A Somewhat Lengthy Talk on Education
Depending on what people’s understanding of education is, people perceive it differently. This involves many factors, including the field of study. For example if we take into consideration the study of space travel by the means of the space shuttle, it would be ill-advised to seek such an education from a country which is not involved in the space shuttle program. The same idea is true for the study of other fields. I will give a prime example. I was interested in the study of religion. Long ago I went to one of the highly respected top-notch universities in California, USA. I shall not name the university. I physically went up to one of the high-rise buildings where classes where being held. 🙂 I approached a teacher and asked him about religious study courses. He informed me that they do not have such a field of study.
I inquired: “So in the future if this university decided to provide a course on Hinduism, do they go to India and bring in a knowledgeable Hindu Priest who knows about Hinduism and is an expert in his field of study to teach here at the university
He immediately said: “Noooooo, we get someone in our own university who studies anthropology and he makes a bridge over onto religion and starts teaching in that way”
So what I understood from this, is that people who go to this university and pay thousands and thousands of dollars in the hopes of getting a top-notch education will be getting substandard education. An anthropologist does not know about religion as deeply as one who is deeply knowledgeable about religion. From this exchange I understood that this university is not interested in providing the best education. In my understanding it is about money. It is about credibility. If this university does bring someone from the outside, it is acknowledging the legitimacy of such a person. However bringing an anthropologist from within their own university to teach on religion is only credible within their own university and its circle of influence in other academic institutions, it is not credible within the site of an expert on Hinduism found in India.
I had a person who took the study of Buddhism in another top-notch university. He told me that he was highly disappointed, since he discovered that the university was not interested in learning what Buddhist thought really is, from the Buddhist’s perspective. They wanted to study the Buddhist thought by the western scientific method. He was specifically told this by the teacher he was studying under.
There are various fields of study. If I had wanted to study on space travel by means of the space shuttle, I would have to go to an institution which specializes in that field. After studying in a university, I would then have to approach NASA and ask them how to proceed in furthering my education on space travel.
In my case I wanted to study about God, and one of those means was by the study of various religions. I do not mean comparative religion. I do not mean taking bits and pieces of one religion and intermixing it with what I like in other religions. Some people have mistakenly supposed I have approached my study of religions in that manner. I studied each religion separately, one at a time. Through many years of in-depth study and concentration on one religion, and after understanding its depths I would go on to study another religion.
My depth of study and critical thinking and independent research are not about book learning. It is not about simply passing tests. It is not about forgetting what I read for the tests after I passed them. It is about understanding the intended meaning of the author of those sacred scriptures.
My many years of study on Islam exceeds a Doctorate degree (Phd).
My many years of study on Hinduism exceeds a Doctorate degree (Phd).
My many years of study on Christianity exceeds a Doctorate degree (Phd).
My many years of study on Buddhism exceeds a Doctorate degree (Phd).
I studied on Judaism, Bahai, Sikhism, and other religions and spiritual paths as well.
My independent studies and independent research also involved taking knowledge found within those religions, and testing them in daily life, thereby validating them. Then, upon validation of the various knowledge and truths I would apply them to my own life.
My knowledge on the mind exceeds a Doctorate degree (Phd)
My knowledge in emotional fulfillment exceeds a Doctorate degree (Phd)
My knowledge in Sexual Addiction exceeds a Doctorate degree (Phd)
So far that is exceeding 7 Doctoral degrees. I am not boasting about my education. Throughout this web page I am not boasting about myself. I am simply telling the truth about myself. I do not belittle myself, nor do I aggrandize myself. I do not belittle other people, nor do I aggrandize them. I value myself infinitely, I value others infinitely, and I value God infinitely. Those who mistakenly think that I am aggrandizing myself do not understand me, they do not understand my thinking. It is important for people to value themselves. Words often are misunderstood by people. For example when I call myself a master, so many people have the ability to misunderstand, and mistakenly thing that I am artificially aggrandizing myself. This is due to their mis-perception of what I mean by the word master. There are countless other mis-perceptions they might have by other experiences that I have had. A small example, is when a person who calls himself a Christian and say he experiences a similar experience that I have had. He calls his experience “The Holy Spirit” and I do not give it such a name. Others who are supposedly Christian tend to accept the Holy Spirit version, since it is named as such. Any other person in the world who has the same experience, but does not brand it as the Holy Spirit is looked on as suspicious, and even told that he is devilish. These thoughts come from a lack of education. Spirituality is not about branding, and names. it is not about what is on the outside. It is what is on the inside. Open-minded and very aware people already know this, but I am reminding the one’s who have fallen into that trap of ignorance to come out into the light.
Since I wanted to really study these religions in search for God, I wanted the best education available. I was in search for truth. I understood that if I went to a Christian religious school they would be biased towards other religions. I had already seen their inaccurate statements made about other religions, within many a book that are from some of the Christian perspectives, which painted a totally inaccurate picture of other religions, simply because of a lack of their in-depth knowledge of other religions.
I was not interested in a regular education where one goes to school and has to work on a paper, and essay, memorize facts, etc. I was interested in deep knowledge and deep truths. I was not about to waste my time on trivial pursuits. I was guided by God towards the most phenomenal of educations. I gained access to literature which was written by deeply knowledgeable persons in their field of study. I had already done much study on my own by being completely unbiased, in the study of Islam, and Christianity. There is a considerable difference, and ocean of difference between a study by a person who is unbiased, in search for truth, who examines every possibility that he thinks of, has heard and or studied, and who in search for truth purifies his mind and disallows obstacles of pride, national superiority, religious superiority, country of birth superiority, parental birth superiority to cloud his mind and perception, comprehension, investigation, research, and interpretation. The adage seek and you will find is certainly true. However, it will only work for those who are honest with themselves. Those types of individuals are hard to find.
There are sciences in existence today which owe much of their knowledge from contributions from other cultures and from other religions, and other ideologies. As an example Psychology owes a great deal to religious knowledge in India. Jung admits this. Those scientists in the field of psychology who refuse to acknowledge where they got a hold of such knowledge are ungrateful and discourteous. They credit themselves without giving due credit from where the knowledge originated from. I do not appreciate the actions of such people who discount where they got hold of knowledge. That is the reason I openly share with people the sources of my knowledge. I appreciate the phenomenal knowledge, and do not attribute it to myself. I attribute it to the phenomenal knowledge provided in various scriptures of the world, a guidance from God. In particular “Bhagavad-Gita As It Is” by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. Bhagavad-Gita means Song of the Lord. Bhakti means Love, Vedanta is the end of knowledge (referring to the highest spiritual knowledge) It means ‘Love’ ‘the highest spiritual knowledge’. My deepest respects to all of God’s messengers, prophets, and Godly people around the world.
Having said all that, one last thing. Those who close themselves off from my years of study are closing themselves of to a person who is one of the most honest people you can find, a devotee of God, and well-wisher of all. I am one who has sincerely taken to the study the teachings in the Recitation, teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, and other teachings such as Baha, and ancient teachings revealed in India. Furthermore I am one who has tested the knowlegdes and truths, and has applied such truths to his life, with phenomenal results.
Results of experiencing extraordinary spiritual experiences, and extraordinary experiences of closeness to God. Experiencing the all encompassing unconditional love, that is to love all the beings in existence and to be loved by them. Results of experiencing complete and lasting emotional fulfillment, and to be mentally completely tranquil, to be sexually completely free from unfathomable lust. In essence you are depriving yourself of a wealth of insightful practical knowledge.
Of course, I am in agreement that if a person is not yet sufficiently stable in his or her path it is alright for them to keep on that path to learn it in-depth instead of being mixed up by other paths. Considering various perspectives is necessary even in the study of their own chosen path. Looking into other paths is alright too. However sticking to one path and learning it deeply is much better. The problem is that many people just do not know how to do that, and they learn a version of their religion which is very limited in truth, and has a set manner of thinking that is provided for them. There is a set logical framework which they are taught. This is very limiting. It is so limiting that it does not address various questions which they have, and so they are in effect kidding themselves, and in answer to these questions they are repeated the same logical framework and they are told that they must have faith, even when many serious questions they have are not addressed and the answers do not make sense to them. I will discontinue talking about this. I will be writing about this in detail in one of my last books. However since this is a very important issue, because it has to do with learning, I decided to write in somewhat detail to be of some help to people. Concerning the present book “OPEN TO BLISS”, which deals with sexual addiction, the knowledge is straight-forward, so any person theist or atheist will be able to understand the commonsense information. There is no reason to go into religion about this.
To those Christians who think that this knowledge is unaccaptable to them because it is not solely focused on Christ: This knowledge is revealing mind manipulation so you can stop being manipulated by sexual presentations. Think to yourself, is freeing people from sex addiction for God or against God? Is freeing people from sex addiction good work or bad work?
Also, all the true prophets and messengers of God, whomever they are, they are all on the same team, they are on God’s team. They work together, they are not seperate from each other. Many people focus on the messenger and forget the message. The message? LOVE.
- to Love
- to be kind
- to be honest
- to be understanding
- to be compassionate
Those who study in universities, or a formal educational system of any sorts are subject to these conditions (I over simplified them to make a point about my own studies):
- They have to study books.
- They have to be able to think on their own and understand. Otherwise they are robots or parrots.
- They have access to a teacher’s guidance.
- In the upper levels of higher education they are encouraged to take part in independent research.
In my studies,
- I studied books.
- I thought on my own in order to understand.
- I studied books that were taught by master teachers.
- I was involved in deep, unbiased and independent research since the beginning of my research from 1973.
The university students have access to instructions from the teacher, although lets face it, the teacher is rather inaccessible.
The true purpose of university teaching is to develop the student to a point of independent learning, critical and unbiased thinking. This is what I began with in 1973.
I shall provide for you some information on universities which you will find informative. You can visit this page which shows more of the data. I have provided a few of the data below.
I am providing this to show that just because a person has a degree from a university, even from a prestigious one, does not mean that he or she has a higher education. Education is an inner quality rather than an outward one. One has a higher education when one applies oneself to indepth study and learning and educates oneself. This education can be done in or outside of university.
Excerpts from L. F. Gardiner’s Article
“Why We Must Change: The Research Evidence”
“We find a substantial body of evidence that clearly demonstrates a crisis of educational quality in our nation’s colleges and universities.
This crisis should evoke a serious and determined response from the entire professorate. But rather, … we too often find complacency within our ranks.
“We seem to turn a blind eye to the quality of our educational processes and results. The busyness of daily routine and the seeming rightness of the familiar obscures the need to change.”
“One national study has revealed that only 35 percent of faculty strongly emphasize their institution’s curricular goals. Only 12 percent utilize feedback from their earlier students, and 8 percent use the viewpoints of experts in instruction. The conclusion: ‘The faculty interviewed seemed to teach as they had been taught …'”
“Faculty in another national study ‘overwhelmingly’ saiddeveloping effective thinking was their primary educational purpose, but most of the 4,000 course goals they submitted related to teaching concepts in their disciplines, rather than developing the intellectual skills they said were so important.”
“… involving students in discussion fosters retention of information, application of knowledge to new situations, and development of higher-order thinking skills — and discussions do this much better than lectures do. …
… Yet 70 to 90 percent of professors use the traditional lecture as their primary instructional strategy.”
“In a study of 155 class sessions at four different institutions, questioning of students comprised 0.2 percent to 9.2 percent of class time.”
“… in most courses, transmission of facts from teacher to students and discussion that requires only the recall of facts are the dominant class activities, regardless of discipline, the number of weeks into the semester, or size of institution.
In one study, 89.3 percent of questions asked by the faculty required only recall to answer, not comprehension of concepts. ...
In only 0.3 percent to 2.5 percent of class time were students required to use the much more complex skill of evaluation.”
“The median cognitive level in classes of 15 or fewer students was analysis. In classes of 16 to 45 students the median was comprehension. In large classes of 46 to 300 students the median intellectual activity was recall.”
“… numerous studies demonstrate widespread cheating among students on classroom tests, possibly involving 40 to 90 percent of all students. …
One-third of studentswith A’s and B+’s cheated [national study of 6,165 respondents] , as did two-thirds of 6,000 students at ‘highly selective’ colleges.”
“For well over a decade we have been warned that if we do not put our academic house in order, others … will step in to do so. They have begun to do this. We must act quickly.”