Proposal

 

I ground into forest chaplaincy as an activism with a theoretical lens in sociology of religion. The aim of this project is to hold space for a forest chapel, with a consideration of ritual studies. Ethnography of forest chaplaincy is ment to hold space for anthropology and social change.

​

The foundational premise of this research is to consider the social body, upon the process of subtilization and the cognitive world. From Nancy Scheper-Hughes and Margaret M. Lock’s (1987) “The Mindful Body: A Prolegomenon to Future Work in Medical Anthropology,” the conception of the “three bodies” (body politic, social body, and the individual body-self) has allowed me to consider the process of socialization and ritualization that is within the theoretical lens brought by Peter L. Berger (1967) and Catherine Bell (1992). Berger illuminates the process of socialization, which lends Bell's illumination into the process of ritualization. In The Sacred Canopy, Peter L. Berger (1967) offers an argument that is meant to have a modest aim, as an exercise in sociological theorizing of religion. In Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice, Catherine Bell (1992) offers a framework that reveals the production of a ritualized social agent.

​

 Scheper-Hughes and Lock (1987) describe the social body as a natural symbol for thinking about relationships among nature, society, and culture. “Symbolic and structuralist anthropologists have demonstrated the extent to which humans find the body ‘good to think with.’ The human organism and the natural products of blood, milk, tears, semen, and excreta may be used as a cognitive map” (1987, 19). Scheper-Hughes and Lock offer a prolegomenon for anthropology that toggles well with a sociological lens of religion and ritual studies. This prolegomenon also offers an ethno-epistemology “to court a Cartesian anxiety—the fear that in the absence of a sure, objective foundation for knowledge we would fall into the void, into the chaos of absolute relativism and subjectivity” (1987, 30). The significance of acknowledging the objective world, the cognitive world, and the subjective world, allocates space for enlightenment.

​

Berger (1967) explores how the sociality of the human is necessary, though the social world forms a duplication of consciousness, in terms of its socialized and non-socialized components. Berger does not propose a sociological definition of religion, while instead he “operates with what he considers the conventional conception of the phenomenon common to the history of religion” (1967, vi). Illumination brought by Berger is that consciousness proceeds socialization and that socialization is always partial. When consciousness internalizes the social world, it produces “dialectical tensions between identity as socially assigned and identity as subjectively appropriated. The consequence is a setting aside, congealing or estranging, one part of consciousness as against the rest. Put differently, internalization entails self-objectivation” (1967, 83). The experience of socialization is gradually sorted out upon a dialectical character, with two elements producing each other.

​

Society is seen as a dialectic phenomenon, in which society is a human product yet continuously acts back upon its producer. “That is, a part of the self becomes objectivated, not just to others but to itself, as a set of representations of the social world-a "social self," which is and remains in a state of uneasy accommodation with the non-social self-consciousness upon which it has been imposed” (1967, 83-4). Dharma traditions can appreciate sociology for drawing attention to feedback loops enforced upon sociality, to realize more about saṃsāra in relation to process of subtilization through the social body. “It is important to emphasize that this estrangement is given in the sociality of man, in other words, that it is anthropologically necessary” (1967, 84). To have more awareness about embodiment does seem to alleviate the suffering of the never-ending and ongoing turmoil of the human condition.

​

Bell (1992) does seem to illuminate where Berger may have obscured our connection to the social body, appealing to this basic feature of ritual in describing its role in socialization. “Socialization cannot be anything less than the acquisition of schemes that can potentially restructure and renuance both self and society” (Bell 1992, 216). The domains of ritual not only provide a fuller theoretical basis for comprehending complex social transactions in ritualized activities as well as providing clarity into transformation of the self and society.

Ritual is represented as a means to understand the natural process of transformation, and potentially the means to face the human condition, not necessarily as a means in socialization. “As a "discursive practice," ritual activity concerns knowledge (ritual mastery) that is "reproduced through practices made possible by the framing assumptions of that knowledge"” (Bell 1992, 216). The intention is to consider the effect of the ritual on the social body, as well as to consider how spiritual masters are influenced in ritualization and by their accomplishments, rather than to suggest that a ritual is a part of society or that ritual activity resolves socialization. “The practical knowledge that emerges by and through ritualization, what I have referred to as ritual mastery or the sense of ritual, which structures and fixes meanings in historical forms, is an "accomplishment of power"'” (ibid.). The private contemplative domain of ritual may be somewhat obscured by ritual studies, unless there is deeper self-reflexivity and potential auto-ethnography in the study, while also reflecting on ritual and power.

​

A ritual studies lens brought by Bell (1992) is being applied within how modern science is learning how to study and integrate Dharma traditions, which proves to be illuminating. In “Introduction to “Cognitive Science and the Study of Yoga and Tantra”,” Glen Alexander Hayes and Sthaneshwar Timalsina (2017) explore essays about Tantric language, as a means to lay a found for the need of a disciplinary dialogue between cognitive science and contemplative practices. “There are fundamental philosophical differences between Mahayana Buddhist and Saiva Sakta Tantric practices. Nevertheless, numerous deities, mandalas, mantras, and rituals that are commonly shared demonstrate a cultural fluidity in which Tantric Saivism and Vajrayana Buddhism evolved” (Hayes and Timalsina 2017, 6). With this in mind, Hayes and Timalsina focus on an essay by Richard K. Payne, in which Payne engages Buddhist Tantric ritual for an understanding of “ritual syntax.” 

​

With their history in pan-Indian culture, rituals are central to temple religion and can be publicly performed. “Payne makes a distinction between the ritual domain and syntax by observing that rituals are often modeled on ordinary activities, producing some form of motivation” (Hayes and Timalsina 2017, 6). In this analysis, one may attune to cognition as operating at the intersection of body, mind, and the environment, rather than as exclusively to the objective world, mental objects and operations. “By borrowing Catherine Bell’s conception of ritualization, Payne concludes in his paper that the dichotomy between the mind and the body can be avoided, and he uses ritual homa as an example of the intersection between the mental and physical” (ibid). Ritual studies thus have been enlightening on how one could view the world other than through a Cartesian dualism, further pointing to the social body, or the subtle body.

​

Scheper-Hughes and Lock suggest that we are “[t]o do otherwise, using a radically different metaphysics, would imply the "unmaking" of our own assumptive world and its culture-bound definitions of reality” (1987, 30). I have come to find deep reverence and resonance with this practice and connection, which allows for sacrality of daily life and deeper awareness of transformation within embodiment. All of my vulnerabilities tend to be met well in the Tantric worldview, with deep purpose and an offering of contemplative practices, where I am an activist for forest chaplaincy. To lean in with an ethnography of forest chaplaincy implies a radical act for social change, while to establish and cultivate an open space for a forest chapel feels to be up to the local environment and potential of the social body. 

​

In terms of the gifts and beliefs that I bring to the work of spiritual care and network of chaplaincy, I bring an extraverted intuition and am keen to feminine theology. I sense that this extraverted intuition brings an openness to multiple spiritual and wisdom traditions, while having a sense of oneness. With the Devī Gītā, C. Mackenzie Brown (1998) examines the message of universal energy (Śākti), as the Great Goddess (Maha Devī). The “relationship of the Devī’s aspect as the supreme feminine principle of the universe to the fundamental masculine principle, a relation usually expressed in terms of the interaction between Śakta and Śiva” (1998, 22). The two-fold dynamic relationship is viewed here to draw attention to both creation and liberation.

​

“The relationship may be one of dependency or codependency (in the strict meaning of the term), or it may be one of radical independence, or something in between. Tantra in general presupposes a bipolar view of ultimate reality, of the One unfolding into Two as the God and Goddess, associated with various other complementary opposites such as spirit and matter, consciousness and energy, passivity and activity. Both creation and liberation are seen as the result of the union or reunion of the two co-ultimate principles/deities” (ibid).
 

Whereby, Brown highlights the purification and transformation of the body are very important as a means for the old body to dissolve and for the body to become infused with divine breath.

​

My personal vulnerabilities are womanhood and being a woman, as well as residing in the forest and really only holding the capacity to live in rural areas. The function of wilderness contact is acknowledged in Rita Sherma’s (2026) “On Ecopsychology and Biophilia.” “The mountains and forests were also claimed by the hermit’s abode, the guru’s ashram, and the many wandering ascetics who hoped to find realization in a darkened cave, or under a green canopy. Hindu sages (ṛṣis) left towns and villages and sought realization and wisdom in nature propelled by the intuition that the natural world provided the most suitable environment for communion with the Divine” (2026, 15). For this project, that is to adhere to forest living and feminine theology, I am considering more into sociology. and ritual studies, as a means to recognize the process of subtilization, which I theorize is experienced in the individual and the Divine.

​

Overall, the ultimate objective is to look to sustain ethnographic fieldwork and ways to continually develop and use questions as the transforming force for a forest chapel. This circulation is to be maintained by ritualization, as well as considering my place within the social world that appears as the cognitive world. Thus, I am to participate in ritual activities, while I am to maintain an understanding of my part in the world. While in the position of working with grief and bereavement, advocating for retreat and restoration, it may not be the place for direct and formal ethnography. It does seem that ritual studies can illuminate the temple rituals that are publicly performed, while I suspect I will be slow to conduct formal ethnographic interviews in the space as a chaplain. Although chaplaincy occupies the place of estrangement, that is a curious space within society, in which an ethnographer would naturally wish to document ritual practice, this process will require tremendous patience, care and consideration into shared values.

​

With consideration of the anthropological conception of the three bodies, which I suspect has ontological roots in ancient philosophy found in Dharma traditions, I quest into the area of the social body (and cognitive world) that is a micro-reflection of the Divine, while the individual-body self (and subjective world) is in a feedback with the body politic (and objective world). The contemporary purpose of my ethnography, within forest chaplaincy as an activism, is to hold space for Dharma traditions within media production as well as consider the ritual studies of Tantras that enlighten us of the process of sublitization. 

​

 The reason for understanding a social body is to consider psychological values that orient a circle, to be healthy and sustainable, as a microcosm of the microcosm, which sustains and brings health to the shared cognitive world. Self-reflexivity has been a means to document practice and enact ritual in relation to my own personal set of yoga studies, within a self-study of how a woman can attain forestry within the outer edges of society or within many layers of micro-societies. Berger would like to consider the outer edges of society as a place of estrangement, while Bell might recognize how within many layers of micro-societies a woman may embody an entrancement. The contemporary purpose of my ethnography, within forest chaplaincy as an activism, is to hold space for Dharma traditions within media production as well as consider the ritual studies of Tantras that enlighten us of the process of sublitization. 

​

These roots present themselves in the Tantras, while building from Vedanta Sūtra knowledge in Hindu philosophy, Buddhabhūmi-sūtra and Madhyāntavibhāgakārikā of Mahāyāna Buddhism, and the Jaina Doctrine Of Karma—vis-à-vis the anatomy and process of the body system. Vedanta Sūtra brings forth three bodies in Yoga philosophy, sthula-sukṣma-karaṇa-sarira, as casual, subtle, and gross body. Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra offers an early conception for a three body theory, while Mahāyāna-sūtrālamkāra signified how the threefold function or "fluctuations" (vṛṭṭi) within the singular Dharma realm of the Buddhas, encapsulated by Dharmakaya (Truth Body), Sambhogakaya (Enjoyment Body), and Nirmāṇakāya (Emanation Body). Jainism also has a concept of the three bodies that is a fundamental aspect of the philosophy, known as the audarik body, tejas body, and karma body.

​

The shared assumption between these traditions is that the body system is a singular source of function, which is the individuate, while the recognition of this individuation is actualized through the realization of the aggregate. The individual-body self sees itself in the body politic, finding obstacles and experiencing challenges, where the sthula sarira (causal body) finds and experiences the karaṇa-sarira (gross body). A healthy social body or sukṣma-sarira (subtle body) is required for the individuate to realize the aggregate. Within Hindu philosophy, when the physical body which is of  the karaṇa-sarira perishes, the energy carried by the sthula sarira (causal body) also falls away with the objective world, while the karaṇa-sarira moves on its own and yet remains as a micro-reflection of the Divine. 

​

In Jainism, the audarik body is the physical body, which is what perishes. The tejas body is responsible for managing the body systems, su pported by prana energy, while the karma body is the invisible body that contains karma and is always in union with the soul, which is maintained until the soul attains emancipation. These bodies are integral to the understanding of the soul's journey and the cycle of rebirth, the union of the karma body and tejas body is referred to as the subtle body; the liberation of the soul involves getting freedom from the imprisonment by these two bodies. Thus, one could say that the body politic is the work of the audarik body like the gross body of Vedanta philosophy, while the liberating process of subtilization occurs once the social body and the individual-body self are in union.

In Mahāyāna buddhology, or the theology of Buddhahood, the concept of the three bodies posits that a Buddha has three types of kayas or "bodies", aspects, or ways of being, each representing a different facet or embodiment of Buddhahood. The three are the Dharmakāya (Dharma body, the ultimate reality, the Buddha nature of all things), the Sambhogakāya (the body of self-enjoyment, a blissful divine body with infinite forms and powers) and the Nirmāṇakāya (manifestation body, the body which appears in the everyday world and presents the semblance of a human body). These bodies are not separate realities, while they are functions that circulate within a single state of Buddhahood.

When considering holding space for the process of subtilization, the Dharma body may be similar or the same (for a liberated jiva) as tejas body and the karma body unite in Jaina and as the subtle body in Vedanta philosophy, while the Sambhogakāya may be as the tejas body or casual body. Thus, to consider holding space for the many Dharma traditions, it is interesting to take note where areas of socialization and ritualization may be shared by the many traditions and how this sharing can be the source of communion within a forest chapel. My original in-take on forestry was from a Western standpoint that looked to consider how socialization is improved or advanced through right action, which was the way to hold space for estrangement and alienation. While now that I have been living more in the forest, I look to not fill a void in which I am the messiah to do so, but rather, knowing where I find joy and where I wish to take part in ministerial work. 

​

The choice to facilitate space for a forest chapel, with a media lab, is based on my own process of subtilization and aim to hold space for liberation through social change and personal growth. To consider how union with the self and the social is the only way to experience ultimate reality and self-enjoyment is where an activism of forest chaplaincy could hold space for Dharma traditions. Since chaplaincy is now about meaning-making in the world, what psychological values can help us sustain a healthy cognitive world and social body? If the radical reformation brought by the Buddha is the awakening of the meaning crisis, where is the making in the following moment? These questions are meant to facilitate space for the studies and arts that make up the contemplation that will be necessary for a forest chapel to sustain healthily. 

​

This ministerial organization will require spiritual counsel; however, it is important to note that the function of my eco-ministry is meant to be connected to the root of a centralized matriarchy, that signifies, trust yourself, and each their own ministry. In order to establish this organization as a 501(c)(3), a treasury and a secretary are required to create a counsel, so my goal is to find council members that already have their own 501(c)(3) and are looking to be a part of this counsel as well, with similar aims and objectives. The forest chapel is meant to hold space for individuals to consider their own internal values and ways to work in a group with those who have shared values, such as improv groups. The idea is to know more about your own aims after coming out of the place of communion, through your own natural art and sharing.

​

The ministerial organization will be based around media production, as a media production company that is funded by ministerial support, through donation and grant funding. The media lab is meant to be a medium for social change and personal growth in music and theatre arts. Holding space for the development of a film crew is also an important part of this ministry, because a primary sentiment is the art and study of filmmaking, through the which the local crew builds skills in filmmaking and can work together to pursue narrative film projects, montages as music videos, commercial videos, and ethnographic documentary films. Overall, my aim is to hold space for study and practice, ritual and art, while encouraging self-reflexivity upon contemplation, with the field of contemplative studies and the process of contemplative arts. 

​

Further questions and outlooks, in relation to upholding Dharma and holding space for Dharma traditions, pertains to proper ways of interfaith dialogue, as well as encouraging particular faith leaders and ritual masters of specific traditions, to hold space in the forest chapel. As I connect more with networks around me, am I to focus more on a specific lineage alongside inviting individuals from many faiths to participate in ritual activities, and sacred studies? Might it be better to focus more on a specific area or would it be better to consider where the many traditions connect and relate? How might certain times of the year, or different times of my cycle change my outlook of the social, and how I connect with different members of faith? Is it best for a chaplain to follow ritualization of specific lineage or is it wise to consider creating new rituals?