I waited until I had a better term and it arrived through the studies I am currently involved in and specifically looking at the work of Heraclitus, a great pre-socratic philosopher. It was explained to me, by Dr Geldard, that Heraclitus,  is usually identified with becoming, with flux and infinite change.

The photo is Brokeoff Mountain, Lassen National Park. Mount Shasta is behind. This was my biggest summit hike so far.

For more about Heraclitus, I think the most insightful book you could ever read on his fragments is from Dr Richard Geldard, http://rgbooks.com/

I can feel the beginnings of a different understanding of personal development, spiritual or otherwise, but I don’t think I can articulate yet, and maybe never. I will wait and see. So for now this section has no place to go.

The lovely rock flower is from Mount Shasta on the South Gate Meadows Trail. I was informed that it is a rock flow anenome. Very beautiful spaces from these curious flowers. They seemed to come from deep within the mountain.

The immediate response to this position that comes from many of my professional colleagues is – how can an organization be vulnerable?

My view is that organizations can only survive if the people making decisions are prepared to be vulnerable when necessary. One excellent example of this would be the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster. My reading of BP’s behavior in this crisis has been to duck responsibility. It is very likely that the public perception of BP would be much better than it currently is, if the company had expressed their shame and grief over the horrible mess they caused. Instead I assume they took the safe legal route whenever responsibility came up and the public perception is one of cover up. I for one, avoid purchasing anything from BP since this disaster. (1)

I continue to confront my vulnerability from more directions than I would have believed possible. At times I think I have developed an endless number of strategies to avoid vulnerability.

Many of us that could be described high achievers, are especially good at blocking vulnerability. People with lots of will are typically way too busy for all the messy stuff. Too much to do. And we like it that way.

Brene Brown in a TED Talk linked below, talks about her personal journey to vulnerability and she fits well into the category of a person with will. Someone who knows how to achieve what she wants. Her journey toward understanding vulnerability took some 6 years with professional help. I would add that once realized, the vulnerable journey is ongoing. The more vulnerable we are, the more challenges to our vulnerability that we find. The journey becomes our path to growth. In the spiritual sense, this what the Sufi’s call  journey to the Face of God, or to become the Perfect Man (who can then see the Face of God).

The vulnerable path, is by definition, a path of service to others, not a path to self gratification.

Brown described the realization of the importance of vulnerability as a breakdown and her therapist described it as a spiritual awakening. Of course, I prefer the latter view.

Without deliberate exploration of the self, and some kind of support system to help keep us honest, it is very easy to delude ourselves that we are doing everything that we possibly can to be good members of our community, a good family member, a good partner in our relationship, and so on.

Speaking from experience, it is very easy to opt for the numb path. We go out and have a few drinks and some fun and forget about what is bothering us.

It is very easy to opt for the blame path. If only XXX would understand what to do, how to follow instructions, how to help me, and so on – then our lives would be better.

Combine these two major distractions from ourselves, and we loose touch with what is really going on. We no longer understand reality because we have created our own reality. And the idea that something is very wrong with our world will never completely go away.

Which path to choose depends on our own ability to resonate with a particular path. Religious or non religious views will influence choices.

Arriving at a particular path may require some shopping around, some experimentation.

Begin somewhere and stay focused on the wanting for more than numbing and blaming.

Have the courage to confront the worst of our fears and keep moving because – as the great teacher Rumi has said “There are many excellent spiritual Teachers but there are not many good students”.

It is not hard to find the right teacher, or teaching method. It is much harder to make their teachings work.

Here is a wonderful talk from Brene Brown to wet the appetite for change.

(1) http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/04/20114161153981347.html

(2) http://clairvision.org/techniques/meditation-inner-space-techniques.html

There are so many approaches to changing unwanted patterns in ourselves that examining them would take more time than I have available in one lifetime. Psychology, psychotherapy, perhaps psychiatry, and of course self help modalities do this very well. However without a spiritual dimension, it could be said that these approaches can only go so far and may lack a certain richness and unique flavour of joy that I would argue can only come from a spiritual underpinning of personal change for the individual.

The best known spiritual transformational paths can be found in Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, Gnosticism, Christianity and Islam. These are ancient traditions and rest of spiritual processes. There are many branches and cults within each and not all of those branches and cults have substance or integrity however there are plenty that are awe inspiring. I have not studied each of these paths in great detail however I have studied them sufficiently to recognise the processes and the spiritual depth and heartness that can be found within them.

Perhaps what works well is to start with the basics, such as psychological support, and then develop into a path that has greater dimension for the person?

Buddhism and Sufism are two paths that offer both. Buddhists speak of psychotherapy and enlightenment. (1)  Sufis speak of three principles: the self, ego, soul/psyche (Nafs), heart (Walb) and Ruh (Spirit). (2)

Dr Samuel Sagan, speaks of transforming consciousness and awakening as part of first hand experiences of consciousness. An aim of the Clairvision School techniques is to put the individual in the drivers seat to direct their own development and transformation. (3)

The psychology of a spiritual path is of great interest to me. I have explored with great interest Sufi devotional practices and will use that path as an example here because I know more about the Sufi path than the Buddhist path. The Sufi path is transformation from the heart through service and devotion to God. It is this process of unconditional opening our heart to God that underpins all Sufi teachings.

For me, the most obvious distinction between primarily western approaches to self examination and change, and spiritual paths to transformation – is heartness. Of course there are many other distinctions but there is no spirit without heart and developing heartness and strength of heartness is what emerges in those who follow devotional paths such as Sufism, Hinduism, Budhism, and of course, Judaism, Christianity and Gnosticism.

From this very personal and individual realisation, I have developed a simple way of filtering messages from different spiritual traditions. If the speaker or the literature has no heart, I  don’t waste my time.

For heartness to be a guide for someone’s spiritual path, it must have strength, which could also be described as will. Marshmallow heartness is not going to take us very far in any direction simply because it can’t support will and a lot of will is needed to transform. In my experience, many so called ‘New Age’ traditions, rest on what I describe as marshmallow heartness. That’s nice for them but it’s not for me and my approach to transformational change.

Rick Warren strikes me as someone who has followed his heart from his Christian standpoint. (4) This talk he gives on TED regarding life purpose is exceptionally inspiring in the simplicity of his heartness. In the talk he makes many references to the emptiness of the material life and transformation through change.

What are some of the basic principles of personal change? There are many more but in some ways they all lead back to these principles.

First and foremost – change is a process, not an intervention. We cannot expect change to happen because we do something with that aim. We can only expect change, by actually changing. My teacher often says “You can’t fix your problems but if you change, your problems simply go away”. (5)

Self examination is a critical step: Understanding what we are hungry for. What we think we are hungry for is usually just the first layer. Stripping away those layers is essential. If we simply take the first desire, we are often disappointed because fulfilment of that desire does not satisfy the hunger. Some spiritual teachers will often give the student too much of what they hunger for. At first that may seem counterintuitive but often it is not until we are absolutely fed up with the desire that we think we want, that we can move on to discover other deeper desires.

Stepping aside from the pride of the small ego: This is a complex spiritual and psychological issue, however my own experience is that the pride of the small ego is a barrier to our deeper self. Unless we are prepared to forego the small ego’s desire for satisfaction through pride, we tend to go around in circles. The Sufis tell a wonderful story on this topic (6). A Sufi scholar went to a Sufi master after hearing him speak and pleaded:

“O master! For thirty years I have been fasting in the daytime and remained standing at night in prayers. I have left all my passions. But I feel in my heart nothing at all of what you are talking about, although I believe in what you say and I know that you are telling the truth”. The master replied:

“Even if you fast for three hundred years and keep standing in night prayers for three hundred years while you are (in the state in which) I see you, you will not experience one atom of this knowledge.”

“The man asked, ‘Why, O master?’  The master answered, ‘Because you are veiled by your own self’”.

In other words, the scholarship of the man had taken him as far as he could go on his spiritual path. His next step required him to let go of who he thought he was and become someone different. To change. To become more of himself.

But how do we know what it is about ourselves that must go and what can stay?

In the example of the Sufi scholar, intuitively we imagine that he would not be expected to give up Islam in order to be enlightened. I think not. But I do think that he would have to need to give up many belief systems that no longer served his path. It might be the belief that if he meditated and if he prayed he would find knowledge of God. Personally I think that the master was pointing to a certain arrogance that may arise from the belief that we are entitled to receive Grace when we meditate and pray.

The only way we could discover what could be discarded and who we really are, is to follow a path of self examination, seeking self knowledge – the critical step involved in the spiritual path and the desire for transformational change.

The Ancient Greek aphorism which was inscribed on the forecourt of the Temple of the Great Apollo at Delphi says:

“Know thyself”. (7)

With this Ancient Greek aphorism in mind, it seems to me that seeking self knowledge has been the critical step on the path to God, and the gods, for a very long time.

(1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddhism_and_psychology

(2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sufi_psychology

(3) http://www.clairvision.org/about-us/index.html

(4) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Warren

(5) http://www.clairvision.org/about-us/samuel-sagan-facts.html

(6) Sheykh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, The Sufi Science of Self-Realization. The Institute for Spiritual and Cultural Advancement. Louisville, KY. 2006.

(7) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Know_thyself

I am fascinated by transformational change on many levels, especially personal and for communities and organisations. My interests have been supported by the Clairvision model and Dr Samuel Sagan (1).

Transformational change for communities and organisations has emerged as a new approach to supporting corporate and personal capacity development largely because strictly scientific methods have failed to yield desired results in certain settings, particularly not-for-profit and community based settings.

Strictly process orientated approaches to change management have failed to build human capital and develop the cultural capital necessary to foster the desired change and improve leadership. The best example I know of this is among Indigenous health services, especially in Australia. Imposed changed is often unsustainable.

Transformational change as the basis for capacity building acknowledges that human development needs to be supported on a deeper, at times metaphysical level for change to be sustainable. The goal of change is not simply to improve on past but also to create a new future. Transformational change introduces a new way to be and to do, either personally or professionally. Transformation transcends limitations, either organisational or personal. Problems and opportunities are perceived differently and greater inner resources to deal with them are available.

My consulting work has been involved with Aboriginal communities for some 15 years. I have seen countless attempts to impose change on Aboriginal communities. The action might be helpful and with good intentions but it rarely engages the community in a way that is sustainable. Sadly, there are occasions when those actions fail to engage the communities in any way at all. Good intentions and good administration is not by itself sufficient to foster sustainable change. And you do not need to look very far to see that. Take the recent movie: Samson and Delilah. This is possibly one of the most profoundly revealing films about contemporary Aboriginal society that can be seen today. It is a magnificent love story and the background to the story makes people ask how did that happen? Because we know it does happen. Watch the movie trailer and think about these points.

It is obvious that neither of these young adults have a high school level of education. They sleep and cook outdoors. It is unlikely they have electric power. The young man is a petrol sniffer. They leave their community to escape violence but they have nowhere to go and they sleep under a bridge in town. And then the story gets worse but it is ultimately inspirational.

The movie trailer gives some sense of the environment that many Aboriginal people live in.

Imposing change on Aboriginal communities is most likely to bring up past hurts related to disempowerment since colonial settlement. Some communities and people will always resist change but others cry out for it. I have worked with many communities where the message they gave me time and time again was  “help us to help ourselves”; “don’t tell us what to do – teach us how to make it happen”.

These concepts are easy to understand but they rarely translate into funding from government sources. Instead government sources use a raft of approaches to fund Aboriginal communities that are the same as those they use for non Aboriginal communities. That would make sense only if non Aboriginal communities suffered the same social and health problems that Aboriginal communities do. We know that is not true so why do government departments insist that it should be the same? Ultimately, what happens is close to nothing. Sure money is spent but it is rarely targeted at building capacity and rarely targeted at the unique problems of a particular community in a wholistic sense. In other words, what does this community need and how do we as professionals charged with responsibilities for those communities ensure that they have access to what they need?

Building community capacity as the single focus of government expenditure is the only genuine way forward. Program funding does not achieve this. Program funding assumes that there is the capacity to do something with the funding. Today if the capacity to do something with the funding does not exist the community is not funded. How could that be fair in a society where the majority of the population live 20-30 years longer than Aboriginal people living in the same country?

(1) www.clairvision.org