Exploring Perennial Wisdom: Universalist vs. Traditionalist Perspectives

Peter: 00:00:00

Views, interpretations and opinions expressed are not advice nor official positions presented on behalf of any organization or institution. They are for informational and entertainment purposes only. Now join Ryan and Peter for another episode of the Tracking Wisdom Podcast.

Ryan: 00:00:23

Good morning and welcome back to another episode of the Tracking Wisdom Podcast. My name is Ryan.

Peter: 00:00:29

My name is Peter.

Ryan: 00:00:29

And today we are springboarding off of our last episode where we talked about perennial wisdom. And today we're going to expand on that perennial wisdom and explore the two different schools of thought.

On perennial wisdom, there's the universalist perspective and a traditionalist perspective.

And so we'll go into kind of outlining what the perennial philosophy is, discuss the universalist perspective and the traditionalist perspective at a high level, discuss the strengths and criticisms of each, and then Peter and I will kind of give our own take and reflection on the concept and what we take away from it. So to start, the perennial philosophy, which we discussed last.

Last episode, is the idea that rooted in all religion, and that is what the perennial philosophy speaks to. Last episode, we expanded that broader to include science and culture and a number of different areas.

But the idea being that at the core, there is a shared core truth about reality, consciousness and the human experience, human nature, the fundamental nature of humanity. And this idea was. What was his name? Aldous Huxley. Thank you, Peter. Coming to the rescue.

But the idea emerged during the Renaissance and was also integrated in neoplate Platonism, hermetics, and other religious elements. And Then in the 19th century, Aldous Huxley wrote the book the Perennial Philosophy.

Now, out of that, the idea of perennialism, which is what we just discussed, this universality or this core element, there's the universal universalist perennialism. And they see religion as different paths to the same truth.

So, so, kind of using the pointer metaphor that Peter has shared many times before, where we come from different perspectives, and each of our paths are pointers to a singular common destination, if you were to put a destination to it, or, you know, a truth.

Another element of universalist perennialism is that it emphasizes the mystical experience and the inner realization over tradition and doctrine, which is common in institutional religions. And it supports. And this is one of the key items in universalist perennialism.

And where the critique comes is it supports a syncretism, which is a blending of the insights from various traditions.

Counter to that is the traditionalist perspective, which holds that each religion has a unique and divinely inspired form, meaning that underlying truth and commonality to be preserved. But the core of this perspective is that it believes in guarding that purity of the traditional teaching against blending. So there's.

That's really the biggest difference between these is the traditionalists view syncretism as. As diluting the spiritual truth.

And they hold dear and prioritize the importance of the religion and tradition as being divinely inspired and being the foundational element to teaching and guiding down the path towards the common knowledge.

So strengths in the universalist perspective would be that it's can be considered more inclusive and adaptable to modern spiritual teachers or seekers. It values that inner experience and intuition, emphasizing the mystical experience and the mystical core.

I kind of align this with that general kind of awakening experience that has common elements that describe the experience. And obviously we just talked about Aldous Huxley as being a prominent figure in this.

There was also Theosophists and Transcendentalists that were prominent in the universalist perspective. The criticisms from the traditionalists on this is that the.

The syncretism is super, can lead to superficial and relativistic understandings and mixing these traditions, diluting the authenticity that came from the original so called divinely inspired tradition that held that core element. And so it's perceived as losing that sacred specificity by merging these paths.

Alternately, the traditionalist perspective, in emphasizing the integrity of tradition, preserving the rituals and doctrines as sacred, focuses on initiation. So the idea of having an initiation within the tradition that sets people on the path.

And I imagine this, or think of this in certain shamanic traditions where, you know, there's an event, there's a celebration and an embarkation on the journey and that the traditionalists hold this as a dear part of following whatever traditional path towards achieving the recognition of the ultimate truth and understanding.

So the criticisms from the universalists on this perspective is that it can be viewed as rigid and exclusive and resistant to modern interpretation, can be perceived as failing to adapt to contemporary spiritual needs. So for us, which resonates more so for me.

So in the last episode at the end when I introduced this topic, I asserted that I think Peter and I are probably on either side of the center line here. I think we may land. Bear with me. Bear with me. Peter's giving me faces.

I think that Peter tends slightly on the traditionalist side and I will back that assertion up with some objective evidence. And I think it's probably fair to say that I lean universalist.

However, I do recognize the critique and this critique has come up, actually Peter has shared the critique and the critique came up. And in other areas, for me, the idea that.

So if I was taking the perspective of supporting the tradition, the I'M sorry, the universalist perspective. This aligns with me specifically because I have embarked on an organic path. I have strong hesitation, rejection.

It's literally resistance to institutional doctrine. And, and I personally have found huge value in that blending of different traditions. Now I'm not blending practices as much.

It's really more that I recognize this perennialism and I explore the variety of different teachings, so to speak, but also recognizing it in other areas.

And it's in identifying those consistencies, those alignments with the perennialism, that I find not gratifying but inspiring and indicative of the path that I follow. But I recognize mostly to your point, Peter, where you've brought up the importance of teachers. No. You haven't said that?

Peter: 00:08:59

No, I'm just curious. Well, keep on going.

Ryan: 00:09:05

In my recollection, Peter has talked about the importance of teachers in certain circumstances. I think you have not been rigid on. That's why I'm saying, I think by and large we're very fluid across the center line here.

But I think I would definitely align more towards the universalist perspective, however, acknowledging in certain, if not many circumstances there is a valid need for that guidance and that blending different traditions can lead to confusion.

And I mean, one of the critiques about this, and it reminded me of New Age, your perception of New Age being that when we're blending these traditions, the meaning gets diluted, to use the previous term, but it gets lost and it becomes more of whatever I want and whatever I feel and then can be co opted by charlatanism and things like that. And I think that that's in part your perspective or perception of New Age.

Peter: 00:10:18

Okay. Okay. So. Okay.

Ryan: 00:10:21

Are you, do you want to. Are you, Are you done? Yeah, I mean, I think that, that I recognize that I will be done in one moment. I.

I recognize that that critique is legitimate, that there is a. A risk of dilution, dilution of the teaching, but also being deluded in your own path, in whatever it is that you're feeling or wanting.

But I do think that we are in agreement that the mystical experience and primacy of that inner experience over perhaps a doctrinal type approach.

And what I would critique specifically about the critique from the traditionalists is, and granted this is probably a couple hundred years old, this critique, but it misses the point it basically creates. So I agree with the traditionalists insofar as and as we've discussed, the original heart of orthodox religion had this element of.

And they do speak specifically to Orthodoxy. So I don't want to conflate non orthodox traditions with their perspective, because their perspective is specific to Orthodoxy. However, they would.

They do incorporate Catholicism in that orthodoxy.

And the point that I would make is that things have come so far and it ignores the fact that over time, the institution itself deviates from the original teaching.

And so that's an additional critique that I make in a critique that I make to their critique, which is, yes, there's a risk of diluting the original teaching in blending different traditions, but I also think that in taking that perspective, it's missing.

It has a blind spot, that orthodoxy, while the original true nature of orthodoxy may have strong alignment to this core teaching, that it ignores the fact that over time that orthodoxy kind of loses its edge, so to speak. Now I'm done.

Peter: 00:12:56

So I. Yeah, so I'm reacting because I think it's interesting that you peg me as a traditionalist because.

Or even traditional leaning, because as soon as I read the outline of universalist versus Traditionalist, my reaction was, oh, we clearly fall squarely into universalist perennialism. So. So the idea that I'm leaning. I think that's interesting.

I mean, I can understand historically, from things I said early on how you might interpret me as a traditionalist, but I think where I am now, I'm. I'm completely not a traditionalist. I mean, I think the. The risk for. For universalists is that you have to.

It requires discernment and critical thinking.

Ryan: 00:13:56

Right.

Peter: 00:13:56

That's what I. That's what I would say. Because you have to create your own guardrails.

Basically, that's the universalist approach is we're taking off the guardrails.

We're not locking you into this structure, and we're not locking ourselves into a structure and we can explore freely, which means you can end up in the mud, you can get in the weeds, but that's just a hazard. I think that from my perspective, the hazards of traditionalism are more serious.

Ryan: 00:14:31

Yeah.

Peter: 00:14:31

And I think that. I mean, I think that's the central thesis of our conversation throughout, is that you have to recognize the.

The limitations and hazards of traditional paths and organized religions and that explicitly they're not wrong because they do carry the core truth. But the, the structure introduces hazard because not all leaders and teachers are able to say, here's what's essential.

Ryan: 00:15:07

Right.

Peter: 00:15:07

This stuff is just to help you along the way. It's just to get you. It's just to funnel you in, basically. Right?

There's a lot of structure in all paths that is there to guide you in when you're coming from a very lost Place of inexperience. And I think traditional paths are designed as funnels where you go deeper and deeper. You get, you know, the deeper mysteries or you get kind of more.

The more sophisticated views, the farther you go. But behind it all is the. The truth is very, very simple as we've come around to very, you know, again and again.

And the problem is that so many people. And I would. I'm going to place a disclaimer on my perception of the way the world is, because I was just gonna say most people. I'm gonna.

I'm saying most people with the disclaimer that, yeah, I don't really know what, you know, most people think, but my perception is that most people get lost in the structure, and most people are very honestly, in my opinion, not even interested in the core truth. So I guess I'm not going to go into detail because I don't want to take a position of criticizing a particular religion. But that's what I.

That's what I think. And so. So what I thought you were going to focus on, or I thought your evidence was kind of my reference to Buddhist structures and my.

My kind of alignment with Buddhist tradition.

Ryan: 00:17:01

It. So, I mean, I didn't actually outline my. My objective evidence to my position on that. But yeah, it. I mean, it's. It's in line with that.

But also, I think more broadly in your. You're a bit of a dichotomy. I recognize part of you very much follows this. There's a part of you that clings to institutional knowledge.

And I don't know if that's just historical conditioning or not, but there's a. Whenever I hear something like I need a teacher or practice things like that, that indicates to me this.

Peter: 00:17:46

Attachment.

Ryan: 00:17:46

Attachment.

Peter: 00:17:47

No. Okay, fair. Yes.

Ryan: 00:17:50

But beyond that, I agree. That's why I was kind of saying. Yeah, maybe either side.

Peter: 00:17:56

So intellectually. So. So intellectually, I disagree. Like, intellectually, I'm firmly universalist, and intellectually, I don't want to be. Right. But I am.

I do have a lot of conditioning around structure. I mean, my core conditioning is around rules and criticism.

Ryan: 00:18:18

Right.

Peter: 00:18:18

Like, and being right. That. That's really deep core conditioning that I'm working on. But that's the thing is that I recognize that as conditioning that I'm working on.

So it's not that it doesn't come out and that you won't hear me say those things, but I'm saying those things against my inner wisdom.

Ryan: 00:18:35

Sure.

Peter: 00:18:36

And they're just. They're coming out of my Mouth. And I'm trying to learn not to say them, so. Fair enough. I mean, you're right. So if I could turn this back on you, I.

Yeah, I mean, I mean, I think. But we talked about this last episode where, where we have these two. We're coming to the same path from different places of origin.

Ryan: 00:19:07

Yeah.

Peter: 00:19:07

Right. So you're. You're coming from this pre. I don't know, pre awakened. I don't know what you call it, but this is like very early.

I think you described it as there was no time when you remember not being as aware as you are now. Yeah, kind of. Right.

Ryan: 00:19:26

What I would frame it specifically with the fundamental well being.

Peter: 00:19:29

Right.

Ryan: 00:19:30

Jeffrey Martin's matrix. A fundamental well being. And I can't recall a time when I didn't have that base fundamental.

Peter: 00:19:40

Right. So. So Martin's.

In Martin's model, there's a transition away from conditioning where we start out in this conditioned state and then we have this transition experience which pulls us towards awakening, onto the path of awakening. And he like, he's very. Well, his research is all about finding that transition and helping people make that transition.

And you don't have a transition point.

Ryan: 00:20:13

That I recall at least. Right.

Peter: 00:20:15

And so. And whereas I'm really painfully aware of decades of conditioned experience prior to what I recognize as my first transition in my 60s.

And so those are two different. Those are very different.

Ryan: 00:20:34

Yeah.

Peter: 00:20:35

You know, coming to the path in two very different ways. So. So I think. Just caution you.

I think the fact that I have conditioning, or rather your interpretation of me being more traditionalist because of my traditioning is an artifact of you're not recognizing a pre transition experience and being able to say I'm a dichotomy because I have a pre and post and you're not because you're just there, you know, so.

Ryan: 00:21:12

But which is not to say I have no conditioning or anything like that, just the fundamental well being.

Peter: 00:21:18

Which is a really interesting question which I would really like to explore. I don't know how to explore.

Ryan: 00:21:25

This comes up.

Peter: 00:21:26

Yeah, I know. Well, yeah. I mean, because I'm so. So this is, I mean, this is our essential, I guess dynamic. Right. Is that I'm really deep into my conditioning.

Like I'm really focused on. I'm really aware of it. I have a lot of it.

And because you have this, this long, long period of fundamental well being, my postulation or my hypothesis is that you have conditioning mass by fundamental well being, whereas most people have fundamental being mass by conditioning.

Ryan: 00:22:01

Yeah.

Peter: 00:22:01

I mean, and this Is, I think it's an interesting model because it's kind of like I, I think of it kind of along the lines of, you know, Jeffrey coming up with his model based on talking to a lot of people about their experience of awakening. And then he developed his matrix and his model of the awakening path.

And I think I'm seeing something, you know, between us in our conversations and in the contrast between our experiences. It's like, oh, well, is this another model? You know, is there.

It's not the Martin's matrix, but is definitely the model that Jeffrey uses that and many teachers use.

I mean, Tara Brock and Jack Kornfeld also use this model, I think of the ever present inner wisdom being obscured by, you know, the true self or the Buddha nature, being obscured by the spacesuit self or the conditioned self or the, all this, these other terms that they use to describe the, the smaller self, the ego. Right. The psychological ego. So there's that, there's the, the Buddha nature being covered by the ego.

But is it possible to have the ego be covered by Buddha nature when someone has kind of an earlier awakening or can't recognize a pre transition condition state? And yet there's still clear conditioning because as we've said, awakening doesn't. Right. Material existence is conditioning. Right, Right.

So just being awakened, even if you're awakened from birth, it doesn't mean that you're free of conditioning any more than, you know, having a very dramatic awakening at the age of 23 means that you're free of all your conditioning. If you don't address your conditioning, you're not free of it. And you might be subject to, you know, being controlled by your conditioning.

Ryan: 00:24:08

Right.

Peter: 00:24:09

So anyway, but, so I, I think that's a very interesting contrast or I guess dynamic is what I would say.

Ryan: 00:24:18

Right.

Peter: 00:24:19

It's like there's something between the two of us as, as much as we have in common, there's this, there's this difference that's very interesting and I, I still don't understand it. I mean, I mean, I don't think, I don't think, I mean, I don't think you understand.

I don't think we understand our experience, each other's experiences overall very well. I think we, we understand each other's awakening experiences quite well because that's the nature of awakening.

Like if you have an awakening experience, you talk to someone else who's had an awakening experience, you're kind of like, oh yeah. So I think it's interesting to see that the transcendentalists are central to the universalist school of thought. The universal perennialism.

Universalist version of perennialism. Because there is.

Well, basically the, the center of transcendentalism is in Massachusetts and there's a museum called Fruitlands Museum, which I visited many times and it's famous for being the home of transcendentalism. And I didn't know who the transcendentalists are. So now I see another connection. Oh, there are they interesting into this. Yeah. So they're.

One of their things was they were. They envisioned a community where they could live free of like all kinds of modern entanglements. Okay. And.

But one of their things was they were going to grow all their own clothes. I don't really know how they're gonna. Maybe it wasn't. They're gonna grow it because I know they didn't grow cotton. They only wore, I think, cotton.

Cotton. Part of their thing was they, they made this commune and they were going to like live and be self sufficient.

And they didn't make it through the first winter because they got too cold. And part of the reason they got too cold is I think they didn't want to wear wool. Was like part of their thing.

Like, we're not going to wear animal products, so they're trying to wear just cotton. I didn't learn enough from my trips, my many trips to the museum with my kids because it's for my kids. I'm not paying attention. But anyway.

Yeah, so Fruitlands Museum.

Ryan: 00:26:38

Interesting.

Peter: 00:26:38

Take a trip. Yeah, it's kind of interesting. So, yeah, so now I can go back there and say, oh, they were universalist perennialists. Yeah.

I mean, definitely my comment about traditionalist perennialism was kind of like, oh, this is the kind of the interfaith party line of, you know, the formal, like the religious leaders to get together and say, yes, we all approve of each other as long as kind of you stay in your own lane. Right, right. And it's like, yeah, I'm not going to speak out against your religion, you know, but mine is the only true one or something like that.

Right. Like, if you're gonna be. You have to commit. Like if you're gonna be in my religion, you can't stray and, and go to these other religions.

I mean, I don't know that it's really that negative, but that's. Reading this outline made me feel like, oh, it's those people.

Ryan: 00:27:41

Right. What do you think about the, the assertion from the traditionalist that veering outside of a, of a established path can dilute or risk.

Peter: 00:27:55

Yeah. I mean, it's kind of. So. So they're not saying my way is the only true way. They're saying I have a true way and you have a true way.

But if you're not on my path or your path or this other path, then you're not gonna see the truth.

Ryan: 00:28:12

Right. I think that's kind of where it points.

Peter: 00:28:15

And I think I said in the end of the last episode that it's not essential.

Ryan: 00:28:19

Yeah, right.

Peter: 00:28:20

Because. Because the truth that they're pointing to is essential human experience. And so you do not need a path and a teacher, essentially.

Now, having said that, the vast, vast majority of us have conditioning such that we need a path and we need a teacher or, you know, some variety or combination of that in order to start to get the experience that we need to recognize the direction that we need to go in.

Ryan: 00:28:59

Right.

Peter: 00:29:00

So. Yeah, I mean, I, I hope that's not too subtle. I mean, it's, it's. Yeah, I, I just, I don't, I don't buy.

Well, most especially here's, here's the problem that I have, which is again, going back to our original central thesis, which is that organized religions are full of non essential structure that they make essential.

Ryan: 00:29:26

Right.

Peter: 00:29:27

And that's a problem. So you may already be on the edge of awakening, but you must follow this path. And if you haven't, then that means you can't be saved.

Ryan: 00:29:39

Right.

Peter: 00:29:40

Or that you still need to be saved, even though. Yeah, I mean, that's the whole thing. When in reality, in my understanding.

And while I'd love to get someone from like a seminary or theological background. Right. To. To weigh in on this, because in my view. So my new model, keeping it saying this is teaching to the bell curve. Right.

In my view, institutions are designed to optimize impact by hitting the majority of people.

Ryan: 00:30:13

Right.

Peter: 00:30:13

Which, and kind of by definition, structurally, they're not interested in the tails because there's very little return. Because the objective of the institution is to maximize their impact. Because now that's an institution, it wants to kind of own everything.

It kind of wants to get as many people in the door as possible. And the way you do that is you focus on the middle of the bell curve and you sacrifice the tails.

And that's where I think the hazard of traditionalist perennialism is. Is that designed to sacrifice the trails.

With the exception of exceptional leaders and teachers that have their eyes open for, oh, these people, there are some special people or these people who inhabit the tails of the bell curve where this mainstream doesn't apply.

Because they don't have this kind of conditioning that we're designed to deal with, and because they don't have that kind of conditioning and because we don't know how to deal with it, because it's not built into our structure, there must be something wrong with them.

Ryan: 00:31:27

Right.

Peter: 00:31:28

And. And that's what it comes down to is.

Is institutions making people feel like there's something wrong with them aside from the bigger idea of original sin, which is kind of the big, the ultimate. There's something wrong with you. But I mean, even barring that. Right. Like people who can't. I don't want to get into details, but, you know.

Yeah, I think it's pretty clear what.

Ryan: 00:31:53

Yeah.

Peter: 00:31:53

You know, this kind of concept. Yeah, that's my. That's my. That's my perspective on that. I mean, I think it's really interesting.

I wish we had more people to talk to because we're kind of. We are in a bit of an echo chamber, literally. There's just the two of us here. And.

Yeah, I'd really like to get some perspective and discussion about these kind of approaches to perennial wisdom, because I think, you know, just like you were attributing things to me and how I would view this, obviously I'm attributing things to, you know, people who align differently on this in this model.

Ryan: 00:32:42

Right.

Peter: 00:32:43

Than I think I do.

Ryan: 00:32:44

Well, I think, too, that traditionalist perennialism is probably hard to come by at this point, because specifically focusing on Orthodoxy, which in and of itself is waning. I mean, we're. There's. There's very little.

And I don't even know if I would personally consider the Catholic Church orthodoxy, but that would be probably the main set. The point that I'm trying to make is many of the more modern religions think, what is the Judaism, you guys thought?

Peter: 00:33:19

There's Reform.

Ryan: 00:33:20

Reform Judaism and Protestant Christianity, things like that. These in and of themselves, to me, are forms of the universalist perspective because they are blending.

They are not the pedigree of the Orthodox religion.

Peter: 00:33:41

But I think. Yeah. I mean, okay, so there's technical orthodoxy, which I guess is what we have to be talking about.

Because what I'm thinking about is, well, what about fundamentalism? Right, right. I mean, all kinds of. What I'm saying, what I'm suggesting as well, there's a semantic aspect to Orthodoxy.

Ryan: 00:33:59

Sure.

Peter: 00:34:00

Right. I mean, fundamentalists, I think, by definition, are calling themselves Orthodox. Right. They're not saying, oh, we're a new way of looking at it.

Ryan: 00:34:12

Right.

Peter: 00:34:12

They're saying, we're the fundamental way of looking at it yet. And yet they're often new.

Ryan: 00:34:20

I mean, I guess the right. Taking the Christian approach, the each denomination of Protestantism probably takes.

Maybe they're not articulating that they're orthodox, but they are likely believing that they are following the core essence of the original truth.

Peter: 00:34:40

Yeah, that's a good point.

Ryan: 00:34:43

You know.

Peter: 00:34:43

Yeah, yeah.

Ryan: 00:34:44

But I do see certainly strict orthodoxy.

But I would say in the context of strict orthodoxy, definitely there's a challenge and a valid critique from the universalist perspective that translating that teaching that was designed in a culture and world that was completely different than now makes it difficult. This is my perspective that interpreting that into a modern context creates.

Following a strict orthodoxy that is thousands of years old is going to complicate things in a modern world. And then translating that into a modern world.

I mean this is where we kind of get in this back and forth chicken and egg thing where, where I think the universalist is trying to allow for the growth and the variety of experience. And obviously they're in embodying the primacy of mystic experience, mystical experience over tradition.

That when you're taking the traditionalist perspective, I guess I just kind of reject this idea that following the original air quotes, divinely inspired way that this was designed. Number one, I would, I would argue that those don't exist anymore in so far as like, yeah, the, the pri.

The, the majority of the religions are, are not pure pure unless we're following the way or Gnosticism or something that was.

Peter: 00:36:27

But I mean, so to your earlier point is that many, I'm not going to say all, but many denominations that identify as a traditional religion, Judaism, Christianity, Islam maybe I really don't know anything about Islam. Variations of Islam would call themselves essential. I mean, okay, so I'm thinking about what I know about Reform Judaism.

So there's a focus on the Torah as a structure. Right. And then a very active interpretation of this traditional document.

But there's a faith that we can adhere to this traditional document and follow the cycle of the Torah through the year. And this serves us in our modern life because it's the word of God.

But because we're intelligent modern humans, it's our design to interpret and reinterpret this. And that's our work, that's our sacred work is to engage with this traditional document and interpret it. So that's, that's one. So is that.

I don't think that's inherently universalist.

I'm not sure this is why I'm a Little confused because it's like it's adopting a traditional structure in this specific document and in many, many rituals and holidays. It's a whole thing. It's not just a document. It's a whole structure of holidays and traditions. But it's reinterpreted.

Ryan: 00:38:15

Right.

Peter: 00:38:16

And it's not just like, well, it's what the rabbi says. It's. No, every person has to engage with this and interpret, and we can argue and disagree, and that's part of the process.

But overall, it will guide us. Right. And in our disagreements, and we'll. We'll be doing the best that we can. I'm not sure whether that's universalist or traditionalist.

Ryan: 00:38:43

I don't think it falls squarely in either case.

Peter: 00:38:46

Right, right. So for me, I mean, I have a fair amount of background. I have enough background in Buddhist traditional teachings that it guides my thinking.

Like that structure and the references. I can make references to it in ways that I find useful, but I'm not dogmatic about it.

Ryan: 00:39:09

Right.

Peter: 00:39:10

And that's. And that's why, you know, at one point, not too long ago, I wanted to be dogmatic about. I'm like, oh, I'm not a good enough Buddhist.

I have to become a better Buddhist. And then I was like, oh, wait, oh, that's what awakening is. Oh, never mind. You know?

And now I'm not concerned with being a better Buddhist, but I'm also not saying, oh, that Buddhist stuff is garbage. I'm like, oh, this is really great. This is the best teaching that I've found. I really like it. I really find it useful. I'm just not dogmatic about it.

I'm not just. I'm just not gonna say, hey, you've got to see that. You've got to read this. You've got to believe this. And that's the.

But see, that's not what they're describing as traditionalist Universalist either. Right. They're not saying, you've got to believe this.

Ryan: 00:39:58

They're saying, you got to believe one of these.

Peter: 00:40:01

You've got to believe or follow this path or that path. Right, Right. So I don't know. Yeah. I feel like we're kind of like, not quite well enough equipped to really grapple fully with these questions.

I mean, it's a really interesting introduction which raises really interesting questions. I think that I'm much more of a universal. Universalist and that I don't really understand what this material is describing as traditionalist.

Ryan: 00:40:34

Sure.

Peter: 00:40:35

Right.

Ryan: 00:40:35

Yeah.

Peter: 00:40:35

It's like, how does that work?

I Mean, I kind of have the flavor of it because of these, you know, interfaith conclaves and things like that where, you know, these clergy get together and they say, you know, we've, we've talked to each other and we respect each other and all this, but, you know, I'm still an Orthodox Jew and you're still a Catholic. And, and so what does that mean? I. I don't know in, in, in detail. I don't know what it means. I only know that those conversations happen.

I know that the Dalai Lama has been engaged with interfaith dialogues. Yeah, right. Are those dialogues traditionalist or universalist? Are they inherently universalist? It seems that they wouldn't be.

Ryan: 00:41:17

No.

Peter: 00:41:18

I mean, if you're a clergy, if you're, if a cleric, if you're clergy in an organized religion, it seems like you can't be. Well, I don't know. It seems to point away from being a universalist.

Ryan: 00:41:31

Yeah, no, I agree.

I think to think about it from a broader perspective as traditionalist, meaning more along the lines of adhering to an established framework, more so than just strict orthodoxy like I was framing. It makes sense. And I think the, I mean, essentially the underlying.

The concern seems to be around efficient direction, and I don't want to use the word achievement, but, you know, more advancement, but this kind of progression, progression towards both schools of thought agree that there's an underlying essence that is the perennialism in both schools of thought, that there's this underlying teaching.

One preserves the value or prioritizes the value of the established frameworks in progressing and achieving, recognizing that universal truth and cautioning, blending and taking your own organic path, because you might get lost.

And I think that, like you said, that there is a counter risk to taking that position, that the established framework, in and of itself certainly over time, can do the very thing that it's trying to not do, which is to distract specifically people who might be on the tail ends of the bell curve, who might be experiencing more unique or less conventional experiences, that it doesn't serve that community. And I think I'm not taking a perspective that either one of these is absolutely right or wrong. I think they both have value.

And certainly I think even from a universalist perspective, even though transcendentalism seem to reject established religion. And personally, I don't reject. I don't reject established religion, but I have reservation and. Come on. Trying to pull it out of my head.

Peter: 00:44:02

I mean, I think the problem is that it's so easy to see from our perspective how traditional Paths can go wrong.

Ryan: 00:44:12

Right.

Peter: 00:44:13

Which doesn't mean they have to go wrong. Doesn't mean that it mostly goes wrong. It's just that they can go wrong very dramatically. And it's.

Ryan: 00:44:22

Yeah, well, in a universalist path doesn't preclude following a traditional established religion. That's the way I would see it. You could still value, you could pick.

Peter: 00:44:35

Your own path, which happens to be exclusively one traditional path. But you recognize, you recognize that that's just your path.

Ryan: 00:44:47

And I think to touch back on one thing that you mentioned, and I think it was absolutely on point, I think also missed the counter to it, which was you said you need to be aware of the limitations of established tradition or something along that line. And I think that in fairness, it goes both ways. Right.

Whatever path we use, it's incumbent upon us to be discerning and to recognize the limitations with either approach or any approach we take so that we can move forward with confidence and not fall victim to traps.

Peter: 00:45:31

Well, I mean, okay, so from a, from a universalist, perennialist perspective, if I'm going to say that's the one. I take I.

Making the argument that traditional paths are designed to a bell curve, which means that they work for most people, like, by definition, like, oh, they actually work for most people, or they can. And I think that's the problem, is that there's the design and then there's the application.

Ryan: 00:46:05

Right, right, right.

Peter: 00:46:06

There's the design, then there's the way people hack it. It's like, no, it wasn't designed to be used that way. Yes, but this is the easiest way to use it. Yeah, but it doesn't work if you do that.

You know, I mean, this is our, this is coming back to our professional experience. Like, you have to use it the way it's designed to be used in order to get the benefit that it was designed to produce.

Ryan: 00:46:29

Correct.

Peter: 00:46:30

So, which comes down to, I think, what I said before. And this is not a weakness. This, this is not a weakness. What I'm, what I'm trying to say is that traditional paths require good teachers.

Ryan: 00:46:44

Yes.

Peter: 00:46:45

And if you have skilled teachers, then that path is going to work really, really well. I believe the problem is, it's like, it's so hard to find a good leader or a good teacher. There's so many bad ones out there.

Now, just because there are so many bad teachers out there doesn't mean that if you go out on your own, you're going to do better. Right, Right. Then, then you have to be your own better teacher. And then all that means is it doesn't mean that what you do on your own becomes right.

It means that you have to do, you have to take on more responsibility for yourself. And that's what I was saying about critical thinking, that it's not an easy path.

That's, that's, and that's the misinterpretation of all of this stuff, right? Oh, if I just do this, if I just do everything this guy says blindly, then I'm going to be saved, right? Because that's the path.

I just have to not be responsible for myself and do whatever my teacher says or do whatever my leader says. And then it's all good because it's in the Bible. And so, you know, I don't have any responsibility and that's the way I want it to be.

And that's where the whole everything falls apart.

Ryan: 00:47:58

Right?

Peter: 00:48:00

So whatever path you choose, you've either got to be responsible for finding a really good teacher or leader and rejecting any teacher or leader who is not good. That's the hard part. Or you've got to be your own really good teacher or leader.

And I guess, I mean, that's the community that I'm involved with, which is a community where, which is dedicated to helping each member of the community be their own best teachers and leaders. And that's what we do. Like we get together and we learn from each other and teach each other while we're teaching ourselves.

I mean, if you, in my community, someone comes with a problem and the leader guides them to their inner wisdom, working through the problem and they're working on their own problem, right? They're not working on my problem. But by seeing them succeed in working their problem, I learn how to work on my problem.

I learn how to be my own best teacher. And that's why, that's why, that's why I work with my teacher, because that's what she does.

And, and I had the opportunity to observe many hours of practice before deciding like, oh, I think this person knows what they're doing and actually observing real time outcomes.

Ryan: 00:49:42

Right.

Peter: 00:49:42

Which is not, in my experience, not the typical opportunity you get in any kind of organized religion.

I mean, you get to hear that so and so is a really good teacher or you get to hear that, oh, they said something when I went to their talk and they seem really good, but that's not an outcome. Right, right. That's like, I liked what they said.

I mean, I thought Mingyur Rinpoche, after reading a bunch of his content and watch listening to a bunch of his content. I was like, oh, this is. This is when I was like on my way to becoming a more serious Buddhist because it was like, wow, this is great.

I really connect with this. But I don't think that's the most legitimate way to evaluate. To evaluate.

I think if you have the opportunity to see results in real time, you know, I don't know how you find that.

I mean, other than like, I have a very specific path that's my own, that I had my own opportunity to come to this specific class that had the specific teacher. I mean, it's. It's a very unique thing. I mean, it doesn't even help.

I don't think it's particularly helpful for me to name the class and name the teacher because it's not like, oh, you can just. I mean, I guess I should name the class the teacher. I mean, it was Power of Awareness and teachers Clear passing. And I'm still with her and.

But you know, it's like, she's not the only teacher.

Ryan: 00:51:17

Right.

Peter: 00:51:17

It's just my. That's my point. It's like, yeah, I don't want to create a funnel here where everybody has to join Cleopasty because she's the only good teacher.

It's like, no, I had this unique ability, a unique opportunity to find a good teacher because I was able to observe and evaluate.

Ryan: 00:51:33

Right.

Peter: 00:51:34

And I don't know how you get that.

Ryan: 00:51:36

It's hard. I mean, in a way, you had some luck insofar as the person that you.

Peter: 00:51:43

I mean, that's where my synchronicities, that's what I'm. You know, when we talk about, you know, the synchronicity of awakening and all the. Yeah, that's where. That's where I see it.

Ryan: 00:51:52

Because if that wasn't the case, you'd be in the same boat as everybody else, which is how do you. How do you get the opportunities to observe real time outcomes like that?

Peter: 00:52:03

Right. Yeah. I mean, yeah, I think it's unique. I. Unfortunately, I think I just got really lucky because if you.

It does not particularly helpful for me to tell you to go register for Power of Awareness because. Well, I mean, she is still active in power awareness and you still can pick her as a teacher. But, you know, they used to have a dozen mentors.

Not all of them did this. In fact, maybe two of them did it.

Ryan: 00:52:29

Yeah.

Peter: 00:52:30

I mean, Clea's the only one who did it the way she did it.

Ryan: 00:52:32

Yeah.

Peter: 00:52:33

And I just happened to. I didn't. I don't even know how I picked her.

Maybe I don't know if I have access to materials where I could see a list of people and say, oh, that's what it said. That's why I picked her.

Ryan: 00:52:45

Is that when you got in contact with her was.

Peter: 00:52:48

Yeah.

Ryan: 00:52:49

Power of awareness.

Peter: 00:52:50

Yeah. So I know what it looks like, but I don't know how to tell you to find it.

Ryan: 00:52:55

Sure. Yeah.

Peter: 00:52:56

That's very frustrating.

Ryan: 00:53:00

It is. The crux of the paths is either being your own best teacher or I think discernment is the key.

Peter: 00:53:08

How. This is the. This is the so frustrating part that I'm very frustrated with, trying to say, this is what you need to do.

And it's like, I can't tell you how to do it.

Ryan: 00:53:19

Yeah.

Peter: 00:53:20

I mean, it's true. I have no doubt that what I'm saying is true. You need to find a reliable teacher. I mean, not that you can't do it on your own.

Ryan: 00:53:32

Right.

Peter: 00:53:33

So how do you learn how to. How do you. Okay, I guess I gotta plug. I'm gonna plug my. The programs I've attended, because this is the path that I've been on.

Ryan: 00:53:41

Sure.

Peter: 00:53:41

So I'm gonna plug. It doesn't mean that. It doesn't mean it's gonna work for you.

Like, for me, going to MMTCP with Jack and Tara worked for me very well, but it's very circumstantial.

Ryan: 00:53:55

Right.

Peter: 00:53:56

So in the end, I genuinely feel like as a teacher, I am a direct product of Jack's teaching towers teaching. Because there. I know there are things that they've taught that I've completely internalized. Like, I would. That is absolutely correct.

Ryan: 00:54:11

You were studying their work before the class.

Peter: 00:54:13

I was familiar. I wasn't studying it. I mean. Well, I mean, they're. They're prolific.

Ryan: 00:54:18

Right.

Peter: 00:54:19

Teachers, and so they have a lot of content out there. So, yeah, I was. Had a lot of contact with their content. Yeah. And I was aligned with, you know, the way they were doing things.

But I remember going in think, like a lot of people, like, oh, I want to become Jack's student, or I want to become terrorist. I was like, yeah, I don't know.

You know, and then coming out, as I was talking to my wife the other day about my intentions for teaching, I was like, oh, that's exactly what Tara teaches. Like, oh, I really internalize that. She's absolutely right.

Ryan: 00:54:52

Yeah.

Peter: 00:54:53

You know, but that's not the only way to be a good teacher. And that's the only. Not the only way to be a good self. Guide. And that's the point. That. Right. I'm trying to be a little helpful.

It's like, how can I help someone point, point someone in the right direction? All I can do is say if you invest in mmtcp, you might find it's. But that's hardly. I guess you, you have to go on a tasting adventure.

And, and certainly I'm mad. I have done that. I have listened to many teachers, but even that didn't help me choose Jack and Tara. I got there by serendipity.

Ryan: 00:55:36

Yeah.

Peter: 00:55:38

So which sucks. I mean it sucks in terms of wanting to help people. Like, oh, I got there by serendipity. Well, that's totally useless.

Like how can, how can you re right, we want. What's it called? Repeatability. Yeah, right.

Ryan: 00:55:54

Maybe, maybe it is the taste testing. Maybe it's the taste testing that brings.

Peter: 00:56:01

Things into a line. Sorry, my apologies.

Ryan: 00:56:07

Maybe it is Peter.

Yeah, I mean, I think that, I mean it's my perception, Belief, faith that knocking the door shall open that earnest seekers following their intuition will be brought to where they're supposed to be. Whether that's a traditional pathway or a more organic or intuitive pathway.

That wherever you're brought, if you're, if you're being discerning and open minded and an earnest, honest seeker that you will find.

Peter: 00:56:47

And yeah, and I do agree that trust in your path and trust in your inner wisdom is essential. Like if I didn't do that, I wouldn't have followed this path exactly. Like I absolutely trusted where I was going.

Which is different from trusting whatever you read or trusting whoever you hear.

Ryan: 00:57:09

Yes, absolutely.

And I think that that may be where the discernment comes with the, you know, the critique of the traditionalist who is concerned that just doing whatever you want and listening to whoever and you know, blending all this stuff creates havoc on the path.

But I think the universalist perspective is, is that understanding that if you are listening to that inner wisdom and that inner guidance, that you will find the right way.

Peter: 00:57:40

So, okay, so now I can add something concrete. So yes, do, do your investigation, do your exploration, listen to your inner wisdom. When it resonates with you deeply, that's the right way for you.

And it doesn't mean it's a permanent way.

Ryan: 00:57:56

Right.

Peter: 00:57:56

It's just that's the next step to take and keep on listening. And when you have another turn, you take that turn. Don't just stay on the path because I said I was going to do this.

On the other hand, here's where the discernment comes in, make sure that the content or the teacher is not playing on your conditioning.

Ryan: 00:58:16

Sure.

Peter: 00:58:17

If you, if you are moved by a sense of guilt or fear or obligation or short should or I want to do the best. All of these things are different from your inner wisdom and your true heart. And that's, that's the best we can do.

I mean trying to tell you how like what your inner wisdom sounds like that's on you. I'm afraid that's, that's the, that's the tough part.

Ryan: 00:58:44

Yeah.

Peter: 00:58:44

Yeah.

Ryan: 00:58:45

So perennialism. Thanks for this discussion. This was fun. Was interesting to kind of explore those two different avenues, I guess.

Until next time, thanks for listening.

Peter: 00:58:58

See you then. Bye bye. Thank you for listening to the Tracking Wisdom Podcast. Join us next time as we continue the discussion.

Don't forget to follow us on Facebook, Instagram and YouTube and visit www.ethstudio.com for more information and content.