Another Argument for Syncretism

During the Shift, syncretism – the idea of appreciating the value of and commonality between many different spiritual traditions -- will become increasingly important especially as it relates to the idea of moving away from dualistic thinking. But sometimes syncretism is seen as a kind of spiritual mush, a feel-good amalgam of different spiritual traditions that radiates the idea that “it’s all good” but fails to make useful distinctions. Also sometimes we see critiques of its close cousin, so-called “cafeteria spirituality” which some see as either a kind of indulgence, a symptom of the inability to commit, or a kind of butterfly-hopping faddism.

But where can true syncretism take us? We’ve done a lot of work on this topic at the Emergence Project and Annette and I have studied and experimented with many different spiritual paths. One of my litmus tests for a worthy spiritual teacher has always been the degree to which they were willing to acknowledge the importance of other paths. The first guru I was associated with, Sri Chinmoy, had a strong message of syncretism and stressed the importance of honoring different paths. Paramahansa Yogananda is another great teacher falling into this category.

My own path started out with a practice involving Sri Chinmoy and Swami Rudrananda, the path of devotion and surrender and heart-practice. In a different phase of life, I began to study Buddhism through the work of the Tibetan master Chogyam Trungpa. Then as I began to take up the body-centered practice of Tai Chi, the focus shifted to Taoism. Today all three of these still remain very important aspects of my spiritual path. I think of them as three pillars in support of the unification of body (Taoism) heart (the Vedic tradition) and mind (Buddhism). I feel my spiritual practice would be greatly diminished if any one of them were not present.