--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The thing that's fascinating to me is the "trickle- > down craziness" involved with this. It's not just a > case of some lazy fucks realizing that there is an > easy way to avoid working, and that it's called > begging. That's just one side of the phenomenon and > of the conditioning. > > The other side of the conditioning is seen in the > *sponsors*, the people who have been taught that > there is some *benefit* to themselves that accrues > when they pay so that these guys and gals never have > to work. It's a remarkably symbiotic relationship; > one side of the equation couldn't exist without > the other. > > I know that a lot of people here and in spiritual > trips in general just assume that this is all a given, > and that it's always worked this way -- people who > have chosen a full-time spiritual "career" being > supported by those who have money and have chosen > a more householder path. I'm challenging the very > *idea* because I really believe that it's a *bad* > idea, and that most of the problems that one can > find in *any* spiritual tradition spring from this > assumption, and from this practice. Historically, > the spiritual traditions in which the monks or > clergy pay their own way in life, and are *not* > supported by the "rank and file" members of the > organization, seem to me to be much cleaner and > spiritually healthier. > > Just *think* about it for a moment -- it's one of > the biggest scams in human history. In almost every > era and in every tradition, all that you had to do > to avoid getting a job like everybody else was to > claim to be "spiritual" and get other people to pay > so that you could be "spiritual" full time. I'm > open to the possibility that many of these full-time > teachers might have done a few nice things for the > world, but when you look at it objectively, it's > really quite amazing that no one really challenges > the status quo of this whole scene and questions > it. The meme of the rank-and-file rabble paying > for the lives of the spiritual elite is that > taken for granted, that ingrained in the collective > consciousness. > **** This is healthy questioning. The kind of giving where you buy yourself a good conscience and a better feeling of yourself by the giving, makes me feel quite uncomfortable. It could be healthy to ask oneself: why do I need to buy myself a good conscience? A lot of developmental aid has been given to the developing countries, but how much has it really helped those people? Look at Africa? Could it be worse without the aid and interfering in the lives of those people by westerners in the name of charity. I am all for support for the poor and weak. Unfortunately this support often comes in a form that makes it possible for people to continue with the attitudes and lifestyle that has made them poor and weak. Basically the same applies for spiritual people. The idea of people in spiritual organizations living luxurious lives through actively collecting support money feels disgusting. Even more disgusting feels the present trend in many organizations to collect money to charity purposes and then actually use at least part of that money to empire building for your organization and your own luxurious life. Mother Theresa is often seen as an epitome of selfless giving. But was she really? She also powerfully preached against birth control. In other words she actively contributed to the situation that a lot of children are born to unbearable life-conditions. And then she created herself a halo by bringing a little bit relief to a few of those unfortunate beings. I have heard that Indian government doesn't like the work of her organization, because it attracts poor people to the big cities, which increases the problems of the slums. These people would be better off in their villages. We send food aid to people in hunger. And what is the result? These people breed like rabbits. The number of people living in unbearable conditions multiplies. And no incentive appears for them to change their values and attitudes and lifestyle, that has lead to their present problems. Of course I feel also bad about the idea of not helping those people. But open and honest evaluation of the situation may help in developing better means to help. And it may help in discriminating between the help organizations. I myself believe at the moment that the best way to help developing countries is, when governments give money to those governments in developing countries that do good work. And the private help organizations should at least try to co-operate with the governments of the developing countries. Irmeli ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Join modern day disciples reach the disfigured and poor with hope and healing http://us.click.yahoo.com/lMct6A/Vp3LAA/i1hLAA/UlWolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
