TRADITION 2
ULTIMATE AUTHORITY
09/25/2008 ULTIMATE AUTHORITY
2. For our group purpose there is but one ultimate authority—a loving God as He may express Himself in our group conscience. Our leaders are but trusted servants; they do not govern.
2. LONG VERSION? For our group purpose there is but one ultimate authority—a loving God as He may express Himself in our group conscience.
Discipline- 1. A branch of knowledge; 2. A system of rules of conduct or method of practice; 3. The trait of being well behaved; 4. Training to improve strength or self-control.
DISCIPLINE..? What's that got to do with our 2nd tradition and an ultimate authority or our group leaders being but trusted servants that do not govern? I have a theory. Watch out…!
Way, way, way….back; BC, "before Christ" or as some non-Christian writers would write, BCE, "before Common Era"; there was a period of time in China called the "warring states period" or the Era of Warring States. This time period covered somewhere between the 5th century BC up to the unification of China in 221 BC, or the Qin Dynasty. Often referred to as the "second dynasty", but actually it was 35 years younger than the first which was the Eastern Zhon Dynasty which had-had its end in 256 BC. Remember, we're talking before Christ and the beginning of our time calculations used today, so we are counting backwards you see. Careful we don't implode while ciphering this!
This was a time frame when the Chinese leaders (warlords) or as we would say today, "government leaders"; they would take over and annex the smaller weaker villages or states surrounding them to form a larger and stronger "Dynasty" so-to-speak, and then they would administer their rule or "laws". Annexation; this of course still happens today, right here in our own communities causing chaos in the tax department along with city/county everything's, from trash pick-up, to water lines etc.. All of the Warring States philosophers (philosophers were held in high regard back then, they still are today, we just don't necessarily call them philosophers anymore), anyway, they assumed, agreed, did everything but vote, that the government should be ruled as a monarchy (An autocracy governed by a monarch who usually inherits the authority), autocracy-1 A political system governed by a single individual; 2. A political theory favoring unlimited authority by a single individual. Can you see where I'm going with this? It gets better, I promise; or I hope. This King or "monarch" who was usually born into this prestigious position of authority; had full government administrative rights to do whatever he wanted to do and with whomever he wanted to do it with. This would include the taking of human life at his command solely. He was their Ultimate Authority!
OK… with that in mind everybody knows who Confucius was, or at least has told a joke starting with, "Confucius say…", or we've read a fortune cookie or two, right? Confucius is held as one of the greatest philosophers of all time and Confucius had road brothers too. Mencius and Xunzi (453-221 BC) were two of them; they all lived along that same time in the "Confucian philosophy" heydays. These guys rode a coffin's length apart from each other and commanded respect at every roadside stop. Well Xunzi (pronounced Hsun Tzu, or something like that), he believed man's inborn tendencies needed to be curbed through education and ritual. Pretty close to the definition of discipline, wouldn't you say? Xunzi had studied the philosophies of the world, including Greece; so he knew a lot of history and how things worked, or how things needed structure to work way back then. He thought in terms of ethics, the philosophies of language, political theories and also developed a strong philosophy of education. Xunzi believed that ritual was crucial in changing human nature and that human nature lacked an inborn moral compass; if left to its own device it then would fall into contention and disorder. Self-will run riot is why Xunzi would come to characterize human nature as bad. For Xunzi, nature and spirituality played second fiddle to changing human nature; he focused on humanity's part in creating the roles and practices of a well disciplined, orderly society. It was at this time that the Chinese people, or government, believed that music was the most direct and effective way of influencing human emotion. (Look at the fiddle players they, along with Japan have produced today)! Being that music was so influential, they only allowed what was considered to be the "correct" music to be played and this was also critical to their government rule. It seems they agreed then, as some parents and government would, or do agree today; that music would, or could, or has had an impact on our behavior. (Excuse me… while I kiss the sky!)The Chinese believed that the "right" kinds of music; that is, music attributed to the ancient sages; could give people an outlet for emotion that could not be satisfied in other ways, like aggression; this would form discipline among the masses. This would channel their emotions and bring them in line with "the way" (or the government's way of thinking and controlling). The wrong kind of music would instead encourage wanton-(1. Occurring without motivation or provocation; 2. Casual and unrestrained in sexual behavior.), destructive behavior and cause a breakdown of social order. Sounds like what we lived through in the 60's and 70's along with more modern music today having its mosh pits or gansta' rap music etc. Xunzi believed regulating music was one of the duties of state and that because of its powerful effect on the emotions, music was as important a tool as ritual in moral education, discipline and governing. Government then must place into effect as law the correct music to give people a legitimate source of emotional expression and ban unorthodox music to prevent it from upsetting the balance of society.
Reasons for me using this story as a means of translating or interpreting for myself tradition 2 into what happened in the past and why… is; think about our "organized religion". Before we sit to hear what we have been told we should sit and hear; we have to sing or be sung to with an influenced style of music played and written. This would then serve purpose for me to conform to what I am about to hear; being spoken by an authoritative figure that has been voted upon only in that sect or hired to lead me into "their way" of thinking. For some of us, this will never do! I believe Bill and Dr. Bob were thinking in this vein a long time ago. Any form of government would keep us from looking to the true presence of spirituality that we are seeking and all diversions must be placed aside. We are invited to pray if so desired, but we do not employ music of any kind to identify ourselves. What kind of a mess would we have if we had to decide on what music to listen to or play at such-and-such meeting? The self-disciplines of AA and the knowledge that no single person is in total control or censoring even; is all we need to give us the freedom to seek a power greater than our self.
OK, I feel I've been a little radical today and I'm not sure I've presented my argument with all its merit intended; but, disciplining myself to relate to spiritual and not physical, mental, individual or even governmental diversion is the essence of what I wanted to say.
Hoping maybe you get something out of this or can leave something for it.
Thanx,
BonesXXX
