>
SRF Walrus
Mt. Washington, Ca
Open discussions about SRF
Gold Community SRF Walrus
    > Householder vs. Monastic
        > Boot Camp or Love Central?		 New Topic    Add Reply

<< Prev Topic | Next Topic >>
Author Comment
Raja Begum
Unregistered User
(12/3/01 4:40 am)
Reply 		Boot Camp or Love Central?
To PS:
The actual quote is as follows: "I have come to measure spiritual advancement, not alone by the light that surrounds one when he meditates or by the visions he has of saints, but by what he is able to endure in the hard cold light of day."

In your original post you mentioned that one benefit of an organization is that it can provide "a 'cold light of day' proving ground for one's realization. Essentially I agree, inasmuch as anything, anyone or any place under the sun can provide opportunities for spiritual growth. There are 6 billion humans living on our planet right now. Not all of them belong to an organization -- unless you consider the earth's ecosystem a natural one -- yet all have the same opportunities to advance through what our guru calls titiksha or endurance.

Endurance is a universal strategy of the species. Cactus do it. People don't have much choice either. Endurance is a manifestation of the Universal Patience. To the degree that one expresses it, to that degree one demonstrates the Life behind all life.

In one sense, I have practiced Gyanamata's advice faithfully since first joining SRF. I have had to endure living an inauthentic life. I have had to accomodate my personality and inclinations to fit a very rigid monastic-centered paradigm which is based on self-denial, when, in actuality I am a very creative and life-affirming person. As I drifted further from myself, I've had to endure depression and uncertainty. And as I made a motion to heal myself, I endured the rejection and misunderstanding of those who I once thought were my spiritual brothers and sisters. I know what it is like to endure in the hard, cold light of day.

My own personal peeve is when people frame spiritual organizations by what tests they offer rather than how much human suffering they can alleviate. Since its my peeve, I guess I'll have to endure it since other's have the right to frame the spiritual path according to their inclinations. After all, what law is there that an organization can't be a spiritual boot camp? Or what law says it can't be a school in the art of benevolence? In truth, an organization can be anything it wants to be. Surely, I can anticipate your next thought: "If an environment is too soft and friendly, doesn't it run the risk of turning people into spiritual cream puffs?" Yes, it could. However, there's no guarantee that a house of spiritual discipline will keep its pure intent and not devolve into a horror shop of sadomasochism. The knife cuts both ways.


Many years ago, I had a chance to stay a while at Hidden Valley. One of the most peculiar experiences I ever had in SRF was working under a lay-disciple who, having been given a supervisory position, never failed to mark our names in a notebook if we were talking and not practicing the presence. At regular intervals, he would ring a bell and all of us would stop what we're doing and have a moment of silent prayer. Sometimes he would read out of the Spiritual Diary. Naturally, that was a recipe for disaster. The few of us who preferred to offer God spontaneous flowers instead of hothouse grown ones felt incensed and put upon. Before long, we were staging a quiet mutiny. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to guess that I was among the rebels. "Forgive me Lord, for I have sinned. I have failed to look into my spiritual eye at the predetermined interval of time!" The poor guy was getting the test of his life.

During the break, this gentleman -- let us call him Bartelby -- sat on a box in front of me struggling for the right words. He finally said, "We're going to need to talk to Brother about this. Which one of us should go first?" I volunteered. So off I go, knocking on Brother's door, disrupting him from God knows what? A meditation or something? And I explained the whole story, though it was apparent to me that he was already acquainted with my case. After a short discussion, he quietly suggested to me, "If your supervisor asks you to stand on your head and walk across the field, then just do it. The guru will work through him and, if he's wrong, he'll be corrected." "Well, wasn't that advice straight out of the dark ages!" I thought. I thanked Brother for his time but resolved that I wouldn't follow his advice or any advice that made me into a carnival acrobat.

Somehow, I managed to endure the periodic hard, cold ringing of Bartelby's prayer bell. I did so for about a week, maybe more. I think he felt proud of himself for whipping us into the cream of discipline. In retrospect, I think he was an ISTJ Guardian, or what Keirsey would call "The Inspector." 180 degrees opposite my personality (an ENFP Idealist), Bartelby could only be happy when I was not, and visa versa. I must confess that I didn't notice any increase in my realization. However, it did help me endure moments of entrapment such as when I might be stuck in an elevator with people who pass gas. But I digress.

It wasn't long before Bartelby had us chomping at the bit and even considering him as a worthy first SRF homicide victim. We confronted him about our dislike of the regimentation. The next day, I was asked to help some guys in the gardens -- a time-out you might say. It was bliss. I had such a good time. The guys I worked with were such gems. So considerate. The hours flew by and we seemed to wish they'd go on. Master seemed to be smiling in the sunlight with us, whispering the words of Divine Mother: "By being happy my child, thou dost please me."

Late one night some weeks later, Bartelby and I happened to be the only two people reading the study behind the chapel. We both had a recognition that the moment had come for us to work out our differences. I can't remember exactly what we said, but I do recall it felt very human and very beneficial for us both. There were no rules to guide us, no protocols to follow. All we did was talk about the things that hurt us most and what our hopes were. We were simply two human beings trying to make sense of the strangeness of our circumstance. I learned a lot that night about this individual. He forever lost his one-dimensionality and became a living, dreaming human being to me. I can still remember the godly presence which filled the room like candle light and incense -- obviously Master's benediction was upon us.

Never again did he or I have troubles between us. He understood me and I understood him. In fact, I saw a remarkable change in him after that point. He started to smile with everyone more. He was more relaxed. His mood lightened. And I never saw him pull out that notebook and pen again. I knew a miracle had happened. And I noticed a broadening in my heart. So I must have changed too. The irony is: The change only came about when I rejected the classical discipline of the ashram. when I broke every conventional expectation, ignored the counsel of a Brother, and was insubordinate...and the payoff was a miracle that matured and transformed two individuals.

I won't take credit for the miracle, but I will take credit for being true to my process. I don't believe in looking for tests. You just live life authentically, that's all. Now, I can say that because I'm what Keirsey calls an Idealist, and that's how my type works best. Some need a leash and others need a sky. I'm the latter. Either way we enter the Great Spirit who is center everywhere, circumference nowhere.

chuckle
Unregistered User
(12/4/01 12:04 pm)
Reply 		Maybe there's hope
RB--I'm new here (this is my first post), but I had to respond. What a story! A notebook and a bell--my God, that's hilarious! But the beauty of your story is the understanding and reconciliation that later occurred. It makes me think that change in SRF is possible: we owe it, not only to ourselves, but to other devotees to be fully human.

pschuppe
Registered User
(12/5/01 1:56 pm)
Reply 		Re: Maybe there's hope
I agree. In fact, it makes me wonder what prevents just such miracles from happening with anyone else at SRF.

pschuppe
Registered User
(12/5/01 4:01 pm)
Reply 		Re: Boot Camp or Love Central?
Dear Raja,

Thanks for the long and obviously heart-felt reply, replete with personal story! I hope I haven't "Bartelbyed" too many people in my supervisory roles.

In your post you say:

My own personal peeve is when people frame spiritual organizations by what tests they offer rather than how much human suffering they can alleviate. Since its my peeve, I guess I'll have to endure it since other's have the right to frame the spiritual path according to their inclinations. After all, what law is there that an organization can't be a spiritual boot camp? Or what law says it can't be a school in the art of benevolence? In truth, an organization can be anything it wants to be. Surely, I can anticipate your next thought: "If an environment is too soft and friendly, doesn't it run the risk of turning people into spiritual cream puffs?" Yes, it could. However, there's no guarantee that a house of spiritual discipline will keep its pure intent and not devolve into a horror shop of sadomasochism. The knife cuts both ways.
-------------------

And my pet peeve is that the psychological approach to life and spirituality is the *one true path.* So I probably have to endure that too. Ultimately, I don't think any of it has to be either/or.

The boot camp model, for example, has as its ultimate purpose, greater joy and expansion of awareness. Is it therefore everyone's cup of tea? Of course not. And yes, if an environment is too soft and friendly, it could, in fact, turn out the best spiritual cream puffs you ever tasted. But again, it doesn't have to.

In fact, to put a fine point on it, I'd say if you can make an organization that provides warm fuzzies from the beginning of the day til the end, more power to you! The world is in dire need of just that in many ways. The world is also desperately in need of the awareness that no one discrete approach to the spiritual life or organizational modelling is going to fit everyone either. That's why we need many more openness in Master's work. Why should anyone think they must only serve him in one way or context? No good reason that I can think of.

ps

Raja Begum
Unregistered User
(12/6/01 2:44 am)
Reply 		Psychological Antiques: Our Revered Board of Directors
Quote:
"The world is also desperately in need of the awareness that no one discrete approach to the spiritual life or organizational modelling is going to fit everyone either. That's why we need many more openness in Master's work. Why should anyone think they must only serve him in one way or context? No good reason that I can think of."


Dear pshuppe,

I'm glad you stated that. This is one of the major core issues not being addressed in SRF. Although we have the same guru in common, we are not alike in temperament and spiritual needs. You must be familiar with the our guru's term "psychological antiques"......That's the SRF Board of Directors I'm sad to say --- fixed immutably in their one-sided, monastic, Guardian mindset.

<< Prev Topic | Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Email This To a Friend Email This To a Friend
Topic Control Image Topic Commands
Click to receive email notification of replies Click to receive email notification of replies
Click to stop receiving email notification of replies Click to stop receiving email notification of replies
jump to:

- SRF Walrus - Householder vs. Monastic -



Powered By ezboardŽ Ver. 7.32
Copyright Š1999-2005 ezboard, Inc.