To some extent, the relationship between tutor and student within a group meeting is characterised by the idea that the tutor plays the role of buddhi and the student that of manas - "a good servant but a bad master".
The student may report success due to following an instruction, or failure due to not following the instruction, but to question the instruction itself, to point out that the instruction was not wise or consistent with reason, is almost impossible because the student is playing the role of the manas. Only the buddhi (played by the tutor) can adjudicate. Even if the tutor is wrong, it is better for the student to follow the instruction without question because he will ‘come to no harm’.
Monday, June 05, 2006
Tutors and Students
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
There is a purpose for this in that it follows the injunction, 'Act - then understand.' Many is the time I've inwardly rebelled against an instruction, or a line of thinking - only to find that the tutor was right after all.
But there is a disadvantage in all this. A student may become quiescent and, without active feedback from students, a tutor may well wonder what is going on. It may just be a question of getting the balance right.
Where does that injunction come from?
It seems to me to contradict the tradition of "shrawanam - mananam - nidhidhyaasanam", ie "listen - understand - practice".
'Act - then understand' can cut right through the mental constructs that one has built up. That is the value of obedience if it leads to a liberation from constricting ties. If it leads only to further restriction then it is of no value. If one only needs to listen to understand then all well and good, but sometimes action, in itself, is the stronger force.
In my personal opinion this is an overrated idea. It assumes a mental construct on the part of the 'student'. Even to carry out a basic task one has to understand it.
Yes, there are things that you only learn in experience, but that is different from saying "my tutor, right or wrong". What if the instruction was wrong? EG "Go home and give your wife a sound thrashing! Do her a power of good!" (Absurd example, but the rule has to work in all cases)
Should you ever turn off your consciousness?
This goes to the heart of the question of "external" and "internal" discipline. At what point is the discipline internalised? At what point does the student have to be trusted to decide things for herself?
I agree. But we need to have good tutoring not just because of good tutors, but because of good guidance to tutors.
Act - then understand, has the edge when there is resistance to overcome. There is little so convincing to an individual as acting contrary to his or her inclinations - and discovering that the 'action' has cut through the knot of difficulty. It dissolves reluctance quicker than anything else. It expands boundaries and chews away at limitations. It may be that 'action' is but one tool in the way of liberation but it's an important one. For some people at some times, seeing the result of 'action' - even in the school of hard knocks - leads more surely to 'understanding'.
If there had been a closer connection between 'action' and 'result' the current broohaha between former pupils and St James might have been avoided. Results are much more important than we sometimes think in the School. Otherwise, how can the effectiveness of action be judged?
"If there had been a closer connection between 'action' and 'result' the current broohaha between former pupils and St James might have been avoided. "
But then again, if there had been a requirement on the staff of St James to understand before acting the former pupils might not have so much to complain about... ?
As V says, the argument has to work in all situations - if you put people in the position of acting on an instruction that they don't understand then they will not anticipate the potential outcomes. The medical profession have a better instruction: 'First prevent harm'.
That is a good instruction. And the thing is that if the actual instructions of His Holiness had been the basis of the education from the first, there would have been fewer problems.
I once had a conversation with a senior St James figure who showed me the collected sayings of HH on education. "Not one word anywhere about pressure or force," he said, "I can't really understand where it comes from".
I think an answer is beginning to emerge.
Post a Comment