Spirit-Centered, Rajashi Leadership
The Sanskrit dictum “svarat samrat bhavati” means that one who can rule or govern oneself can also lead others well. That is, the ideal or model leader exercises leadership on himself or herself first. This entails bringing forth the hidden Spirit into the forefront of the leader’s personality. Then the leader becomes empowered to lead others. Indian civilization is based on the groundwork laid by such leaders, called Rajarshi’s, which literally means a king and a sage. In this model, the schism between the secular and the sacred vanishes (the king is the secular aspect while rishi is the sacred aspect). Great examples of Spirit-centered, Rajarshi leadership in Indian history include Emperor Ashoka (220–300 BC), Jamshedji Tata (nineteenth century), Mahatma Gandhi (twentieth century) and R. K. Talwar (twentieth century). The twenty-first century need Spirit-centered or Rajarshi leadership because the vast, hidden and irreversible damages caused by science and technology driven economic growth, which thrives on globalized greed, needs to be halted. Spirituality has to be the master, not the servant of material attempts. Relevance to the bottom line of business cannot be the test for spirituality. Instead spirituality has to be the benchmark for business projects.
¡°THE QUEST FOR THE TRUTH¡±: SPIRITUAL MANAGEMENT AND ITS SHADOWS IN ACADEMIC LITERATURE
The present research is aimed at analyzing spirituality according to the way it is presented in academic management literature. To uncover comprehensively way this phenomenon is described, a thorough scientific analysis of the selected articles was performed including coding the materials, systematically categorizing them as well as critically investigating particular aspects. While conducting the literature study, the selected and studied academic articles were analyzed from a range of standpoints such as cultural influences, mobbing/bullying, availability of unique practices, what spirituality is according to the articles, how intellectually and emotionally the sources affect a reader, etc. This study shows how the academic literature presents spirituality, viz. it describes only the ¨Dfacadei¬ of spiritual management while the core (direct discussion about managing onei®s spirit) is silenced and not addressed by researchers. In spite of this, the concept makes an impression of being a full-fledged one which in actual fact was achieved through intellectual and emotional pressure on a reader.
Italian Influence on the Development of Calvinist Scholasticism
THIS ARTICLE TRIES to show that the rise of Calvinist scholasticism, which was the most important development in Calvinist theology during the second half of the sixteenth century, stemmed largely from several converging Italian influences, particularly from the writings of Peter Martyr Vermigli and Jerome Zanchi. Here Calvinist theology refers not only to the personal thought of John Calvin but also to the teachings of the founders of the Reformed or Calvinist tradition as it spread out from Geneva and Switzerland to France, Germany, England, Scotland, Poland, and the Low Countries. In this context Calvin emerges as the brightest star in a galaxy of Reformed theologians which includes Heinrich Bullinger, Pierre Viret, Theodore Beza and Wolfgang Musculus as well as Martyr, Zanchi and others. These theologians were often more influential than Calvin himself at a given place or time or on a given point of doctrine. Bullinger, Martyr, and Martin Bucer were all more important for spreading Calvinist ideas to Edwardian England than was John Calvin. Early Elizabethan Protestantism looked more to Zurich than to Geneva, as did early Polish Calvinism. German Calvinism owed more to Heidelberg than to Geneva.' These leaders developed their theologies sometimes in mutual dependence, sometimes with surprising independence. By no means was their relation to Calvin simply that of disciple to master, for each gave a personal nuance to his style of Calvinism. Thus the sixteenth century Jesuit Cornelius Schulting states on the opening page of his five volume polemic against Calvin and Peter Martyr that Martyr was clearer and far more learned than Calvin.2 Recently John Bray has pointed out that research in seventeenth century Calvinism leads "to the conclusion that the impact of Calvin upon the Calvinistic movement has been greatly over-rated. It may well be that some of