Can spirituality really be taught?

[Stormdancer]

opps , I almost forgot,
and,
" ignorance can be bliss........"

[Vajradhara]

Originally Posted by Susma Rio Sep

Dear Vaj, may I redact your words into more simple essential statements?

1. Ignorance is the source of sorrow.

2. Ignorance prevents or limits one's perception of the Buddha-nature.

3. The third paragraph is a bit hard to redact into simple essential statements. Anyway, here we go:

a. You are ignorant of the Buddha-nature hidden within (you?).

b. Look for it within (yourself?).

c. Looking within, you will find it, and the find will gladden you.

d. Buddha-nature will gladden you.


I think I will have difficulty in accepting that ignorance causes sorrow; maybe when ignorance has been lifted by knowledge, as when one was ignorant of having thrown away a diamond ring and then realized what he had done.

In my limited readings of Buddha's teachings, I seem to have the impression that the conquest of desires or the acquisition of impassivity toward desires is liberation from sorrow, because desire unsatisfied results in sorrow, as when one is frustrated -- that is one principle tenet of Buddha's teachings.

Susma Rio Sep

Namaste Susma,

thank you for the post.

if you don't mind... let me rephrase your redactions to be more inline with actual Buddhist thought...

1. Ignorance is the source of dhukka. dhukka is usually translated as "suffering" however, it's more persuasive than that. the word literally means "thirst" or "craving".

2. dhukkha prevents realization of the Buddhanature.

3 a. sentient beings are ignorant of the Buddhanature within themselves.

b. it is not somewhere else and it is not something that you gain from another. it is something we already have in full and complete measure.

c. if you realize Buddha nature, you are liberated from the cycle of samsara.


in our view, the universe is explictly causal, cause and effect. however... your statement is a bit imprecise. ignorance causes delusion, not sorrow. delusion is one of the causes of suffering, not the sole cause.

there is a 12 linked chain of this (12 Links of Interdependent Co-Arising). perhaps you've not had a chance to review this information yet? it is, in essence, the Heart of the Buddhas teaching, to borrow from Thay.

i'm happy to go into all of that here... however... i think that i'll start a new thread in the Eastern Thought Forum to fully expound on this. please join me there for a continuation of this conversation.

[metro_tramp]

For me, it seems the question 'can spirituality be taught?' is best answered with a nice rounded Mu!
It's like learning to drive - You can buy a car and just sit there for a few days/weeks trying all the different pedals and levers 'till you've figured it out - its pretty hard, and will take a lot longer than normal, but it can be done with the right frame of mind.
You could read a load of books on how to drive, the highway code and all that - this'll quicken things up, but you still need a car and some roads to practice with.
You can get a teacher - now, some teachers are crap and will charge a lot when they know nothing, some will know a lot and charge a lot, and some will know a lot and teach you for free; but teachers seem to be the quickest (and perhaps surest) way to learn - you get feedback on how you're doing - you can ask questions about driving that books might not answer, or that you dont know how to answer yourself...

But all this depends on the person. You could try all three methods and still be the worst driver known to humanity. Or you could go for one lesson and it'll all click straight away. Or you could sit straight in the car... well; you get the idea...

So really, teaching can be good if you got a good teacher, as can 'self-help', as can intellectual learning. But in the end it all depends on what mix works best for you within the cosmos.

I personally like all three..

Every one of we 6 billion people is different, and so it makes sense that there are 6 billion different paths to spirituality...

I disagree with those who say 'some have it, and some don't' - assuming we believe in spirituality (and we all seem to agree that we do..) it can only make sense that everybody has 'a spiritual side'. to say someone is without spirit would be the same as saying they half-exist or something... yeah, a lot of people have a hell of a lot of dirt piled onto their real self, but if they didnt have a real self, they wouldn't Be.

all is one, one is all, and all that...

so yeah. i reckon; MU!!

[Marsh]

Personally, I see an individual's spirit being on par with their body, and so to me the idea of teaching someone to become spiritual is the equivolent of teaching someone to grow a third arm: not possible. We all have a body, and with it comes the ability to use it or not use it. I think the same is essentially true for one's spirit.

However, I think that it's entirely possible to teach someone how to exercise their spirituality, and in doing that to improve the sense of spirituality that they already possess. The question is, of course, what is the spiritual equivolent of a bench press?

I'm not an expert on spirituality by any means. However, in the last 5 years of my life I've found myself growing increasingly spiritual. I've found some causes that seem to correlate. The exact causes, though, aren't really material because they were personal causes; there's more than one way to build strength. The point is, however, that religion was not one of the causes of this renewed spirituality.

One of my biggest criticisms of religion (in general) is the way that all of them, at least to some degree, claim to hold a monopoly on spirituality.

[Sacredstar]

Esoteric knowledge as always been taught and handed down orally for 1,000's of year's. When knowledge is lived by the aspirant, it can then be integrated, through integration of the experience it then becomes wisdom. Hence why esoteric knowledge was shared slowly to give time for integration.The sad thing about today is that in this throw away society people can jump rapidly from corner to corner without going inside to sit down and integrate the collection. Hence the term workshop junkies! They get off on the high and don't want to come down......but if they integrated they would be on a high all the time.

Dear Brian

Well a treatment sounds like a healing treatment not learning spirituality as such. Is that what you meant Brian?

Love beyond measure

Sacredstar

[Blue]

The Jesuits would say so, regarding the question:

"Can spirituality be taught?"

Does that equate to indoctrination or 'brainwashing'?

[Sacredstar]

Dear Metro tramp

I agree

Dear Blue

well this as been the case by those that have not integrated their own knowledge, cults have been known to control,dominate and brainwash. I have met a few people that have gone through this and they still have not let go of the brain washing...very sad indeed. As an observer all those that got involved in such organisations were coming from a powerful desire and craving.....hence they have not achieved what they set out to achieve bringing ultimate disappointment, disenchantment and lost hope. They also seem to be people who live in their heads instead of their hearts and have not integrated the basics.

In my experience if a spiritual teacher is doing their job properly they become redundant very quickly, through sharing with other's how to access the light within oneself. Gnosis!

Love beyond measure

Sacredstar

[Blue]

I don't know on what basis you draw your conclusions, SacredStar.
With respect, I have yet to meet a Jesuit who is not sincere about his spirituality, or convinced of his personally validated truths.

Their educational processes work. Their Spirituality can be learned through their educational processes.

Similarly, those being 'processed' by Cultish techniques are just as likely to be confirmed and happy in their spirituality as those who are not.

The fact is that 'indoctrination' occurs.... with perceiveably judged 'bad' or 'good' results according to one's perspectives.

I say all indoctrination is not 'good', spiritual, religious, political. or otherwise,because it encourages the person indoctrinated to be 'blind' ot others' views,be they spiritual, religious or political.

Therefore for good or ill, 'spirituality' can be learned and can be taught - as your reference to a Spiritual Teacher attests.

As you say, I cannot see what it means to use integrated knowledge of their own... when you say:
"have not integrated their own knowledge".
What does that mean? How does it work, or not work?
Indoctrination is indoctrination, from an evil standpoint or a good. Can anyone stand against it, especially if they are 5, 6 or 7 years old? (Which was the point about the Jesuits supposed saying.)

They can only be protected against it by learning, rationality and reasoning with a firm basis of objective knowledge and objective understandings... and even then it may still 'work'!

[Blue]

Incidentally, using a term like 'Gnosis' is not a wise thing to do... all it refers to is intuitive apprehension of spiritual truths, which happened to be an esoteric 'form' or 'type' of knowledge sought by the Gnostics.

Intuitive apprehensions are notoriously unreliable in reality.

Again, this is not personal opinion, but fact based in the denotation of the word.
If we are going to claim additional esoteric connotations for words, as you may do, on top of their denotations, we tread a perhaps even more dangerous path.

Many thanks for an interesting and courteous debate today.

[lunamoth]

Actually, brainwashing is an accurate term. No matter what belief system you decide to follow, or create, you have decided to mold yourself to a certain standard. You act in the manner that standard dictates, and eventually it becomes habit, it becomes you. And I would bet that you have actually changed the chemical and physical makeup of your brain in doing so. This is the process of transformation. I suppose brainwashing has bad connotations when it involves aggressive prosyltization of people who for whatever reason are weak or vulnerable at the time, and to an end that is oppressive or harmful or takes advantage.

I prefer the term transformation because it has positive connotations. The thing that brainwashing adds is that if for some reason you decide to change course, your brain is altered so it is difficult to let go of some of the habits.

[Sacredstar]

Dear Blue

Originally Posted by Blue

I don't know on what basis you draw your conclusions,
With respect, I have yet to meet a Jesuit who is not sincere about his spirituality, or convinced of his personally validated truths.

I was referring to estoteric christianity not mainstream religion.

Originally Posted by Blue

Similarly, those being 'processed' by Cultish techniques are just as likely to be confirmed and happy in their spirituality as those who are not.The fact is that 'indoctrination' occurs.... with perceiveably judged 'bad' or 'good' results according to one's perspectives.

I agree but it is interesting to view different peoples experiences and perspectives thereof.

Originally Posted by Blue

I say all indoctrination is not 'good', spiritual, religious, political. or otherwise,because it encourages the person indoctrinated to be 'blind' ot others' views,be they spiritual, religious or political.Therefore for good or ill, 'spirituality' can be learned and can be taught - as your reference to a Spiritual Teacher attests.

I agree

Originally Posted by Blue

when you say:
"have not integrated their own knowledge".
What does that mean?

I was referring to teachers who do not walk their talk. e.g. like Jesus rebuked the Jewish priests for not living the truth.

There are also modern day spiritual teachers that had knowledge but did not integrate it. E.g. they are not operating from the heart. For instance a spiritual teacher that wishes to control, dominate or brainwash other's is against the true essence of spirituality e.g. unconditional love, acceptance, honoring others uniqueness and individuality, compassion. These teachers are operating from a place of desire of power for self and not from the the heart, in these cases it is also abuse of energy. In my language they are operating from the lower levels of consciousness, of root, sacrel and solar plexus. Due to a lack of their integration of the universal spiritual truths they have not moved their energy truly into their hearts of giving divine love.

Love beyond measure

Sacredstar

[Blue]

For instance a spiritual teacher that wishes to control, dominate or brainwash other's is against the true essence of spirituality e.g. unconditional love, acceptance, honoring others uniqueness and individuality, compassion. These teachers are operating from a place of desire of power for self and not from the the heart,

I could not agree more, as you might by now expect.

You do say something rather strange though, to slide away from the main points of discussion - you refer to 'esoteric' Christianity... isn't all of Christianity 'esoteric'?

Are you simply referring to sects that depart from Pauline Christianity, for it was Paul who founded the 'religion', not Jesus of Nazareth?

[Blue]

Just in case you misunderstand my last comments:
esoteric means that which is intelligible only to those with special knowledge.
Isn't that what all Christians claim?

No one can be a Christian, an Hindu, or even a Pagan without at least partaking of what can be called the 'knowledge' in a spiritual sense, and IS 'special' because of that.

[Sacredstar]

Dear Blue

"I could not agree more, as you might by now expect."

Yes big smiles and hugs!

"You do say something rather strange though, to slide away from the main points of discussion - you refer to 'esoteric' Christianity... isn't all of Christianity 'esoteric'?"

I agree with you, but some people do not feel that the things I speak of should be part of mainline Christianity. I just have a different understanding and interpretation of the same. And feel it is good to share all views to enhance the richness of the legacy.

"Are you simply referring to sects that depart from Pauline Christianity, for it was Paul who founded the 'religion', not Jesus of Nazareth?"

No I am referring to modern day spiritual teachers.

Love beyond measure

Sacredstar

[Blue]

I can only but agree with you, SacredStar.

You have used and explained a personal connotation and that is fine by me... if not others! lol