doc benway

Hi Bob, The icon was because I thought you were joking. Does the word nipple offend you? Or the idea that one might accidentally brush up against one? I’ve been on both sides of that experience. I chose that word for a reason. Nipples, like people, can be very sensitive, shoulders not so much. Stepping on a toe causes pain but brushing a nipple can be titillating or offensive, depending on context and intent - just like our words here. I think it’s an apt metaphor and will let it stand. My apologies if it makes you uncomfortable, that was actually part of my intention - not to offend you personally but to demonstrate how words can be powerful and contextual.

FWIW, my opinion is that long time lurkers should speak up when and if they please. My primary motivation and guiding intention in modding here is to help make this a place where people can feel welcome and supported to discuss sensitive topics related to their spiritual path without fearing ridicule and harassment. As wstein pointed out there is always a small number of people here whose posting style, intentionally or not, shuts others down. Perhaps I’m guilty of it sometimes… This is probably unavoidable in an open, anonymous community. So AFAIC lurk for as long as you want my friends, those I know and those I never will. Enjoy your time here, if you can. Enjoy my words or despise them as you see fit. If my silly ideas help you in some way, that is a blessing for us both. If they hurt you in some way, my sincere apologies. All we can each do is our own unique and beautiful dance, accidentally stepping on the occasional toe or brushing the occasional nipple…

I do think there are similarities. Both give you permission to enter the mandala of the divine. Through tantric empowerment you may become and express the power, the enlightened qualities, of the empowering agency. Sadly that approach is rare, but not entirely absent, in Christianity. I encourage reading Demello who describes the sublime empowerment of awareness in the Jesuit process. And there are clearly negative aspects of both types of indoctrination as well.

Queen Omega

It’s only a platitude when you objectify and conceptualize it. It is not an attainment, that idea is what makes it seem so far away. It is always here and now. Nothing to attain at all, it is already complete and perfect.

All beings are said to have innate buddha-nature. That is, their essence is primordially pure and perfectly complete. Nothing needs to be added or subtracted. The only obstacle is a failure to recognize. They need do nothing, change nothing whatsoever to realize/actualize this other than simply to recognize the truth.

Buddhism actually does say that everything is perfect in a very explicit way - the path of dzogchen. The word literally means great perfection, referring to the fundamental, primordially pure, unfabricated state of being - our inherent essence. There are three major paths in Mahayana Buddhism and this is one. The other two paths and the Hinayana don't necessarily accept or agree with the dzogchen view but it is an important part of Bön and Buddhism, generally referred to as the highest or most precise, and most elusive, view.

A thorn wouldn’t be painful if the foot is numb… Taiji is a great example regarding problem solving, many ways to address issues, including simply walking away when that is an option. The “no longer a ‘you’” is precisely the type of solution I’m referring to. This is what is meant by emptiness. When we genuinely find that we identify less with that sense of ‘me’ many problems are far less problematic. This is the source of the result you are questioning. The main reason my mind isn’t likely to change on the topic is that I am living with and benefiting from the effects of the practice. I’m not so much cherry picking as simply not getting too engaged in theoretical concerns and conceptual analysis. I don’t reject rules or logic, they certainly have value and an important place in my life, I simply don’t find them useful when it comes to my spiritual practice. In this arena they can be limiting rather than enlightening. My practice doesn’t require rules, this is the point of it in fact. Through practice I’ve seen changes in my life and attitude that reinforce the practice. Very few rules are necessary once some degree of familiarity is there. Thanks, I feel I owe that to the very practice and associated benefits being discussed in this thread.

Sorry... I appreciate you pointing that out. A few kilobytes refers to a few written symbols here setting someone on fire. The canoe is an abstruse reference to Zhuangzi (the empty boat parable) and then I tacked on an affirmation of Dao's nondual nature.

I think that if people want you to feel bad they are actually addressing a part of themselves that is triggered. We only know our reactivity, our assumptions and expectations, you have little to do with it… a few dozen kilobytes is all. You’re the canoe, ……and the lake and the breeze and the rest of it of course. They need to work out their shit, you yours… often using each other to work on ourselves completely unaware. Awareness of it harnesses great power!

I find it is less threatening and confrontational to share with someone how their words make me feel, rather than saying they are this or that, or that their words were wrong or inappropriate.

Here are a few others, some quite explicit and others open to interpretation and my own projection: The Inner Light by George Harrison (lyrics adapted from Juan Mascaro's translation of Ch. 47 of DDJ) All Things Must Pass by George Harrison (lyrics adapted from Timothy Leary's poem All Things Pass - Lao Tzu) Within You Without You by The Beatles (probably more Veda-influenced but that last line!) Sitting by the Riverside by The Kinks Let's Live for Today by the Grassroots Letting the Days Go By by the Talking Heads

If you haven't seen it yet consider checking out The Beatles: Get Back, a documentary about their final sessions and performance together by Peter Jackson. It's long but really wonderful if you're a fan.

It's always interesting to notice how we tend to assume our experience, or our conceptual framework, is necessarily true for others. I suspect you are on the youthful side of life based on your posts. Life has taught me to sometimes 'be OK with no solution.' Perhaps you will come to agree with this someday and perhaps not. While you are entitled to hold on to the belief that "a 'perceptual-bliss' that transcends both pain and joy, is fallacious" you have not made your case to my satisfaction. Conceptual arguments definitely have value but there is much that transcends logic and intellect and much to discover there. I'm not too concerned with whether or not Buddhism breaks its own rules. Rules are artificial and conditional by nature. I'm much more interested in understanding what the wisdom teachings are trying to show me. With proper study and practice a deeper and more comprehensive understanding is possible if one has the interest and drive. You're welcome. I appreciate your considered response.

I don't see it as a paradox. It simply says you can disagree with others but not insult them, regarding lifestyle choices and other things.

I think the best way to discover why people do what they do is to look inward at my own motivation and patterns. I started studying martial arts about 50 years ago. Looking back a primary motivating factor was insecurity. I've always been a pacifist and have never fought unless I or a loved one was threatened or attacked. I don't think pacifism is at at odds with an interest in self-preservation or the desire to protect loved ones. We can love and strive for peace in our lives without being willing to permit others to take advantage of us. Of course we can define pacifism in very absolute terms which are theoretically well and good but I don't find such constructs to be practical or realistic for most people, certainly not for me. For the very few individuals that are truly pacifists in an absolute sense, there would be no reason to study martial arts. I reached a point through my own meditation practice where I felt I had to give up my martial training. The implicit and explicit violence became simply too much of a disturbance, too distasteful. That said, under the right circumstances I would still defend myself and others and after along hiatus I even engage in some martial training again. I suspect the majority of people who identify as pacifists have some threshold beyond which violence becomes an option, maybe more accurate to say a necessity. I'm not sure I would believe most people's claims that they would never fight under any circumstances. Not saying absolute pacifism is wrong or right, just extremely challenging to achieve for most living creatures.

@Kojiro @Zoya My apologies for the delay - your PPD's are now available.

Thank you for your patience, your PPD awaits you

Looking forward to checking this out when I have some time. I'm also a fan of exploring the convergence, and divergence for that matter, between science, philosophy, and spirituality. I've enjoyed Carlo Rovelli's writings in this area recently.

Mine as well

Recommended short story - https://steveschutzman.com/the-bank-robbery

I understand your point and maintain that contradictions can give us an opportunity for growth and deeper understanding, particularly in the spiritual arena. Rather than looking at them as problems, the quote I offered suggests they can be opportunities. Everyone experiences challenges, it’s not optional. The only option we have is how we deal with them. We can avoid them but that rarely leads to a long term solution. Over time they tend to gain power and eventually catch up to us. Another approach is to face them with full awareness and openness. When we face them with awareness and openness we tend to have access to more possible solutions and if there is no solution, we can stay with the experience and eventually find a way to be OK without one. The whole subject surrounding impermanence is fascinating and, for me at least, worthy of considerable reflection, practice, and study. Impermanence relates to all things that are conditional. When considering that which is unconditional, the same rules don’t really apply. For example, we often see “space” used as a metaphor for the ground of being, particularly in dzogchen. This is because space has unique and particular characteristics that help us to come to a deeper understanding of the unconditional. These characteristics include the fact that space is indestructible, unbounded, unborn, undying, has no edge or center, and so forth. When we consider these characteristics, especially that space is indestructible, how can we say that it is impermanent? So this is where the idea comes in that while everything in our field of experience is impermanent, the fundamental ground of being is not. Regarding the prolonged or permanent nature of liberation, it has to do with the fact that the liberation referred to in dzogchen is not related to a subject being liberated from an object or a set of circumstances. It is more related to the sense of individual identity shifting as a consequence of non-dual realization. This is a long term shift. It’s not that one no longer encounters problems but rather that we don’t identify with the subject as strongly so that problems tend to come and go without causing much turbulence. Anyway, just some thoughts on an interesting topic. Thanks for your comments.

If you ever want to discuss my contradiction, please point it out. Perhaps I could learn something that way. Contradictions in spiritual discussion sometimes have a different significance than they do in rational arguments. I have benefited from this guidance from a great poet and teacher. “And if you want a point of departure for this new journey of soul, don't choose an intention, don't choose a prayer, don't choose a therapy, and don't choose a spiritual method. Look inwards and discover a point of contradiction within yourself. Stay faithful to the aura and presence of the contradiction. Hold it gently in your embrace and ask it what it wants to teach you." ~ John O’Donohue

I enjoy the similarity of discussions here and …

My pleasure, I don't mind but also not sure my answers will be satisfying! No, there is no renunciation in dzogchen whatsoever. That said, nearly every practitioner of dzogchen has at some point engaged in sutric or tantric practice, renouncing or committing to samaya vows but none of this is a part of the dzogchen path which is one of radical non-avoidance. No, I don't think it would accurate to say that. To posit an identity of any sort that takes the place of the individual, conditioned identity would be to simply substitute a more sophisticated conceptual identity which would continue the cycle as you point out. From the side of the absolute, there is no need tot fill that space created by the absence of self-identification. From the side of the conceptual mind, we need to fill that gap or we are unable to continue the dialogue, internally or externally. Consequently we can use terms and concepts to describe what is present when the self-identification drops away but these are simply conceptual labels that attempt to communicate characteristics of the ineffable, nothing more. We can list a variety of characteristics but must not mistake them for what they describe. Interestingly, what we describe when we engage in this exercise is not the absolute itself but only the obstacles we experience as a part of our samsaric nature. I hope that makes some sense. Anytime @whocoulditbe? PS - another way to say it is that if there is a sense of me present that is identifying with something, no matter how great or small, there is already subject/object duality present and this is a wrong not the dzogchen view