Continuing this post, in a FB discussion Eric mentioned that the difference between contemplative and embodied spiritual practices was that the former were more inclined toward elitism, while the latter more originated in the common folk and hence were more inclined toward addressing political inequities. My
anecdotic experience is different. In the martial arts traditions of
China, of which I've been a practitioner, the masters and their lineages
are considered like iconic spiritual leaders, a special class. People
pay them inordinate amounts of money and
they are showered with gifts and free food/lodging constantly. And of
course they are considered masters of True Reality, not just their
particular martial skill set. And due to that I haven't seen much if any
involvement in political class struggle, since they are in the elite
and like it that way.
Like with any meditative tradition, they assumed what they were
connecting with in those states was Ultimate Reality. Hence they were
revered like priests of God (or Tao). Granted many of the Chinese
martial traditions, like Buddhist meditative ones, also had a good set
of ethics and used their martial powers only to defend against abuse of
power. And their beneficent intent was to teach others this well-rounded
skill set. But like Buddhism they too didn't involve themselves in
broader political struggle to change the socio-economic conditions of
class. It seems to have been an inherent deficit of such elite
traditions, as if transforming one's self was all that was necessary.
Kind of like the elitist integral movement! It's why I look to the collaborative commons now, a truly syntegral development.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.