About spiritual teachers

I really love this post. A lot of wisdom packed into a few paragraphs.

One thing you said: Just because someone you consider a teacher has done something to break your trust, doesn't mean they were never able to teach you anything. I'd like to add that  maybe by seeing the problems the teacher has become involved in, you have just learned something else. 

So glad to see this post Jake.

Some of my best teachers have also provided the best examples of what not to do! It has been a blessing to me to be able to take the same position as yourself - “The only true spiritual teacher in your life is you.” And although I often engaged in passing on the teachings of a particular teacher, I am NOT caught up in the frenzy of guru worship - ever.

Thanks Jake
PJ

Thank you so very much for this post!!  It is exactly what I needed at this exact moment.

Jake, what can i say? you are awesome! i'm just glad i work with you. tagged this post with jake+is+awesome :)

Yep.  Very well said, as usual Jake.  The guru's job is to point to that in you that is your Highest Self.  Unfortunately, the guru must point at it using human fingers.

I'm probably the most novice of our team in terms of time spent studying great ideas. The lesson I've tried to keep first in my mind as I read, view or hear anything is to separate ideas from those who communicate them. Your post is an awesome expression of this lesson. I couldn't have said it this well. Thank you for sharing Jake. 

Great post Jake.  I hope more people see it.

“My whole spiritual paradigm comes not from the collection of gurus but the accretion of ideas and concepts that agree with my own reason and common sense; along the way, I have met people I consider helpful in guiding me - either by showing me the path to follow or by showing me the path to avoid.”

I couldn't have summed up my thoughts any better. 

Well done! Thanks. 

thanks jake!  

isn’t it funny how we all have our own brand of common sense with elements of our history, our lineage, our environment, our ever-developing sense and sensibilities? its called “common” sense but where’s the thread of commonality? it would seem this (usually) subjectively subsumed/ (usually) subjectively utilized thing called ‘common sense’ is more like, ‘unique, inherent guidelines somewhat akin to a conscience only with a broader use (e.g. common sense stops you from doing stupid unethical stuff, like a conscience, but it also is used as a measuring tool for the validity of the message emaning directly or indirectly from various communications like literature and movies and everything else that requires interpretive internalization which often hinges on a sort of cognitive capacity and ability to objectively segregate and categorize types and sources of incoming stimuli or whatever.’ but of course that definition propels common sense into a sort of green meme, overly-individualistic stance implying that if killing Jews is in alignment with your own unique common sense, then by God - do it! So there must be an individual element to it and a sort of collective weigh scale that sometimes steps in and says, “Ah-ah-ah, stealing people’s wallets may seem like common sense to you but in this instance you’re going to have to improve your preconventional and conventional interior structure because that’s not going to work out here in the real world.” Which really amounts to an interplay of all quadrants (with individual interior convictions and worldviews and their exterior correlates interacting with collective interior convictions and widely accepted worldviews and their exterior correlates) and sometimes ends in disaster, but other times ends well. But of course my little outline of the quadrants with the right hand side always being simple exterior correlates can be a touch reductionistic because the right side has a reality all its own and while it might be healthy, in some or even most cases, to view that right sight as a ‘resultant’ affair it’s also good to remember that certain right hand quadrants exert themselves and the left hand becomes a reflection and a correlate of the right hand. LIke in the case of mental handicapped individuals, their capacity to develop has been hampered on the right which has caused arrestment all across the board. See what I’m saying?

In the end, everything remains unclear. Except that Jake rocks.

No, Brondu was right.  You rock!

I, like ~Matthew, insist on ascribing a quality of ‘rocking’ to you.

I think those cumulative influences do guide us, as well as a sort of unique intuition attuned, as it were, to the collective upon which were are interdependant. I didn’t really have a definite opinion on the whole thing, though.

Also there isn’t really an integral color scheme. Ken’s been using Spiral Dynamics for a while, but he’s always retained a sort of autonomy from it by saying, “now to use a stage-specific model of consciousness development, say-arbitrarily- Spiral Dynamics.” and then he’ll illustrate his point in colors. So… who knows what a real integral color scheme would look like, one that’s not just used by Ken but made up by Ken or a team of smart people backed by Ken. I bet it would have more orange and magenta in it, though. Like burnt orange and dried-blood magenta or something. Wait, that sounds a little evil. Hmmmmmmm……

So, you wouldn't call Ken's altitudinal color scheme (not Spiral Dynamics… talking about the one in Integral Spirituality) an integral color scheme?  You know what I'm talking about right?  For example, Amber is the altitude that would correspond to the Blue vMeme, but it would also correspond to that same altitude in all the other lines.  Is that not an integral color scheme, or is it just a color scheme.  I'm confused.  Please explain using Brondual language.

I haven’t read Integral Spirituality. Its not available for purchase so I had only heard whispers about it. I suppose the one in that book totally would be an integral color scheme.

in which case I am totally stoked that KDub has his own colors.

cause I didn’t think he did…

but it becomes clear that he does…

and for that I am glad.

Jake, don't take Brondu too seriously. he's just a weird ass (pun intended because an ass is somewhat related to a horse) and still very much infected with Wilberitis (same as ~Matthew).

great, just what we all need. more freakin' colors representing the Wilber-Combs matrix. GAAA!!! 

get a life Brondu, or a crush, or something not related to enumclaw.

Brondu, there's also an integral spirituality pdf out there somewhere that Wilber released to the public that clearly defines this altitudinal scheme as well as some other cool stuff, like zones.  Hence, my integral math jokes earlier this year.

to have a life you need a driver’s license. and I don’t have one of those.

man! you can drink without a driver's license? only in Canada…. :)

Good post, and very true on an individual level. One other point

Leaving a spiritual teacher is not, psychologically, like leaving your basketball coach.  There's a lot more involved, and a much greater possibility of wounding.  It's not an “easy” thing, and to imagine that it is, is unrealistic.  

Here for more .

 Because of that - as with psychologists - there necessarily is a greater need for a “Code of Ethics” for spiritual teachers - starting with “First, Do No Harm”.

As an example, here is the Code of Ethics for the American Association of Pastoral Counselors.

 A long bit:

1. We do not abandon or neglect clients. If we are unable, or unwilling for appropriate reasons, to provide professional help or continue a professional relationship, every reasonable effort is made to arrange for continuation of treatment with another professional.
2. We make only realistic statements regarding the pastoral counseling process and its outcome.
3. We show sensitive regard for the moral, social, and religious standards of clients and communities. We avoid imposing our beliefs on others, although we may express them when appropriate in the pastoral counseling process.
4. Counseling relationships are continued only so long as it is reasonably clear that the clients are benefiting from the relationship.
5. We recognize the trust placed in and unique power of the therapeutic relationship. While acknowledging the complexity of some pastoral relationships, we avoid exploiting the trust and dependency of clients. We avoid those dual relationships with clients (e.g., business or close personal relationships) which could impair our professional judgement, compromise the integrity of the treatment, and/or use the relationship for our own gain.
6. We do not engage in harassment, abusive words or actions, or exploitative coercion of clients or former clients.
7. All forms of sexual behavior or harassment with clients are unethical, even when a client invites or consents to such behavior or involvement. Sexual behavior is defined as, but not limited to, all forms of overt and covert seductive speech, gestures, and behavior as well as physical contact of a sexual nature; harassment is defined as but not limited to, repeated comments, gestures or physical contacts of a sexual nature.
8. We recognize that the therapist/client relationship involves a power imbalance, the residual effects of which are operative following the termination of the therapy relationship. Therefore, all sexual behavior or harassment as defined in Principle III, G with former clients is unethical.

 If most gurus/teachers would conform to something like the above, adapted for their mileau of course, I think there would at least be a reduction in these type of incidences. 

 Any chance of Zaadz - as an organization - only associating with other organizations that are willing to adopt and sign off on a formal code of behavior?  

that's a good one ebuddha. i would prefer that too. however, signing off on a formal code of behaviour is stretching it a bit.  also, anyone could sign this but still be an a-hole. e.g. doctors pledge the Hippocratic Oath all the time but there are still lots of a-hole doctors.

spiritual teachers, at least those authentic ones, need not sign such an agreement because IT IS already part of their job to be ethical.

IMHO, what i think Zaadz should do is to be neutral with compassion as much as possible with any spiritual organizations and let the Collective and Collaborative Intelligence of the social network determine which organizations and/or spiritual teachers do not live up to expected ethical standards. 

my two cents.

This is beautiful ebuddha.

~C4Chaos is right for his 2 cents. We can expect developed AQAL teachers to be conscience that they are part of therapeutic process. The process of human developing the student experiences. The UR of being a student is reflected in the UL+LL+LR development of Knowledge. In that way teachers are tools of healing, hence they should take  Hippocratic Oath.

I will try to get my  cent  -

Fred Kofman was asked in one of Integral Naked videos about the issue of sex relationship of teacher-student. He suggested the answer was something like:  “what a good question. We should keep this question”. Gafny's legal allegations are exactly in this question mark.  And the signs are that he failed this question.

I accept Kaufman suggestion because I recognize the erotic dimension of learning this Kosmos. Student-teacher relationships are erotic in that sense.

When I try to grasp the notion of the nondoal, I am in a point that I recognize that We cannot run away from problematic teachers it is no longer external. So, We left with the expression of Wisdom in Compassion. But what ever they do, they sharing it with us. Gafny's faults are wide and destructive, his record show it and some people who were with him felt it. We cannot let his faults hurt others, nor himself nor Us. We need to be able to express the collective wisdom and do what we can. Gany is a good lesson for us, it is a good lesson for me.

I pray :

Let Gafny develop his personality to contain his abilities.

I wish the miracle to hear Gafny again and be able to believe in him.

The joy will be so great. The message will be so clear.

Amen