Nothing exists in isolation, so we should choose our team wisely. Traditionally, “Sangha” is just a word that connotes a group of mature adults who are willing to try to set down their baggage and enter into a sincere investigation of reality with an open heart and an open mind – that is, as scientists. It is the primary responsibility of the Sangha to preserve the works of the directly inspired mentors who form the lineage. It is the secondary responsibility of the Sangha to ensure that each member also becomes a directly inspired mentor who can steward future generations of practitioners.
The “Tibetan lineage” outlines the path to enlightenment and is therefore truly a precious treasure. This lineage has its roots in modern Nepal, which was included in the ancient Indian political zone. Nowadays, H.H. the 14th Dalai Lama will often say, “I’m a student of the Nalanda Tradition of ancient India”. The Nalanda Tradition originated in “enlightened beings”. It’s up to each of us to grapple with that philosophical challenge – is enlightenment real? The lineage is not a culturally specific phenomenon – it is a movement through time and across cultures, motivated solely by inclusivity and service. The lineage and the path outlined begins manifesting wherever and whenever the necessary causes and conditions are present.
Taken to the logical extreme then, these teachings are not “Buddhist” possessions, if we are mistaking “Buddhism” for a religious doctrine. Buddhism is a discipline – a science. The real meaning of “Buddha” is “awake”. By nature, the “ultimate, inclusive wakefulness” does not belong to any one tradition, culture, time, or place – but includes all beings, all traditions, all times, and all places.
As modern citizens of an increasingly complex world, we must make the effort and take the necessary time required to re-contextualize and “update the language of the teachings”, as well as reestablish a shared value and appreciation of “the lineage” of practitioners who have kept these teachings alive. It is not enough to simply join an old establishment. We must create a new and globally inclusive “house” for the teachings, so that they can be clearly understood in the context of our contemporary civilization. To reiterate what has previously been stated, the lineage is inclusive in its motivation, working in service to others in a very specific and skillful way. This type of non-sectarian approach is also what distinguishes a true mentor.
The lineage as it currently exists is both wonderful and somewhat off-putting to students who have not been properly exposed to the culture. There is a certain formality and rigidity that must be analyzed and diagnosed. We now bear the burden of serving our great mentors by distilling ourselves so deeply in the teachings in a traditional manner that we may develop the ability to discern and then “renovate the wings of the mansion that are dilapidated”.
Advanced concepts are only proliferated when delivered in clear, relatable, “everyday language”. The ability to execute this requires experiential knowledge of the path, not simply linguistic or academic. Young people are always hungry for information, and we are doing a profound disservice to our youth by not making the effort to connect with them in their own “language”. After all, they are the ones who have the greatest potential to change the world.
However, and to be redundant, contemporary society is not accustomed to the “vibes” of “lineage life”, and therefore certain concepts such as “the intensity of the mentor” or “the beauty of hierarchy” must be addressed, clarified, unpacked, and perhaps even reworded. If working with a mentor were something of high value and priority, the question would return to developing the ability to discern who is actually a real mentor or lineage-holder.
For example, I know that Michael Jordan is good at basketball, because I have seen him play. And if I were to play him one-on-one, I would be no match. His dedication, training, skill, and experience would produce rather unpleasant results for me, were I to compete with him. To connect the metaphor, the intensity and degree of clarity of the mentor is greater than that of the student, by definition, and therefore creates a polarity that is uncomfortable – at first, anyway. But as all real learning only happens “outside the comfort zone”, soon the student recognizes that the “fact of distance” is what is responsible for creating the necessary resistance required for the transformation to occur. Realizing this correspondence, the student develops a deep respect for the mentor.
Another misunderstood and misappreciated concept is that of “hierarchy”. As we have seen, in the basketball hierarchy, I fall below Michael Jordan. If a basketball related question were to arise, I would value Michael Jordan’s input over my own – I would also turn to him for leadership in times of basketball crisis. A truly constructive understanding of hierarchy has nothing to do with levels of “importance” – rather, with maturity, experience, leadership, and responsibility. All beings in the human hierarchy possess equal importance, but some have willingly taken on greater responsibilities. But why would anyone want to willingly take on greater responsibility? From the point of view of the lineage, doing so is the only way to move toward enlightenment. Why anyone would want to move toward enlightenment is the most profound question that can be asked.
To unpack this a bit more, a constructive hierarchy is established on the basis of “protecting that which is most precious”. From the point of view of the lineage, all life is truly precious. For this reason, the lineage holds service to all life as its primary motivation. Clearly, whether we participate in the lineage or not, we all try to protect that which we value most – ourselves, our loved ones, our sources of meaning, and so on. The things, people, and ideas that we love the most are what we make an effort to protect – we deeply wish for these things to endure.
However, the truth of the matter is that any lineage that is established must take a culturally specific form – a name, place, space, language, and so on. All lineages and traditions, because they are necessarily manifested within cultural specificities, will eventually die or become outdated. But this is okay. The fact that lineages will die and disappear is actually inconsequential in the grand scheme, because “the source of the teachings” is “uncreated” and “eternal” – that is, what lineage founders discover is beyond birth or death. Enlightenment is the discovery of the fact of inclusivity – and therefore responsibility. The best a lineage can ever do is to exist as a vessel to express the ever-present fact of inclusivity as a shared, interdependent, constantly evolving phenomenon – and to teach compassion as the foundation, therefore.
The best we can ever do for the lineage is to be transmitters of these teachings for a certain period of time. So it’s worth considering that offering the purest, most concentrated, and accessible form of the teachings might be doing a better service to the lineage than trying to proliferate rigidities of language, ritual instruments, deities, and so on. Sometimes, it’s effective to be provocative, harsh, or colloquial. And sometimes it’s effective to be gentle, proper, or formal. A real mentor knows which one is appropriate for the context.
Comments