Oh Great Tarvu,
Interesting topic, this one
One of qualities I find virtue in is the sense of ‘freedom’, feeling unbound, spontaneous,
unburdened by the weight of expectations and self-limiting judgments; and characterized
by a lack of fear, anger and suffering. I
do think there are teachers that have knowingly used unusual, even aberrant
behavior to make good points, and I’ve seen this in action a few times. I think a depth of freedom, innocence and
unpredictability can arise in the actions of someone that has grown past unnecessary
artifice and limitations. Wisdom can provide 'space’ to act consciously, which can fall outside of norms and memes when
translated into action.
The ‘Crazy Wisdom' tradition became codified in Tibetan Buddhism, and was typified in
Padmasambhava, who is credited with bringing Buddhism to Tibet. His brand of Buddhism was very different
than, say, Christian ethics, where it’s pretty easy to see where someone is coming
from by their behavior, and where there is a pedagogy around a divine, theistic
hierarchy and a complimentary way of being that falls in line. Whereas
much of hardcore Tibetan Buddhism points at eradicating even the idea of individual
being, and also points toward the idea that an individual cannot be ‘spiritually
evaluated’ by how they behave. Crazy Wisdom, on behalf of teachers, would sometimes involve radical behavior to
intentionally force question into a student’s limited idea of what is
happening, hopefully to jog them into a heightened awareness of what actually ‘is’. Zen’s use of Koans is similar in a way.
In looking at the Crazy Wisdom effect in a teacher’s behavior, the judgement of where to draw the
line with what is acceptable to the viewer is the crux, and likely based on the
extent of the harm to others a teacher’s behavior generates Vs. any wake up
calls and beneficial effects it may have on the student, and also how conscious
and intentional the aberrant behavior is (and if not just pathology at work). I suppose this is true of most types of
teachers that utilize some level of shock value, and surely the stock and trade
of many performance artists.
I know I have been shocked out of mental lethargies and self-limiting ideas in a very
refreshing way at times via something I have heard or witnessed, whether from a teacher or not.
A dear friend of mine and a teacher in the Zen tradition sent me a missive this past week that
included the following paragraph:
“As humans, as beings who evolved to possess the current configuration of neuronal circuitry and synthetic cognitive
capacities, we are very keen to constantly construct and project upon the flow
of our experience abstractions about that experience. In the process, which is
so ubiquitous and smooth that we rarely are aware that we are generating and
propagating a derivative version of reality, we strive for a conclusive version
of the narrative—an answer, a theory, a philosophy—that once and for all will
explain everything for everybody for all time. This quirky twist in the
trajectory of the evolution of our species surely contributed to our survival,
as it allowed us not only to get really accurate at anticipating and predicting
course of events but also made it possible for each one of us to create a very
convincing sense of an independent self, imbued with apparently self-evident
importance and meaning, that needed to be sustained, cherished and protected at
any cost. But the price for that evolutionary shift is the distancing from
direct, sensory experience and the atrophy of our abilities to simply feel and
trust the immediacy of the raw contact and grounding without having to revert
to compartmentalizing and organizing the wild content of our lives."
Back in the late 60’s and early 70’s, there was a wave of change that was pushing the limits of social mores and individual limitations.
I found the sense of impending freedom that permeated the air around GMJ, and I really enjoyed its wonderful nuttiness (and at the same time would recoil at its seamy sides and some of the stupid shit going on). But I recall perceiving spontaneity in
the way he seemed to live and respond to his surroundings. But it seems to me that this gave way a long time ago to constrictions and constructs that no longer promoted a sense of freedom and ease. But when I look at GMJ and premiedom today, I see constriction that borders upon strangulation, and a narrowing of potential and possibility in its ‘corporate methodology’ rather than ongoing opening to new learning and personal growth. This is also written in his face now, I actually feel sad in the company of still-practicing premies, and am mystified at how they can continue to invest their time in something so obviously nowhere.
I haven’t spent any time around him for decades, but I would be interested to hear what it was like in his household more recently. Was there a lot of laughter, a sense of ‘funness’ around him?? I am sure there are many on the Forum that could weigh in on this.
Mike
(after perhaps one too many cups of coffee)
