Syntax

A man staring at his equations
said that the universe had a beginning.
There had been an explosion, he said.
A bang of bangs, and the universe was born.
And it is expanding, he said.
He had even calculated the length of its life:
ten billion revolutions of the earth around the sun.
The entire globe cheered;
They found his calculations to be science.
None thought that by proposing that the universe began,
the man had merely mirrored the syntax of his mother tongue;
a syntax which demands beginnings, like birth,
and developments, like maturation,
and ends, like death, as statements of facts.
The universe began,
and it is getting old, the man assured us, and it will die,
like he himself died after confirming mathematically
the syntax of his mother tongue.
- Castaneda

The Other Syntax

Did the universe really begin?
Is the theory of the big bang true?
These are not questions, though they sound like they are.
Is the syntax that requires beginnings, developments
and ends as statements of facts the only syntax that exists?
That's the real question.
There are other syntaxes.
There is one, for example, which demands that varieties
of intensity be taken as facts.
In that syntax nothing begins and nothing ends;
thus birth is not a clean, clear cut event,
but a specific type of intensity, and so is maturation, and so is death.
A man of that syntax, looking over his equations, finds that
he has calculated enough varieties of intensity
to say with authority
that the univserse never began
and will never end,
but that it has gone, and is going now, and will go
through endless fluctuations of intensity.
That man could very well conclude that the universe itself
is the chariot of intensity
and that one can board it
to journey through changes without end.
He will conclude that, and much more,
perhaps without ever realizing
that he is merely confirming
the syntax of his mother tongue.
- Castaneda

My own audience

I'm just my own audience.

The Teacher

There is a point of view that questions the value of the teacher that is less than pious. This rather theistic point of view presumes the teacher is something that he or she is not.

A teacher is just that, a teacher. A teacher is not a god or a magician that will somehow enlighten us. A teacher may show us that we are enlightened and have nothing to grasp or attain. He may show us how to relate with who we already are.

The notion that the teacher should behave this way or that way is no different than saying a television repairman or a chef should act a certain way.

The value of a teacher is that a teacher knows what to do to recognize enlightenment and what to do to realize it. If you care about a television repairman's fondness for cannabis or his personality, the television doesn't care and the repairman won't either.