doc benway

I've often seen that when people challenge spiritual realization or abstruse teachings, they offer up the most extreme examples to make a point. Our minds are quick to go there. Of course, one would need to have an impeccably stable and comprehensive realization to be able to find refuge and humanity in an a prison camp, and yet some people do, and no doubt many don't, and it's not an all or none thing. One day may be more tolerable than another and the practice may help a little or a lot, depending on the circumstances. I've read accounts of Tibetan lamas withstanding horrific conditions for years and decades in Chinese camps, enduring torture and abuse, and coming through relatively unscathed. And of course many never make it out. I've also read accounts of prison guards describing such masters' compassion and being deeply affected by it. I suspect that the vast majority of practitioners, monastic and lay, are not nearly stable or realized enough for their practice to keep them sane and kind under such terrible conditions. But the point I really want to make is that we don't need to resort to horrific conditions and challenges to realize that our view and our practice are not perfect and have limitations. We can see this in our day to day actions, our thoughts and feelings in relation to the most trivial problems and successes, in our times of illness, and especially experiences of loss. At the end of the day, we can see for ourselves to what degree these teachings and practices work, or not, for us. If they work, we can cultivate more and more deeply and if we are committed enough, our refuge will be so strong it can accommodate anything. The sky is always larger and more expansive than anything we can try to fill it with. Our openness, the spaciousness of our heart and mind, can be like the sky, able to accommodate far more than one might imagine, and nevertheless we are certainly going to die. We are transient. This is unavoidable.

Maybe more accurate to say it is my understanding of the rationale of dzogchen practice. Not so much my understanding of nonduality, per se.

I've observed it to be a case of diminishing and dissolving for some teachers and practitioners. To be clear, I'm not referring to anyone here. In Bön teachings this is often identified as a common error on the path of which we should be cognizant, hence the quote from The 21 Nails warning us not to misconstrue the energetic display of the base as somehow deficient. Agreed, it is the mind's nature to reify and grasp. I agree here as well, in part. Beyond the tricky ego, the non-dual experience can be extraordinarily powerful and transformative, as you well know. I think that the profound degree of confidence and certainty that arise from such realization can come across as arrogant and dismissive, particularly for people who don't have a relatable frame of reference. I learned this lesson personally from a close friend who is open and confident enough to be direct with me when I rub him the wrong way. I think this is one of several reasons why some non-dual traditions strongly discourage discussion of the subject outside a closed cohort.

My teacher often refers to the more sophisticated and subtle layers of ego in the advancing practitioner as the "smart ego." It's more wily than the more gross and obvious inner voices. It is endlessly fascinating to become aware of deeper and subtler layers of this onion in practice and in life.

I appreciate you sharing your dream and your interpretation. In my opinion and experience, non-duality is a valid and efficient path for the karmically connected traveler. Your interpretation of your dream clearly has much meaning for you. I think it’s appropriate for you to trust your interpretation and follow your heart and mind in the matter. Nevertheless, your dream has little or no significance for those who connect with a non-dual path and for the path itself, which can never be separate from those following it. From my perspective, there are no limitations inherent in non-dual practice, only in our attempts to treat it conceptually.

Recognizing and accepting that this may go against the grain, even against common sense and against accepted authority, I challenge the idea of non-being as "more ultimate than being." We see this proposal in Daoist and Buddhist circles but I find it problematic. Being and non-being define one another and, for me, it is gratuitous and imaginary to suggest or conceive of one without the other. In my metaphysics they coexist and co-arise, they are intimately and inextricably related. The interplay between the two is ongoing and simultaneous rather than temporally separate or hierarchical. Our understanding and conceptualization is temporal and hierarchical because that is an inherent limitation of our cognizance (see for example, Time's Arrow and Archimedes Point by Huw Price as well as other examinations of the nature of time and its relationship to human experiece) but I think that is a side effect of human embodiment rather than a characteristic of reality. This is an area where I find great interest in the evolving understanding of quantum mechanics and the nature of space-time.

Some interesting stuff in this thread. I personally have not yet tried communicating or querying any AI engines any my feelings and thoughts about its value are complicated and evolving. I would like to comment on a few points about non-duality that came up in your post. I have also found that many proponents of non-dual viewpoints, be they on traditional paths or modern, demonstrate a tendency to grasp at or "understand" non-duality in a way that Buddhism and Bön label as an error of eternalism. In some cases, I think this is a perceived error based on the limitations of verbal communication, in other cases a true error of understanding and practice. Here, even ChatGPT struggles as it would be misleading to refer to non-duality as undivided awareness or even as a transcendence of dualities. I agree that it is accurate to say that some proponents tend to mistakenly endorse diminishing or dissolving the characteristics of Eros and Logos whereas in the non-dual path I've studied and practiced all of these characteristics are appreciated for what they are, manifestations of the infinite potential of life, and embraced as the path itself. In one the most treasured Bön dzogchen teachings it is said in reference to the "mental afflictions" (this refers to characteristics of both Eros and Logos) that Viewing them as deficient is the error. This is obvious to me when reading many posts by people struggling with the study of Buddhism, Madhyamaka in particular, but also other non-dual paths as well. Overemphasis of detachment can lead to nihilistic crisis. Intellectualization can lead to spiritual bypassing and nihilism. The experience of transcendence can lead to counter-productive arrogance. An example of this can be found in the more recent writings of Michael Singer, a non-dual "teacher" who by all accounts had genuine non-dual realization but then had a rude awakening when his "enlightenment" failed him during a health crisis and has now abandoned the path. One of the weaknesses of modern "non-dualism" as a philosophy and practice, is its lack of a comprehensive and time-tested foundation and framework. The power of non-dual experience gives the impression that nothing else is needed, and indeed this may be the case for some, but not all, probably very few in reality. As life goes on with its tests and challenges, we often need more to support us and that can take as many forms as there are individuals. This is where spiritual traditions embracing non-duality that have survived and supported practitioners for millennia have so much to offer us that modern non-dual teachers and hobbyists may not. The non-dual teachings I engage with strongly emphasize the risk of spiritual bypassing and other common errors and obstacles encountered on the non-dual path. After introduction to the nature of mind and associated meditative practices, the most important set of teachings relates to commonly encountered errors and misunderstandings in the view, practice, and conduct. Of note, this path does not often engage in differentiation or balancing of the various characteristics of Eros and Logos or to xing and qing. Rather the entire spectrum of ideation and emotion are seen as the manifestation, or dynamic ornamentation, of the base and the direct realization of this depth and breadth of integration in an active and lived sense is the fruition. In this paradigm, it is the very differentiation of self and other which is the fundamental impediment to integration, so the work is done at this level of differentiation, as opposed to at the level of the multitude of experiences, emotions, and ideas that occur to the source of differentiation, the self. My understanding is that the term non-dual was introduced to avoid the error of Monism/eternalism associated with the terms One or Oneness. Understanding this clearly, the phrase "not one, not two" seems essentially equivalent to "non-dual." On the other hand, there is no question that for some, the term "non-dual" or "non-duality" has become something to grasp at, something conceptual and tangible, that can be a powerful obstacle to genuine understanding and realization. In this sense, the phrase "not one, not two" could be quite valuable, but then again there is nothing preventing this phrase from becoming yet another misunderstood and misused label. Consequently, I avoid discussions of non-dual concepts and theory and prefer to point to the practice itself, which is the view, the meditation, and the conduct. Non-duality as a concept is essentially meaningless and of little value, IMO, much as the word God adds little to any discussion of reality. Conversely, as a practice, both on the cushion and in the activity of life, it is profound and priceless. In my own practice, there is little more important than being aware of the tendency to bypass. This is one of the most critical roles of mindfulness in my spiritual practice. It is all well and good to use meditation to calm and soothe and help provide relief in a controlled environment. In this capacity, meditation is a wonderful balm and most practitioners do not go beyond this level, IME. It is another thing altogether to experience real transformation through meditative practice; this absolutely requires working with our experiences of desire, aversion, and ignorance (or whatever other paradigm you prefer to describe the range of experiences of life) directly and in an ongoing fashion. While I don't share your profound distaste for erroneous aspects of contemporary non-dualism, I can understand and appreciate it. Practicing this type of path myself, I feel more compassion and empathy for the errors than distaste. There is an arrogance and a dismissiveness that can come through that is very off-putting but, for me, it is no worse than similar qualities one sees among adherents of virtually any religious doctrine, or that of trail blazers who are convinced their creation is correct to the exclusion of all others. At least the non-dualists are not trying to pass laws in a secular society based on Bronze Age mythology... there's that. There is no single correct path, IMO. I would go so far as to say there is no single truth, as even the "truth" of non-duality, once expressed in words and concepts, is no longer truth but rather an incomplete description of that which is unimputable. I appreciate you sharing your process and your work with AI. I do find it interesting and revealing. I think it can be used as a tool, much as this site can, for us to look at our own reactivity, our own views, assumptions, and expectations, as a tool for self-investigation and growth. I would be wary of using it in an effort to understand a topic with which I am not intimately familiar as I don't think it is an effective tool for discriminating truth from fiction or useful from useless information. Much like the path and practice under discussion, I think it can easily give a sense of authority and authenticity to the uninitiated that may be misleading. Of more concern, I think it is has the potential for misuse that may prove to be devastating in the near future.

Best wishes to the DaoBums for a year filled with peace, joy, and good health. May all obstacles be removed from your path!

Agreed That’s no joke! 😆

I find it so helpful to do just this whenever possible, which equates to whenever I remember - to speak about my experience and from my perspective. I think it’s largely projection when I make assumptions about what others mean, think, or experience.

Finished the last chapter of War and Peace today after a year long slow read hosted on Substack by Simon Haisell with Footnoteds and Tangents, recommended by @liminal_luke. Thanks Luke! It was a wonderful experience and will be starting again (for the final time) on January 1, 2025. I liked it so much that I will be doing one or two slow reads in the coming year (thinking about The Divine Comedy and possibly adding Homer - The Iliad and The Odyssey). Just started reading James by Percival Everett, a retelling of Twain's Huck Finn through the eyes of Jim. I loved his book Erasure which was made into the film American Fiction.

1 Don’t pursue the past 2 Don’t dwell in the future 3 Leave the present as it is This is the view, the meditation, and the fruition. This is how one abides, in all experiences of life, eventually; fully connected to the wholeness of the present moment, clear, aware, and responsive. When there is clarity and unimpeded connection, we have a wider range of options and are not as locked into conditioned patterns. There is also an innate intelligence of response that I find analogous to wu wei. Karma, like the physical, subtle, and causal bodies, not to mention the 3 bodies of Buddha, are all empty, inter-dependently arising, but as real as real gets; these are the two truths. Fancy words, conceptual words, dancing words even, … but the fewer words the better if we’re trying not to add more conditioning and complicated dance moves 🕺🏻 And it’s more than just reading and hearing and understanding the words, the next step is it must be actualized in practice so that we see it for ourselves, this is direct introduction. If there is someone struggling, someone that needs healing, then appropriate methods are used to heal. When one can simply practice 1, 2, and 3, nothing else is added or taken away. Otherwise we do what we need to do. This is the direct path that takes advantage of the innate perfection of unfabricated wholeness, dzogchen. And this is just one approach and clearly doesn’t appeal or open itself to everyone, just as tantric and causal practice don’t open to all. It’s only the right approach if it’s right for me. Otherwise, it may become an obstacle. Dzogchen is curiously and frustratingly prone to become an obstacle for many, hence its secrecy for millennia.

I agree, everything conceptual is related to our karma, this is why the non-conceptual becomes the method in dzogchen. Integration is in fact the path, to bring us full circle, and occurs through naked seeing, or hosting, and abiding in that which is unconditioned and unfabricated.

I can’t say I hold firm views on these subjects. There are things I don’t know (like what happens after death) and I prefer to be open to the not knowing than filling the openness with a belief. I can see the effects of karma in my life and those around me and I can also see the effects of my practice on my relationship to karma. Stirling’s response above says most of what I would offer as a response. I do think that if you subscribe to the general Buddhist/Hindu view of karma and rebirth, and if karma is truly transcended (or integrated) during life or death, then it will not influence rebirth, by definition.

No, though abiding in the natural state one is not subject to karma.

Do I sound that fancy? I do love a good two step! https://tenor.com/bmZoC.gif

Having a human body implies being subject to karma so no, even a historic Buddha is subject to the workings of karma while inhabiting human form. This is why the fruition of the dzogchen path is said to be the rainbow body, even the limitations of the physical body are released and resolve into the five elemental lights.

Please help me understand what you mean by “lawful law.” How does that differ from an unlawful law? We are not discussing jurisprudence so I am confused by this phrase. In the dzogchen teachings, ignorance is a lack of realization of one’s true nature. Abiding and acting from the natural state, one does not accumulate karma. This is why dzogchen is often referred to as the most direct path and why it is said one can achieve Buddhahood in this very lifetime.

Karma is created by ignorance. In the absence of ignorance, karma cannot accumulate. Karma is a law in the sense of physics having laws, more a description of series of observations over time.

Yes, this is an important part of the dzogchen path which is a non-dual practice. My experience has been that being able to release some of the over-identification with the subject of emotional experience allows me to experience more clearly, more directly, with less dysfunctional and habitual overlay. It’s a bit paradoxical that realizing a less “subjective” mode of experience can actually facilitate a more full experience and create an openness that permits a wider range, and less patterned and predictable responses. Never, intentionally, as this is not the practice, although I can’t say it never happens. The inner narrator likes to work overtime. In my practice emotions are perhaps the most valuable, not to mention plentiful, material to work with. Endless opportunities to engage in real time application of practice. I have a different experience and understanding. For me, and by “design,” Dzogchen (non-dual spiritual) practice encompasses, integrates, and transcends the subtle body.

Yes, in my approach transcendence and integration are different aspects of one process.

About 30 years ago, my wing chun shifu got a recipe and ingredients for dit da jow (primarily for acute injury but of some value for more chronic conditions) from his teacher (WIlliam Cheung). We cooked it on a hot plate for about 3 weeks I think and stored it in a cool, dark place for about 3 months before starting to use it. It was powerful stuff. I had so many injuries in those days I was able to do some controlled testing of it. I saved it for a few years but eventually ran out. What I have now my taiji shifu imports from Taiwan. Not quite like the home brew but I still use it regularly with good results.

Much appreciated! The knee is generally fine but when running it tends to limit me to about 2-3 miles, it varies considerably. It gets very tight along the front and lateral side and if I try to push through the pain it can give way. When it acts up I simply alternate walk/jog and its easily manageable. I did have a bad episode with it a few years ago which was most likely a torn meniscus, though I did not do any imaging or seek medical treatment. I used some topical medicine recommended by my shifu (dit da jow from Taiwan) and it recovered over about 6 weeks. I will give your recommendation a try, thanks very much. PS - I'm also fond of Saint-Emilion Gran Cru wines, along with Pomerol, my favorite of the Bordeaux's. I've become increasingly enamored of wines from eastern Washington state - cabernets and syrahs in particular. Although, truth be told I rarely drink anymore. My brother is visiting next week so it will be an alcohol heavy 10 days! Gotta start doing some preparation...

What a pleasant surprise! Thank you in advance to Apech and another heartfelt thank you to all who are still putting in time to keep this place humming.