More on Reason

The Indian Sufi, Hazrat Inayat Khan, has some interesting things to say about reason.

“Everyone has their reason,” he says. He relates it to the three gunas. The tamasic reason is that of the thief, who says, “It’s raining, and I need a coat,” and he takes the first one he can lay his hand on. The rajasic reason is that of the honest person, who says, “Even if I get soaking wet, I ought not to take that coat”. This is the reason of the world. The sattvic reason is that of “the poets, the mystics and the sages”. It lifts us into a new reality, previously unimaginable. So, for example, Gandhi came up with the idea of satyagraha – what is called passive resistance but means holding fast to the true. The British had no answer to that. His example inspired the US Civil Rights movement and the Anti-Apartheid struggle. The famous Truth and Reconciliation process apparently has its roots in ancient African traditions, but if so it has a lot of affinities with Gandhian ethics. It is sattvic reason in action.

So far, the St James Truth and Reconciliation process hasn’t managed to emulate Gandhi or Tutu. This isn't necessarily anyone's fault, as I'll discuss below. The great courage required for the process is that the perpetrators have to hear what they are accused of in public. On the other hand, the complainant has to accept that there will be no revenge or punishment. Everyone has to agree to tell the truth. The Inquiry differs from South African T & R in a number of ways – it’s not public, the most serious allegations remain private, and the results are adjudicated by some of the people whose independence the Report calls into question (“the Governors were MacLaren’s Men”).

The Inquiry has to operate within an environment of British law, and this is the bottom line. It’s not possible to be open if there is no guarantee of immunity from prosecution. It’s not possible for a complainant to make public allegations that lays him or her open to libel charges.

What this means is that to reach the sattvic reason the schools now have to work twice as hard to prove their sincerity. It won’t be a short or easy process. It will need apologies from the remaining teachers implicated. It will require courage and sacrifice on the part of the complainants. If it fails, we are back to the hard realities of rajas, and just desserts.

Sackings, multiple resignations, legal action, collateral damage to many innocents.