stirling

The Tao isn't knowledge in a book and is inexpressible in language, thus an intellectual understanding of it is NOT it.

The Tao.

Aren't they all from translations? Experience. There aren't any positive or negative outcomes. Things are as they are.

Volition is a delusion we carry around with this idea that we are separate beings in the world with agency. It is actually a simple misunderstanding that is entirely clarified with the dawning of realization, though it is very possible to get a taste of it in meditation IF you are looking and it has been pointed to.

I have read many definitions. One that I would say is closest to what is being described is: effortless action. Where there is the living experience of the Dao, there is no "I" to "interrupt the course of nature", instead what there is happens as the "effortless action" of reality.

I think I see the disconnect... while conceptual understanding is helpful, it is only the permanent experiential knowledge that gives you the full depth of the realization. For example: I read the recipe for what is supposed to be a truly exceptional cake. I memorize the ingredient list, the proportions, the step by step instruction. This however is nothing like actually having baked the cake - totally understanding the process as an experience you have had, and being able to actually hold the still warm cake in your hand and taste it in this moment, not as an idea but as something you can sink your teeth into right now. The Tao de Ching isn't the experience of the Tao, it is a document that POINTS to the experience. An intellectual understanding of riding a bike ISN'T riding a bike. Earlier in this thread you asked me: I understand because it is my experience in this moment.

So, you are saying you read the Tao De Ching and after thinking about it came to a conceptual understanding?

Do you yourself understand it? How about this: Wu Wei arises is the understanding that enlightenment and the world of separateness occupy the same space, though one of them is a "deeper" reality. To a person who experiences the world as a "self", there is a world of separate objects, and a "self" with agency that interacts with them. From the experience of enlightened mind it is obvious that the separateness is a delusion, and that the unity of things takes care of itself. The way this appears is from the same perspective, but with two ways of seeing - there is still the appearance of a body that interacts with the world, but from the enlightened perspective this action is not the product of volition but the action of reality itself acting as a wholeness. No amount of reading or pouring over translations and commentaries will ever yield an understanding of the non-dual nature of reality, of which Wu Wei is only a single intellectual perspective. The broader realization isn't an intellectual understanding, and the reality of it will never match an intellectual idea about its nature. The only path to understanding Wu Wei is in having it become your permanent experience through realization.

To truly understand Wu Wei, we must consider a radically different perspective on reality. Most of us assume that we exist as separate players in an world of separate players, each making their own decisions. From the perspective of the Dao, or Rigpa, or enlightened mind, this is a nonsense. The separateness can be seen in operation, but also is very obviously a delusion, once understood. It is pointed to here: As worded, this is a nice little joke, inside of what looks like a riddle (it isn't)... this, in my experience, is the flavor of non-duality - "its" sense of humor. When we can see "emptiness", it is clear that it is the most salient quality of all illusory things, and that what you can see in this moment is also the extent of what can be seen in this moment.This is alluded to in Dogen's (creator of the Soto Zen school) "Instructions for the Tenzo": Words are emptiness. They refer to concepts, not real things. Practice is complete presence in (non-dual) reality in this moment. This moment is everywhere/everything, there is nothing else to do - nothing is hidden. The Dao is this, here, now, without delusions of "self" and "doing" and without time/space. To be transparent and aligned with the Dao, drop the idea of doing by allowing the mind to become still, or REALIZING that the stillness of emptiness is already what permeates all experience. This field of experience "we" are enveloped in acts as a whole, not as a series of parts, and the "Dao, or Rigpa, or enlightened mind" does it all without our input. Even our responses and intentions arise as part of the whole - aren't "ours". It appears that there is "doing", but what appears to be happening happens of its own accord, in timeless, spaceless awareness. Wu Wei is the happening of the phenomenal world without a subject/actor. The subject/actor has dropped away... things happen of their own accord, and are naturally taken care of, including the parts we might have thought "we" were doing. We aren't driving the car. A person lost in the suffering of their separateness, appears to "Dao, or Rigpa, or enlightened mind" like this: ...lost in the delusion that they are in charge. Arguments about how Wu Wei looks that involve how individual pieces on the chess board (animals/people/events) miss the fundamental point. It isn't up to "you'. It isn't about how "you" choose to act, or the kind of person "you" think you are.

...and shades of the Bahiya sutta: ...and the Heart Sutra: ...and: Truly a great document in the canon of non-dual tradtitions.

I have great respect for the body of teachings and teachers that represents the lineage I am part of. The lineage is meant to embody an unbroken lineage between the teacher, back to the Buddha, and even further to the primordial buddhas. Teachers in my tradition are generally supposed to have realization, and therefore be able to apply skillful means to help others realize themselves. Having said that, I have encountered a number of teachers who aren't, but still embody kindness and have deep familiarity with the teachings, and with few exceptions, they are a refuge to those they meet. Our pledge is to be the vehicle for the greatest kindness, the dharma, with the intent to help others to realize Samyak Sambodhi , or "supreme, complete, and perfect awakening" in this lifetime. The way to embody that practice is the way of the Bodhisattva, and I aim to (imperfectly) be that refuge for all beings. Having said that, the Buddha way is not the only vehicle by a long shot, and I have deep respect for all of those pursuing the true nature of reality. BTW, Steve, thank you so much for your beautiful paragraph, and your continued practice and service to others. _/\_

Yeah... he'll want to keep it in the tradition, I would imagine. No surprise there. This is often very much the case with all of the original Tibetan teachers that escaped China, or were trained by them. I can't tell from your post, and you may know this, but the eventual goal of Dream Practice is not lucid dream, but rather being awakened in all moments including sleep. This is something that, in my experience, sometimes naturally happens on (or just after) retreats. Lucid dreaming would be more of a siddhi than a desirable path milestone. Do you mind if I ask: Do you know experientially what is meant by Rigpa, or the "nature of mind"? This isn't intended as a "gotcha", it might not be something that arises in the traditions you have pursued.

Wonderful! There is always a tension between the mystic and the monastic. The monastic believes that the written word is what leads to transformation, and the gnostic gnows that it only points the way. Being a gnostic (or heretic, depending on one's perspective) is a dangerous business.

Religions are created by gnostics. A gnostic is someone who gains insight into the nature of reality. The gnostic can't shut up about it (typical gnostic thing) and so alienates, scares the shit out of, and excites a variety of the people he encounters with tales of his path. If the gnostic is persuasive enough, some of those who listen get the idea that they could do the same thing if they just do precisely as the gnostic has done. They write down his story as they remember it, but often misquoting or adding bits that they think are true or helpful, couching it in language that THEY understand but that may slightly obscure the teachings. Eventually the teacher leaves, or dies, and the stories from his path get distorted over time. Larger groups form into a religion where the 'teachings" are shared, practiced, etc. Eventually some of the people doing these practices "awaken" themselves, perhaps accidentally stumbling on to some of the fairly simple pithy principles at the center of the now fairly elaborate religion. As gnostics, they understand that the practices themselves were not the mechanism for illumination, or concoct their own practices, being able to see where the religion has become slightly or greatly corrupted, and they often leave to teach what they know based on their own path. The way to enlightenment isn't actually hidden, it is man that corrupts what is actually a fairly simple set of principles.

Had to look that up, and yes I absolutely agree. Of course, Tibetan Buddhism, Daoism, and Ch'an all grew up together in Northern China in a particular period and were not always taught strictly as separate schools, apparently . Contrast ""quiet sitting" (靜坐; jìngzuò), with shikantaza's "silent illumination" (mozhao, Chinese: 默照).