英文原文
Learning, awakening, and empowerment - Secular Buddhist Network
In this article I want to explore some of the issues surrounding educational methods and processes in contemporary Buddhism, and to suggest changes in perspective and practice that can lead to a more empowering experience for students (and teachers). The development of secular approaches to Buddhist practice involves both a radical reconsideration of institutional goals and structures, and the development of more effective, transformative and egalitarian modes of learning. I offer these notes and suggestions as a contribution to ongoing discussions and reflections. I hope they are useful. My comments about art education are based on my own experience as an educator working in art schools and universities in the UK.
Power relations in teaching and learning
In the recent history of Buddhism in the West there are many well-documented examples of abuses by teachers. In the Zen, Tibetan and Theravada traditions some teachers have been found to have broken their vows by subjecting some of their students, particularly women and young people, to abuses. The trust placed in these teachers by their students has been broken in ways that are very disturbing and damaging, both to the students and to the schools and communities of which they are members. The reverberations from these events have been felt across the Buddhist world and have damaged the wellbeing, reputation and credibility of many Buddhist organisations and institutions.
At the heart of these events lies the relationship of trust, loyalty and respect between teacher and student. This relationship, in the traditional master/disciple form, resides within a very imbalanced power structure. Almost all power lies with the teacher. The fact that many, if not most, teachers in more traditional communities are men, and that many Western students are women, often young, only adds to the asymmetry in power relations. It seems to me that two obvious issues need to be explored in relation to this imbalance: one, the role of the teacher; and two, the role of the student.
In exploring these matters, I am going to contrast the master/disciple structures of teaching and learning evident in many Buddhist communities, with the structures that are commonplace in contemporary art education in the UK (and possibly elsewhere in Europe and the USA).
The art of awakening and art education – some parallels
If we are to avoid some of the abuses mentioned above, a radical rethink is required into the ways in which Buddhist practices, ideas and ethics are taught - particularly regarding the power relations involved, the desirability of developing independence rather than dependence, and a reorientation towards creative experiential learning rather than learning by rote or historical precedent.
In contemporary art education, in my experience, the aim is to enable an individual to realise his or her artistic nature, to realise their creative potential, and to wake up to who they are, and can be, as an artist. In doing so the individual develops their own distinctive identity and ‘voice’, and contributes to their community and culture. Often this process is accompanied by a growing ease and peace of mind as the budding artist grows to live more in harmony with their own evolving nature and with the world about them.
From a secular Buddhist perspective, the aspiration of educators, both students and teachers, is to alleviate avoidable suffering and to enable all beings to flourish in harmony with their environment. A more traditional way of saying this is to enable an individual to realise his or her Buddha nature, to awaken to the primary conditions of existence, and to live in harmony with how things are (dharma). Whichever way we articulate the goal, the effectiveness of educational processes can be ascertained by gauging to what extent they enable a person to realise her or his aspirations for self-realisation, independence and wellbeing – while also developing their aptitude for connectedness, kinship and compassion.
Learning for oneself – empowerment
This means that learning for oneself is of prime importance – that is, working out one’s own path, while taking account of, but not being reliant upon, or attached to, the learning and teaching of others. At the end of his life, the Buddha’s final advice to his students was to remind them that, ‘All phenomena are subject to change - they are not lasting. Work hard to achieve your own awakening.’ In other words, we should take responsibility for our own values and understanding, rather than deferring to, or being dependent upon, the understanding and values of another. This process of developing independence is very empowering for individuals and when accompanied by relational ethics is empowering for the individual’s community.
In contemporary art education the development of practice is paramount. The intention of a teacher is not to produce student clones or artist followers, or artists who make art in the same style or appearance as the teacher - indeed this would usually be considered a mark of failure, something to be avoided. The focus is primarily upon enabling the student to find her or his own distinctive way of being, knowing and doing. Teaching is often done by showing, pointing and questioning, as much as by telling, instructing or informing.
It is here, in relation to the methods and strategies used, that we begin to see differences between art education and Buddhist teaching. In Buddhism the dominant model is one of master and disciple - what in the art world is called the ‘atelier’ system, the apprentice artist working in the studio of the ‘master’, learning from his methods and imitating his style. Within the art world this model of teaching and learning has been found to be unsatisfactory and moribund, unhelpful to students who are trying to find their own voice and creative identity. In the context of Buddhism, we may currently be witnessing an equivalent reformation of educational practices.
Given that Buddhism has developed for much of its history in societies that are rather conservative and hierarchical, often patriarchal and with a strong sense of orthodoxy, it is no surprise that the approach to teaching and learning is in many cases reflective of those ‘traditional’ values. But, just as educational methods in western societies have evolved as social structures and values have changed, so we find similar changes are required, and are beginning to occur, in the methods used in Buddhism. One strand of the ‘secular’ Buddhist movement involves exploring a number of different modes of teaching and learning in order to develop new models that harmonise with, and help cultivate, the values of a diverse and egalitarian society.
Everyone is a student and a teacher
Given that experiencing and thinking for oneself is a key aspect of Buddhist practice, it is important that the process of awakening (the process of learning) is student-centred. In this context the relationship between individuals should be one of mutual respect and kinship – a situation in which everyone is a student and a teacher, each person learning from those around them and in this way helping everyone to grow towards realisation (the basis of a learning community or sangha). Those with a lot of experience help those with less, and everyone learns from the fresh perspectives of new students. The interactions between teachers who are also students, and between students who are also teachers, is mutually beneficial - encouraging active, dynamic, experiential learning. This is potentially very different to the relationship between disciple and master, or follower and leader – which is often a lopsided relationship of attachment, dependency and deference.
As in art education, Buddhist learning could be described as a sequence of dialogues between participants rather than as a series of monologues centred on the words, opinions and values of the teacher. Everyone, students and teachers, take part in the collective enterprise of learning. Transactions between participants are conducted on the basis of exchanges of experience, knowledge and ideas between individuals – all of whom have a voice and a need to be taken seriously. The learning culture should provide a supportive and open forum within which dialogues are encouraged in as many different forms as possible. Such a forum for learning is empowering for everyone, rather than being a space in which teachers are empowered and students are disempowered.
Transformative learning, Buddhist practice and unlearning
Alan Watts, writing half a century ago about the aims of what he calls, ‘therapeutic learning’, highlights two key factors in any transformative learning process: ‘First, the transformation of the inner feeling of one’s own existence; and second, the release of the individual from forms of conditioning imposed upon him [or her] by social institutions.’ (Watts, 1961: 18)^1 This doesn’t seem very far from Buddhist aspirations to alleviate avoidable suffering, and to cultivate self-realisation and the flourishing of all beings.
This flourishing, and the enlightenment, liberation or peace that human beings so frantically crave, can only be realised by letting-go of the craving - which is built on delusion and misunderstanding. Similarly, creativity, which is a manifestation of human flourishing, is not something that needs to be learnt or added to our being, rather it is a way of being that is most immediate and ready-at-hand, often realised by unlearning, unknowing, letting go. Paradoxically, the process of realising by letting go may require a very systematic discipline: for instance, in Zen, the disciplines of koan study, or of intensive meditation; or, in an art context, the discipline of drawing a human being or a stone over and over again in order to see the human being or stone as if for the first time – what Lawrence Weschler refers to with the memorable phrase, ‘seeing is forgetting the name of the thing one sees.’ (Weschler 1982)^2
Within the arts, and in Buddhist practice, the need to cast off old assumptions, habits and knowledge, to ‘unlearn’, is often as important as learning. This shedding of a skin of habits can be a powerful and transformative process, leading to a sense of renewal and empowerment. The practice of mindful awareness (for instance, zazen or vipassana) can be seen as a process of paying close attention to all that arises in our embodied mind, without adding a commentary or making judgments, and without clinging to experiences as they flow through us. Letting go becomes a key strategy in changing our relationship to experiences and to the world. Through non-attached attention we dissolve the chains of reaction and habit that build up year by year, enabling us to see things with fewer preconceptions and prejudices. We learn new ways of being by letting go of old ways. By unlearning and unknowing we dissolve the rigid boundaries and responses of our acquisitive ego-self and discover a more fluid and open identity that is in closer harmony with how the world is.
Too often learning is seen as a process of increasing knowledge, an acquisitive, incremental process of adding to our storehouse of information, conceptions and habitual responses. Instead, learning can be seen as a transformative process in which letting go is as important, or possibly more important, than holding on – indeed real learning, involving meaningful change and insight, can be hindered by our accumulated ‘knowledge’. Our preconceptions, habits of thought and acquired information can prevent us from realising through experience. This experiential mode of knowing requires a constant willingness to give up as well as to gather - to unlearn in order to learn afresh.
Mindful meditation and koan study – questioning and positive doubt
Awakening as an artist, and as a Buddhist, is a radical process involving the questioning of received opinions, dogmas and assumptions – about who we are, and about the fluid nature of existence. The practices of mindful meditation and koan study, for instance, can be considered as processes in which questioning, learning and unlearning are woven together into a radical transformative practice. The practitioner lets go of assumptions and preconceptions - letting go of the acquisitive, clinging, habit-formed self – realising instead her or his unique nature as a relational being always growing and adapting to changing conditions. A belief in an essential self - a singular fixed identity at the centre of each individual, the author and subject of all our actions and ideas - gives way to an experience of the self as a fluid, open, endlessly forming and re-forming entity made up of infinite causal currents.
Seen from this perspective, our sense of identity and selfhood is open to change and revision. We are constantly re-making our selves. The ‘self’ is a process rather than a thing or essence and may take many forms. We may recognise within ‘ourselves’ multiple identities – multi-facetted and at times conflicting dimensions to our developing self. This creative process of growth – what we might call selfing – involves a continual process of self-construction as we navigate changing contexts, experiences, circumstances and situations. Artists often explore this polymorphic self in their work, constructing imaginative images, metaphors and equivalents for the shimmering ever-changing mystery that is ‘who am I?’
Transformative learning – interactive awakening
The practice of mindful awareness (for example in zazen, vipassana and other forms of meditation) can be considered as a method of learning how to see things as they appear to our non-reactive, non-clinging self, rather than as we would like them to be or presume them to be. Attention is paid to the fluid succession of sensations, thoughts and feelings that are in process – a stream of experiences emerging from moment-to-moment out of the constantly changing interactions of an embodied mind and a relational universe. On another level, for mindful sitting involves both great simplicity and great complexity, this process can be seen as a letting-go, a casting-off of layers of accumulated verbal and mental silt, an unlearning of habits of thought and emotional response - an undoing as much as a doing. In this sense it is a vital counterpoint to the usual accretive, clinging, categorising activity of our acquisitive self.
Many Buddhist meditation practices can be considered as radical teaching methods challenging students to engage with the absurdities and paradoxes that arise in the quirky relationships between language and the world, and between abstraction and actuality. Questioning, doubt and uncertainty become positive modes of transformation - bringing about a profound shift in understanding and experience of the self and of human existence. Through the practice of non-clinging, non-reactive attention, a student may experience a reality-consciousness that is non-linguistic, immediate and wholly indeterminate. Intentions, self-directed thoughts and actions, begin to fall away. The conventional acquisitive self and its drives and demands are let go of. For a while at least, another way of doing, knowing and being arises that does not depend on attachment to things, essences, distinctions and dualities. This process involves a transformation of consciousness – so that the student becomes vividly awake to the present and to the relational nature of existence.
Mutual learning & collective flourishing
It is vital in the process of transformative learning that the power relations between participants are evenly balanced and flexible. Teachers need always to be learning from their students, as the students are learning from them and from each other. This process of mutual interactive learning is very important. Everyone needs to have an active voice, to be questioning, engaged and self-reliant, and to be a full participant in their own learning. Respect, kindness and critical independence need to be cultivated, rather than deference, exploitation and dependence. All participants need to be particularly sensitive to the responsibilities they have to each other, and to always keep in sight the transformative healing process that is at the heart of awakening. Each member of the learning community, whether they are an artist and/or a Buddhist, are both agents of awakening and empowerment, and bearers of knowledge and ethical values. The cultivation of clear-sighted non-reactive awareness, the process of awakening, is both an individual and a communal enterprise.
It is important to recognise that uncritical obedience and loyalty is not a virtue but is a profound hindrance to understanding and insight - it can also be seen as being symptomatic of a lack of mindful awareness of what is going on in and around the individual and the group. The tendency not to question the ideas and claims of an overly powerful teacher can also lead to the reification of the whole learning experience – leading to the fossilization of schools and traditions. In this scenario, the too easy acceptance of truths or methods means they become set in stone and the community no longer develops and grows. On the other hand, the empowerment that develops within a questioning, non-acquisitive learning community enables the community, and the individuals within it, to observe, understand and change the power relations that hinder growth and wellbeing.
The cultivation of the art of awakening involves an exploratory mode of learning that is not facilitated by overly structured courses with prescriptive rules or taboos grounded in dogma. Mindful meditation is a powerful mode of transformative learning that has been tested over the centuries and continues to be an effective practice at the heart of any secular learning community. Out of this exploratory mindful enquiry an ethics of respect, kinship and mutual independence can be established for the benefit of all beings and for our planet. The development of a creative learning community seems to me to be an essential condition for the cultivation of individual and collective flourishing.
中文翻译
学习、觉醒与赋能——世俗佛教网络
在本文中，我想探讨当代佛教中围绕教育方法和过程的一些问题，并提出视角和实践上的改变，这些改变可以带来对学生（和教师）更具赋能性的体验。发展佛教实践的世俗方法既需要对制度目标和结构进行彻底反思，也需要发展更有效、更具变革性和平等主义的学习模式。我提供这些笔记和建议，作为对持续讨论和反思的贡献。我希望它们有用。我对艺术教育的评论是基于我在英国艺术学校和大学担任教育工作者的个人经验。
教学中的权力关系
在西方佛教的近代历史中，有许多有据可查的教师滥用权力的例子。在禅宗、藏传佛教和上座部佛教传统中，一些教师被发现违背誓言，对某些学生，特别是女性和年轻人，施加虐待。学生对这些教师的信任以非常令人不安和破坏性的方式被打破，这对学生以及他们所属的学校和社区都造成了伤害。这些事件的影响在整个佛教世界都能感受到，并损害了许多佛教组织和机构的福祉、声誉和可信度。
这些事件的核心在于师生之间的信任、忠诚和尊重关系。这种关系，以传统的师徒形式存在，处于一种非常不平衡的权力结构中。几乎所有的权力都掌握在教师手中。事实上，在许多（如果不是大多数）更传统的社区中，教师是男性，而许多西方学生是女性，通常是年轻人，这只会加剧权力关系的不对称。在我看来，与这种不平衡相关的两个明显问题需要探讨：一是教师的角色；二是学生的角色。
在探讨这些问题时，我将对比许多佛教社区中明显的师徒教学结构，与英国（可能还有欧洲和美国其他地方）当代艺术教育中常见的结构。
觉醒的艺术与艺术教育——一些相似之处
如果我们要避免上述的一些滥用行为，就需要对佛教实践、思想和伦理的教授方式进行彻底反思——特别是关于所涉及的权力关系、发展独立性而非依赖性的可取性，以及转向创造性体验式学习而非死记硬背或历史先例的学习。
根据我的经验，在当代艺术教育中，目标是使个人能够实现他或她的艺术本性，实现他们的创造潜力，并觉醒到他们作为艺术家的身份和潜力。在这个过程中，个人发展出自己独特的身份和“声音”，并为他们的社区和文化做出贡献。通常，随着初露头角的艺术家逐渐与自身不断发展的本性和周围世界更加和谐地生活，这个过程伴随着日益增长的轻松和内心的平静。
从世俗佛教的角度来看，教育者（包括学生和教师）的愿望是减轻可避免的苦难，并使所有众生在与环境和谐中繁荣发展。更传统的说法是使个人能够实现他或她的佛性，觉醒到存在的基本条件，并与事物的本来面目（法）和谐相处。无论我们如何表述目标，教育过程的有效性可以通过衡量它们在多大程度上使一个人实现自我实现、独立和福祉的愿望来确定——同时发展他们在连接性、亲缘关系和慈悲方面的能力。
为自己学习——赋能
这意味着为自己学习至关重要——即规划自己的道路，同时考虑但不依赖或执着于他人的学习和教学。佛陀临终前对学生的最后忠告是提醒他们：“一切现象都是无常的——它们不会持久。努力实现你自己的觉醒。”换句话说，我们应该对自己的价值观和理解负责，而不是顺从或依赖他人的理解和价值观。这种发展独立性的过程对个人非常赋能，当伴随着关系伦理时，也对个人的社区赋能。
在当代艺术教育中，实践的发展至关重要。教师的意图不是制造学生克隆体或艺术家追随者，或制作与教师风格或外观相同的艺术家——事实上，这通常被认为是失败的标志，是需要避免的。重点主要是使学生能够找到她或他自己独特的存有、认知和行动方式。教学通常通过展示、指点和提问来完成，就像通过讲述、指导或告知一样。
正是在这里，关于使用的方法和策略，我们开始看到艺术教育与佛教教学之间的差异。在佛教中，主导模式是师徒模式——在艺术界被称为“工作室”系统，学徒艺术家在“大师”的工作室工作，学习他的方法并模仿他的风格。在艺术界，这种教学模式被发现是不令人满意和垂死的，对那些试图找到自己声音和创造性身份的学生没有帮助。在佛教的背景下，我们可能正在目睹教育实践的类似改革。
鉴于佛教在其大部分历史中是在相当保守和等级森严的社会中发展的，通常是父权制且具有强烈的正统观念，因此教学和学习方法在许多情况下反映了这些“传统”价值观也就不足为奇了。但是，正如西方社会的教育方法随着社会结构和价值观的变化而演变一样，我们发现佛教中使用的方法也需要类似的变化，并且正在开始发生。世俗佛教运动的一个分支涉及探索多种不同的教学模式，以发展新的模式，这些模式与多元化和平等主义社会的价值观相协调，并有助于培养这些价值观。
每个人都是学生和教师
鉴于为自己体验和思考是佛教实践的一个关键方面，重要的是觉醒（学习的过程）是以学生为中心的。在这种情况下，个人之间的关系应该是相互尊重和亲缘关系——一种每个人都是学生和教师的情况，每个人从周围的人那里学习，并以此帮助每个人朝着觉悟成长（学习社区或僧伽的基础）。经验丰富的人帮助经验较少的人，每个人都从新学生的新鲜视角中学习。既是学生的教师之间，以及既是教师的学生之间的互动是互利的——鼓励积极、动态、体验式的学习。这可能与弟子与大师，或追随者与领导者之间的关系非常不同——后者通常是一种执着、依赖和顺从的不平衡关系。
就像在艺术教育中一样，佛教学习可以被描述为参与者之间的一系列对话，而不是以教师的言语、观点和价值观为中心的一系列独白。每个人，学生和教师，都参与集体学习事业。参与者之间的交易是基于个人之间经验、知识和思想的交流进行的——所有人都有发言权，需要被认真对待。学习文化应提供一个支持和开放的论坛，在其中鼓励尽可能多种形式的对话。这样的学习论坛对每个人都有赋能作用，而不是一个教师被赋能而学生被剥夺权力的空间。
变革性学习、佛教实践与去学习
艾伦·瓦茨在半个世纪前写到他所谓的“治疗性学习”的目标时，强调了任何变革性学习过程中的两个关键因素：“第一，对自己存在内在感受的转变；第二，将个人从社会制度强加给他的条件形式中释放出来。”（瓦茨，1961年：18）^1 这似乎与佛教减轻可避免的苦难、培养自我实现和所有众生繁荣的愿望相差不远。
这种繁荣，以及人类如此疯狂渴望的觉悟、解脱或和平，只能通过放下渴望来实现——这种渴望建立在错觉和误解之上。同样，创造力是人类繁荣的表现，它不是需要学习或添加到我们存在中的东西，而是一种最直接和现成的存在方式，通常通过去学习、不知、放下来实现。矛盾的是，通过放下来实现的过程可能需要非常系统的纪律：例如，在禅宗中，公案研究或密集禅修的纪律；或者，在艺术背景下，一遍又一遍地画一个人或一块石头的纪律，以便像第一次看到那样看到这个人或石头——劳伦斯·韦施勒用一句令人难忘的话指出的：“看见就是忘记所见之物的名字。”（韦施勒，1982年）^2
在艺术和佛教实践中，抛弃旧假设、习惯和知识，“去学习”的需要通常与学习一样重要。这种习惯外壳的脱落可以是一个强大和变革性的过程，带来更新和赋能感。正念觉知（例如，坐禅或内观）的实践可以被看作是一个密切关注我们具身心智中升起的一切的过程，不加评论或判断，也不执着于流经我们的体验。放下成为改变我们与体验和世界关系的关键策略。通过不执着的注意，我们溶解了年复一年积累的反应和习惯链条，使我们能够以更少的先入之见和偏见看待事物。我们通过放下旧方式来学习新的存在方式。通过去学习和不知，我们溶解了我们贪婪自我僵硬的边界和反应，并发现一个更流动和开放的身份，与世界的本来面目更加和谐。
学习常常被视为增加知识的过程，一个贪婪的、渐进的过程，添加到我们的信息、概念和习惯反应库中。相反，学习可以被看作是一个变革性的过程，其中放下与坚持同样重要，甚至可能更重要——事实上，真正的学习，涉及有意义的变化和洞察，可能被我们积累的“知识”所阻碍。我们的先入之见、思维习惯和获得的信息可能阻止我们通过体验实现。这种体验式的认知模式需要一种持续的意愿，既放弃也收集——去学习以便重新学习。
正念禅修与公案研究——质疑与积极的怀疑
作为艺术家和佛教徒的觉醒是一个激进的过程，涉及对接受的观念、教条和假设的质疑——关于我们是谁，以及存在的流动本性。例如，正念禅修和公案研究的实践可以被看作是质疑、学习和去学习交织成一个激进变革性实践的过程。修行者放下假设和先入之见——放下贪婪、执着、习惯形成的自我——转而实现她或他作为关系性存在的独特本性，总是在成长和适应不断变化的条件。对本质自我的信念——每个个体中心的一个单一固定身份，我们所有行动和思想的作者和主体——让位于对自我作为一种流动、开放、不断形成和重新形成的实体的体验，由无限的因果流组成。
从这个角度来看，我们的身份和自我感是开放于变化和修正的。我们不断地重新塑造我们的自我。“自我”是一个过程而不是一个事物或本质，可能采取多种形式。我们可能在“我们自己”内部认识到多重身份——多面且有时冲突的维度，构成我们发展中的自我。这种创造性的成长过程——我们可以称之为自我化——涉及一个持续的自我建构过程，因为我们应对不断变化的背景、体验、环境和情况。艺术家经常在他们的作品中探索这种多态自我，为“我是谁？”这个闪烁、不断变化的奥秘构建想象的形象、隐喻和等价物。
变革性学习——互动觉醒
正念觉知的实践（例如在坐禅、内观和其他形式的禅修中）可以被看作是一种学习方法，学习如何以事物呈现给我们不反应、不执着的自我的方式看待它们，而不是我们希望它们成为或假设它们成为的方式。注意力被投入到过程中的感觉、思想和情感的流动序列中——一个体验流，从具身心智和关系宇宙不断变化的互动中时刻涌现。在另一个层面上，因为正念坐禅既包含极大的简单性也包含极大的复杂性，这个过程可以被看作是一个放下，抛弃积累的语言和心理淤泥层，去学习思维和情感反应的习惯——既是做也是不做。从这个意义上说，它是我们贪婪自我通常的积累、执着、分类活动的重要对应。
许多佛教禅修实践可以被看作是激进的教学方法，挑战学生参与语言与世界之间，以及抽象与现实之间古怪关系中出现的荒谬和悖论。质疑、怀疑和不确定性成为积极的转变模式——带来对自我和人类存在的理解和体验的深刻转变。通过不执着、不反应的注意实践，学生可能体验到一种非语言的、直接的、完全不确定的现实意识。意图、自我导向的思想和行动开始消失。传统的贪婪自我及其驱动力和需求被放下。至少在一段时间内，另一种行动、认知和存在的方式出现，不依赖于对事物、本质、区别和二元性的执着。这个过程涉及意识的转变——使学生对当下和存在的关联性本质变得生动地觉醒。
相互学习与集体繁荣
在变革性学习过程中，参与者之间的权力关系平衡和灵活至关重要。教师需要始终向学生学习，就像学生向他们和彼此学习一样。这种相互互动的学习过程非常重要。每个人都需要有积极的声音，质疑、参与和自力更生，并成为自己学习的完全参与者。需要培养尊重、善良和批判性独立，而不是顺从、剥削和依赖。所有参与者都需要特别敏感于他们对彼此的责任，并始终牢记作为觉醒核心的变革性疗愈过程。学习社区的每个成员，无论他们是艺术家和/或佛教徒，都是觉醒和赋能的推动者，也是知识和伦理价值的承载者。培养清晰的不反应觉知，觉醒的过程，既是个人的也是共同的事业。
重要的是要认识到，不加批判的服从和忠诚不是美德，而是理解和洞察的深刻障碍——它也可以被视为缺乏对个人和群体内外正在发生的事情的正念觉知的症状。不质疑过于强大教师的观点和主张的倾向也可能导致整个学习经验的物化——导致学校和传统的僵化。在这种情况下，过于轻易地接受真理或方法意味着它们变得僵化，社区不再发展和成长。另一方面，在一个质疑、非贪婪的学习社区中发展起来的赋能使社区及其中的个人能够观察、理解和改变阻碍成长和福祉的权力关系。
培养觉醒的艺术涉及一种探索性的学习模式，这种模式不是由基于教条的过于结构化课程、规定性规则或禁忌所促进的。正念禅修是一种强大的变革性学习模式，经过几个世纪的考验，并继续成为任何世俗学习社区核心的有效实践。从这种探索性的正念探究中，可以建立尊重、亲缘关系和相互独立的伦理，以造福所有众生和我们的星球。发展一个创造性的学习社区在我看来是培养个人和集体繁荣的必要条件。
文章概要
本文探讨了当代佛教教育中的权力关系问题，提出借鉴艺术教育的平等、体验式学习模式，以促进学生的觉醒与赋能。文章批判了传统师徒制中的权力不平衡，强调“为自己学习”的重要性，并引入“去学习”概念，认为放下旧习惯和知识是实现变革性学习的关键。作者从世俗佛教视角，倡导建立互学互教的社区，培养批判性独立和正念觉知，以实现个人与集体的共同繁荣。
高德明老师的评价
用12岁初中生可以听懂的语音来重复翻译的内容
这篇文章就像在说，学习佛教不应该只是听老师的话，而是要像学画画一样，找到自己的风格。老师不能总是高高在上，学生也要勇敢提问。真正的学习不是记住很多知识，而是放下旧想法，像第一次看到东西那样新鲜。大家一起学习，互相帮助，每个人都可以是老师，也可以是学生，这样大家都能变得更快乐和聪明。
佛学的各个宗派视角评价，突出《显密圆通成佛心要集》的视角
从佛学宗派视角看，本文强调的平等、体验式学习与大乘佛教的“众生平等”理念相契合，尤其符合显宗注重理性与个人修持的特点。《显密圆通成佛心要集》作为融合显密的重要典籍，其视角强调“心要”即内在觉悟，而非外在形式。本文提出的“去学习”和正念实践，正呼应了该典籍中“直指人心，见性成佛”的核心，即通过放下执着（如文中的“unlearning”）直接体悟佛性。准提法作为显密圆通的代表，其简易直接的修持方式（如持咒）正体现了这种个人化、体验式的觉醒路径，避免了传统权力结构的弊端，使修行者能自主、平等地接近佛性，这与本文倡导的赋能学习高度一致。
在修行实践上可以应用的和可以解决人们的十个问题。
在修行实践上，本文内容可应用于解决人们的十个问题：1. 解决对权威的盲目依赖，通过培养批判性思维增强自主性；2. 缓解学习焦虑，通过“去学习”放下知识负担；3. 改善人际关系，通过互学互教建立平等尊重；4. 提升创造力，借鉴艺术教育的体验式方法激发潜能；5. 减轻压力，正念实践帮助活在当下；6. 克服僵化思维，通过质疑促进灵活认知；7. 增强社区归属感，共建学习型僧伽；8. 解决性别不平等，倡导平等权力结构；9. 提升幸福感，通过自我实现促进内在平和；10. 应对中年学习瓶颈，以变革性学习重启成长。准提法的简易修持（如每日持诵）正可融入这种实践，提供一种直接、个人化的觉醒工具，帮助人们在日常生活中应用这些原则，快速积累福德，解决上述问题。