|
Urmila
Devi Dasi
The individuality of the self is a central teaching
in Vaisnava philosophy, but what is our practical understanding
of this term? Individuality is present in all living beings on both
a material and a spiritual level. This article translates how this
concept needs to relate to education practices in ISKCON today.
The author explores evidence in some of Srila Prabhupada' writings
and scripture that deal with the issue of individuality together
with some more recent research by academics in the field. With this
data, the author builds a persuasive argument for devotees to become
more aware of the individual, both in themselves and in others so
that they may respond with respectful awareness to the individuals
needs.
Every living being is a separate and uniquely distinct
individual. The Vaishnava scriptures, such as the Bhagavad-gita,
teach us that this individuality is present on three different levels:
from the physical appearance of a person, to the subtle level which
is made up of the mind, intelligence and ego, and also more profoundly,
on a spiritual level the spiritual identity of a soul is also unique
and individual. Members of ISKCON have a strong understanding of
uniqueness in spiritual identity of an individual soul, as this
is one of the major teachings of our tradition. Unfortunately, the
individual uniqueness of a person on a material level (body and
subtle elements) is often overshadowed by our understanding and
emphasis of the spiritual ideal.
The need to respond to the needs of a separate and unique individual
is an everyday issue for the students and teachers that work in
the Society's schools. We need to respond to this need more comprehensively
through raising awareness in our teachers. There are a number of
well-researched systems that have been put forward by various academics
which may be useful for teachers. These will be examined in more
detail together with references to the Vaisnava scriptures in the
demarcation of personality types. There will also be a few suggestions
as to how these concepts can be put to practical use by the teachers
in our movement.
A good education system in Krsna consciousness must show respect
for individuality, first by recognising differences as inherent
and value-neutral. The failure either to recognise the existence
of distinct personality types or to accept them as value-neutral
lead to various problems to the development of an individual or
a society, one of the most damaging of which is an understanding
that spiritual perfection is an adjustment of material personality.
Teachers must then learn to establish a rapport with students based
on this understanding, and respect and adjust their teaching methods
accordingly to give useful direction for vocation and spiritual
service that will be in harmony with each individual's nature. We
can then go beyond respecting individuality, to glorifying diversity
as a means of pleasing the Lord.
The Gaudiya Vaisnava position on individuality
The soul, according to Vaishnava theology, is not simply 'light'
or existence, it is, in fact, an individual living entity which
has an individual relationship with God. When Krsna tells Arjuna,
'Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these
kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be', [1]
the Lord is directly referring to the unending nature
of individuality and the immortality of the soul. Srila Prabhupada
comments, 'The Supreme Personality of Godhead is the supreme individual
person, and Arjuna, the Lord's eternal associate, and all the kings
assembled there are individual eternal persons . . . [2]
The individuality, to which Lord Krsna and Srila
Prabhupada refer to in these examples, means that each soul is a
separate and distinct being with an individual relationship with
God, and these relationships have been described in the scriptures.
One of the first broad categories of distinctions of spiritually
liberated souls is that of their rasa, or relationship, with the
Lord.[3] According to the various
divisions and gradations of devotees, permanent devotional situations
can be divided into five categories: peacefulness, service to Krsna,
friendship with Krsna, parental affection toward Krsna, and conjugal
love for Krsna. Each division has its own different taste and relish,
and a devotee situated in a particular division is happy in that
position. [4] So one aspect of
spiritual individuality is seen in that one perfected soul relates
to the Lord as a friend, whereas another perfected soul relates
to the Lord as their master, and yet another perfected soul relates
to the Lord as their worshippable Deity.
However, even within these five categories, there is great scope
for individual expression; it is not that all those who view the
Lord as their intimate friend are alike in their mood of friendship,
or even alike in their personality. The Bhagavatam, one of our main
scriptures, relates a story where the demigod Brahma steals not
only Lord Krishna's calves but steals His cowherd boy associates
well. Krsna then expands Himself into replicas of each of those
boys and calves. It is described that each boy and each calf appeared
with their own individual characteristics and personalities and
appearance, so Lord Krishna had to replicate each boy and calf with
all of these differences.[5] This
is a good example to demonstrate that the Lord actually enjoys variety,
as each of these boys and calves has an individual relationship
with the Lord due to their individual personalities.
Krsna delights in experiencing a variety of relationships with individuals.
So, does the Lord have a preference? Many devotees and scholars
have analysed the spiritual variety described in the scriptures
in terms of 'higher' and 'lower'. While such an analysis has validity,
it is also true that in Krsna's eyes, and in the vision of the devotee
of Krsna, all types are good, and wanted. Srila Prabhupada would
often say, 'Variety is the mother of enjoyment.'
In the material world the specifics of our original identity with
the Lord are hidden, as we have not only been given a material body,
but also a subtle mentality as well. Even though we are not aware
of our eternal spiritual rasas with the Lord (unless we are on an
elevated spiritual platform), we are still aware that each of us
has unique body and mind. Even if we observe identical twins, they
are never exact copies of one another; each has a unique personality.
When dealing with the issue of personality types, and individuality
it is helpful to use certain categorisations for the purpose of
analysis. It is common to hear criticism, even outrage, whenever
one attempts to demarcate personality types. One hears accusations
such as that one is trying to 'label' or 'pigeonhole' people. Presumably,
the assumption is that labels for personality types, especially
broad labels, are an insult to the very individuality they are meant
to honour. Yet, broad descriptions have value, not only for a theoretical,
academic purpose, but also as a tool for understanding others and
ourselves in the context of our practical interpersonal dealings.
Properly understood labels broaden rather than narrow our view,
bringing us to a deep and genuine respect for one another.
It is acknowledged though, that as each person is a unique blend
of characteristics, categorisation can give a broad idea of a personality.
If we look to one of our main scriptures, the Bhagavat-gita, Lord
Krsna Himself categorises people. In fact, we will first consider
His categories. Krsna names the categories of personality as follows;
'Brahmanas, ksatriyas, vaisyas and sudras are distinguished by the
qualities born of their own natures in accordance with the material
modes.'[6] Brahmanas are the priestly
class, ksatriyas are warriors, vaisyas are the business community
and the sudras are the manual workers in Society. It is important
to note that these are understood differently to the modern context
of the term 'castes', which is delineated in terms of race, ethnicity,
or birth in a higher or lower social group. Rather, Krsna speaks
of an individual's personal 'qualities' and 'nature'.
It is common for those who study personality types to conclude that
much of our type is 'inborn'. This is in line with Prabhupda's translation
that indicates that these four groups have an 'inborn' nature (Srila
Prabhupada writes, 'born of their own nature'). Dr. Rohm, for example,
writes that we are different 'by design' and that we are 'wired'
to be a particular style.[7] If
we accept this as fact, then each of us is born with a strong tendency
toward a particular type of personality. We find all the above personality
types represented in all races and cultures in the world, for all
must exist in order to have a heterogeneous society
To return to the four divisions of individual natures as described
in our scriptures, Krsna continues in the Bhagavad-gita to describe
the psychology of the brahmanas. He says, 'Peacefulness, self-control,
austerity, purity, tolerance, honesty, knowledge, wisdom and religiousness
these are the natural qualities by which the brahmanas work.'[8]
In the Bhagavatam, a similar description is given.
The symptoms of a brahmana are control of the mind, control of the
senses, austerity and penance, cleanliness, satisfaction, forgiveness,
simplicity, knowledge, mercy, truthfulness, and complete surrender
to the Supreme Personality of Godhead.[9]
The ksatriya's nature is defined as heroism, power, determination,
resourcefulness, courage in battle, generosity and leadership.[10]
To be influential in battle, unconquerable, patient,
challenging and charitable, to control the bodily necessities, to
be forgiving, to be attached to the brahminical nature and to be
always jolly and truthful these are the symptoms of the ksatriya.[11]
The vaisya being always devoted to the demigods, the spiritual master
and the Supreme Lord; endeavouring for advancement in religious
principles, economic development and sense gratification; believing
in the words of the spiritual master and scripture; and always endeavouring
with expertise in earning money these are the symptoms of the vaisya.[12]
The qualities that are the hallmarks of the sudra are offering obeisances
to the brahmanas, ksatriyas and vaisyas, being always very clean,
being free from duplicity, serving one's master, performing sacrifices
without uttering mantras, not stealing, always speaking the truth
and giving all protection to the cows and brahmanas--these are the
symptoms of the sudra.[13]
Brahmana, ksatriya, vaisya and sudra also known as the four varnas
can be defined in terms of an individual's situation in what the
Bhagavad-gita terms the 'modes' of nature. Those modes are termed
goodness, passion and ignorance. Each of the four varnas will gravitate
towards one or more of these modes. The relationship between the
three modes and the varnas is a vast topic and for the purpose of
this discussion, it is sufficient to note that a person's alignment
with these modes is another indication of his or her varna. Very
briefly, the brahmanas are situated in the mode of goodness, the
ksatriyas are situated in the mode of passion, the vaisyas are situated
in the mixed modes of passion and ignorance, and the sudras are
situated in the mode of ignorance in terms of material nature.[14]
Acceptance of the personality types described in the Bhagavad- gita
and Bhagavatam do not preclude the validity of some of the classifications
which modern researchers have developed. Sometimes modern academic
classifications will simply be described in different terminology
to those of the Vaisnava scriptures. At other times, personality
classifications will be a wholly different way of defining individuality.
Below are a few examples of various theories in personality types.
They are not presented as the definitive models by which teachers
in ISKCON should base their work, but they are presented simply
to show that several empirically verifiable models exist which have
practical application for teachers.
Models for classifying personality types
The first model is one originally proposed by psychologist,
Dr. Howard Gardner. The seven types are linguistic, logical-mathematical,
spatial, musical, bodily-kinaesthetic, interpersonal and intrapersonal.
Recently, those who use this system in education have added a category
of 'spiritual'. Gardner stresses that most people are a blend of
strengths and weaknesses in several of these areas.[15]
Those with linguistic 'intelligence' have highly developed auditory
skills. They like to read, write and tell stories. Their memory
is good, as is their spelling, and they take pleasure in solving
puzzles involving words. The logical-mathematical type thinks in
concepts, patterns and categories. They are capable of abstract
logical thinking and are concerned with philosophical questions.
Those with spatial 'intelligence' can think well in images and pictures.
They love to draw, design things and build. The musical type often
remembers by putting information into melody and can discern subtle
differences in music that they hear. The bodily-kinaesthetic 'intelligence'
is demarcated by physical restlessness, and either fine-motor co-ordination
or abilities in activities such as sports and dance. Those of the
interpersonal type understand other people, and tend to have positions
of leadership. They enjoy and are good at anything that involves
relationships between people. The interpersonal 'intelligence' types
are aware of their own feelings and motives. They often like to
work alone and have a sense of independence or strong will. They
can motivate themselves, have strong opinions, and are generally
self-confident.[16]
We now turn to the categories which psychological researcher Howard
Witkin used when conducting experiments for the US Navy. He was
seeking to understand why some pilots would fly out of a cloudbank
upside-down. He concluded that there are two broad ways in which
people gain an understanding of the world: global and analytic.
Most people are capable of both types of understanding, but will
rely more on one of the two. The analytic types like things ordered
step-by-step, observe details, value facts over feelings, want to
concentrate on one thing at a time, are self-motivated, rarely become
personally or emotionally involved, and may miss the main idea while
grasping the facts. The global type is sensitive to others' feelings,
flexible, needs reassurance and reinforcement, takes criticism personally,
avoids competition and may skip steps and details.[17]
Yet, another way of demarcating personality types is the model that
Dr. Anthony F. Gregorc developed. His concern was mostly in the
area of the different ways that people process information, although
his definitions of types overlap areas of interpersonal interaction,
vocational preferences, and so forth. His research has shown that
people are primarily concerned with either concrete or abstract
information, and then organise this information either sequentially
or randomly. [18] Taking all
combinations of these mental organisational systems, we can classify
four personality types: the concrete-sequential, abstract sequential,
abstract random, and concrete random. Again, most human beings can,
and to a certain extent do, function in each of these four ways
The concrete sequential's general qualities are that he or she is
hardworking, conventional, accurate, stable, dependable, consistent,
factual, and organised. They may have difficulty working in groups,
in a disorganised environment, with incomplete instructions, and
with demands to use their imaginations. The abstract sequential's
general qualities are those of being analytic, objective, knowledgeable,
thorough, structured, logical, deliberate and systematic. Their
difficulties are with not enough time for research, repetitive tasks,
many specific rules, 'sentimentality', and being diplomatic. Abstract
randoms are categorised by being sensitive, compassionate, perceptive,
imaginative, idealistic, sentimental, spontaneous and flexible.
Their challenges are in the areas of having to explain their feelings,
competition, giving exact details, accepting criticism, or focusing
on one thing at a time. The qualities of concrete randoms are to
be quick, intuitive, curious, realistic, creative, innovative, instinctive
and adventurous. They struggle with restrictions, formal reports,
routines, fixing something after it has been done, keeping detailed
records, and having no options.[19]
Dr. W. Lee Carter has analysed six personality types-oppositional,
sensitive, anxious, depressed, self-centred, and deceitful.[20]
The difficulty with his understanding is that he
focuses on the negative aspects of these types, which is reflected
even in the labels he assigns to them. There is little guidance
as to how the 'negative' qualities can be applied as strengths.
There is also the Barbe-Swassing model of modalities-does a person
learn and remember primarily through auditory, visual, or kinaesthetic
channels? The 'modality' model for understanding varieties of human
behaviour is of great importance to the educator, as it addresses
how each of us best assimilate and store information. Fortunately,
although most of us have a predominant strategy for the order and
circumstances where we use each modality, we can learn and remember
in various ways. However, some people have such a strongly dominant
mode that learning in other ways may be difficult. Individuals with
such an intensely dominant modality will have describable patterns
of learning, and, often, behaviour.
Finally, the model put forward by Dr. Robert Rohm is particularly
well developed.[21] He and other
researchers such as Charles Boyd, have extensively applied their
research to educational applications, and perhaps most importantly,
he defines each type in terms of tendencies that can be either useful
or harmful to the person depending on the use and direction of those
inclinations.
Dr. Rohm first categorises people as primarily outgoing-fast-paced-or
reserved-slow-paced. Those who are fast-paced generally have the
following attributes: confidence, ingenuity, like learning new skills,
work in bursts of energy, are future-oriented, have more enthusiasm
than patience, and are interested in results. Those who are slow-paced
generally have the following characteristics: questioning attitude,
like using skills already learned, work steadily at an even pace,
are present-oriented, have more patience than enthusiasm, are fine.
[22]
Within each broad category of fast and slow-paced, are those who
are primarily task oriented and those who are primarily people oriented.
The general characteristics of the primarily task oriented are:
they value logic over emotions, are truthful rather than tactful,
question conclusions, can live without harmony, make decisions impersonally,
are firm-minded, guard their emotions, are more decisive than curious,
and take pleasure in finishing projects. Those who are primarily
people oriented have these general tendencies: they value emotions
and traditions over logic, are tactful rather than truthful, have
strong relational abilities, accept conclusions, desire harmony,
live according to the moment, are more curious than decisive, and
take pleasure in starting projects.[23]
By combining the above categories, we arrive at four basic personality
types. There are the fast-paced task oriented people, the fast-paced
people oriented people, the slow-paced task oriented people and
the slow-paced people oriented people.
Those who are fast-paced and task oriented tend to be strong-willed,
determined, independent, optimistic, practical, productive, decisive,
a leader, and confident if they use their tendencies for good purposes.
If they use their tendencies improperly, they are likely to be angry,
cruel, sarcastic, domineering, inconsiderate, proud, crafty and
unemotional.[24]
The people oriented fast-paced person who uses his or her tendencies
well will be friendly, compassionate, carefree, talkative, enthusiastic,
personable, and fun. When those qualities are used improperly, they
will be weak-willed, unstable, undisciplined, restless, loud, undependable,
egocentric, exaggerative and fearful. [25]
A people oriented and slow-paced individual's well-used tendencies
will include being calm, dependable, easygoing, trustworthy, efficient,
practical, conservative, diplomatic, and humorous. Improperly used,
the qualities of this type will be stingy, fearful, indecisive,
spectator, self-protective, unmotivated, selfish, timid, and shy.[26]
The slow-paced, task oriented person's tendencies when used well
will include being gifted, analytical, sensitive, perfectionist,
aesthetic, idealistic, loyal, self-sacrificing, and thorough. When
used improperly, such people will be self-centred, moody, critical,
negative, rigid, theoretical, impractical, unsociable and revengeful.[27]
What of the differences in the physical appearances of an individual?
Of course, we have the two broad distinctions of male and female.
Some people are stronger and more athletically/physically able than
others, some are healthy and some not, and so on. The differences
of gender and physical ability are also certainly part of an individual's
material inclinations such as their way of learning and vocational
aptitude. Finally, the culture, or cultures in which we grow up
also has a great influence on how we exhibit our personality to
others.
Practical application for understanding others
Suppose all the above methods of classifying personality are
rejected because we do not want to classify people into types, wishing
to relate to, and deal with, one individual in exactly the same
way we do others. We may think that everyone is basically the same-or
ought to be the same. When we do perceive differences, we will then
evaluate against a fixed set of criteria. Charles Boyd writes, 'I
have yet to meet a person who does not 'put labels' on people. When
you meet someone, for example, you make a quick evaluation of him
. . . You size up his look, his personality, his intelligence, and
how he makes you feel. If you're mature, you'll adjust your evaluation
as you get to know this person.' [28] So,
we are always evaluating-but perhaps only in comparison to some
'ideal' or ourselves.
A practical example of this is my observation of two women that
were living in the same temple accommodation. One was outgoing and
people-oriented while the other was reserved and task-oriented.
Each thought that there was something very wrong with the other.
They saw each other as inconsiderate, either uncaring or too pushy
about the physical environment. Another example is that of a young
man who was content to do rather simple and repetitive tasks in
the service of the Lord. When he would be called upon to explain
why he wished to live as a devotee of Krsna, he would simply explain
how much happiness there is in Krsna consciousness. I would sometimes
hear others remark that this young man was foolish, and, others
felt that this man's spiritual life would not last if he did not
quickly became more philosophically learned.
In both of these examples, people were making judgements of 'good'
and 'bad', both in relation to materially and spiritually desirable
qualities, using the positive aspects of their own individual type
as an absolute criteria. In other words, if I am courageous and
heroic, ready to take all personal risk to right the wrongs of society,
I may see someone with a more peaceful, forgiving, and tolerant
nature as weak and useless. The other person may in turn see me
as conceited and reckless. The Sanskrit term for such narrow-minded
thinking is atmavan manyate jagat, or 'everyone thinks of others
according to his own position' [29], or
in other words, 'I see others against the criteria of my own qualities,
which I consider as good qualities.'
If one does not acknowledge the existence of various types of personalities
as being fixed and value-neutral, they may have the opposite difficulty,
thinking that everyone should be more like himself or herself. He
or she may think a type very unlike him or herself to be the ideal.
A person then strives to change one's basic innate nature, rather
than to utilise one's nature in the service of the Lord. Such an
attempt is generally useless, as the individual will never achieve
the 'ideal' goal, which is in their imagination because their innate
nature and talents are incompatible for achieving this ideal personality.
This is acknowledged by Lord Krsna as he points out that, 'Even
a man of knowledge acts according to his own nature, for everyone
follows the nature he has acquired from the three modes. What can
repression accomplish? [30]Compelled
by the work born of your own nature, you will act all the same.'
[31]
If one who thinks that spiritual advancement, or even becoming a
materially 'better' person, means changing their personality, then
this person will surely be frustrated. He or she will also be wasting
valuable time and energy that could be used to enhance and utilise
his or her own personality type for a good cause. It is even more
dangerous to present only one 'ideal' personality type for a devotee
of the Lord. In an extreme case a person may even reject spiritual
life as irrelevant if they do not perceive success for themselves
in becoming the 'ideal' personality type for a devotee. It is more
healthy and philosophically correct rather, for an individual to
render service to the Lord according to their innate natures, and
from these activities every individual can become perfect: 'By worship
of the Lord, who is the source of all beings and who is all pervading,
a man can attain perfection through performing his own work.[32]
Categorisation into superficial and unhelpful personality types
is another problem that arises when there is a failure to recognise
that there are many varieties of personalities. Unhelpful categories
are those that are taken as the total description of what the person
is, or should be, for example, those relating to age, gender or
race are particularly unhelpful; We can illustrate this further
with an example of personality categorisation according to gender.
If all women are expected, for example, to be a particular personality
type such as that they all should have a sudra mentality (suggesting
low intelligence) or, they should all be concrete-sequential, or
slow-paced people oriented, then women who do not fit into the assumed
'correct' behaviour pattern would be classed as deviant to the expectation
of that society, clearly creating many problems. Some of these problems
would be that that society would attract only a certain type of
woman who naturally had these personality traits, those already
part of that society with different natures to the accepted personality
would either feel alienated or attempt to artificially change their
natures to the expected ideal they would not be able to simply be
themselves. Similar examples can be drawn from racial perspective.
If a society classed all oriental people as a business orientated
and only accepted them if they fitted this categorisation, then
clearly there would be a section of the oriental community which
would not be accepted in that society.
Empirical research has shown that, whichever of the above model,
one uses, there is not an equal distribution of personality types
in the population in general. For example, in Dr. Rohm's model only
10% of the population are predominantly fast-paced and task oriented.
On at least one occasion, Srila Prabhupada described the ideal society
as containing 5% brahmanas.[33]
In the Gregorc model, the smallest group in the population is the
abstract-sequential, though interestingly there is virtually an
even distribution of each personality type within all models, across
gender and cultural lines.
The final difficulty we will consider, that arises when we fail
to acknowledge individuality, is intolerance for differences in
opinion. We are not referring to differences of opinion about the
Vaisnava siddhanta, the ultimate goal of life or the Absolute Truth.
Rather, we are considering differences of opinion when considering
how to accomplish a goal, the order of priorities that we take and
the 'right' and 'wrong' with the actions taken in a particular situation.
Srila Prabhupada explained that:
So far as your question about controversy amongst the disciples
. . . that is a fact. But this controversy is not material. Just
like in a national program, different political parties are sometimes
in conflict and make propaganda against each other, but their central
point is always service to the country. Similarly, amongst the disciples
. . . there may be some controversy, but the central point is how
to preach the mission of His Divine Grace. If the central point
is fixed up then there is no harm in such controversy. Every individual
being must have his opinion; that is the significance of individuality,
but all such differences of opinions must coincide in Krishna. In
the battlefield of Kuruksetra were Arjuna and Bhisma who were fighting
with one another, and because Krishna was on the side of Arjuna,
sometimes Bhisma pierced the body of Krishna also with arrows. But
still they remained the greatest devotees of the Lord.'
[34]
Individuality and the teacher
In order to respect individuality in education, we need to understand
that individual uniqueness is an integral feature of reality, both
in the material and spiritual worlds. We cannot make everyone the
same, and as illustrated earlier, this is the opposite to the desires
of Lord Krishna as he enjoys variety. We also need to accept that
the innate material characteristics of an individual cannot change
in this lifetime. Further, all varieties of personality are neutral,
with the possibility of application for good or ill, spiritual advancement
or material degradation.
After accepting the above values, we can demonstrate our respect
for the individual practically when we work with their nature rather
than against it. We can do this if we first recognise our own nature,
and, seeing both our strengths and weaknesses, make an action plan
for turning our inclinations to good purposes. In a similar way
we can teach and relate to others in a more constructive way if
we adjust to their individual motivating forces and self-perceptions.
Cynthia Tobias lists five stages that one goes through when understanding
individual differences. The first is awareness that there are fundamentally
different types of people. The second may be to think our style
is best. The third stage is appreciation of others, realising that
diversity is necessary for balance in society. Fourth, one may make
excuses based on the limitations of one's own nature. And, finally,
one can learn to adjust one's style to meet the needs of others
that think and act quite differently.[35]
We can also develop understanding and rapport with others by knowing
enough about their personality to understand how they experience
the world, without which we cannot teach them, or be taught ourselves.
We adjust our methods of teaching and explanation to the needs of
the student, his or her modalities of learning, ways of intellectual
processing or interpersonal dealings, or all three. The specifics
of how to adjust according to these considerations are a vast topic
beyond the scope of this essay. It is sufficient to say that a good
teacher can and will adjust to the student. At the same time, giving
a good education requires that we teach our students how to adjust
as well, as the world will rarely come to meet them on their terms.
Instruction on how to adjust their style is carried out with the
idea that their style is wrong, or deficient and that we must 'fix'
them. Instead, we must know how to be helpful, and this necessarily
means that the emphasis is on the teacher to adjust if we wish to
give the student a beneficial education.
In the field of vocational training, teachers need to guide students
to a career that will resonate with the student's tendencies and
thus bring the individual satisfaction and contentment in their
lives. Varieties of vocations are meant not only to accommodate
various talents and propensities, but also tend to a balanced society.
If we look at it in Vaishnava spiritual terms different vocations
are not meant for the gratification of either the individual or
society, but for the pleasure of the Supreme Lord, Krsna. Our duties
will only truly satisfy ourselves when they satisfy the Lord.
If we understand personality through the models presented in the
Bagavad-gita, the corresponding vocational direction becomes easier,
as in that model personal qualities and work are closely entwined.
Those with brahminical qualities work as priests, teachers, physicians,
scholars, astrologers and government advisors. Ksatriyas administer
governments and serve in the military. Vaisyas have work related
to farming, business and trade. And sudras work in manual labour,
entertainment, crafts and as general assistants to the other three
types in society.
The concept of matching individual personality types to suitable
vocations is not unheard of in academic research. From the other
models discussed earlier. Each model of personality classifications
described earlier also have vocations that naturally fit them; for
example, the concrete random would be well suited for creative and
innovative work, and the abstract sequential for intellectual pursuits,
among other occupations.
For devotees of Krsna, vocation indicates not only one's means of
earning one's livelihood, but also the way one serves the Lord.
There are services to the Lord that are purely on the spiritual
platform and are equally available to everyone, regardless of personality
from any angle of vision. These are services such as hearing about
the Lord, chanting His name and His glories, remembering Him, and
so on. However, when it comes to whether one should manage a temple
or a temple garden, be a renunciate or get married we should look
not at what is considered 'best' in absolute or theoretical terms,
but rather what is best for the individual according to his or her
nature.
Probably the most significant advantage of respecting individuality
for the educator is the ability to encourage everyone as a devotee
of Krsna. For example, when a student prefers to talk and be with
friends rather than concentrate on his or her work, do we see him
as distracted and lazy, or people oriented? When a student wants
extra details for assignments, do we see him or her as picky or
analytical? Similarly we can view the qualities of students in two
ways, there are almost always two sides to any personal quality,
and it is an important responsibility for the teacher to guide a
student to utilise their personal characteristics for a positive
purpose. A teacher can see every 'fault' as a potential good quality
that simply needs the right direction and environment to manifest
properly. And, as every type of person has a contribution to make
in the Lord's service, we can encourage the development of an ability
to make a contribution that is in accord with one's nature.
Understanding the nature of others is fundamental to good teaching
practice. Without this understanding it is impossible to guide them
in their vocation and service. How is that understanding accomplished?
Formerly, determination of varna was established by the spiritual
master observing the student's qualities and studying their astrological
chart. Unfortunately, this facility is not available to most of
us now, yet we can still guide others based on our observation of
their qualities. Of course, there are many modern tests to determine
personality and corresponding vocation according to various models,
and such tests may be helpful as long as they are used as with other
guides rather than the sole determining factor. Information on this
subject should also be gathered from the Vaisnava scriptures for
this.
To say that our educational system needs to be founded on respect
for individuality does not go far enough. We need to learn to see
ourselves honestly, and then engage our strengths while compensating
for our weaknesses if we can attempt to do this we need not envy
nor disparage other personality types in our schools and temples.
We need to honour, glorify and teach students in consideration of
both theirs, and our own, individual characteristics.
Footnotes
[1] Bhaktivedanta
Swami, A. C., The Bhagavad-gita As It Is, Los Angeles, USA: Bhaktivedanta
Book Trust, 1989, 2.12
[2] Ibid., 2.12 purport
[3] The word rasa is impossible
to translate exactly into English; it has a number of different
meanings. For the purpose of this essay, we will loosely translate
rasa as 'relationship'. For more details see Bhaktivedanta Swami,
A. C., The Nectar of Devotion, Los Angeles, USA: Bhaktivedanta
Book Trust, 1997
[4] Bhaktivedanta Swami, A.
C., Teachings of Lord Caitanya, Los Angeles, USA: Bhaktivedanta
Book Trust, 1994, ch.14
[5] Bhaktivedanta Swami, A.
C., Srimad-Bhagavatam, Los Angeles, USA: Bhaktivedanta Book Trust,
1987. 10.13.38 purport
[6] Bhaktivedanta Swami, The
Bhagavad-gita, 18. 41
[7] Rohm, Robert A. , Who Do
You Think You Are, Anyway?, Atlanta, GA: Personality Insights,
1997, p. xi, 3
[8] Bhaktivedanta Swami, The
Bhagavad-gita, 18.42
[9] Bhaktivedanta Swami, Srimad-Bhagavatam,
7.11.21
[10] Bhaktivedanta Swami,
Bhagavad-gita, 18.43
[11] Bhaktivedanta
Swami, A. C., Srimad-Bhagavatam, 7.11.23
[12] Ibid., 7.11.24
[13] Ibid.
[14] Bhaktivedanta Swami,
The Bhagavad-gita, 4.13, purport
[15] Dr. Thomas Armstrong
has made Gregorc's work accessible to the lay person. He lays
out a method of assessment for the lay person. Armstrong, Thomas,
In Their Own Way, New York, USA: G. P. Putnam's Sons Publishers,
1987
[16] Rohm, Who Do You Think
You Are, Anyway?, ch. 2
[17] Tobias, Cynthia Ulrich, The Way They Learn, Colorado, USA:
Focus on the Family, 1994, ch. 9
[18] For those who feel that
'random' has negative connotations, they could use the terms 'linear'
and 'lateral' for sequential and random, respectively.
[19] Tobias, The Way They
Learn, ch. 2
[20] Carter, W, Lee, Kid Think,
Houston and Dallas, TX: Rapha/Word Publishers, 1991
[21] While there are several
other models of personality type that could be listed, we'll end
with those of
[22] Rohm, Who Do You Think
You Are, Anyway?, pp. 34-39
[23] Ibid. pp. 40-45
[24] Rohm, Dr. Robert A.,
Get Real, Atlanta, GA, Personality Insights, 1995, p. 12
[25] Ibid., p. 15
[26] Ibid., p. 18
[27] Ibid., p. 21
[28] Boyd, Charles F., Different
Children, Different Needs, Oregon, Multnomah, 1994, p.47
[29] Bhaktivedanta Swami,
Srimad-Bhagavatam, 5.8.16
[30] Bhaktivedanta Swami,
Bhagavad-gita, 3. 33
[31] Ibid., 18. 60
[32] Ibid., 18.45 & 18.46
[33] Bhaktivedanta Swami,
Room Conversation, Vrindaban, 20, April, 1975, Hillsbrough, N.C.,
USA: Bhaktivedanta Archives
[34] Bhaktivedanta Swami,
A. C, Letters, Hillsborough, N.C., USA: Bhaktivedanta Archives,
letter to Mandali Bhadra, 28, July 1969
[35] Tobias, The Way They
Learn, pp. 144-5
|
Print
this page |
