychological layer, this obscure area between what is expressed and what is concealed [...] This level of psychological invisibility has nothing to do with sacred theatre. “Holy Theatre” implies that there is something else in existence, below, around and above, another zone even more invisible, even farther from the forms which we are capable of reading or recording, which contain extremely powerful sources of energy.

In these little-known fields of energy exist impulses which guide us towards “quality.”

It [“quality”] is not communicated through noise but through silence. Since one must use words, one calls it “sacred” [...] The only question that matters is: Is the sacred a form? The decline, the decadence of religions comes from the fact that one confuses a current, or a light, neither of which has a form, with ceremonies, rituals and dogmas, which are forms that lose their meaning very swiftly [...] The only thing which may help us is an awareness of the present.

The sacred art of acting evolves freshly moment by moment. Sacredness is not a setting aside of the everyday in favor of some holier expression; it is an embrace of everything. Prejudice for or against the things of this world needs to be set aside. The actor must also set aside the desire for political correctness or applause in favor of the truth of the powerful sources of energy that are contained in forms but are not the forms. Although this world is filled with pains and tortures, the sacred actor dedicates him or herself to uplifting the human condition. That which he acknowledges as sacred reflects the size of the actor’s heart. Peter Brook challenges the contemporary theater to be a crucible whereby the alchemy of transformation can occur.

The sacred is a transformation, in terms of quality, of that which is not sacred at the outset. Theatre is based on relationships between humans who, because they are human, are by definition not sacred. The life of a human being is the visible through which the invisible can appear. Are we not all sacred actors?

Ashashane

[Innockcroff]

Are we not all sacred actors?

Ashashane

I would say: "Only if our actions are sacred..." i.e. dedicated to living in truth, love, beauty and goodness with the intention of bringing into being the greater good of all while causing harm to no-one.

Otherwise, we're just acting out a useless and meaningless play, as described here.

"All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages. At first the infant,
Mewling and puking in the nurse's arms;
And then the whining school-boy, with his satchel
And shining morning face, creeping like snail
Unwillingly to school. And then the lover,
Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad
Made to his mistress' eyebrow. Then a soldier,
Full of strange oaths, and bearded like the pard,
Jealous in honour, sudden and quick in quarrel,
Seeking the bubble reputation
Even in the cannon's mouth. And then the justice,
In fair round belly with good capon lin'd,
With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,
Full of wise saws and modern instances;
And so he plays his part. The sixth age shifts
Into the lean and slipper'd pantaloon,
With spectacles on nose and pouch on side;
His youthful hose, well sav'd, a world too wide
For his shrunk shank; and his big manly voice,
Turning again toward childish treble, pipes
And whistles in his sound. Last scene of all,
That ends this strange eventful history,
Is second childishness and mere oblivion;
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything."

The monologue of Jaques (Act II, Scene VII, lines 139-166)
As You Like It by William Shakespeare.

Jaques's view of the seven stages of man gives no hint of honouring the spirit or the sacred, and in this it contrasts with the Vedic view of the four stages (ashramas) of man, which are based on man as a spiritual being in a human body.

According to Vedic philosophy the human life span is divided into four stages known as ‘ashrams’. The word ashram means shelter implying that the person takes shelter successively in each of the four stages during his life’s journey. These ashrams are Brahmacharya, Grahasta, Vanaprastha and Sanyasa. The Vedas define a specific purpose for each ashram and offer specific instructions to be followed in each ashram. The overall movement from ashram to ashram facilitates the merging of the jivatma (individual soul) with the paramatma (universal soul or God), which is the purpose of life.

The first ashram, Brahmacharya, is the student phase of life when the person is supposed to immerse himself or herself in learning the craft or trade in preparation for later life. During this period the person is supposed to live a celibate life (Brahmacharya means celibacy) because sexual activities were thought to have an adverse effect on the learning process. Till a few decades back, celibacy till marriage was the norm in India. In rural India it still is. However in urban areas the incidence of premarital sex is increasing, largely under the influence of the west.

Grahasta (meaning householder) ashram is the stage of family life. It begins with marriage and proceeds to raising a family. It involves earning a living through the skills acquired during Brahmacharya ashram. It encourages the enjoyment of a material life, including sexual pleasures with one’s spouse. The householders have the responsibility of bringing up their children in the same way that their parents brought them up. The householder needs to perform his religious duties as well.

Vanaprastha indicates the departure from material possessions. The person lives with the family, in society, but in a withdrawn manner. The man no longer takes part in the commercial activities and the woman leaves the running of the household to her daughter-in-law. People in this ashram play the role of mentors. The social activities become religious in nature. Celibacy is again advocated. The person is in this world but not of this world. The process of detachment from possessions, desires and relations begins in this stage. When Mr. Narayan Murthy, the founding father of Infosys, relinquished executive responsibility on turning sixty he was acting according to this philosophy.

The final stage is Sanyasa or renunciation. The person leaves society to spend the remaining part of his or her life in meditation and the contemplation of God in solitude. This is a very severe step and once upon a time was the norm. Hinduism propounds that religious and ethical values decline from age to age and hence it is not surprising that today this stage of life finds few takers.

In Hindu philosophy there exists a universal soul known as 'paramatma', which is another way of describing God. Each living being also has a soul known as 'jivatma'. The objective of existence is to try to merge the jivatma with the paramatma. This is known as moksha or salvation. The four ashrams prepare a person to undertake the process in a controlled but directed manner. From here

[itsmycock]

As I remove my rose coloured glasses for just a moment---We in the western world are not so bad at the first two stages, and terribly lacking in the last two.Â*
We've abandoned the hero's journey.Â*

Â*



...and my personal favourite:



Ashashane