Nalakuvara said in a recent post:
After seeing this wave of new regulars at our Auckland and Wellington centres I’m convinced that if any centre anywhere isn’t getting this steady flow of serious candidates for the spiritual life then something has been overlooked.
I’m always interested to know what works and what doesn’t, in order to identify the active principles and apply them in a more effective way.
The 7 Principles of Effective Ministry begins by saying, basically: “If you’re happy with how things are going in your programs now, then great. The results you are getting are a product of your programming. If you are interested in considering something else, then this book may be for you.”
That’s a good approach. If we do have the feeling that our outreach is not as effective as it could be, or that we’d like it to be, then the question we have to ask ourselves is: “Why are they not coming?”
We have to ask ourselves that question.
Preaching and Leadership are the same thing - Influence. In both cases our intent is to induce / inspire change or transformation in others.
Let me relate a personal experience in relation to this.
A number of years ago one of the residents of the ashram I was living in went to visit another city. While he was there someone got in his ear and said things like: “Why are there so many people there? Why don’t they send some people here?”
This question was not being asked in an honest way, to elicit information with a view to making improvements, but rather as a rhetorical, veiled criticism: “It is wrong. They should send some people here.”
I know that previously I said my style is not to go point-by-point. I do actually do that, but I’m not into public debating. I do it for myself and for others who are genuinely interested, and not inquiring as a veiled criticism. I have no interest in twisting the arm of people who don’t want to accept something. I wrote a point-by-point rebuttal of the arguments and doubts that my friend had been exposed to, and I shared it with him. I think enough years have passed now for the persons involved to have faded into anonimity, and to allow me to speak about this in a clinical manner. Let me address this one particular point.
“It is ridiculous to ask why people are not being “sent” here. The question that he should be asking is why he is unable to inspire people to come forward. That will actually give him some useful information. Here there are people because there is some situation where they feel inspired to come forth and voluntarily participate. To demand that people be “sent” is a symptom of the problem that is he’s facing there.”
Leadership is not position - it is influence. Preaching is not position: “You have to listen to me, because I’m right. You have to listen to me because I have the absolute truth”.
You cannot demand that people follow you. If you try to lead from a position then your actual influence will decrease. If you try to preach from a position (”You have to listen to me because I am… I know…”) then your influence will decrease.
In order to lead effectively you have to “touch the heart before you ask for a hand”. Authentic leadership means helping people to develop both themselves and the external situation, simultaneously, toward a better and brighter future.
You have to genuinely care about people and want to help them, not view them as resources to carry out your plans. Of course external objectives are there, but these must only ever be pursued in terms of the people you are working with. We give people appropriate tasks linked to organizational objectives in order to challenge and develop them. When you demonstrate that to the people, they will come. They are searching for genuine leadership.
So whether you are considering a replete ashram in another location or an empty outreach center surrounded by thousands of people, the question you need to ask yourself is “Why are they not coming?”
When you ask yourself that question honestly, and when you can correctly answer it, then you can do something about it. Otherwise, asking this question to other people as a means of reproaching them or criticizing them will be ineffective. You can’t change how others are acting in the situation - you can only modify what you’re doing. If you want to lead then you start leading “from the inside out”, as Srila Bhakti Tirtha Swami put it.
As I summarized for my friend: “Let him demonstrate his qualification for taking care of these people first, and then maybe some people will come to him.”
And so it is. If no-one comes, then we say: “What are we doing or not doing that is stopping these people from coming?” We honestly examine the situation, identify the error, correct it, and advance.
As they say at the beginning of the 7 Practices - if you’re happy with what you’re doing, then all glories, this post is not meant for you. Otherwise, there may be something you can do about it - if you’re willing to take ownership and responsibility for the situation, and that starts with the honestly-asked, self-directed question: “Why are they not coming?”
You’ve got to start out thinking like that in order to be successful in the Loft preaching paradigm, and you’ve got to keep thinking like that to keep it alive. You see, asking this question means that you have actually started to consider the “others” as persons and taken the first step toward treating them personally.
People matter!




True is dat. Thanks for expanding and clarifying the subject for our understanding. Progress is not always bad, but stagnation always is.
” You have to genuinely care about people and want to help them, not view them as resources to carry out your plans. ”
- ahhhh. perhaps some of us are learning from the past. I always noticed how quickly we can lose sight of the goal. We are essentially a group of volunteers trying to help people. Strange how we can so easily put our strategies for furthering the mission (on an external level) at such a high priority all the while neglecting the people who could wholeheartedly contribute to the mission in a much healthier and less contrived way. There does seem to be, in some, a psychological tendency to want to carry the weight of the mission on their back as if a one man show. It just doesn’t work - does it?
Reminds me of the saying by Charles M. Shultz (of Charlie Brown, Snoopy and the Peanuts Gang fame):
“Fanatacism means to redouble one’s efforts after the original goal has been forgotten.”