|
When
I was invited to give this lecture to honor Victor Danner, I knew
that nothing short of physical incapacitation could prevent me
from accepting. For long before the 1976-77 academic year in which,
together with our wives, Victor and I guided thirty students around
the world studying religions on location, I had come to regard
him with a blend of affection and esteem that very few academic
colleagues have drawn from me, and that trip vastly deepened our
freindship.
And
when I was asked for the titel for my remarks, that too came easily.
It was clear to me that I wanted to speak to the master-disciple
relationship, for two reasons. First, during that round-the-world
trip I came to look u to Victor Danner as something like my master--not
in the full-blown sense of that word that I will be describing
here, but certainly as my mentor in matters far exceeding his
expertise as an Islamicist.
The
other and confirming reason for choosing this title was that it
brough to mind an essay concerning religious masters that I had
read many years ago. It appeared in a volume of essays by Professor
Joachim Wach titled Essays in the History of Religions,
and it impressed me to the point that I promised myself that when
I had time I would return to that essay, this time not just to
read it but to study it. We all know, though, what roads paved
with good intentions lead to--I never got back to that essay and
I saw this lecture as providing the prod to do that. I found Wach's
essay quite different from what I wanted to say; still I happily
credit him with sparking many of the ideas I will be trying to
develop.
Let
me begin by staking out my trajectory. I will not concern myself
with the conceptual content of what spiritual masters teach, which
obviously differs from master to master. Instead I shall try to
describe the character of the master's vocation, the kind of person
that fits this role. Second, I shall not concern myself with whether
the masters I shall be mentioning by name perfectly exemplify
the type or only approximate it. Disputes over degrees are notoriously
indeterminable; as someone remarked, we could argue all night
as to whether Julius Caesar was a great man or a very great man.
Instead, I shall be invoking Max Weber's notion of "ideal
types."In
the technical sense of that term which Weber moved into the terminology
of sociaology, an ideal type resembles a platonic form; whether
it is instatntiated is secondary because its primary object is
to keep our ideas in order.
But
regarding instantiation, I will say that the much publicized recent
rash of fallen gurus who betrayed their vocation is no ground
for deprecating the vocation as such, which I believe is the highest
calling life affords. Religious masters have contributed immeasurably
to civilizations, if indeed they did not launch every civilization
we know about. I personally think that as channels for the divine,
the greatest pace-setting masters did set civilizations in motion,
but nothing in what I say here turns on that opinion. To come
back to restate this second methodological point, it is the ideal
type of the master that I will be trying to depict.
Third,
I will range cross-culturally in my illustrations of the master's
vocation. I found Professor Danner's descriptions of Sufi masters
so mesmerizing (to reiterate the word the speaker who prceded
me, Dr. Zaineb Istrabadi, so aptly introduced) that I started
my preparations for this lecture thinking that I would concentrate
on them, but as I got into the subject, I realized that those
waters are too vast to allow for wading, which is all that I (who
am not an Islamicist) could manage.
Any
stab I might make trying to nuance the differences between the
Prophet Muhammad, the prototypical Islamic master, may peace be
upon him, and the masters who followed him--the first four caliphs
and their successors; the Imams in the Shi'ite tradition, and
masters who are known as Sufis (of which Jalal ad-Din al Rumi
is the best known in the West) to mention only obvious subdivisions--would
be unworthy of a lecture mounted by the Department of Middle Eastern
Languages and Cultures.
So
I will fall back on my professional enclave as a comparativist
and draw my examples from a variety of religious traditions, while
noting that I will be skipping over China. Lao Tzu is too obviously
mythological to be brought to focus, and though the high regard
of Confucius's disciples shines through every page of the Anelects,
the aphoristic character of their reports leads me to consider
Confucius, as the Chines themselves do, as their foremost teacher
rather than a religious master.
Nor
will I cite Socrates, though Plato's portrait of him as master
is as convinicing as any on record. And while I am mentioning
exclusions, let me say that I place prophets in a different category
from masters, although some prophets were also masters--I have
already mentioned Muhammad. In juaism, it is the Hasidic rebbe,
literally "master," rather than the bibilical prohpets
or ordained rabbis (teachers) who come closest to the masters
I am presenting here.
My
fourth and final guideline is of a different sort, for it is really
no more than a didactic device. Contrasts help to sharpen the
contours of topics, and so--speaking as I am on a university campus,
I shall profile the master mostly by contrasting him to teachers.
It speaks well for the city of Bloomington to learn that there
is a large community contingent in the audience this evening,
but I assume that most of you who are here are either teachers
or students, so as I say, I wille tch the master-disciple relationship--in
Sanskrit, the guru-chela relationship and in Arabic, the sheikh-murid
relationship--by contrasting it with the relationship between
teachers and students. To keep from rambling, I will itemize the
contrasts, but as there is no logical sequence in the order in
which I will be discussing them, I shall not number them but demarcate
them by placing a bullet before point.... To begin:
What brings students to their teachers is a body of knowledge
or a skill that the teacher has mastered and to which the student
aspires. Feelings, positive and negative, naturally enter, but
they are byproducts of this central objective that brings them
together...
|