Harimedia Forum

Dear Hari,

the man who contributed to the end of apartheid in South Africa is an issue that many are talking about this days. His motto was a human life and action with a higher purpose in mind. It was surprising for me to learn, as told by one of his closest friends on BBC News that this man had accumulated inside himself quite a lot of hatred and distrust against those who caused him so much inner pain. But he intelectually understood that in order to reach the higher societal and educational goals he had in mind, he could never ever show this kind of feelings and emotions to anyone in his immediate entourage or the general public.

In public he would instead present himself always as an example of decency, fairness, integrity, and forgiveness. Can such a human life and action with a higher purpose in mind influence and be an example in spiritual life? "He was not afraid to compromise for the sake of a larger goal," one can listen the US President speaking. Could that serve also as an incentive for us to follow, and when does the risk of drifting into something negative or unwanted arises? What actually constitutes an unwanted understanding such as "the end justifies the means?" Of course the motto "all's well that ends well" is more positive, but both understandings carry with them the necessity or ability to persue a larger goal or a higher purpose in life.

"A real leader uses every issue, no matter how serious and sensitive, to ensure that at the end of the debate we should emerge stronger and more united than ever before." ~ Nelson Mandela

"I asked him ones, I said: "You know, how do you do this?" I said: "You had to hate those people, look what they did to you." He said: "I was young and strong when I went in prison, and for eleven years I lived on my hatred. Than one day I was bracking rocks and I thought of all they have done to me and all they had taken from me. They had abused me physically; they had taken from me the right to see my children grow up; they eventually destroyed my marriage; I realized they can take everything, except my mind and my heart." He said: "Those things I decided not to give away. Neither should you" ~ Bill Clinton at BBC News from his conversations with Nelson Mandela.

Helmut Schmidt (95) German Chancellor in the 1980ies, I heard today speaking in a TV documentary a very interesting sentence. He said in regard to his former political activity: "To someone who holds a public office applies the ancient Roman maxim `Salus populi suprema lex`the public good (the well-being of the people) is to be the highest law."

Is there a question in all this?

Sure, Hari. My question was or is: Can such a human life and action with a higher purpose in mind influence and be an example in spiritual life? Or in what way might this be an example one might not want to follow oneself or in ones society of people? In a video online you speak for example about establishing the essence of spirituality. Now your explanation therein gives rise to all this kind of questions I tried to point to in my references or quotations above. I think one would have to make also a division among the practice of spiritual life and that of social life and everything connected to it, especially if one is or may aspire for a certain position or office therein, isn`´t it so?


.Video: Hari on how to "be" self-realized rather trying to "become" it.

You know me well Hari, I am a person who wants to penetrate and understand things. I give you an example from a discussion I had recently on a Facebook group where there are about 13500 users registered. Allmost all the contributions people were sharing there are a kind of into line philosophically (gleichgeschaltet germ.).

For me that was somehow unsatisfactory so I wrote my view on all this: "You believe in something the future will provide to You, if You do (work and act in a certain way) and have faith in the "process" You believe would provide You with the desired result of your dreams. In fact what You do is creating a system of belief and a religion of your own. The future will show if it will provide You the desired result, You so dearly aspire for in your religious practice and in Your activities. How long will You (want to) wait for it (the, your, dream) to be manifested: one year, ten years, a few hundred years, thousand years, life after life? What makes You so sure that the future will provide You anything in the way you desire to have or be manifested in Your life, for the future is a creation of Your mind which is also somehow a creation of Your dreams, life after life. When will it end; why should it end? Is life an endless waiting for something YOU may desire to have manifested in Your dreams? That YOU will have to answer by Your-Self, provided you know, have become aware, have "realized" who You are; who You really are besides Your outer appearances and the dreams you may have created in Your mind to be manifested in the future ..."

To my big surprise all this honest point of view of mine was viewed as a threat instead of an invitation to reflect further on the subject. Someone asked me why I would like to challenge the belief of the people in that group. I responded with a counter-question asking the questioner why should one, why would one want to put a group, a certain society, religion, state, heck, even God it/her/him-self on such a high pedestal so that a simple hint towards ones-self, the genuine one, would be viewed and understood already as a challenge?!

The answer was that the groups purpose would be among other things to collect donations and followers. Of course that person did not wrote directly that the main goal would be to collect followers but that is what I understood from the comment. To my big surprise this morning when I wanted to answer to that I was already removed as a contributor to this site... Now it's up to you to find your own meaning out of all this.

.
Without wanting to anticipate your answer on my questions, Hari, I would like to let you know a very thoughtful perspective on this of a man from Nigeria, Africa. On his Facebook site, I have subscribed to, he mentions that he studied at the Enugu State University.

He writes: "Education in the coming age will not be a form of “indoctrination” as presently practiced but a systematic approach towards awakening the innate voice of reason in each man, his intuitive perception and cognition. Increasingly, education will entail mental exercise and training. Mental training as the cornerstone of modern education is that systematic method of opening up the child, exposing him/her from the tender age towards acquiring the mentality of rationality/objectivity/intuition in thought processes. It is the ability to think independently and therefore reach a personal conclusion.

This is the “vista” of modern education. It will no longer be a “monotonous indoctrination” of the contents of the text-books and notes by the tutors. It will become akin to all inclusive “debating” process encompassing all views and opinions. The rapidity of new knowledge is fast making the knowledge of last decade obsolete.

The educated man of the new age will be an inquirer. A walking question mark. Not an intelligent “memorizer” of the outputs of thinking men. Each will become a thinking man in his own right. It will become a true art. Each man will be able to assemble and deduct from a perspective peculiar to his “innate” nature. Classrooms will be “interactive” in nature not a one way monologue. There will no longer be constants but only variables as opposed to today’s method of teaching constants without any variables. Thus, garbage in, garbage out.

The building blocks of learning will only be the common factor; common factor being what you can “attest” to personally such that need for proof disappears with respect to you alone. On such basis will common grounds be founded. The pupil will become the “researcher” right from the onset, and then knowledge becomes an independent form of personal output. No man in the true sense of the word is a “better” teacher of any man except the man himself. The most another can do is point to the way. Even with that, there is no “one or right” way, there are as many one and right ways as there are people on earth.

This will be the dawn of the era of the “mental” man (spiritualy evolved man, added by me). The horizon is unlimited and its “inherent” wisdom is immeasurable. The present monotonous system of learning/education will give way. Knowledge will present itself in its true form; simple which is in sharp contrast to the garb of “complexities” that men have built around knowledge."
___

A former university teacher from South Africa replied: "I have always viewed education as a process of enticing - not as enforcement. I always thought it was my job to create that inquisitiveness and excitement in learners about what I was about to teach."

Another woman wrote: "I'm in complete agreement with this piece! This is what I wish my children's education to be. For now, I can only be brave enough to live by intuition as silly and different Mommy can seem. This is about restoring and acknowledging the divinity of every single individual on the face of the planet. Every one can shine with their creations, ideas, affection, movements, strengths...and as my husband just complimented me of my 'gift' of cleaning house "

The case of Nelson Mandela hiding his hatred of those who caused him pain, allows us to speak about both his quality as a human being and our misconceptions about leaders and great men. Because he is a great personality who was an example for his countrymen, he understood that expressing hatred would create a long term conflict and many deaths. He wanted independence, but he wanted one that was sustainable and based on principles that would endure. Revolutions made out of hatred, where one party kills or crushes the other, eventually stumble back into a system that resembles the previous regime or deteriorate into a chaotic rivalry amongst historically opposing factions. To demonstrate his conviction, he avoided proposing a violent revolution and embraced inclusiveness. This was not only successful, it was a great example for the entire world.

He set aside his personal emotion for the sake of his cause and only expressed qualities that were favorable to all citizens of his state. He was indeed a great man.

A common misconception amongst spiritualists is that their leaders have to be perfect, otherwise they cannot be leaders. This creates a somewhat sterile atmosphere as leaders repress their emotions or true feelings to maintain the expectations of their followers. It is not sustainable. Everyone should have the freedom to express their energy as it is without being forced into a common mold. Nelson Mandela’s inner hatred might surprise those who wished to see him as a saint without fault. Those who appreciated him as a great human being, as Mr Clinton did, saw his setting aside his deepest feeling of personal revenge for the sake of his people as an act of valor and selflessness.

Is this selflessness and austerity, indeed this incredible discipline under severe hardship and trauma, spiritual? Do these acts display spiritual strength and fortitude? In my opinion, yes, of course! His spiritual essence as a godly man caused him to set aside his perceived tormentors and seek the long term goal of freedom for those who suffered. Most certainly it is a good example for leaders of state.

Now as far as your Facebook group comments go, gee, they sure seem like a direct in-your-face challenge to those folks, so naturally they will get upset and dump you from the group. Maybe a better question to them is, “Are you certain it is best for me to follow what you teach rather than to find my way through the life that appears before me moment by moment?” You were not interested in their reply since you already knew they did not have an answer you liked; you were acting to wake them up or change them. Since they obviously are not interested to do that, any “challenge” meant to change their minds is best given in subtle ways.

Rudolf Steiner created a system of education in the first half of the previous century wherein he saw the student in a similar way as your quoted personality. Socrates used dialogue as a method of education long before. So long education is a means to churn out slaves to production and consumption, it will remain bound to controlling the development of individuals. And without individuals buying into the dream of prosperity in a technological wonderland, no one would accept such a restrictive environment,

Education should be a process that teaches one how to learn anything one requires to know. This is vastly superior to a system that creates highly specialized workers and thinkers. But I think that technology has also allowed each individual to find what they seek in life even as they get their degrees and learn to be whatever their employers want. Search engines, free exchange of information and knowledge, and freely available online university courses found on the internet have created an atmosphere where anyone desiring to expand their horizons can. Even in the present system, the inherent desire within each of us to find our own truth causes many to break free from the limitations of modern education.

However, not even a highly evolved educational system can ensure that a person will desire “correctly.” It can only assist society to accommodate and facilitate everyone’s desires in the best possible way and for the greatest common good. Balancing what is good for the individual with what is good for the group remains the major struggle for all societies in the world.