Robin

I have very rarely seen him smile, in many years as a student with him. His material is great, and it may well be that relative to the trauma he has experienced (including a psychotic mother), the way he shows up is testament to the quality of the teachings and his application of them. But at face value, there does seem to be a lack of warmth, and a lot of ego.

Have you studied with the guy? I agree he seems to have big ego and a pretty abrasive personality, but he is clearly extremely knowledgeable and is generous with his knowledge. Your judgement of him seems to say as much about you as it does him.

Song/sung is certainly part of what Bruce teaches. He claims it is excellent for martial arts, but that for deep healing and meditation work, more is needed. He teaches outer dissolving, where blocked chi is released to outside the etheric field, and inner dissolving where it is released into inner space. Tom Bisio writes: "Dissolving and Clearing Blockages: In Lesson Five we learned how to slacken (Song) areas of tension. This is the starting point for clearing obstructions and dissolving blockages of the Qi/Breath. Becoming aware that an area is blocked or tight is the first step. By standing in the Wu Ji posture, observing and breathing, one becomes aware of these areas bit by bit. By bringing your awareness and attention to an area that is blocked, you bring the Qi/Breath to that area. As the mind-intention and the Qi/Breath gather there, it is possible to slowly disperse, melt, and dissolve the blockage. It does not happen all at once, but little by little over time. Attempting to use the mind-intention to force its way through will only make the blockage more resistant. It can be dissolved by gentle awareness that slowly dissolves the blockage, like water wearing away a rock." It is this "next level" past song which seems like it is potentially from the same source. I say this because whereas many practices involve scanning the body and being aware of sensations, the idea of "hanging out" with blockages and using the warmth of the mind to dissolve them is much less common.

It's the dissolving thing specifically which I've not come across outside of Bruce's teachings - although similar teachings are out there such as body scanning in Mindfulness meditation, or Yoga Nidra. Also Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche's beautiful teachings on self-healing are very similar, but without the inner/outer dissolving distinction found in Bruce's teaching. Also, I've seen quite a lot of tai chi being done without engaging the kwa. It's the physical details of Bruce's teaching which have inspired a certain amount of confidence in his more esoteric teachings, although it's not cut and dried for me...

Thank you for this. That's all very interesting. Bruce has a tendency to speak in hyperbole, so it's easy to get the idea that what he teaches is something special. It's an ongoing enquiry for me, as I like to think that we innately posses the capacity to heal ourselves. And yet at least 3 traditions which I respect make a deal of "transmission." Maybe there's a middle way between honoring and connecting with our own innate "body intelligence, " and also allowing any enhancement that may come our way via transmission to happen as well. One challenge for me is knowing which of the various spins on the technique to apply at any given time, and avoiding getting into a head trip about it.

I've been studying some of Tom Bisio's Ba Gua and meditation materials. I've also studied with Bruce Frantzis. There seems to be quite a bit of crossover. For example, the use of the kwa, sinking chi, and dissolving blockages. Some of https://www.internalartsinternational.com/free/daoist-meditation-lesson-six-theory-dissolving-clearing-blockages/ sounds a lot like what Bruce teaches in dissolving meditation. This is very interesting to me, as over the years, I've really wanted some cross-references for Bruce's teachings, and I've found almost none. But with Tom Bisio, there appears to be some "corroboration." The question is, for me - is the overlap in material due to a shared common source, or did one of these teachers learn (some of) the material from the other, without explicitly stating this?

Dzogchen requires guru yoga, from what I've been taught, and the direct transmission of the enlightened state. Other Buddhist traditions simply give a method which we can follow. I'm confused. I have received Dzogchen teachings and am generally impressed with the teacher, although they make some pretty outlandish claims, viewed from a western viewpoint (transmutation of beans left in the back of a cave for a year from one type to another as an experiment in loosening a retreatant's fixed beliefs, for example. Or references to dragons.) So Dzogchen is this "high" teaching, very much steeped in Tibetan cultural beliefs. It's often glorified as the ultimate or best teaching by its practitioners. What am I to make of other traditions where there is no guru yoga, and no telepathic transmission? Are they inferior? Do they offer a lesser kind of enlightenment? Is the Tibetan tradition somehow elitist ("mahayana" implies assumed superiority, perhaps?) Do we need to hold our teachers in the kind of regard required by guru yoga? I've heard it said that these higher teachings were somehow given by Guatama Buddha as a kind of "silent aside" to those ready to receive them. I'm torn. On the one hand I've been "sold" dzogchen by a couple of people I kinda sorta trust on these matters. On the other, there are a great many people practicing outside of this tradition with methods which require less "suspension of disbelief" or which I can more easily empirically validate, while at the same time recognizing that things beyond my current ability to comprehend or perceive may require a certain amount of faith to remain open to. Does anyone here "feel me" on all this?

I've been involved with mediation for many years. Initially I was involved with Buddhist meditation but then I got involved with Taoist meditation through the teachings of Bruce Frantzis. Bruce often mentioned Dzogchen with high regard, so when Lama Lena (a highly esteemed Dzogchen teacher) came to teach for several years in a row very near to my home, I went along. I also came across Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche (a Bon Dzogchen teacher) mainly through his online content, although I did travel to see him once. I have some curiosity concerning two apparently different categories of meditation practice. With Inner Dissolving (Taoist meditation from Bruce Frantzis), and Dzogchen both from Lama Lena and Tenzin Rinpoche, there is a notion of "progression" in the sense that we have obscurations/blockages/"pagchas"(like neuroses in Tibetan), and that through practice over time we can resolve these to move closer towards "enlightenment"/clarity/healing etc... In all these traditions, there is the possibility of using an agenda to work with specific issues in our lives, with a view to dissolving/resolving them at some root energetic level. This makes sense to me, and gives some kind of sense of structure/progression to my practice. I am aware that there are certain paradoxes that come from the idea/reality that we are "already there" (non-duality teachings etc.), and yet there is a firm understanding from the teachers I follow that we do actually need to meditate to attain(?) the fruits of meditation. Like the last lesson of Marpa to Milrepa - to show the callouses on his arse to emphasize the need for practice! In other traditions I've come across, such as the teachings of the FWBO (whatever they are now know as), Zen, Mindfulness etc. there seems to be a conspicuously different attitude towards "progress". You do the practice, whether it's mindfulness of breathing or body scanning or even working with emotions by "simply being" with them - but there is no sense in the practices I have come across of working with specific issues/blockages and resolving them at a root or energetic(?) level. It's more like "here we are again looking at our minds and sensations...." with no particular sense of direction or need to attain/achieve anything. I know that the need to achieve anything is seen as a hindrance in both categories of practice, but this is in some ways something of a contradiction. While of course grasping will not lead to freedom, nonetheless there is an implicit intention to get somewhere/something, in the very decision to become involved in meditation in the first place. So these are some of the observations and thoughts I'm having around my practice at the moment. Partly wondering which practices to emphasize to help me navigate a chronic illness, and also wondering about the notion of progress and achievement in relation to meditation. Very curious to hear your thoughts on all this.

Thanks for this., and good to be reminded of the classic song. I think sometimes it's useful to focus on the reasons for leaving ( a teacher/marriage/cult etc.) to get the clarity we need to stop deliberating and make the cut. However, that is often not the whole story, and from the outside people can't always see the complexity. Like a marriage which was genuinely wonderful but grew to no longer serve either partner. Once the clarity is there that we need to end things, and maybe with some water under the bridge, we can grieve and honour the good stuff that had to end. Regarding my practice with Bruce, I'm clear that for the time being I don't want to pursue his spiritual work. However, the health stuff is great, and is deeply embodied in my system. It would probably be silly to go to the effort of trying to replace all the stuff I've learned from him with similar material from other sources. Nonetheless I am conflicted, and I can't pretend otherwise or sweep it under the rug, however simple the situation may seem from the outside. I value what has come to me via Bruce. I have a lot of respect for him and he has had a big positive impact on my life in many ways. However I can't deny that with my current perspective I find what appears to me as a lack of humility and warmth to be a source of genuine distress and confusion. I guess also there is some unease about the fact that I have criticized my teacher publicly. It is probably a complete non-issue but I haven't got to that point yet. From some of the messages I have receive it is as if I have committed some kind of sacrilege. So even if Bruce has no desire to be a cult leader (which I don't think he does), it looks like some people have given him that level of status in their own internal worlds. ON the other hand I've received many messages thanking and supporting me in speaking up about something which has bothered them. So overall it's probably for the best or at least of no consequence that I did what I did. However there is still a fire burning around it inside me, which won't be extinguished until it is extinguished. I'm very happy to hear any further thoughts and reflections on this, particularity with people who can empathize/sympathize with the non-polarized nature of the situation.

I found this article to be pertinent and interesting: https://earthbalance-taichi.com/2020/02/the-anti-guru/

Thank you for sharing this. I will give it some thought.

I think I've been quite clear about this. I want clarity around what to practice and who to learn from moving forward, and to help me achieve this I'm interested in other peoples' experience. I'm not going to just imitate the answer I like best, but different perspectives can help to inform the totality of my process. I'm not looking for someone to give me the answer. There is no obligation to contribute, but personally I don't find questioning the premise of my request very helpful. In terms of reaching out to other students of Bruce's, that is partly what I am doing here. I shared a link on the Energy Arts forum to this thread. Some people have contacted me personally as a result.

While I do appreciate the advice some people have shared, I think it's important to remember that no one from the outside can know all the variables at play. I think it would be even more helpful to hear about others' experience of similar situations, key moments and deciding factors, and how they resolved them. I know of several people who moved on from Bruce after many years, and some who stayed in spite of difficulties. I imagine for all of them the process was not simple or clear cut, but that there were twists and turns before clarity was reached. Hearing about these would be helpful so I can compare and contrast and hopefully get some insight into my own unique situation. With hindsight, I expect the path forward will have been obvious, but until then, not so much. I hear what some people have said about over thinking and/or listening to my higher self who might already know the answer. This is certainly worth considering, but clarity cannot always be forced, and I may have to sit with the confusion a little longer until it emerges. In the meantime other people's insights are valuable to hear about.

I don't think they can necessarily be separated, and I'm not confident they should be, entirely.

While I certainly can overcome the "triggeredness", the question for me is whether I want to, as it may be entirely reasonable. It seems some people are OK with taking what serves them and ignoring the rest, which is fine, but for some, including me, it's not quite that simple. I guess for me there is something about harmony within the totality of my experience. I don't mean in a naive way, expecting no issues ever to arise, but a sense that overall there is harmony and balance.