Fountain of ecstasy

G David Kendrick�s Fountain of Ecstasy � a review by Gregory P. Torre

 

I can start out by saying the book emphasizes the naturalistic or Buddhist, depending on your chosen point of view, outlook of continuity of all things�one moment giving rise to the next. Naturalistic concepts in the book support the Buddhist concepts regarding dharma, the underlying elemental force of existence.

Through the vehicle of the continuity of all things the Buddhist is able to subjectively engage his faith on a personal level. That is he or she is able to put themselves personally into communion with the larger picture, stepping aside from individual interests and concerns of the day, and transcending earthly circumstances.

It might be said at this point that that is what drug induced highs accomplish. And that is true particularly for marijuana, however, the point the book tries to emphasize is not the physical experience, but the experience of personal relevance, personal interaction with a religion. For the Muslim faith, conversely, all other things aside, it is the sound of the human voice calling to prayers that squares religion into the social context of everyday life. The call to prayers takes the individual out of his personal daily angst and delivers him into the world of the community, the world of the culture, his civilization, and the realm of God. Likewise, communion with the Holy Spirit is meant to take Christians away to the world of the good, the holy, the conscientious, and the righteous. The Holy Spirit serves as the vehicle to make Christian spirituality a tangible experience through which the individual interacts with faith on a personal level.

One featured hero of the book is the mill operator Mel. Mel is one of the unsung, unrecognized bodhisattvas that make life interesting and bearable under conditions of continuing duress. Mel survives in what to us is an alien world, a world of Mississippi poverty, seedy characters, rubber, and rubber processes. But in whatever world you would find him, or countless other bodhisattvas like him placed in our earthly realm, you�d still find him providing relief; comic, emotional, or spiritual, from the daily rut and tension of life. Here again, bodhisattva is a Buddhist concept. Unfortunately, there is no equivalent in western thought other than something like, �he�s a nice guy who is everyone�s friend and always seems to make the day seem brighter.�

Those things said; are there little Buddhist nuances to be gleaned from the text meant to sway or even to convert someone to the Buddhist persuasion? No, and further, the purpose of the book is not to denigrate western culture or even to show how western culture could benefit from certain eastern influences. As advertised, the book provides a �compendium of transcendent states� � Buddhist and otherwise � although these are woven into the text making them difficult to distinguish. Which leads to the question, is the book an ambitious attempt to go beyond varieties of religious experience to varieties of spiritual experience? Maybe.

The central postulate of the entire presentation, however, is glossed over fleetingly as the author very briefly presents, �the ultimate truth.� The ultimate truth has to do with all things being delicate and fragile as babes, a fact easy enough to accept in light of environmental issues. The central postulate, however, goes much deeper. It could give way to hours or pages of rumination.

The ultimate face-off of the universe � or universes, since Kendrick doesn�t limit himself to the existence of just one universe � will be conscious omniscience, alternatively referred to as cosmic consciousness, confronting non-conscious omnipotence. Non-conscious omnipotence will be the winner.

In other words, through technology mankind has usurped nature and developed a cosmic consciousness that reflects the dualistic reality, published first by ancient Greeks, but confused and confounded by various doctrines through time. The world of the mind of men - the idea world that presses cultures of all organisms into compliance with man�s dominance of the planet - has created a cosmic omniscience completely divorced from physical constraints. It is beyond a state of matter � but requires the matter of the brain for its propagation. Not one brain, but a cacophony of brains, the sum total being more than its parts.

�Omniscient� is limited, however, to the present state of possible knowledge and our ability to in some way appreciate it � through art, music, or raw ideas. This cosmic consciousness hurtles forward in starts and fits, to good ends and bad. It is cultural. It is made-up. It is real, but it is not reality in the sense that it is not derived from a logical progression of mechanically sound constructs, the way, for instance, that progress of a chemical reaction is real.

The forward thrust of our technological culture propels us to try to impose our consciousness throughout the solar system, and one can assume the galaxy, then our universe. Does man hope one day to be able to micromanage the universe? The evidence from the surroundings described in the book indicate man doesn�t seem to be doing such a great job here on earth. Maybe it would be better to leave it all to the non�conscious omnipotence in control before mankind ever happened.

In control before! How can we be so sure? The author tells us, sort-of. Order exists throughout everything we perceive. This may be due to the fact that being limited by technology, we perceive only order. Or, it is due to a force of order actually existing and allying all to its volition. Everywhere we look with our technology things prove orderly. Where did order come from? We�re pretty sure it�s real. How did order gain dominion over our universe?

Non-consciousness omnipotence, then, is a real force of nature, one that has produced all the beauty and harmony of our world and our universe. The goodness of this force, seeking harmony and precision in all things, is self evident.

We might at first protest . . . everything follows rules and laws; an underlying force has nothing to do with it, that�s just the way things are. Well, Kendrick says, consciousness exists. It doesn�t always follow rules. Most of the time cultural assertions and political realities fly in the face of rules and logic. Consciousness appears governed more by emotions. Emotions follow rules, true, it�s when those emotions get interpreted in unstable human consciousness that everything falls apart.

Disorder and chaos have always reigned in human thought. Here the author doesn�t tell us. We�re left to our own devices � such as history and literature � to figure it out. So we�re dragged along in one of the long boats from the Pequod, with Captain Ahab, inexorably pulled toward our own doom by the mad obsessions of our culture, allowed to feel, but not to think. We are after all, animals. Consciousness descended from animals, honestly . . . and, I�m not saying that just because I�m human. Truly, consciousness is overrated; just ask any highly evolved plant.

I hope I�ve made the point - disorder and chaos can and does exist within an outwardly functioning, seemingly rational system � human consciousness, i.e. the omniscient cosmic consciousness. Could such a power control some distant universe or part of this one? Why not, isn�t that ultimately what mankind seems to desire? A universe doesn�t have to follow the rules our predisposition and prejudices say it should. In fact, if we look into any unplanned explosion, chaos and disorder would be the expected, the rule . . . odds seem to favor the absence of order.

Ultimately, these two forces collide. The force for good in Fountain of Ecstasy is the non-conscious omnipotence. This is a force that is mechanically in control of all things, creating great harmony � without ever having to give a thought to any of it. The dichotomy between good and evil is predicated on good being independent of evil. How far cosmic consciousness goes before finally being subdued by non-conscious omnipotence will depend upon how well it can come to know and technologically control every aspect of the heavens.

This central postulate is glossed over, as I said, which leaves plenty to discuss concerning the rest of the book. From the standpoint of being a literary enterprise, the book is no less ambitious. Unfortunately, I have a general lack of knowledge in the area of what it takes to cultivate an intellect. It seems to me, never-the-less, Kendrick experiments with a methodology for bringing difficult concepts into understanding. Verbalizing, putting concepts into words, in a way that can be readily apprehended is what he explores. From this, he proposes that to the extent the apprehending mind is pre-cognitively �set� with an expectation for understanding, the verbalizing is facilitated. And, in fact, that sounds like something the psychologists have already established.

Kendrick�s experimental approach may be what is different. Humor or the expectation for humor sets the mind to a cognitive attitude of openness and readiness to pursue a line of thought that may be, itself, complicated and anything but set. Perhaps, the best illustration can be had by looking at the converse situation. A strictly logical exercise, such as this writing, wants only to proceed in an ordered progression. The apprehending mind is analytical. It is not ready, or willing, to be imposed upon by a sudden contradiction or incongruity. For example, in focused meetings or serious discussions an interposed funny remark often goes by unnoticed by some and unappreciated by others who do catch on. The interposed remark detracts from the train of thought. A mind anticipating humor, on the other hand, is predisposed to bounce off in any of a multitude of incongruous directions. Such a mind is not following a �train,� of momentum and direction. The best teachers, not surprisingly, intersperse humor into their lesson plans. Open minds more readily respond, learn, and tie new learning into greater numbers of associations making it more readily assimilated.

So, Fountain of Ecstasy, while not intended to be humorous, tries, never-the-less, to predispose the reading mind toward a humorous �set.� In fact, the main character of the book, Killap Moley, is intended to be portrayed like Raskolnikov in Dostoevsky�s Crime and Punishment as easily contemptible and comic in a tragic sense. The character is an otherwise intelligent young man who commits lewd, antisocial acts of passion and recklessness�which are comical. He has lived a disordered life hinged on preposterous emotional insecurities and, tragically, has never endeavored to move beyond the alleyway persona into which circumstances and a deprived environment apparently thrust him as a child. Kendrick�s hope, apparently, is that the complex and difficult concepts to be understood, juxtaposing ideas used to lay out a plan and a format for discovering the proof of God, will be more easily apprehended. There are a number of twists and turns to the process which, hopefully, the open mind is ready to follow while the analytical mind follows along taking notes.

While all of that is going on, Kendrick makes a point of attempting to show how modern man, after 50 thousand years, appears to be heading down the same road taken by Neanderthal man over the course of 250 thousand years, but doing it on a higher intellectual level. Could it be that Neanderthal, with his larger brain, was really the more advanced variety after all?

Our ancestors of one thousand generations ago would probably be appalled at the point to which we�ve come. More and more we are becoming everything like the trolls they abhorred. The culture of the spirit world�the culture that made Homo sapiens different from Homo neanderthalis�is the world that made humans truly human. The joys and sorrows of the adult Neanderthal were likely mostly stoic, almost ritualistic. In contrast, for our Sapiens ancestors every day was Halloween. Every day was a day to get painted-up, dressed-up in some weird costume, and act out some imaginary fantasy. By fantasy I don�t mean some perversion, a guy who buys ten acres, two horses, and a cow, after all, is probably acting out some kind of ranch fantasy.

Yet now, what do you call a culture that tells us there is no God and decries the fact that over half of us believe in UFO�s, ghosts, and spirits? The same culture wants us to live as predatory beings in a world obsessed with stark reality, goal oriented work, and the rationally delineated pursuit of well being . . . even if it is totally unnecessary for our own personal survival. So that a large proportion of our fellows stalk through ten to twelve hour days, six or seven days a week, in a spiritless existence of narrowly focused striving. Focused on what? On getting more, focused on beating the competition, on taking more from consumers while eliminating more employees.

Can you call it a Technological-Corporate-Media Enterprise, or Military-Industrial Complex? Islam calls it the Devil. Neanderthal is probably most appropriate. And what do you call a hardcore fact based approach to reality�one which leaves nothing to the imagination? Since pornographic rationalism may go a bit too far, again Neanderthal is probably most appropriate. But, this presents a paradox. Technological culture is completely divorced from the natural world, yet Neanderthal culture was so much a part of nature that culture barely existed � and that�s the connection in a nutshell.

I can�t just say that technological culture is divorced from the natural world, dismiss it as fact, and walk away. No questioning mind is going to be comfortable with that. So what am I saying? Absolute zero is a theoretical fact that can be pursued with tangible results even though it is something which may never exist. Technological culture would call absolute zero a natural phenomenon. But you and I do not call absolute zero a natural phenomenon and never will.

How else do Neanderthal and technological man come together? While it may be proven that we humans bear no genetic traits indicating that we are descended directly from the Neanderthal, we should not be so quick as to divorce ourselves from his heritage. As pointed out in the book and elsewhere, cultural evolution has usurped physical evolution in the progress of getting to where the human race is. The culture of the Neanderthal is still with us, as is the culture of many other species not of our lineage. Just look what we have learned or adopted from them: fire and cooking, the club and spear, stone tools and implements, hunting skills, clothing and body decoration, music and art, burial, forms of communication, religion, tribal bonding and many more intangibles, no doubt.

So where is technology taking cultural evolution today? Kendrick sees us headed forward into the culture of the Neanderthal, the dull culture where if a man sticks his hand into the hollow of a tree to catch a possum and pulls it out with a piece of a finger missing, no one will consider the situation funny. It is easy to get carried away on the subject.

The book is titled, Fountain of Ecstasy. One public relations release for the book calls it, �a compendium of transcendent states,� as I mentioned at the outset. What purpose does it serve, to be led around bumping into various spiritual experiences and what are they? They seem to be instances designed to elicit Herbert Benson�s, �relaxation response.� Perhaps they�re intended for the purpose of holding the readers� interest.

After all, the plot is weak. It ambles about with the protagonist trying to solve a problem he interprets as more scientific than technological. In fact, the plot highlights another of Kendrick�s ambitious agendas � this one wants to show how science is good, technology is bad. How do transcendent states fit into good science? I donno, it seems scientists arrive at epiphanies, technologists arrive at hard fact explanations.

Looking at Kendrick�s presentation advocating immortality of Jesus and the s�ance analogy for the Catholic Church service, I was struck by the fact that I�d never been exposed to the ideas before. Either I had been really lacking in my education and reading or Kendrick was giving us something totally new which was, at the same time, very old, but nowhere in our awareness � or at least in mine.

There is a popular television series called What the Ancients Knew. The scenario developed in the book for the earthly immortality of Jesus is something that Jesus knew as did the first Christians, apparently. But it can�t be said that �the ancients knew� of these things. Nowhere else is there any individual, group, or organization that has achieved what has been achieved for Jesus. It is something which all our so-called advanced science has not caught-up with yet; and raises the question, was Jesus really from some advanced society sent back in time? Let me review the area of study before going on.

More and more scientists are beginning to understand and explain the great knowledge behind such discoveries as Antikythera Mechanism, first discovered in 1900 with the remains of an ancient shipwreck. The device is believed to have been built some time between 65 and 100 BC. Only now, after 100 years, have researchers made progress in reconstructing and understanding how this technologically advanced device worked to predict solar and lunar eclipses and track astrologically auspicious occasions. The lost art of Egyptian mummification is, likewise, and example of knowledge of developed sciences known by the ancients but not yet cognizant in modern times.

If we look at the topic of s�ance what we find is that today it is a realm more closely associated with entertainment. No one seems to take research in the area seriously - except in terms of capitalizing on the mystery and excitement associated with something seeming, to the modern mind, as taboo as conjuring up the dead. The internet is full of s�ance �how to� offerings full of hocus pocus, electronic smoke and mirrors, and dire warnings of unsuspected outcomes found on sites such as that of ehow.com, soyouwanna.com, and others.

A great deal of the objective scientific research, such as that of Harry Price in his famous Laboratory of Psychial Research, aimed more at exposing frauds than in conducting inquiries into understanding. In those studies and others since, the scientific methods employed have almost always isolated the medium � the person conducting the s�ance � from the participants using blind and double blind experimental techniques. It seems almost as if a skeptical outlook is a prerequisite to any serious study.

Either Jesus knew something others did not or he and the early christians, immersed in a less scientific more spiritual age, did not have the psychic phobias and did not approach s�ance with the skepticism that we do today. What they knew is obvious, is hiding in plain sight, but, nevertheless, was left for Kendrick to rediscover.

Consider those things needed for immortality. If you want to be immortal, you�ll have to continue on in body, mind, spirit, and most importantly, consciousness (humans really have such a thing for consciousness, they won�t consider you �really� immortal unless you have it). Jesus attains all of these requirements through the Catholic Church s�ance.

In that service there is first a trained medium, the priest, a prerequisite as you found from the internet if you have bothered to check. The medium is necessary for several reasons, but most importantly because he is consistent and knowledgeable in knowing who Jesus is. Like a conductor who carries in mind his translation of a melody from the Nutcracker, he also knows the notes from the score, unlike everyone else, non-musicians, who carry their own individual versions of the melody which may or may not match the reality of the music.

The medium reads from the Bible, conjuring-up the mind of Jesus and bringing it into the collective mind of himself and the assembled. He next performs for the audience his dance of metaphors. He prepares and offers to the assembled the body of Jesus in the form of bread and the blood in the form of wine. He is suggesting, indeed declaring, that he and the assembled are now the body of Christ with the mind of Christ. The blood is a metaphor for the spirit, the boundary or connection between mind and body. The priest and congregation now transcend their earthly presence � they are collectively body and mind with the spirit of Jesus � in an ecstatic state. The priest steps forward to give a sermon from above � his consciousness becomes the resurrected consciousness of Jesus.

Jesus achieves immortality and is kept alive mind, body, spirit, and consciousness; all propagated through the actions of his followers. So where are the other ancients that have performed a similar achievement? I cannot think of any. Whether Jesus is a God on a supernatural level or not is not something Kendrick chooses to speculate upon. Such speculation would not be consistent with a scientific investigation (Moley is conducting one for Junior). But if you define a true God as someone who is immortal � Jesus qualifies.

If there is a science of how maintain readers� interest � and I�m sure there probably is but I�m not aware of it � then suspense, intrigue, action, horror, and curiosity must figure greatly into it. But transcendent states! Maybe this says something more about the author.

As far as holding the readers� interest, that doesn�t fly. A few of those �states� were easily recognized, but overall I couldn�t tell where they were, how many there were, and I didn�t experience any kind of emotional release. Maybe Kendrick did.

For instance, instead of going along and every now and then getting a shot of adrenalin rush, this author needs the occasional fix of alpha wave infatuation. He craves new vistas . . . the meditative bliss of peaks into unexplored realms. His thrill may be like that of an archaeologist removing the first brick into an unviewed chamber. Or, he�s like the pothead, addicted psychologically, if not physically.

Such an addiction could stem from a lifetime spent gathering insights into the new and undiscovered � even if those revelations occurred in a world as alien as the rubber industry. At the very end, he infers his subjects, and his agendas discussed above, to have been treated as by an outsider�s objective analysis, but, in fact, he treats them dispassionately. We are left to conclude that Kendrick is not really interested in cosmic consciousness, science, or how to communicate knotty propositions � what he�s really interested in is getting high.

Did I mention ambition? Kendrick seeks to provide a scientific proof of the existence of God. He definitely provides several different frameworks for a convincing proof. And, see for yourself, a couple of rationally solid proofs including the one above.

You decide. In any event, the book provides something of a service. It addresses consumerism and what living a life constantly being told what you need more-of does to the psyche of the people. While the characters, each in their own way, fend-off brainwashing, scheming corporate governments, and the influences of endless marketing campaigns the subtle effects, as feelings of inferiority, obsessions with personal appearance, sex, perceived standard of living, desire for riches, and impulsive behavior leading to violence or crime, eat away their integrity. Having missed the lives that could have been, and having been molded into lives filled with the current fashion and fad, one can easily assume the characters eventually will evolve personally into melancholy and sentimentality when they finally turn-off the radio, TV, or computer and put down the newspaper, magazines, and book reviews.