The conventional identity moves from low to high and back again as part of the dual emotional self-image. Through the formation of various subpersonalities, we utilize these images and subsequently, influence our actions in the world. When we do any transformation on the identity, which involves their stabilization, particularly in True Philosophy, they go through a transformation. We can look at the way the different faculties operate or co-operate, through the analogy of a political institution, for as in a governmental organization, our faculties are like departments that operate within the domain of the organization of power and authority of whatever the type and form of identity.
For example, if a person has quit an addiction and then for some reason, experiences a relapse, one identity, perhaps from depression, let’s say, decides to use the particular substance (food, sex, shopping, alchohol, whatever). The reason for the relapse occurred through a decision of power and authority: a new identity took control, as it were, and the other faculties, such as thought, emotion, volition, instinct, etc. were compliant or were otherwise mobilized to follow the new administrator. Our faculties are like departments which take orders from whatever identity is establishing itself, much like a government. Any governmental institution is an organization of power and authority and all the different departments are organized in a certain fashion, depending upon the particular political institution.
We will use seven different governmental institutions as an analogy to point to the way the individual mobilizes its faculties - or departments- in order to navigate social experience. This will not be a critique of governments, but will be identified as a list of the most destablized to the most stable, or to put it more appropriately, from chaos to unity. We will briefly describe the make up of the literal political institution, and from there describe the corresponding organization from within the individual, or how this person manages his life. These are not “states of consciousness”, where an individual moves from one to the other, through discreet time frames, and enters a new “stage”. Many individuals can move into more than one, throughout the day or week. When there is more internal work, and transformation, the anchoring of the last two are more constant and there is little moving back into the earlier, less stabilized forms of “governments” (or if there is, then it will be for brief periods).
1). Anarchy - This is, of course, the least stable form of political organization and can be considered a literal chaos. An anarchy cannot contain any political order; that is the definition of an anarchy. The example of the individual anarchy is the drunk. Notice that his faculties are not under any organization at all. He moves around without any direction at all. Another example is a person who is institutionalized. He is under the complete guidance of an external authority. In a less extreme example, a person with an attack of depression has a loss of will; there is very little sense of any direction. A depressed person lacks will; there is often just eating, sleeping, entertainment and the simple sense of personal boundary (survival).
2). Tyranny (Despotism, Plutocracy)- This is a very crude form of political organization and it takes the form of an irrational leader who leads out of erratic, control. The citizens often act out of fear, for they do not know what this crazed leader will do next. It was probably what the Romans felt under the rulership of a Caligula, or perhaps, Nero. Strange as it may seem, the tyranny is actually a more stable form of order than the anarchy, for in this case, there can at least be some form of organization, through a central leader, albeit highly erratic and impractical. In ordinary living, we experience the “inner tyranny” when we are taken over by a substance or an irrational emotion or outburst. When we are in the throws of an addiction, we are “out of control” and the other areas of our life - the other departments - are thinking, “Oh God, what is he doing now?”. The same with an emotional outburst or internal implosion that keeps the person so preoccupied that it literally damages other areas of the life. For example, a person at work is given a notice that there will be layoffs. He becomes so pre-occupied that he starts to miss oppointments and is so sloppy in his duties that there are mistakes and even small accidents. He is taken over by an irrational identity - leader, boss - and other areas of life are affected.
3). Monarchy - This form of government involves the establishment of a central ruler, usually a king or queen, but there is much more concern for the citizens. There is a strong interest in power and control, but the leader realizes the importance for having it’s citizens comfortable, so the leader gives them “crumbs” and other forms of reassurance. Of course, constitutional monarchies are more stable than the unconstitutional form. This is a more stable form of government than a tyranny, for the monarch does not rule out of fear, and thus the citizens have more reassurance. In the individual’s life, this is the state of ambition. One area of life, whether business, art or recreation takes center stage in the life and other areas are not seen as vital, only things to take care of, for this person understands responsibility. This is like the head of a business that works 90 or a 100 hours a week and has little time for the wife, kids, friends and other things, but manages to give them “crumbs” of attention and othe forms of reassurance. There is one powerful identity that takes the lead over other identities that may surface; this is more stable than the irrational sensual outbreak or emotional outuburst, for even though this ambition crowds out other important areas, at least it is legal and has some functional use in society.
4). Democracy - This is the political institution that prevents the less stabilized earlier forms of tyranny and monarchy from emerging, giving more freedom to it’s citizenry. There is a centralized government, with rights for the citizens, plus the ability to vote on others who represent them, thus the term: representative democracy. This is more stable than the other two, for the citizens have more interest and are more happy if they have more power and freedom. It is less stable than the three forms which will be mentioned as we proceed, because the democracy has little “direction” because of the persistent checks and balances that occur. In the individual life, this is the co-ordination and “juggling” of different identities and sub-personalities in the attempt to put the life together into a whole. There is the maturity of realizing that other areas of living are important, besides the one focus (reationship, career, art, etc), different from the monarchy; however, there is often the sense of complication, stress and inefficiency, for there is no strong central identity (leadership) that gives it direction. There is often the search for central values or some philosophy, but these are either not anchored or there are different ideas or philosophies that are experimented with, but with little staying power.
5). Socialism (Utopian) - This is the political instituation that is centralized around an ideal, usually political, economic or religious. In the political-economic form, there is an idealogy of the sharing of the means of production among the citizens with the distaste for greed and corruption that often emerges with wealth and unbridled freedom. This is more stabilized than the others, for the citizens are believe in the same ideology, and are more likely to band together, for the ideology itself, whether religious or political, will tend to prevent dissenting voices. The ideology may have built-in laws and legal forms of redress which can counteract forces of dissention. In the individual life, this the utilization of a central ideology, often religious, which pulls together or attempts to stabilize the many sub-personalities. There is more stability and less confusion, for the many identities are under the perview of the central belief system. An less refined example is fundamentalist religion, where the all areas of life are put under the scrutiny of the sayings and ideas of a central book. In other forms of transformation, this is where there begins the process of unification: the person absorbs themselves in a book or ideas and attempt to learn them and apply the practice to their life. There is usually the relationship between teacher and student, in a strict sense..
6). Aristocracy - This is the purified form, and not the hereditary type or other styles which depend upon status or otherwise allow individuals who have little true wisdom or capacity. This is leadership by individuals who are indeed wise and compassionate. They have an immediate understanding of their expertise, while tuning into the ideals (whether inspirational or humanistic) while showing respect, freedom and care for the citizens. In the individual life, this is the conventional wise person, who deepens their life experience, through study, learning and experience, and has learned from mistakes and applied their learning to areas of their life. The sub-personalities and identities are more transparent and can soften and dissolve through the application of wisdom and training. In the realm of transformation, they are beyond just reading the books and attempting to try practices, but have integated them into their lives. They have experience with the training and have identified the ideas (theory) through validity in their own lives, even allowing their own individuality to mix in. The formal teacher-student relationship transforms into a special friendship. There is not the formal sense of authority, but the realization that this person is there for them, or is special to them, just as a special friend.
7). True Soverignty (Republic) - This is the most stable form of Government. It consists of a wise, powerful leader (the Philosopher King orQueen, in the Platonic sense) that not only tunes into transpersonal aspects, but intelligently guides the citizens, unselfishly and without concern for power or genuflection. All of the citizens are subservient to the leader’s understanding, through conscious decision, displaying their true talents. They all play their seperate parts efficiently, without interfering with other roles, while serving the Leader, consciously. There is some similarities to the monastery, where all the disciples follow the main teacher, while each has it’s own role and job in the monastery. This form of government allows the most “direction”; they are unified towards the purpose understood by the philosopher King, and the inhabitants are devoted towards this. In the individual, the Real Self becomes the true leader, and the other “departments”, the faculties, server this leader. There is true unity of direction, because all the areas of experience, are focused on the true understanding of experience, through self-knowledge (unlike the monarchy, where the direction, through narcissistic ambition, is fragmented towards one area). This unity does not fragment into other subpersonalities (factions) which disturb the unity of the person, and cause complications and dramas. All the faculties “serve” the True Self, the one true identity, which is the leader and organizer of the faculties. Also, each faculty plays it’s own destined part and does not interfer with other faculties. Although working with other faculties or departments, they do not interfere with the others where their function is not involved, or cause mischief. For example, the emotions do not influence thought; attention does not unduly influence instinct. Unlike the aristocracy, where wise thoughts are utilized; here, there is direct contact with the Real Self. Wisdom comes from direct experience, through contact with the Real Self, not through wise thoughts or interpretions. With regard to the teaching function, once an individual reaches this unity, they have no relationship to the teacher, other than “colleague”; there in no internal processing from the teacher-friend, or very little rehashing of views, or other interconnections of authority, for the student is now the authority, herself. When she communicates to others, she may utilize some of the views of the original authority, but feels totally comfortable in her individuation, by expressing her own views and understanding (different from spiritual paths, where the student always, through fear and deference, repeats the teachers views and ideals).
This entry was posted on Sunday, September 9th, 2007 at 2:13 pm and is filed under Articles. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.