Words and Authority
April 17th, 2007 by Ernie
I don’t consider myself to have any authority or to be a ‘spiritual person’. Holly & I joke that she once asked me to help weed out our yard and I said in jest, You can’t ask a spiritual person to weed a yard! To which she replied,I didn’t….
But I do love to talk about what I see and to offer this one ordinary life (see Introduction) as evidence that it is possible for regular people, conditioned western minds who have made terrible mistakes in life and who continue to be challenged, to live at least occasionally beyond the psychological “meâ€. So, as a working hypothesis, here’s my take on words and teachers today…
• I believe words are only helpful in understanding ourselves if we use them to point to something real. So, to have a fruitful conversation with someone, we’d have to both be looking in the same direction and trying to describe what we actually see. The words you use may be wildly different from the ones I use. What would be important in such a conversation would be what we are watching together, not the words. And because words are part of thought, it is easy, even natural, to make assumptions about meaning, about one’s motives or identity with the words. You can see the trap of trying to describe the self and its tricks using the self’s own primary mode of expression. It requires a great sense of forbearance to listen to another and seek out what truth is there amidst the always feeble attempt with words. Music and other non-verbal expressions would be much better I think. But we’re humans wired for language and I believe we also can use that faculty to communicate about this.
• There is such an unholy assertion of authority in the world, and every corner of human activity and interest is painted over with it. Anyone trying to use words in this area of human life is easily tainted with it, whether it is so or not. This is probably especially true in western culture, where thought is so vaunted as supreme. Thought creates divisions and authority, imaginary lines and levels. Most of us have gotten caught up in it at one time or another and it’s a shame. I remember a talk by Alan Watts in San Francisco years ago who made this point by referring to the grid of SF city streets and while standing at the beach, gesturing at the sea, said something like, “You see, the mind makes lines, but life is wiggly!â€
• So what can we talk about? What’s actual in the moment is always new, fresh, real, and indescribable. Words are woefully inadequate to touch it and a mind can’t hold it. On the other hand, what blocks someone from accessing the mysterious moment is not so fresh at all, but rather is just the past, memory, and knowledge – consistent, automatic, mechanical, often destructive and certainly sneaky. This is true whether such mechanistic movement is believed by someone to be ‘spiritual’ or mundane. What I think I “know†won’t help me see even that, and indeed may blind me. All of this is available to be seen.
I believe that we can speak with any accuracy only about the latter – the machinations of the ‘me’ – and even that is daunting. The self, the psychological movement of thought, can be seen and described. I think of the process as empirical in the sense that I can watch and learn about it as I watch (actually I’d say that in the seeing, it disappears). It isn’t a process of gaining knowledge but of immediate perception. The utility of pointing at the self or its tricks is like someone saying, “Look, there’s a tsunami coming, get to high ground!†He isn’t setting himself above anyone, only warning of a danger he sees. It’s perfectly natural for him to do so. We wouldn’t consider him a teacher, but we might pay attention and look for ourselves! Similarly, the dangers of the ‘self-run-amok’ are all around us. We ought to warn one another. Where there’s openness, we can discuss it and check things out for ourselves, bring attention to it.
Krishnamurti asked an audience once how they could tell whether he was telling them the truth or not. After much discussion, the answer was we’d have to have our own direct perception. This makes the point both that there is no authority, and that there is something we can see for ourselves. So it seems to me I can’t ‘become’ innocent, but I can nail arrogance for what it is: thought claiming for itself the center of human life. Then the window is open for something else…
• I also think we can share our experiences with one another – what happened to us, what if felt like and how we sense it changed us. This is a uniquely human enterprise. But these sharings are just smoke trails following an event, not the thing itself, and have no use to anyone else as fact, but only as someone’s experience. The words can never be the thing and are always a lie in the sense of being puny and after the fact, or feeble attempts to describe the indescribable. Still, like a Rumi poem or Beethoven symphony, expressions can be lovely creations in themselves. Though they are inherently inadequate to capture the movement of life, they serve to point (well or ill) to something available but usually unseen. I believe the sayings or writings of people like Jesus, the Buddha, Jiddu Krishnamurti and recently Eckhart Tolle are like this. They all point to something similar – the workings of the self – and invite us to inquire into our beings what may lie beyond. I’m so grateful they have done so.
• And then there is the Other. Life as the wonder and mystery which cannot be touched with words at all, though we all try and fail. It isn’t something I can ‘get’, like a prize. Pointing to the Mystery is useless if a listener has blinders on, and is unnecessary if she does not. Indeed, the only sane approach is to assume nothing, know nothing. Whatever I think I know is useless in the face of it. Perception reigns here. Nothing that happened yesterday can help me today, nor prevent me from being fully alive. I must dissolve, and be glad to do so.
Awesome, Dude! 🙂 I found this a nice overview of the traps in our use of words. Not all that long ago, I would pour out thousands of words to try to convince another of my view. Honestly believing that I was helping them. Now I’m more likely to smile and wonder at their unique life, which I can never really know. Listening with my whole being. Perhaps feeling a little sadness if I see suffering happening; curious if there might be an opening to see the cause of that suffering…
It was not that many months ago when I found myself not at all sure what you were talking about, and what I could be missing after so many years of learning and study (and even a fair amount of “spiritual experiences”). And indeed, it was not your description of “that which cannot be named” which finally made everything clear, but your tireless and gentle pointing to that which is in the way, whether Guy’s or Ernie’s. And the demonstration that it was possible…
I do find that simply noticing what Guy and his mind tricks are up to releases me from identification from all that, and the world changes in a moment. All is well… And it took no effort. No trying. In fact, if there is a “trick” it is NOT to put any effort into trying to gain that particular state of being. It’s like those old blow-up “Boppo Clowns” I had when I was a kid. I keep finding that Guy has a foot on the head, holding it sideways, and it simply needs to be noticed. Then he steps off, and the clown pops back upright, bobbing back and forth like a happy prisoner released from a life long sentence.
Thank you again, my friend…
Guy
Hi Ernie,
I have read your message here over and over again. There are many good things said. Thank you for that.
I like your description about the tsunami coming related to possibly pointing at the dangers of the self-run-amok. Of course, as you say, there needs to be openness.
I would hope that you have received my blogs in the spirit in which they are meant. I may perceive a tsunami so I speak. You may perceive a tsunami so you speak. Someone else may perceive a tsunami so they speak. I believe that is apart of your invitation offering here within this forum. If not, please just let me know.
With that in mind, I do have a question related to your last message. I would hope that you receive this in the spirit of what it is intended and not construe it as a spirit of contention.
You state that you do not think you are a spiritual person and you do not have any authority. There are many praises about you in this Website that describe you as being a spiritual person and having authority yet you did not correct these assertions. On the contrary, your only response to most of these is something like, “thanks for the supportâ€.
Here a just a couple that stand out:
“Ernie Thayer represents and “embodies†the most important potentials and insights available to human beingsâ€. I would consider that a description of somebody being very spiritual that possesses “embodies†authority. To bring clarity to this, what if you had said, “I represent and embody the most important potentials and insights available to human beingsâ€. You may say that you never said that though and it was someone else’s opinion but I did not see you correct this statement. I can only conclude that you accepted it as truth. Why didn’t you speak out against this danger? Don’t you see the expediency and necessity to speak out about this tsunami?
And then there is Guy’s statement referring to you: “Also there is a “magic†if you will, about someone speaking from that state of being, and simply hearing the voice can often change you. Without knowing that Guy was speaking about you I would have to think that he is speaking about the Christ. Wouldn’t you agree that Guy is speaking about a spiritual person that has authority?
My question to you is why do you allow these statements to take place without speaking out against these affirmations while at the same time you state that you do not believe that you are spiritual person or have authority? It would appear to me that since you are making this statement you would be very vigilant to make sure everyone always understands your position. Saying thanks for your support doesn’t seem very vigilant to me.
Mark
Mark,
So where does the concern about “Authority” come from? I would say it is an artifact of our culture, and part of being a human being who believes himself a separate animal being with a long history of physical domination ruling survival.
In truth, we are each our own ultimate spiritual authority. By which I mean that no other human being can take that role, and we have our own direct connection to Spirit.
Many of us are afraid to claim that power, and tend to look for others to take responsbility for our lives. I am certainly still watching that in myself. Like all tricks of the ego, it is sly and subtle though…
There is certainly a trap there, and it permeates our entire culture. Many people in our culture seem to be looking for an authority to think for them, or at least to control other people. We even look for someone to take on the authority to correct others who might possibly think them an authority. 🙂
What if we simply each speak the truth of our experience, and let others speak their truth, with none of us claiming authority over the other?
It seems to me that if Ernie were to “correct” people when they related their own experiences and their conclusions, THAT would be asserting authority.
So the question seems to be whether he should be hyper-vigilant about others ascribing some “spritual authority” to him, especially in a public forum. Let’s take the example you gave of what I said about being in the presence of someone (Ernie in this particular example, but not necessarily) in “that state” and how that alone can cause change…
The idea that I was talking about “authority” did not come from me… I don’t see it that way at all, and Ernie knows that about me. So there was nothing to correct.
Should he project onto others what they “might” be thinking, even though this exchange between us was speaking of a truth we both understood, and there was nothing to correct? I think that might be called co-dependence… And frankly, the whole idea that what was being discussed was “authority” did not occur to me, and maybe not to him either. It is a concept which other people bring in and project upon an experience which is really quite different.
What this blog is about is Ernie having the courage to describe his experiences, knowing that the majority of the culture will bring all the baggage about religion into the mix, and accuse him of thinking he is The Messiah. But what he is really saying is that there is an amazing transformation available to ANYONE, and people he knows are also transforming. It is completely outside any religious belief on his part, and his simply his direct experience. The religious overtone come from other people and their own existing belief systems.
It is true that his experiences are not the norm in our culture, and some people are saying that they have noticed that from their direct experience with him. But there is no sense in “correcting” the truth.
I might also say similar things about other people I know, so for me, it’s not just about one particular person. I don’t share that world view there is only one human who can evolve. We all can do so, and it is happening now.
My favorite passage from The Bible is when Jesus said something like “Ye shall do greater things than I have done.” Seems that even within the common religious beliefs, there is room for more people who might affect others by “their” presence. (actually, standing in a larger Presence is probably more accurate)
So does the fact that his presence tends to change lives mean he has some responsibility to be sure that no one misunderstand what some people say about their experiences with him? Only if it is “Ernie” who has that power. But it isn’t. That power to change lives only exists to the degree to which there is no “Ernie.”
Transformation in this way cannot happen if some ego is micro-managing things. It only happens when the ego is seen for what it is.
I don’t remember precisely where I heard it, but somewhere along the way I learned that to allow the possibility for another person to change, I should not talk to the dysfunctional part of them. Instead, I should ignore the protests and tricks of the dysfunctional ego, and talk directly to the most aware part. It might not even seem to sink in, and it is not under my control whether it does or not. But it is the only possible approach which might work.
So it seems to me that Ernie will be most effective in talking to whatever awareness is present, and which might be able to hear him , but not feed the monster in the doorway.
Guy
Mark, this site is open for discussion about something lovely happening in me and others. I don’t want to offer it for ongoing inquiry about whether Ernie pretends some authority. I don’t and have said so as clearly as I can. Having just re-read the entire site, it seems obvious.
I invited you here with genuine affection and was disturbed and surprised by the thrust of your comments (direct and otherwise). I’ve checked my heart and find nothing in me of the authority you insist I have. I’ve given my genuine response to your suspicions in the April 17 post above. I suppose you can find what you’re looking for whether it’s here or not. Now it’s time for me to disengage about this.
Ernie
Dear Ernie,
I am disappointed but not surprised by your response. One lesson to learn by all this Ernie. When you see a friend for the first time in two years and that friend invites you to get together to have a real honest sincere talk with him, you should take him up on that instead of ignoring him. We could have discussed this one on one about three months ago. Disengaging with discussions about yourself like you did two years ago, three months ago and now, is not healthy or wise. It is very easy to point your finger outward but when a finger is pointing at you it is not that easy to deal with. Conveniently using spiritual applications to run and hide isn’t a very healthy choice. Remember the old saying: There is nothing to fear except fear itself. And one more: Never underestimate the ego.
Consider this topic finished.
I must now say good-bye to everyone especially you Bd. I enjoyed the love and light that we felt between each other. You are a very special person.
Mark
Ernie,
“Words and Authority” is a wonderful posting. Thank you for sharing this with us. Awhile back you said to me the question “What is really happening here?” is possibly a good question to be curious about when trying to penetrate the filters of our stories and beliefs into deeper levels of reality. When I work with you that is the question I think about because sometimes it helps me to see what it is you are pointing at. I don’t always get what you are pointing at but the times that I can sense it I feel the bigness/vastness of it. I am awed that you are able articulate “it” as well as you can because I’m can be stuck in the aweness of it. But when I have some clarity of “it” I find that your words have been chosen well. Because of this I think of you as a guide, someone who has more experience of something that I’m very curious about and who is willing to, over and over again, point out some interesting things. Dear Guide, thank you for the wonderful work you are doing.