This is a difficult one for me.
My kabbalah teacher urges me and the others in our group
to keep out of politics and political discussion, and concentrate on developing
our own behaviours and attitudes in such a way that we become more generous,
compassionate, disciplined, empathic, less greedy and fearful, and just
generally more useful and pleasant to our fellow Earth dwellers.
For those of you who have not read my posts before, or
need reminding, Toledano kabbalah (the form of Kabbalah that was developed in
13th century Spain)
has divided humans into three ‘classes’ – with names that I think are rather
tasteless, but nobody’s thought up anything more appropriate yet. The first
group of humans, by far the largest, are the ‘vegetable people’. These souls
are content with enough to eat and drink, with adequate clothing and shelter,
with being entertained, and having the opportunity to have children if they so
desire, and they are keen to fit in with their 'tribe', e.g. their culture or
religion. They are happy to be led, providing the leader does not cause them
too much physical discomfort or alternatively, can offer a convincing promise
of better times. When they don’t think they’re getting this, they may well form
a populist movement to warn or overthrow their leaders.
The next group are the ‘animal’ people. These are the
people who desire wealth, fame and/or power. Among them you find, for example, (not
all, but a lot of) pop stars, business men and women, TV personalities, rabble
rousers, people high up in religious hierarchies, teachers, and politicians.
I’ve heard it said that if vegetable people are the pebbles on the beach,
animal people are the waves that roll them about. However, people in the animal
class are guided by the deep desires and aversions of their egos (their
personalities). In a sense they, too, are the pebbles, and their egos (and ids,
that is, their sub-conscious minds, fuelled by strong and ancient animal
instincts) are the waves pushing them about.
The third class, the ‘human’ people, are those who are
trying to free themselves of the control of their ids and egos in order to be
able to see more clearly, to achieve glimpses of the bigger picture unskewed by
ego fears and id impulses, and to act accordingly. It is probably still the
road less travelled. Toledano kabbalists make regular visits to meetings where
they recount their recent experiences to each other. Others in the group
are usually able to see if the ego is interfering in a way that a person themself
cannot see. In my experience to date, this has never been a daunting procedure.
I’ve not been in any group where somebody has taken a delight, or felt superior
in pointing out to others something that has been overlooked. The prevailing
culture is about mutual support for each other on our journeys. Nevertheless, I
think that a person has had to have got through the ‘defensive against any
suggestion that I’m not perfect’ stage before they can open to this in the most
constructive way. I think you have to be a genuine seeker.
However, not all those aspiring to be human people are
spiritual or believe in higher, nonphysical dimensions; many are humanists, for
example.
There is another group with which I am closely
involved and that is the Integral movement.
Most Integralists are also concerned to act in the world from a ‘higher place’
than their egos, and that includes acting in politics, reasoning that this is
what the world needs right now. Many people within the movement believe that
the world will become a fairer, more pleasant and sustainable place for all to
live in when we move beyond ‘left-right’ politics to something more, well,
integral. Recently I’ve been part of some extremely interesting political
discussions with others within the London Integral Circle (which I have to say
have not degenerated into the ‘I’m right and you’re not’ slanging matches that
I’ve been part of elsewhere.) And one thing that’s emerging is the need for a
meta-political stance. John Bunzl, whom I know through Integral circles, and
who also blogs for The Huffington Post, has set up an organisation called
Simpol. To quote from their website:
“Simpol invites citizens around the world to use their
votes in a powerful new way to encourage politicians to solve global problems
like global warming, financial market regulation, environmental destruction,
war, and social injustice.
Simpol offers us a way to take action on global problems;
problems individual governments cannot resolve by acting alone.
That’s because these problems cross national boundaries,
and because competition between governments to attract investment and jobs
means the markets - not the people - end up calling the shots.
Governments cannot act alone to solve these problems
because any government doing so would make its economy uncompetitive, leading
to inflation, unemployment, or even economic collapse. Any government that
moved first would lose out! While governments remain stuck, it's the markets
that continue to run politics - not we, the people.
Simpol aims to break this vicious circle by encouraging
people around the world to oblige their politicians and governments to
cooperate globally in implementing appropriate policies simultaneously for the
good of all.”
If you join Simpol, you are signing up to vote for any politician,
wherever they are on the left-right spectrum, who will make a declaration of
support for a process leading to the simultaneous
implementation of a range
of policies to solve global problems. The website contains the names of
politicians who have already signed up to this pledge.
Naturally these policies (that Simpol advocate should be
simultaneously enacted by all), have certain values embedded in them. It could
not be otherwise. These values are based on the fact that, as humans have
evolved and life has become more materially bearable for a lot of us (less
nasty, brutish and short), certain values have developed as well, values that
have perhaps made such evolution possible. These values are to do with 1) being
able to cope with increasing complexity: evolution can be seen to be producing
increasingly complex systems all the time, in both the natural and human made
worlds; and 2) developing greater compassion and empathy for others, people who
are not us, or not like us, not part of our ‘tribe’, or even part of our
species. Those who have made efforts to become more spiritually developed
repeatedly report back that the feeling of separateness we all have in our
‘skin encapsulated egos’ is an illusion. So are feelings of independence and
dependence. We are all inter-dependent, and so it makes sense to develop and
live by values that reflect that.
I hurriedly add that becoming more compassionate and
empathic does not preclude preventing others from taking advantage of you. It
is perfectly possible to ensure one’s own needs, and non- greedy wants, are
met, and still be generous and tolerant of others. As Gandhi said, “there’s
enough for everyone’s need, not everyone’s greed”.
In kabbalah the universe is said to be held in existence
between two poles: ‘force’ and ‘form’. (‘Yin’ and ‘Yang’ comprise a similar
model). ’Force’ is outgoing, creative, expansive, merciful and generous. ‘Form’
is structuring, curtailing, setting boundaries, disciplining,
gathering in, and defining. Without this latter ‘form’, the universe would
expand into chaos; and without ‘force’ the universe would just shrink into
itself and eventually disappear up its own fundament. The work of a kabbalist
is to balance these two poles. This cannot be done successfully without having
first developed a perspective which has risen above the level of ego and id.
Some politicians have done this, even if temporarily, and
changed the course of history for the better in the process but, again, one’s
own level of consciousness has to be developed beyond the level of ego and id
to spot them at the time.
After writing the above, as I had reproduced material
from the Simpol website, I sent it to John Bunzl for comment. He offered the
further thought provoking observations:
The need for a meta-stance,
beyond simply going beyond the right-left dichotomy, is that, in practice, the
left has all but disappeared from the political scene. Today, party politics is
really just different shades of right. This, I argue, arises because of the
free-movement of capital which, because it forces all nations to enact only
those policies which keep the nation competitive and attractive to investors,
means politics is squeezed into a broadly centre-right straightjacket. An
effect I call pseudo-democracy: whoever you vote to govern, the policies
delivered remain substantially the same. (Like Henry Ford’s ‘you can have any
colour you like so long as it’s black’)
- So the need for a meta-stance is actually two-fold: 1. To be
able to see the above in the first place and to see why/how its occurring. 2.
To devise a strategy for doing something about it.
- Force and Form. These two energies are like dance partners. Each
is vital but each leads the dance at different times as evolution unfolds.
Force, it seems to me, is what economic globalisation represents: market
competition, as a force has outgrown the Form of the nation-state and has now
gone global. Absent Form at the global level, Force is pathological, as we see
today. (Another way to look at it would be to say that the market economy
embodies the masculine principle whereas cooperative governance embodies the
feminine.) Either way, the masculine principle – Force – has, since 1648, led
the dance to the point where, if Form doesn’t make her move to go global too
and so catch up to balance Force, we’re in big trouble! Simpol, if you will, is
a channel, an emergent possibility, for feminine Form (i.e. global governance)
to emerge and take practical shape.
- Spiritual Politics: To me, the underlying spiritual import of
Simpol is forgiveness.
When we accept that no one is really to blame for the global vicious circle
we’re all embedded in, we truly see that we’re all in the same boat. We forgive
ourselves and each other. We give up the ‘blame game’. Only by doing that can
we reach a spiritual turning point in which truly inclusive global solutions
might be envisaged: we take responsibility!”
To finish this post, I would say just this: Those of us
trying to develop beyond our egos (“egos are wonderful servants, but dreadful
masters”) refer to it as ‘the work’ and, as my kabbalah teacher said recently,
it’s not called the ‘work’ for nothing. It is extremely hard work.
But the wages are good.
No comments:
Post a Comment