doc benway

Yes, it's covered superficially in his book. He plans to offer a 2 week retreat on it next summer in Virginia, USA Not sure these two are all that much different...

He does at the glidewing link above. I think the next course is in the Spring. It's a very good course.

We can divide practice into three paths (somewhat of an artificial division but useful nonetheless). The gradual path of sutra which is also known as the path of renunciation which is more focused on the intellectual work. The rapid path of tantra, the path of transformation, which has striking similarities to Daoist cultivation methods. The non-path of dzogchen, which is simply to rest and let everything be as it is. So for sure, one can take a gradual path. It generally only gets a bad reputation by people who are impatient and looking for shortcuts. Those folks tend not to stick with any path, in my experience. I think we all experience that at some point in our lives. There is much value in study and philosophy and this brings us back to the OP. The middle way can also be applied to this question - we need to study and we need to know when to let go of that. Sometimes we get too wrapped up in the theory, sometimes we get lost in experience. The middle way for me is about finding balance.

When we stop trying to conceptualize, we can connect with what is, as it is, without the intellect getting in the way. For me, the intellectual conclusion that all positions lead to error, the resolution to give up grasping for a position, in and of itself does not bring peace. It allows the mind to let go of the conceptual framework and directly connect. When we develop confidence in this connection, trust in this connection, without the intellectual interference, we can begin to rest. When we truly feel it's support, the connection, we feel as if we are coming home after being lost for a long time, this brings us peace. At least that's sort of how I feel.

A few comments from my own dream practice: The specific method may be less important than cultivating the proper approach and attitude. The intent, dedication, and consistency are critical. The practice needs to be a 24 hour cycle - daytime, preparation for sleep, during sleep, and upon awakening. Alcohol and drugs can erase months of work in no time at all... Cultivating lucidity has been quite elusive for me but I have had a lot of great success. It took me a very long time to see results. We have to be patient and supportive of ourselves. We need to be committed but not overly serious. Playful but consistent. Reverent but relaxed. I think the more esoteric approaches have one significant advantage - integrating the spiritual view and practices with the dream practice makes it easier for us to connect to ourselves at a deeper, more subtle level. Dream practice is about building a bridge between the light and the dark, the obvious and the subtle, between two realities. If we can develop a feeling of reverence and great respect, it helps. If we can develop great confidence and trust in the method and the teacher, it helps. This is why connecting to your body when you do daytime practices and reminders is so important. The message, the bridge, needs to connect deeper than the intellect for it to come up in dream. I suggest you connect with your body, allow the mind and internal dialogue to settle, feel and rest in that internal space, feel supported and comfortable there, connect for a while and then give yourself whatever instruction or reminder you prefer (I use - this is a dream, this is a dream, I am free to do anything, this is a dream... and so on). Try to repeat this at least 15 times a day. If you're willing to spend a little cash there are frequent online workshops available from a variety of good teachers here - http://www.glidewing.com/ (Robert Waggoner, Marc Allen, Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche) Finally, I'd highly recommend Tibetan Yogas of Dream and Sleep. Even though it is quite esoteric, it has a great deal of valuable information much of which is easily adaptable to a more secular approach. While you may chose not to practice the specific techniques the book is well worth reading. Good luck!

I wonder if we can separate thought from emotion so completely? I think the two are inter-related at a fairly deep level such that they arise together. In that sense, perhaps emotion can be inaccurate as well. I don't see it as black and white as you but that doesn't meant that I am correct. In addition, there are many people who experience emotions that are inappropriate for the circumstances. These are often labeled as mental illness, although there may be much more sophisticated ways to look at these variations.

I definitely have positive and negative feelings and I do feel that I'm able to differentiate them. I think I'm saying a few things - 1. When we are faced with a situation that elicits a response, that response is an accurate indication of how we are conditioned to respond based on our perception of the stimulus, based on a whole host of variables (cultural, psychological, spiritual, generational, ancestral...) 2. Our perception of the stimulus is not always accurate and, if inaccurate, our reaction will be similarly inaccurate 3. Sometimes I have the experience that even thought I think I should feel one way, I feel completely differently. For example, something happens and my brain tells me that it would make sense to feel happy but I still feel sad, or vice versa. So I think it's important to be aware that our emotions may not be as accurate as you suggested in your earlier post, at least not for me anyway.

While emotions may be accurate, I wonder if our perception and interpretation of them is always accurate? This is one reason why analysis and understanding is less important in my approach than simply experiencing them and allowing that to be a guide to who it is that is having the experience. There's a lot of truth to that - we want to feel better or avoid feeling worse. As long as we are on that rollercoaster there is little peace.

I gave up wanting people to be this way or that. I'm sharing my personal view and path. I'm genuinely speaking of my life and the changes I have made and continue to make related to MY emotional life. I don't know you at all and make no claims in that regard. All we know about each other is what each of us chooses to share here and there is no way to know how accurate a picture that gives us of each other. You are free to apply my thoughts to your situation or not as you see fit. If you think it's helpful to you, that's great, if not - that's great. Contentment can also mean that we've reached a peaceful state (edit for spelling) of comfort and ease. Boredom is an indication of disconnectedness.

I don't think it's accurate to say that boredom and contentment are the "standard emotion for all people." It's possible that when we feel mostly boredom or contentment, it is because we are repressing or suppressing emotions or are not in touch with them. I am not saying that is the case with anyone in particular, including the OP, but I can say that used to be the case with me. Mostly OK, generally content or bored, with occasional (or frequent) outbursts of intense anger, sadness, fear, depression, elation. After a lot of personal work I am in touch with a much richer emotional milieu. I feel a wide variety of emotions depending on how closely I look. Often more than one occurring simultaneously. It varies with season and situation. Often they are just spontaneously present - no rhyme or reason. I work with my emotions as consistently as possible. When I feel a strong emotion, I let it be there - I don't push it away or analyze it. I feel it in my body, notice the thoughts, impressions, or situations with which it is associated. Then I look at who it is that is feeling the emotion. One way of looking at it is that when we feel a strong emotion, it is a clue that we are over-identifying with a role and relationship in our lives. Noticing those roles and relationships helps us to understand ourselves better. It also helps us to act rather than react. It allows us to choose a response or path rather than get buffeted along blindly. As we are able to let go of those strong attachments (over-identification), we get a more accurate idea of who we are.

And good metaphysics can also treat the construction of the mind, which is the foundation of the world as we perceive it. I would offer that Bön and Buddhism can quite accurately be described as mind science. They propose a theory of mind, test that theory through direct observation, and adapt the theory as dictated by observation. As the Dalai Lama says, “If scientific analysis were conclusively to demonstrate certain claims in Buddhism to be false, then we must accept the findings of science and abandon those claims.”

My Daoist teacher used to speak of our mind of intent traveling faster than the speed of light. It takes 8 minutes for light to travel from Earth to the Sun but our mind can do it in an instant. We were speaking in the context of martial arts but the principle can be applied elsewhere and is powerful.

One of the great texts of Mahamudra from the 16th century is called - The Perfect Description of Moonlight that Illuminates the Stages of Ultimate Mahamudra (The Great Seal) written by Dakpo Tashi Namgyal. It's been translated into English with the title, Mahamudra: The Moonlight - Quintessence of Mind and Meditation. I don't know enough to go into the significance of the use of the term Moonlight in the title but maybe there are some here that are more knowledgable regarding Mahamudra and the Kagyu school of Buddhism.

Precisely - it is always NOW. When it is ever THEN? Similarly, everyone is always ME. No one is ever THEM.

Saying space would freeze without time is like saying there would be no length without yardsticks, no weight without scales. Time is a measurement, created by the mind. Change simply is... Time is contained by clocks and other measurements of change. Change is independent of measuring devices and conventions. It's true in a way, when you connect with what it is that does not change, you realize the nature of immortality.

Have you ever offered food or water to one of your precious birds?

Speech is both internal and external. It is extremely effective for communication with others. Entirely over-rated as communication with oneself. Our internal dialogue is simply a narration, after the fact. A holding onto the past, a longing for the future, a labeling of the present. We are never more in touch with ourselves when still and silent, never farther when lost in the internal dialogue. The one who would focus on action is not different than the one who is focused on narration. I think the sage is not afraid to speak but is silent even in speech. Ready to act but not focused on action, rather allowing action to occur as it is needed.

This is wonderful stuff! I once read a fascinating discussion of time called Time's Arrow and Archimedes Point by Huw Price that helped to open my ideas on time. Not at all an easy read but very compelling. Meditation can be very helpful to loosen the grip our concept of time has on us as well.

I feel powerfully drawn to the moon, full or otherwise. Certainly the effects are more pronounced as the moon waxes and lessens as it wanes. Not sure I can (or want to) label and describe the effects specifically. There are so many things in the internal and external environment that are in flux, all of which affect the body.

I am torn between respecting copyrights and the idea of sharing these beautiful teachings. Not sure what the middle ground is but I do think current laws favor corporate publishing interests over both those of authors and readers alike.

And the author died 45 years ago... Interesting that our system permits a publishing corporation to continue to profit. There is also a link to that pdf through the University of Hawaii...

What other chart are you referring to? That of snowmonki? In the Tibetan tradition, the right and left channels are not near the du mai (I assume this is what you refer to as the "main back channel.") The are more central, on either side of the central channel.

There is also a modern "non-dualist" who writes on these subjects named Steven Harrison. I really enjoyed his book - The Question to Life's Answers. It probably could have been edited a bit better but was worth the read.

I don't now Peterson, I'll check him out, thanks This is a really interesting comment and has sparked a question for myself - Were I to meet the Buddha, would I agree with him on all levels? Food for thought, or contemplation...

Borrowed from Yueya's thread - This would be nice to have here, I think: "In the beginner's mind there are many possibilities, but in the expert's there are few." - Suzuki Shunryuku