Thursday, October 05, 2006

Two Cheers For The Uncharismatic Leaders!

Following on from some of the conversations in recent posts, I'd like to show how a principle can and should be examined in practice. This isn't contradicting what anyone else is saying, but clarifying my own view.

Let's consider the idea that a principle is "a thorn to remove a thorn; when you have made use of it, you throw both away".

It's not a difficult concept in theory, but in practice it seems to cause people all kinds of problems. Let's assume that this idea is true. It describes a finite process. But how long should it take? Either (a) until full self-realization; (b) until a stage of understanding is reached beyond which the individual is capable of independent reason; or (c) until the Teaching has been heard in full and is intellectually known about.

We can dismiss (c) because we know that intellectual appreciation is not enough. We have to make use of the Teaching to remove the thorn of ignorance. We can also dismiss (a). It would be unreasonable to say that the Teaching should be carried about with us forever like a crutch. Not only that, it conflicts with the tradition of the teacher giving the student rahasya and sankalpa - the secret knowledge, and the ability to decide things independently. At this point, the student is no longer a student, but an independent seeker. So if we believe in the tradition we have to accept that at some point between the extremes of total ignorance and total enlightenment, we make use of a thorn, remove a thorn, and then throw both away. There may be more thorns of ignorance and therefore more thorns of knowledge needed. It's a matter of little steps in knowledge, but little forward steps.

If we look at how things are in the School, it might seem as though almost no-one has achieved such a thing. The tutor reads something to the group. The student asks a question. The tutor re-reads the passage. Another question. Another re-reading. How many tutors can hear what is being said and understand it? How many are clear enough about what is being said to explain it in their own words? His Holiness said, "no-one needs to bind himself to a word". How many of us have transcended the word by finding its meaning?

The only way to come at this is to look at examples of apparent transcendence. We are not talking about full self-realization, but about where someone seems to know something independently. There are a few candidates - I've mentioned Mr Jaiswal before; I might also mention Shane Mulhall, whose talks I've been listening to recently. It's a funny thing, but he stands out in that he doesn't really stand out. He's kind of ... uncharismatic. He has a sad, sonorous voice, and a strange gasping laugh when he tells a joke. From his descriptions of his life (most frequent word used "pathetic") he spends time watching football on the TV, he worries about what suit to wear, and loses arguments with his wife and children. In short, he's an accountant.

Why, then, is he so universally loved and respected? It's obvious. He knows what he's talking about; he speaks from the heart; and he lives by his words. Cut him any way you like: you can read the principles of the teaching there like Brighton rock. You might not agree with everything he says, but he doesn't mind that; nor does he imagine that he's got all the answers because he has the books on his shelf. He quotes His Holiness liberally and faithfully, but with a light touch that only comes from knowing the truth of it for yourself. The result? Someone told me the other day that there are 14,000 students in the Irish School. I've no idea whether that's true, but if so it's a great testament to what can be done.

The problem with charismatic leaders is that you can't do without them. We have a few of these types knocking around - masters of the world etc etc - and the problem is that once you accept their help they make you dependent. In the end, it's not very attractive. The real teacher doesn't make you feel how wise they are, but gives you a glimpse of your own native wisdom. The real teacher sets out to make you equal to himself.

But to come back to thorns - how many of us have forgotten that the Teaching itself is a thorn, and that life is not about the Teaching? How many of us have neglected our Self, in our anxiousness to praise the Teaching about the Self? How many of us have bound ourselves to a word? The Great Men who trumpet their virtues don't do that. Neither do the wise. It's the rest of us, rubbing along together in the lowing herd. That's how we keep ourselves the same.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

I was going to start a new post but, as so often V, you anticipated me!

I attended the public Philosophy lecture yesterday, the first in the Philosophical Garden series. The essentials of the School's teaching were laid out very clearly by Donald Lambie, and it was refreshing and clarifying.

One question that came up concerned the 'words of the wise' - how, in all the multiplicity of teachings, did the School choose?

You'll not be surprised to hear that the verification and affirming process leant towards 'tradition'. The strong implication was that false prophets are outed over time and a tradition protects from the effects of chasing after them.

Understood. However, if buddhi was operational and in place, then would this be a concern? Would not our bogus-ometer ping into action?

There's been a good deal of discussion on this blog about various current enquiries, methods and commentaries. It seems a waste to discount these because they haven't had a chance to stand the test of time.

Anonymous said...

What *****s me off from time to time about this excellent blog is that we behave too often as if we don't trust the self in ourself...then it gets to be a moan of some sort...

Better, I say, to go out with the attitude 'Please, Self, show yourself through little me...' and await the consequences !

Sorry if I'm treading on anyone's toes here... blame my optimistic youth...

Anonymous said...

Your comment leads very easily to another observation and one that I've been living alongside most of the day.

Yesterday I went to the funeral of a rather remarkable man called John Kramer. You probably didn't know him although if you live in the constituency of Richmond you may know Susan, his widow, who is the MP.

John was an American. At the tender age of 28 he became Secretary of Transportation in Chicago and was said to be the best transport secretary in America. I won't dwell on his career because it's the man himself who warrants further consideration.

I don't know whether it was natural gifts, or learned knowledge, but everyone loved being with him. His greeting was hugely welcoming, his presence spacious, his humour and love of life infectious. He was deeply reassuring. Everyone felt acknowledged and valued by him.

As a consequence, events
went well when John was around. He didn't have to say anything although what he said was always right.

I don't know if he would have put it in these terms, but the trust in himself - that you mention - was palpable and your observation gave me the opportunity to speak about it.

He gave no directions, rarely, if ever, commented, never urged but was always encouraging, and after a year of suffering cancer died with the words, 'This has been the best year of my life,'on his lips.

I could learn something from that.

Anonymous said...

Laura, thanks for that, it's very much in line with what I meant -- no criticism of anyone on this blog, just the feeling that even if we don't rate our personal 'progress towards liberation' very highly on the maya-meter, we can still call on the Self freely, as honoured guest..and 'let our light so shine before men'..

Kevin said...

Anonymous, I feel sorry for the "optimistic youth" - a friend of yours? :-)

Anyway, the aim of my post was to point out that we really are meant to use the thorns and then throw them away - it's not something that's beyond us. But it does take a bit of self-belief to do this.

I thought I was speaking up for self-belief and encouraging people to have a go.

mikroth said...

As one of the SES long-term Loyal Opposition, I've survived the growing pains of the School in full, which has happily left me with the desire to 'improve' wherever possible in all areas... which I guess is the aim of this blog.

Apropos V's comments on evening groups, I wonder if we don't spend too much time on 'answers' -- mulling over HH's answers (necessary), but too little time on questions ?

LM often made that comment about 'tutor here; student there; discussion joining; knowledge above' -- that this brings new knowledge. I think it's all too easy to sit back waiting for answers and that these just get stale, even untrue, if repeated down the hierarchical line.

Questions -- even questions yet unanswered -- make for a lively mind, a lively student.

But I'm more interested in other people's views than my own. Does this ring bells ?

Kevin said...

It does with me. Though the Conversations are valuable, the real thing is what arises in living conversations.

Nick said...

A little light relief...this made me laugh and seems appropriate to the thread in terms of how we sometimes appeal to authority:


"He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts...for support rather than illumination."

Andrew Lang (1844-1912)


Thanks BTW to 'anonymous' for the reminder to 'be ourselves'. We all need 'beginner's mind'.

Anonymous said...

Is this the Andrew Lang who wrote fairy stories? And many a true word?

Nick said...

Laura - yes I believe so. I know nothing about him really, just came across this quote on another blog site. from a piece entitled, "Insults - they just don't make them as they used to" !

Anonymous said...

From Wikepedia:

Andrew Lang Born in Selkirk, Scotland (March 31, 1844 – July 20, 1912) was a prolific Scots man of letters. He was a poet, novelist, and literary critic, and contributor to anthropology. He now is best known as the collector of folk and fairy tales.

The Andrew Lang lecture at St Andrews university are named for him.
---------------------------

I haven't read these fairy stories since I was a child but they were brilliant. You could say that the Odyssey is cast in a similar mould.

Anonymous said...

V - I'm missing the weather forecast already, were there storms over Rockall?

Kevin said...

Nawww, I just thought that describing Mr Mulhall's voice as like someone reading the Shipping News from Rockall wasn't all that accurate ... I haven't decided what it's actually like yet but will let you know.

Anonymous said...

Oh well, as my Irish-Indian guru said in the ashram, 'Never let the truth stand in the way of a good story.'