Earned Authority

2006-4-19 14:32:00

John C writes:

I wonder how many people would accept this quote from Buddha on its truth and merit alone, without the name Buddha attached to it. In other words actually do what the quote says and "corroborate it by our own reason and consciousness."

JJ:

I think most people on the list already incorporate the essence of the quote and the name of Buddha would add little weight to their acceptance. For one thing Buddha wrote nothing down and who knows which quotes really do represent his actual thinking. And if they did most here are advanced enough to at least question the words if they sound incorrect.

John C:

I love this, this quote says we must believe in a thing "on the mere authority of a master", yet HPB had to make sure that we KNEW this was an utterance of Buddha. But, "Buddha" was not enough. It had to be "BUDDHA". No that wasn't enough; it had to be "LORD BUDDHA", printed on its own heading so that nobody would miss it. She is contradicting the truth which Buddha presents here, that we must not believe a thing just because an authority says it.

JJ:

I am also repulsed from using beastly like titles such as "Lord Buddha." Both Buddhists and Christians make the mistake of using the "names of blasphemy" calling their teachers "Lord," "his holiness" or "most reverend", etc.

That said, the second key of judgment must be used to see the correct use of authority. The one extreme of blind acceptance must be rejected, but also the automatic rejection of a real authority on a subject is also foolish.

When I am teaching something new and I have a quote from an authoritative source to back it up I usually will use it. Why? Because an earned authority, such as the Bible, carries weight with most people and will cause many to reflect more seriously on what I am presenting.

You have to remember that the only absolute authority I have used to establish my teachings are the souls of the students. I have not parted the Red Sea, walked on water or claimed any gold plates to dazzle the outer personality. Those who look on me as an earned authority do so because my words have registered again and again with their souls.

I am also influenced by earned authorities. Perhaps the greatest earned authority, as far as printed words are concerned, are the words of Jesus. Now suppose I had never heard of him or read his words and someone took a phrase out of context and presented it to me. Let us take a couple scriptures as examples:

"I come not to bring peace, but a sword."
"If your right hand offends you cut it off."
"Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you."

If we had never heard these words before and they were presented to us by some crazed-looking individual we would assume they were from the dark side.

But, if they come from an earned authority what do we do? We justifiably assume there may be more meaning to them than meets the eye. We may then study the words before and after to examine more closely what the true meaning may be.

Most of the time when I read DK I just glide along like a sponge because it registers so well with my soul. But every once in a while I find something that doesn't register. Because he is an earned authority I do not automatically reject it but then go back and read the before and after and make sure I understand what he is trying to communicate. In this case sometimes a closer reading resolves the problem with my soul. Other times it does not and I put it on the shelf. Of those things on the shelf some are resolved and I later see how they were true. Other things are still on the shelf and with a few others I just disagree, or at the least would communicate the idea in a different wording.

John C:

Then AAB goes on the repeat the same mistake. I don't blame RJ or myself. We are merely repeating what was already written. Does anybody else, besides me, see the irony and the hypocrisy here?

JJ:

A hypocrite teaches one thing and practices another. I do not see this in relation to the use of an earned authority for this is one of the main teachings presented here.

John C:

I did a test here on Keys a couple of years ago. I quoted JJ verbatim without attributing the quote to him, and oh what flack I got! Nobody recognized where the quote came from, and nobody wanted to corroborate the quote with their mind and consciousness. Instead, people wanted to argue with me and find fault with the quote, simply because they thought the statement came from me.

JJ:

I do not recall this instance and would find it interesting to examine the quote. If you have it handy how about posting it again? I know there are some things I have written that if taken out of context from the full article would be rejected by most.

John C:

But if I had simply included the reference to JJ, nobody would have said a thing.

JJ:

This doesn't always work. I know a many on this list will challenge me in a heartbeat if I say something that doesn't sound right to them. I can usually tell in advance when this will happen and word my posts carefully to avoid it. But sometimes I have to include something that will produce controversy to communicate my thought.

John C:

I think the same thing has happened to Buddha. People want to follow his teachings, but little has been left of his original writings, and now his followers worship him as some kind of a god. It's now "LORD BUDDHA". Boy, am I impressed! :)

JJ:

I certainly agree with this point.

The Quote: "THE LORD BUDDHA HAS SAID that we must not believe in a thing said merely because it is said; nor traditions because they have been handed down from antiquity; nor rumors, as such; nor writings by sages, because sages wrote them; nor fancies that we may suspect to have been inspired in us by a Deva (that is, in presumed spiritual inspiration); nor from inferences drawn from some haphazard assumption we may have made; nor because of what seems an analogical necessity; nor on the mere authority of our teachers or masters. But we are to believe when the writing, doctrine, or saying is corroborated by our own reason and consciousness. 'For this,' says he in concluding,'I taught you not to believe merely because you have heard, but when you believed of your consciousness, then to act accordingly and abundantly.' " Secret  Doctrine  III.  401

JJ:

Good quote, but even your own consciousness and reason may be based in illusion and all must be open to future correction. Even so we must go with the highest we know until more is given.

Dan writes:

Awhile back, don't remember why but I started questioning myself about why I was not wearing a seat belt. When I really dug in I found that I thought it more likely that a seatbelt probably would be a help in more accidents than it would be a detriment and realized that the whole time I had been NOT wearing a seatbelt, as a sort of a protest I guess, just because "THEY" (authority) had been trying to force me to. Sort of a passive-aggressive version of flipping "the beast" the bird I guess, ... here's one for the habitual rebel: Do not automatically discount, dismiss, ignore or COMBAT a thing (or try to induce others to) JUST because it WAS stated by somebody in/with "authority".

JJ:

This is a great point and illustrates the pendulum principle of how we swing from one extreme to the other and often miss the point in the middle.

I also have a natural inclination to reject authority and have to catch myself to make sure I examine such with objectivity.

I empathize with you on the seat belts for I do not like the silly laws that require us to follow rules for our own good.

My ex-wife was (and is) a fanatic in relation to the use of seat belts. She wouldn't dare drive three feet without buckling everyone up.

One time I picked up my kids for a visit and after they were all securely strapped in we took off. Then one of my kids noticed I didn't have my seat belt on and asked me why.

I replied, "I'm not going to have an accident today, so I won't need one. If I'm going to have an accident then I'll put one on."

My kids looked at me like I had lost my mind, but there was method in my madness. My kids were so over regulated and controlled by their mother that I felt I needed to push their thinking the other direction.

That which most people think needs done through law can be done better with proper education.

He had heard people speak contemptuously of money: he wondered if they had ever tried to do without it.
W. Somerset Maugham (1874 - 1965), "Of Human Bondage", 1915