The Student Becomes the Master By Scott Shaw

 By Scott Shaw, Ph.D.

 

There is the tradition on the Buddhist path that one is a direct reflection of their teacher—that one possesses no authenticity unless they can document the transmission of enlightenment from their teacher to themselves and from their teacher to their teacher's teacher, back to the Buddha. Though this method of transmission is commonly accepted, there is many flaws in this path to enlightenment.

 

First, and perhaps most important, is the fact that enlightenment is not something which can be given. Enlightenment is not a rank which can be earned. Enlightenment is a personal process of progressing towards the ultimate understanding of human consciousness. Though a teacher is commonly used as a tool to lay the foundations which ultimately achieve this end, a teacher cannot give you Nirvana as if it were some sort of gift or an earned distinction.

 

Student consciousness is obvious throughout the Spiritual Path. When one is initially drawn to the path, the first step is oftentimes the seeking of a Guru. Once one becomes a disciple, they often times idolize this individual to the degree that they believe them to be so all encompassingly holy that obtaining their level of consciousness is a virtual impossibility. Due to this fact, students become locked into, “Disciple Consciousness.” Though they become great at performing the techniques of worship, they do not develop the necessary mental elements to let go of this limited understanding and move onto the realm where Nirvana may actually be embraced.

 

Christians are the ideal example of, “Disciple Consciousness.” They have attached such a great singular obtainment to one figure, Jesus Christ, that how could anyone ever hope to become, “The Son of God?” What is misunderstood by many modern Christians and is revealed by Middle East, Judaic, and Biblical scholars is that the term, “Son of God,” or more precisely translated, “Child of God,” was a term which was assigned to everyone from the Jewish faith of that era who were persecuted by the Romans. As time evolved and translations of the writing of the disciples of Jesus took place, the term “Son of God” took on the singular connation of being assigned solely to Jesus Christ.

 

When an ideology becomes singularly obtained by one individual, it obviously cannot be experienced by any other person. Buddhism is no different.

 

Siddhartha Guatama, The Sakyamuni Buddha lived over two thousand years ago. Numerous legends have come to be attributed to his life and his enlightenment. With a being so distant and so immaculate, how can anyone hope to achieve the same level of consciousness?

 

Whereas Christianity has evolved to the level where it is, in fact, blasphemy to contradict the totality of holiness, which is solely held by Jesus Christ, the Buddhist should not be bound by this mentality. Yet, in many cases, they are.

 

Certainly, from a Christian perspective, it may be argued that, “Enlightenment is not God-hood.” But, it must be kept in mind that the Buddhist does not want to become the, “Son of God.” The Buddhist seeks enlightenment: oneness between the individual self, the universal self, and the cosmic whole.

 

In India, where Buddha found his enlightenment, there are an untold number of Sadhus, Yogis, and renunciates everywhere. They do the most abstract things to their body and mind in order to alter their consciousness so that enlightenment may enter. They vow to stand only on one leg for a lifetime. They walk naked through the streets, never wearing any clothing, even in the cold of the Himalayan winter. They lock themselves away in caves, refusing to interact with any other human being. This is all done as a pathway to enlightenment. Though these beings may have been initially initiated by a Guru, who gave them a mantra or a specific spiritual practice, they have let go of “Disciple Consciousness,” and have forged their won pathway to Nirvana.

 

Legend states that Buddha himself had two primary teachers. But, he found no enlightenment from them. So, he moved forward and achieved Nirvana by his own method.

 

Immaculate Connotations

Whatever immaculate connotation you assign to your teacher, it is must be understood that as long as you unduly idolize them, you will never reach Nirvana. Nirvana can only be experienced by the individual who lets go of the definitions of Better and Worse, Higher and Lower, Less and More, and relinquishes themselves to the fact by letting go you can become one with all that is: nature, the teacher, and the universe. This is Nirvana.

 

The Pali Canon of Buddhism describes twenty-eight Buddha which lived before Siddhartha Gautama. Throughout the centuries in in India, Nepal, Tibet, Thailand, Japan, and now the Western World, there have been cases of others who have also achieved the highest level of consciousness. So, it is doable! But, it is ultimately only doable by you.

 

Do you wish to be a student or do you wish to be enlightened? If you say you are not good enough, knowledgeable enough, pure enough, or holy enough—you never will be. Your teacher may know more than you, but that is information and knowledge. Information and knowledge are nice, they are even useful to present a point of view, but they are not enlightenment. Enlightenment is steeping beyond all that is believed and that is known.

 

Let go of your teacher and become enlightenment.

 

Copyright 2000—All Rights Reserved

Scott Shaw Writings on Zen, Yoga, and Human Consciousness

I Believe: Compounding Factual Inaccuracies By Scott Shaw

By Scott Shaw

Life is based upon a set of beliefs. These beliefs come to us from many sources. We gain them from what we are taught, what we hear and read, what we witness, and then; once we have been provided with a certain set of parameters given to us by our culture, our desires, and our placement in life and time, we decide what we believe.

Some people decide what they believe and then simply do the conscious thing; believe it. Others decide it is they who have the calling, the desire, the ability, the power, the gift, and/or the need to broadcast their beliefs to the world. From this, they spread their ideologies out, from within in their own mind, to others. Why do they do this? The simple answer is ego. They want to be seen as a knower. If they are not seen as a knower then, at least, they believe they will be understood to be a discontent, sewing the seeds of controversy and anarchy.

There is one essential problem is the conception of, “I believe,” however. Belief is opinion, it is not fact.

In a free society every one has the right to have their opinion. But, if a person lives a life of consciousness they understand that their, “Opinion,” is just that—it is not a fact. It is simply what they believe and belief is an interpersonal process, it is not a factual accounting of reality and something that someone should expound outwards to the world for then only one thing occurs; the compounding of factual inaccuracies which have the potential to negatively affect the life of others.

It is like the conspiracy theorists, they look for and try to find logical reasoning for what they believe to be an anomaly of life, time, space, and/or occurrences. But, there is fact and then there is theory. Some people attempt to broadcast their theories to the minds of other people. This does not make their ideologies fact; it simply makes them broadcasted theories. And, each theory is simply some-thing that a particular some-one hopes to make fact based upon what they, personally, believe. It is not fact, however, it is simply belief. Yet, they hope to pull others into the web of what they believe. This is how many of the falsehood that have been disseminated through societies, throughout time, have come to take hold. Not fact, simply belief that a large number of people have come to believe.

The fact is, some people are so locked into their beliefs that even if you present them with factual evidence that what they believe is wrong they will argue with you about the validity of your presentation and will not concede that their belief about a practical subject and/or their belief system in general may be wrong.

Some people become very lost between the concept of opinion and fact. If they do not possess an analytical mind they simply assume that there is no difference. People driven by ego, desire, jealousy, or anger often fall prey to their own undefined differences between these two mental concepts. They believe, so what they believe IS.  But, is it? Is your belief ever the defining truth for the entire world? Yes, it may be the defining truth for your world but should your belief be expounded to others? Do you ever ponder this fact before you spread your belief(s) outwards?

How much of your life mind-time do you spend pondering the fact of understanding where your belief system arose?  How much of your life mind-time do you spend actually contemplating why you are saying, what you are saying, when you are disseminating your beliefs outwards, beyond yourself? When you do speak of your beliefs do you only care about the fact that you desire your beliefs to be witnessed as the truth? In fact, do you ever think at all before you speak of your belief? Finally, what is your desired end result when you propagate your belief? Why do you discuss your belief(s) at all? These are all important concepts to think about as you pass through life.

It is essential to contemplate why you believe what you believe. Think about this, have you ever believed one thing and now you believe it no more? This is the simple formula to help you define for yourself the difference between belief or fact. And, it is also essential to keep in mind, just because other people believe something (even large groups of people like a religion) this does that mean that you are forced to believe it?

Belief is only what it is; an ideology formed in your own mind. As long as it is kept in your own mind, it can hurt no one. As soon as it is released chaos is given birth to.

Belief is never fact.

Copyright 2016—All Rights Reserved

I Believe: Compounding Factual Inaccuracies @ Scott Shaw.com

Scott Shaw Writings on Zen, Yoga, and Human Consciousness

You Are Not A Christian By Scott Shaw

By Scott Shaw

I was the only customer shopping in a small boutique shop the other day. There were two employees in the shop having a heated discussion.  I could not help but overhear their words. The one, a man, was stating that he believed that it was the fault of the immoral policies of the United States government that had unjustly imprisonment suspected terrorists at the prison at Guantanamo Bay and due to the harsh conditions they were forced to undergo, with no hope of a fair trail or release, that it was the fault of the United States government that some of these prisoners had committed suicide.  The female employee argued that these people were simply mentally ill and, if they were not, they would have not committed suicide.  The argument went back and forth with no end in sight until the man said, “Well, if you believe that, that means that you’re not a Christian.”

            Throughout all levels of society this type of statement comes into play when a person is not getting their way in a conversation and/or argument. It is kind of like embracing the philosophy of, “Well, since you won’t agree with my point of view, I will simply kick you below the belt, to get my point across.” 

Why is this style of dialogue added to a discussion, because from this style of rhetoric, the topic completely changes. The female employee exclaimed, “What! I’m not a Christian! No, you’re the one who isn’t a Christian!”

            Ultimately this is the sad reality about opinions that equal discussions that ultimately lead to arguments—people what to talk.  They want to say what they believe.  They want their point to be accepted. They want everyone else to embrace their philosophy.  And, they want their opinion to be accepted as RIGHT by the masses. When it is not, then the rules of discourse go out the window and it becomes every man (or women) for themselves.

Why Participate

            The ultimate question you have to ask yourself is, “Why should I participate in this style of discourse at all?” Certainly, throughout life, we have all disagreed with what other people have said.  For example, I was recently at a party in Orange County California. For those of you who are not familiar with that region of the country, it is commonly understood to be a bastion of Caucasian Republican conservatism. I was sitting with a couple of friends at a table and a person came up, sat down, and blatantly began to state as fact that the reason gas prices were going up again was because it was a secret plan of Obama. I said, “No, it is because of world market demands and the speculation of investors.” Another person chimed stating that he was expecting Armageddon to occur any day now because Obama had been elected president and Obama was destroying the way the world views the United States. In disbelief I inquired, “What do you think W. did?”

            The two ultra conservatives began to exchange agreeing banter. The three liberals, myself included, got up and left the conversation.

We Each Have Our Opinions

We each have our opinion.  Some of our opinions are based on fact and some are based in belief. But, most people already have their minds made up about what they do and do not believe. It is for this reason that, for the most part, intellectual discussions among people of differing mindsets rarely prove anything.  For example, try to argue with a Christian, detailing the facts of the true history of Christianity to them, and you will run into a brick wall of denial of facts.  First you will be told, “It is all based in faith. And, faith is what our lord expects of us.”  Then, if you still carrying on the discussion, you will ultimately be told, “By the way, you know you are going to Hell for being a nonbeliever.”

This life-fact of differing opinions is the basis for all elements of conflict.  So, first and foremost, before you even enter into one of these heated discussions, you have to decide, are you will to entering into a conflict.  If you are, you must first understand, that conflicts only end one way—there is a winner and there is a loser. Now, the person of war may be willing to pay this price and live their life by this standard.  But, this is emphatically NOT the spiritual way. The spiritual way is a path of peace and positivity—though so many so-called spiritual people forget this fact when attempting to defend their ideology.

But the debative conflict of life is much more subtle that this. At the heart of all debate is the ideology of one person who has instigated the verbal confrontation. From that one person, the debate grows and grows and grows. But, no matter how big it gets, it is based upon the ideology of one person. And, what that person is propagating is most commonly based on attacking the thoughts and actions of another person or person(s).

Schadenfreude

            It is somewhat like the German term, “Schadenfreude,” which can be translated in several ways but basically it refers to the fact that a person or persons takes joy in another person’s demise or fall from grace. People who embrace this mindset look down upon the accomplishments of another and, in fact, find accomplishment a reason and motivation to denigrate and criticize people.

For whatever reason, people love to congregate in their own negativity. They love to band together and find a place where their voice of negativity can be heard and embraced. Some may say that this is a human condition.  But, I don’t believe that to be the case.  The only reason that a person or person(s) may relish the demise of another is based in the fact that a negatively-based person has not achieved the level of accomplishment or success they have desired in their chosen field.  Or, if they have achieved a certain level of success, they feel that by bringing another person down they have become superior. But, higher and lower is all foolishness. Less or more is all a state of mind.  And, less or more, higher or lower, is never a concept embraced by the truly spiritual individual.

From a personal perspective I have seen this many times. Someone will contact me being very friendly—most commonly based upon the fact that they want something from me. Then, sometime later, I will find that this same person is speaking or writing very hash things about me, most commonly based upon lies and falsehoods.

Why do people choose to behave in this fashion? Because that is the mindset they have ultimately chosen to embrace. They have entered a space of negativity.  And, this goes on throughout the world constantly. Think about it, how many people have you heard speaking negatively about someone they do not even know and have never met?  The problem with this mindset and reaction based mentality is all that it produces is a nonsensical waste of LIFE TIME and LIFE ENGERY.

The question to ask yourself, if you find yourself embracing a negative mentality is, “Do you feel good when you criticize others? Does it make you a better person?  Does it make the world a better place?”  The answer will almost universally be, “No.” 

What behaving in this manner actually equals is that you are not contributing to the Greater-Good of this place we call Life. Instead, if you are following this negative level of human consciousness, you are not contributing to the betterment; you are only trying to destroy. And, destruction on any level is a negative pathway.

Think about the people you have admired. Do they follow a path of negativity or do they provide the world with a positive service?  Think about the people who have made major contribution to the world.  Are they negative and critical? Are they constantly involving themselves in criticism, arguments, and negative debates?  No, they are probably not.

No matter what field they are in, what they do is to do what they do. They continue to learn and grow as an individual, and follow a path that leads to the betterment of the themselves and the world. They turn away from confrontations; verbal or to there wise. This is the path to making a positive contribution to the world.

In the Words

So, you enter into a space where people are embracing negative dialogue - either about a subject, a person, religions, politics, or whatever.  Do you stay and take part in that?  Argue your point until you make everybody believe as you believe?  Does your dialogue continue until you are both so agitated that you end up in a physical confrontation? Or do you walk away? You must understand that if you remain in debate, all you are actualizing is the revamping of meaningless banter and discourse. Yes, you may have your opinion, based on fact or fiction—we all do.  Yes, you may like or dislike a person who is in the spotlight, based it whatever ideology.  But, as long as you are taking about them, all you are doing is adding to their notoriety.  It is kind of like the fact that Andy Warhol never read the reviews written by his critics; all he did was measure how big the printed discourse was.

What this means is that you are either becoming you and becoming more.  Or, you are not.  If you are not, and constantly engaged in debate that all you are doing is basing your life upon the actions and achievements of other people.

You can be an armchair quarterback and talk, blog, or write, (good and bad), all you want about another person or another person’s philosophy.  But, if you are doing this, all you are actually doing is paying tribute to that person. And, if you are following this life course, then you must ask yourself what does it equal and how it is causing you to become more, better, and achieve what you truly desire?

So, argue if you want.  Stay in the debate if you must.  Hit below the belt if that is the only way you can win an argument. But, ultimately what does that say about you?  And, more importantly, if you live your life at this level, what will be left when you have exited this place we call Life.  Will you have left a positive legacy?  Or, simply a plethora of forgotten conversations based on opinions.

Copyright © 2009 – All Rights Reserved

 

Scott Shaw Writings on Zen, Yoga, and Human Consciousness