Broken Yogi wrote:There will certainly be some kind of power struggle for "authority", which for the moment probably rests with Sukhamai (Bonnie Beaven).
Yes, historically, the succession struggle after the death of a charismatic, autocratic guru has often been fierce and dramatic. The Hare Krishna movement began a descent into chaos almost immediately after the founding guru died with unclear instructions as to succession. Muktananda died with 2 clearly chosen successors... and I think it took about a year for them to fight like cats and dogs and create a schism. It's good of Da to wait to die till after the US election; it gives us all a new power struggle to follow.
I'm not sure if I've got my jargon correct, or that my understanding of Da's system is accurate. But it seems to me that to lead the org, someone is supposed to be a "7th level" realizer... and there's NO way to clearly identify who is or isn't. When Da was alive, his word was law, so a devotee's level of realization was precisely whatever Da said it was. With Da now dead, anyone without exception can claim to have attained any level, and there's no clear way for anyone to confirm or deny.
I also think about the fragmentation in Mormonism. To the extent that some Mormons believe that God speaks directly to them... anyone can claim to have a mission from God and break off into a new sect. The main Mormon church survived by downplaying these individual revelations of the followers, in favor of an autocratic hierarchy, such that the revelations of the current "prophet" and his minions trump anyone else's claims. So the question is whether Da left a clear and strong enough power hierarchy to keep the org going... and also whether those within the top level of the hierarchy have enough motivation to remain united in recognizing a successor, rather than battling for it with each other.
Some of this is a function of how highly the guru is glorified and worshipped and served, based on the teaching. In some Buddhist/Zen traditions, the leader is seen as a teacher who points to Truth for his students, and provides guidence and encouragement. Since the Zen Master isn't seen as a God-man who must be served and obeyed unconditionally, the job has less appeal for power- and status-seekers. Students are generally independent enough to question the Master's words when necessary, denying the leader anything close to absolute power over masses of flunkies.
(In the Zen school I practice with, the Masters generally get paid little enough that they need to also have real jobs. There's an obvious downside to this... it leaves the teachers with less time and energy to devote to formal Zen teaching. On the other hand, the great virtue is that it makes the job of Zen Master less appealing to wealth-seekers, thus avoiding some of the ugly politics of rising in the org.)
Sure, succession struggles in Buddhims and Zen also turn ugly sometimes. But in a Guru-group like Da's, the leadership role isn't just a job for someone dedicated to helping the followers. It's a power position that offers plenty of perks like a flow of cash and power and unquestioning followers. That makes the upcoming struggle for Da's successorship likely a fiercer affair. Perhaps some of the campaign strategists for Obama and Hillary and McCain are now looking for new work, and the candidates for Murti Guru could hire them to do the polling and design the attack ads etc. A series of primaries or town hall debates may be called for.
Stuart
http://stuart-randomthoughts.blogspot.com/