*reads thread*
*sees random followers gaslighting*
Yeah, that's gonna be a no from me dawg...
If your direct teachings turn people into cultists, they're not good teachings.
Conversation
I wouldn't hold the Buddha responsible for the state of Buddhism today, nor Jesus for Christanity, etc.
But if your very own students are this full of shit, *you're* full of shit.
Replying to
Some people know important things, but are bad teachers. In this case, it's unethical to teach. This is not complicated.
1
4
Follow-up:
My own teacher may very well not be more accomplished than me, but his models of what practices are good for which predicaments, and his ability to see through my BS, are superior to mine
Conveyed with some measure of sensitivity, this means I learn better from him.
2
3
Conversely, you can have a teacher who is vastly more accomplished than you and yet lacks either basic manners or communication skills, and does more harm than good.
Unless that's your kink. Some people need that. But it's only ethical to teach those people that way.
1
2
What I see constantly, however, is teachers who may or may not be accomplished surrounding themselves with students who are not qualified to say, and using their naive disciples as validation for their (gradually more inflated) ego.
1
1
This isn't just failing your students; it's failing yourself.
Someone who can't keep it in the pants with this stuff is a fraud, not a teacher.
2
Replying to
Assuming that Jesus existed, and further assuming that the 4 gospels are an accurate record of his teachings, our Lord wasn't a very good teacher.
And given the gap between Buddha's life and when the sutras were written, there is reason to doubt their authenticity.
1
1
Replying to
I agree with all of those things. It's more of a high-level commentary on the structure of a lineage.
If you've been dead for multiple generations, you can't reasonably be expected to keep any sort of order in your house.
1
2
Show replies