For one reason or another I've started to look
at the art of teaching more in depth.
Sometimes - it would seem - a person needs
personal attention. Not everbody can be taught
the same.
With the teaching of Eckankar one can read
that the temple is within. And get the idea that
all the questions can be answered there.
How do the inner & outer master differ then?
*********
If I were to locate a history for the outer form
of spiritual teachings, I would look at the history
for outer paths, and with regard to how they were
taught. What I could do is look at the records. I
could look at the books and tapes. I could recall
what people basically said and look at that over
a long period of time. All of this would amount to
so many outer expressions though, in my opinion.
Another thing I might try to do is get to know
the teacher. I say "try to do" because many of
those who left behind a legacy of teachings in
the physical are now deceased. And sometimes
it's like looking at outer teachings on top of outer
teachings.
In the book The Whole Truth, The Spiritual
Legacy of Paul Twitchell, by Doug Marman, I
get an idea of him. I get an idea that Paul was
not one to sit in an audience and accept all of
what his teachers gave him. Not without going
and researching it for himself. And not without
trying to teach the same subject himself, and
using his own creativity to do that.
*********
The other day I came across a website that
illustrated so many personifications of Greek
gods (theoi), spirits (daimones) and fabulous
creatures (theres). It stopped me to think for
a moment after I looked at the following page
http://www.theoi.com/greek-mythology/personifications.html
and realized how people "personified" most of
what had been common to the scope of outer
human conditions. I thought about these forms
in the way of teaching aids, along with all of the
mythology sprung up around them over time. I
remembered too that the Egyptians and many
other ancient cultures did something similar in
the way of recording and preserving their outer
teachings. They made it into an outer art form.
In my opinion, religions have an outer form
of teaching too. So much of what has been
crafted over the years can inspire a student,
as if that were all something to take in. How
a personal path to God differs though - from
an outer teaching only - is what a person does
with it all. Especially sitting in the audience,
what they do with all of what comes at them.
*********
How can teaching a subject help a person
to better know it? And researching it too? It
is my opinion that this is what brings the two
sides together for an individual. The inner and
the outer teachings.
Don't expect me to elaborate on the latter
part. It's a fundamentally individual & personal
experience, the whole of which I cannot bring
into the "outer" that others could have it too.
I could leave off saying that when a student
learns something from a teacher, they should
be able to reproduce that for themselves. It is
what defines the term of master****p, IMO, in
the sense of having mastered something. The
first thing that a lot of people learn to master
is walking. Later, riding a bike and driving a car.
These are all "outer" things perhaps, but they
expand a person's scope and experience of
life.
Traveling on any "inner" planes, or worlds,
is something, IMO, that can have an outer
teaching. Listening to others and what they
have to say (or said) about it over time. The
words they use, or the different forms of art
used to describe it. There comes the time
though, IMO, where a person has to do like
the teacher and go beyond the outer history
by researching & exploring it for themselves.
Even teaching what they know to others, in
the way that Paul Twitchell and others have
done.
In this last respect, I kinda imagine that the
outer paths could turn to stumbling blocks for
a lot of people. Especially if they haven't come
to master them, in the sense of going "beyond"
them. This is the ultimate trapping of organized
religion, if you ask me. Putting oneself on idle
waiting for someone to walk, ride the bike, and
drive the car for them, so to speak.
Everyone likes to save and record a creation
on the outer. Like art collectors. What they are
in their entirety though, is all in the eye of the
beholder - if you ask me. Like a reflection in a
glass or a polished surface, the outer object
and its reflection is subject to a number of fact-
ors. On the other side of the viewfinder though,
one might have a different opinion of what it is.
Going to a temple within, IMO, doesn't mean
taking a crowd of spectators with you. Not when
it's your own sacred temple and you decide who,
or what, comes through the door. However, if the
outer and inner temple, master and teachings be
ever the same, that is a personal experience - it
would seem to me. One that doesn't depend on
any "other" person, or any "other" thing but you
and what is your own art of teaching.
Etznab
|
