Self-Realization & Clear-Mindedness - www.clarity-of-being.org
 
 

Modesty, Humility and Pride
  -- Cutting through the Confusion

by Philip Goddard

ABSTRACT

Modesty and humility are widely seen - especially in religions - as a Good Thing and an essential antidote to what they call 'pride' and regard as something totally bad or negative. This is a serious misunderstanding, which greatly adds to the problems of people and indeed the human race at large.

Wanting to print this page?

I recommend that if possible you BOOKMARK it but do NOT print it, for the simple reason that most of these pages are frequently updated and so any printed copy is likely soon to be out of date, and also in a printed copy you wouldn't be able to click on the many explanatory hyperlinks.


This page's contents are Copyright.
All rights reserved.
You are welcome to link to this page, but please do NOT place copies of its contents on other websites. If you find it posted on any site other than www.clarity-of-being.org, please report the fact to me. Many thanks.


Important!

In order to properly understand the contents of this and many other pages on this site it's necessary to carefully read Exit 'Spirituality' - Enter Clear-Mindedness, which provides essential background information.

 

Pride of place!
The Dalai Lama and recent Archbishop of Canterbury - public embodiments
of the twin scourges of modesty and self righteousness respectively, despite
their very best intentions as individuals...

 

N.B. The particular Archbishop of Canterbury pictured and being referred to is Rowan Williams, who was the incumbent in that role at the time of the original writing of this article - but the principles of course would apply with just about any Archbishop of Canterbury.

Modesty and humility too easily fall into inverted snobbery

Modesty and humility are upheld as virtues in the teachings of the vast majority of religions - including those of Buddhism. On the face of it, this looks like common sense, for seeking to impress others and feel that one has special status is clearly problematical. However, if you stop and think about it, a lot of this doesn't really add up. It comes down to 'morality speak', which is about following rules and judging on people and not living a life of love, empathy and fully aware and responsible free choice, which would all arise naturally from our deepest aspects if we allowed it to do so.

If we have special roles (such as being a teacher of self-actualization), or particular strengths, undoubtedly any ostentation in flaunting these publicly wouldn't be a positive or helpful thing for our self-actualization process. When I talk about ostentation here, I really mean, making people aware of your particular special role(s) or abilities without regard to whether it's actually helpful and positive in effect in that particular situation at that particular time for you to do so. On the other hand, the so-called modesty and humility taught and practised widely in religions is very negative in two important respects:

I'd go as far as saying that, far from being virtues, modesty and humility are actually scourges upon Humanity. Apart from the elimination of ostentation and showing-off (which can be achieved in other ways), there's no positive or worthwhile purpose served by those so-called virtues, and they simply program people into being untrue to the stature of their true selves and to live pathetically diminished travesties of the lives that they could be living and which would be enlightened manifestations of their true nature as manifestations of 'the Ultimate'. If you're living on the basis of love, empathy and aware and responsible free choice rather than attachments, desires and compulsions, then you have every worthwhile reason to manifest ALL your personal power* and splendour.

* I'm NOT referring here, however, to the willful use of 'special powers' (i.e.,'psychic' or 'paranormal' powers), because any tendency to do that gets us embroiled with the garbage again, and also immediately cultivates people's attachment to personal or social status. Indeed, as I explain in The True Nature of 'The Forces of Darkness' and its Interference and Attacks, it's very likely indeed that it was very early human-type beings (long before Earth was here) starting to use 'special powers', that resulted in the inadvertent creation of the garbage in the first place - i.e., ALL of the massive problem that, if pointers from my own inner inquiry on the subject are at all correct, so far has screwed up and eventually destroyed every human-type civilization, whether in this or any other universe.

So, what I mean here by personal power is the natural healing power of your love, positivity and clear thought, which would tend to catalyse the opening up of those qualities in other people around you and with whom you interrelate, and which would naturally be powerful in interrupting, dismantling and dissolving the effects of the garbage's interferences, and indeed to a certain extent in weakening and dissolving the garbage itself.

Let's be clear about pride

Okay, now I've got so far, let's bring in the dreaded 'P' word - Pride. A clear distinction needs to be made between what people might call egotistical pride on the one hand and, on the other hand the self esteem and rejoicing in oneself (and others) that's intrinsic to a balanced, enlightened and self-actualized person.

I've seen this latter use of the word in some teachings in the Vajrayana Buddhist tradition, and then it was called vajra pride. While I'm actually happy with the use of a different expression* for the positive meaning, in common usage the two meanings are hopelessly confused under use of the one word, and teachers (if they really must 'teach'!) would better make those two meanings clearly distinct and use different terms for them, so that full, unqualified self esteem is never confused with problematical tendencies. This is what needs to replace all the culturally based and dark-force instigated stuff about humility and modesty. Let's stand our full height and tune into such a self view as "I'm great, unique and beautiful - you're great, unique and beautiful too".

* but NOT 'vajra pride', because the vajra (sorry to say) is just one of the countless symbols and emblems of the garbage that permeate the religious and 'spiritual' traditions - notwithstanding the fact that in Tibetan Buddhism it's supposed to represent the most direct path to enlightenment. In reality, the moment you go using a symbol, emblem or device to represent that, you're already diverted by the garbage away from the most direct means to enlightenment - in just the same way that you're diverted from it by externalizing fundamental consciousness ('the Ultimate') and making it into a god, such as in Christianity, or into 'Spirit', as in various mystical and paganistic traditions.

Personally, I prefer generally not to use the word 'pride' at all, because using it tends to bear religion- (and thus garbage-) sourced connotations of disapproval, and, as noted above, it really covers various meanings and thus it tends to confuse issues. Therefore, I prefer to use more specific and objective terms for what I'm referring to - such as 'self esteem', 'status addiction' or 'self righteousness'...

What that photo shows us...

The Dalai Lama and Archbishop of Canterbury are both, as actual people, lovely individuals, full of good intentions. Their problem, as with people generally who have positions and titles within traditional hierarchies, and particularly in religious ones, is that they've been made into public embodiments of actually highly problematical tendencies, which their traditions are upholding as 'good' and 'positive' and what everyone supposedly needs to be cultivating in themselves.

In the case of the Dalai Lama, the public image of an affectation of humility is the issue, whereas in the case of the Archbishop of Canterbury, officially legitimized - indeed, cultivated - self righteousness is the issue. These different posturings can both be seen as particular flip sides of what both would recognise and deprecate as pride - that is, the problematical, 'egotistical' sort of pride.

I certainly don't intend any sort of personal assault on these two really nice individuals, for you can see exactly the same traits in others in their respective traditions. In Buddhism - or at least Tibetan Buddhism and modern derivations therefrom - it is absolutely normal for monks and lamas right up to the top of their hierarchy to show the same affectations of 'humility', with the same slightly bowed head (physically, mentally and emotionally extremely harmful) and self effacing body language.

Christians worldwide are much more diverse - at least in my experience. However, there is overall a strong tendency for a good proportion of Christians to exhibit some degree of self righteousness - which becomes really marked in the case of those in 'Holy Orders' - i.e., the clerics and priests, who exhibit a sort of 'Holy superiority' in their manner. The majority by far speak in affected ways that somebody outside the deceptions of their tradition would perceive as sounding plain silly, all the time carrying a subtext going something like "I'm in Holy Orders and thus have superior knowledge and belief, and everything that I say to you is Right and True and said in a simple manner for you because you're one of God's sheep and are an ignorant simpleton..."

Note particularly the stiff uprightness of the Archbishop of Canterbury. Rather than the "Look how humble and modest I am" posture and 'vibes' that the Dalai Lama presents, the Archbishop of Canterbury projects an 'aura' of a formal, righteous self importance - "I'm in Holy Orders and am an ambassador of God".
Actually, I feel a bit uncomfortable about applying the term 'self righteousness' to the Archbishop of Canterbury, because, unlike 'humility', it's widely used as a pejorative expression, and I have no wish to be pejorative towards him - but, unfortunately, technically 'self righteousness' is a particularly appropriate term to use here. So, I want to point out that I use that term in an objective way, and I don't mean to imply the normal pejorative aspect of its use. Self righteousness is NOT something bad about a person but simply a particular, addressable, problem that the person has.

There's quite a lot more that I could write about the issues that these two religious figureheads are presenting to us in the above photo, but I've come to the conclusion that it would be a distraction to say more, and to leave it to you to fill in the various gaps yourself if you're interested, particularly referring yourself to relevant sections in The True Nature of 'The Forces of Darkness' and its Interference and Attacks.


Feeling lost here?
Here's a link to a list of the navigation facilities at your disposal.


 

Donations are appreciated!

If you value this page / this site and its contents, a one-off or especially regular donation would be greatly appreciated and would help me maintain it and continue my beneficial projects.

All donations are welcome; a £5 minimum is suggested, but anything at all would help and be really appreciated.

On the other hand, I'd encourage people to seriously consider the value to them of what benefits they're getting from this site and to do their best to donate accordingly, even if here and there that would mean a three-or-more-figure sum (i.e., in GB £). I can't live on air alone, and the sordid truth is that thanks without ££ to back them up have a sneaky way of not paying my bills! Surely some of you out there who come to this site and recognise its importance are well-off enough to provide me with an actual ongoing living income without genuine detriment to yourselves! Where are you? Without an ongoing MUCH higher level of donations, my modest financial reserves will continue running down over a quite small number of years to the point where I don't have funds any more to run my websites or indeed a computer! Is that what visitors to this site really mean to happen?

(You can also help this site by purchasing CDs of my natural soundscape recordings, to use as the healthier alternative to listening to masses and masses of music.)

There's also a way that you may be able to 'donate' significantly without paying anything or having any additional hassle for the privilege.

 

Copyright, © 2008 by Philip Goddard, with revisions to 2014. All rights reserved.
You are welcome to link to this page, but please do NOT place copies of it on other websites.