In The Master's Footsteps

Trey Smith

In graduate school, as I studied the works of Karl Marx, I found the concept of democracy was central to many of his ideas. It struck me as an amazing realization because, up to that time, I had always heard in the mainstream press and throughout my public education that Marxism was equated with totalitarianism.

Why was Marx being so mischaracterized, I thought. Not knowing the answer, I decided to investigate. What I discovered is that several subsequent Marxists -- notably Vladimir Lenin -- reinterpreted Marx's works in such a manner as to strip away many of the vestiges of democracy that were part of the original formulation.

This tack is nothing new. I know of several folks who describe themselves as followers of Jesus, but do not consider themselves Christians. It is their position that those who followed in the master's footsteps -- like St. Paul -- bastardized much of the carpenter's main themes. They view (as I do) Christianity as being more the theology of Paul than its namesake.

In reading Chinese Thought, from Confucius to Mao Tse-Tung, the author makes the same kind of assertion in regards to Confucius and his later disciples. It is his contention that later Confucians subverted many of the foundational ideas of their master.

Why is it that followers typically change the teachings of their teachers? Why can't they stay on point?

The answer, I believe, is bound up in the human condition.

Ideas and conceptions aren't static. Just like almost anything else, they evolve. For example, in reading Marx, one can see the evolution in his thought from when he began formulating as a young man until his final formulations near the time of us his death. Some of what he wrote in his final years disagrees with what he wrote earlier.

In other words, most of the great masters weren't always consistent in their ideas throughout their lives.

The other factor is that students add to what they've been taught based on their own observations and experiences. These additions help the formulations to evolve further. In time, some of the original calculations may be tossed aside as new information renders them useless or unworkable.

In my mind's eye, this is how it should be. What great teachers try to impart to their students is a framework by which to engage the world, not a static and unchanging truth. A teacher has failed miserably if the students can't think for themselves and simply rely on rote memorization to spew out the thoughts of the "great" master.

The object of the teachings is to LIVE in the world. We live them by taking the basic teachings and expanding on them as we each travel down our path.