Hi Wim,
Good to get your response to my dilemma.
Hameed Ali says "If you really recognize the inner nature of reality - that
it is loving, that it is joyous, that it is abundant - you will live from
that recognition and you will act so as to bring about in others that same
recognition. This is why spiritual teachers rarely get involved with social
reform. They aren't against it, but they recognise that it will not solve
the world's problems since those problems are based on cognitive
distortions." (Facets of Unity, p58)
That is the best succinct statement of the Mystic point of view I have
found, but it seems to reflect a common understanding. The mystic 'good' is
the inward search for the divine, and this seems to at best ignore the
social demand for a fair share of the world's resources, and the
intellectual demands (I take your point when you say "campaigning for
freedom, justice etc., which are by the way intellectual and not social
values according to me") which go with that.
My experience with 'campaigners' has been that while they can be self
sacrificing for their cause, there is a less pleasant side to the scene.
Power and status are real drivers of behaviour, not in the commonly accepted
way of making more money, but in controlling the debate and in some aspects
of the aggressive types of activism. Also there is often a disrespect for
their own bodies which to me sits uncomfortably with the supposed respect
for the rest of nature. I always find something incongruous about 'greenies'
urging everyone to drink more at the bar to assist their fundraising to
fight pollution, which is supposed to be poisoning the earth. Anyway, those
are just quibbles.
I would be interested to hear your thoughts on Pirsig's dilemma at Benares,
where he finally walked out. It seems to me that you can't have it both
ways. He chose mainstream values, it seems. You seem to say that there isn't
a real issue, but that is not how it seems to me.
I get a hint that at some deeper level there may be a reconciliation of the
two positions, but in that I may be more hopeful than realistic. A bit like
the reconciliation of subjects and objects when both are transcended in
mystic experience of unity. The immediacy of quality is close to the mystic
ideal, but the distancing of static quality which underpins all organised
forms of social activism seems foreign to the mystic. It seems more likely
that the mystic response would be simply to do good when injustice is
encountered, but not to do anything so future oriented as to organise a
campaign to fight injustice.
What do you say?
John B
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:15 BST