Why I Am Abandoning Esotericism (pt2)
If you read Classical Sufi stories - which I still hold to be repositories of ‘wisdom’ - then you often find a situation like this: Seeker X goes to Teacher Y and says something like this ‘can I sign up/have instant enlightenment/be accepted as a disciple/etc etc’.
Teacher Y generally does not accept the seeker in this manner as this is probably not a fruitful approach but he does something else: he gives the seeker what he actually needs at that point in time for his development.
This, being a prescribed thing suitable for the individual, is not a formulaic response and hence is different for different seekers but generally Teacher Y might say “sorry, you are not suitable because XXX” or perhaps “there is something else you need to do first and this is what it is.....” or even “do xxxxxx” or maybe just a resounding “no”.
What he doesn’t do is just ignore the questioner completely. Yet this is exactly what many of the current crop of ‘groups’ actually do. The amount of people I know who say “I wrote to Shah and received no reply - it is a test”. “no answer is an answrer”, “They are preparing the materials” or something is unfeasibly large, It has happened to me also to receive no reply to letters written to several ‘teachers’, Shah included.
But in terms of Shah, I do not in any way hold this as a criticism or include him with the people I am implicitly criticizing. Why? Quite simply because he addresses this very issue many times in his books and offers the reasons for why he does not respond in many cases. Regardless of whether one agrees with these reasons, the fact is he is explaining what he is doing and why and acting in accordance with his statements. Absolutely no problem with that. I and other ‘letter writers’ should have paid those passages more attention and tried to apply what we’d learnt.
What I do have a problem with is rudeness and impoliteness where it has not developmental nutrient. Clearly, in the above case, one could study Shah’s work and arrive at deeper understanding of one’s motivation for letter writing, the constraints on the recipient’s time, one’s own silliness etc. So the ‘rejection’ (if such it is) is a potentially beneficial action.
Now, this is not the case with other ‘Sufic’ groupings or figures who also use this tactic of not replying to a mail. To me, in these cases, it is just rudeness (if one can be sure that the person written to has received the missive) - but what is it actually saying?
Well, it is saying nothing is it? Most likely because nothing can be said.
To me, it seems entirely logical that if one has embarked on a study of esotericism - Sufism, say - that one must follow the outline of the teaching as laid down by the teaching. And the questioning of ‘Masters’ by ‘Seekers’ is outlined quite clearly in that teaching. The seekers didn’t put it there, they didn’t write the stories that feature this motif and if the stories did not feature this but, for argument’s sake, teachers who constantly ignored questions and letters, then that would be the benchmark. Only it isn’t is it?
Readers of this blog write to me relatively often at my personal mail. As all readers will be painfully aware, I am not teacher and not any wiser than anyone else, but sometimes they ask a question about something I wrote. I always write back without exception - well, perhaps there is one exception: if I suspect it is one of the spammers who often write also - even if I don’t have anything constructive to contribute (as is often, I’m afraid, the case). Why? Because it is BASIC ETIQUETTE AND POLITENESS. If someone takes the trouble to write - all the more so if they take some time and thought about it - then I feel a responsibility to reply, even if it is to say I can’t help.
So if I can do this, why cannot someone who lays claim to being a ‘teacher’ - ie, someone who has reached the end of the road, has achieved their full potential and has a remit to help all humanity not just some quasi-religious elite of the ‘chosen’. Why can they not just reply saying “Sorry, can’t help. Don’t contact me again” even?
Seems to me there are only a few possibilities in this situation:
1) You are temporarily unable to learn.
2) You are permanently unable to learn.
3) You are able to learn.
Which one does such an action fall under? How does it help?
