Interdependence

My mother wrote to me about my recent article on Dandavats.com "Women, ISKCON, and Varnashram"

In her email she said:

God made each of us unique with full and varied skills and the ability to enhance each other side by side, inter-dependently not dependently or independently.

I had lunch with John Maxwell, the famous Leadership author and educator, in Sydney a few years ago. Over lunch someone asked him: "John, you're a well respected author and expert on Leadership. So tell us - who's the leader in your home?"

Everyone had a good laugh at this question, and then John answered.

"As I have been explaining, we lead in areas where we have strength, and we follow others in our areas of weakness when others have strength. So in areas where I have strengths I lead, and areas where Margaret is stronger she leads."

Earlier on in the day Tri Yuga das, who was attending Maxwell's leadership seminar with me, had asked about "Leadership Aptitudes", and John had explained this point - that every person has strengths and weaknesses, and our strengths and weaknesses are complementary. He advocates what he calls "Team Leadership" - leadership by teams of people with complementary strengths who work together in a synergistic way, contributing from their strengths and balancing out each others' weaknesses.

My point is that traditionally as a class men have contributed in the area of protection, and women have contributed in the area of nurturing. Of course in individual situations there are variations of degree even to the point of role reversal, but broadly speaking, in terms of "classes", this has been the case.

The problem arises when a person no longer contributes in an area, but still demands that all the externals of the arrangement should remain the same. This is where a dynamic synergistic relationship has degenerated into a empty husk of social form. This situation leads to exploitation and oppression and is always followed by rebellion and revolution.

The principle is the same whether we are talking about social classes, economic classes, positions of authority in a family, a society, a corporation, a church, or any other arrangement of mass human endeavour.

So I do not advocate "telling people what to do". I advocate making a contribution from your area of strength. That's the point that I'm making. It's not about "authority", it's about service. I think this is the counter-point (in this sense of the word) to the point that Krishna-kirti prabhu is making in his presentation.

Have a look at this booklet that I wrote on the subject of leadership and authority, especially in spiritual organizations: On Leadership, for a more detailed exposition of these ideas.