forestofclarity

If so, I would find it more convincing if some one who practiced his program X or whatever could demonstrate what they learned. Presuming Mizner is legit (and I have no reason to think otherwise at this point, despite his marketing), if whatever he is showing is possible only after many years of full time practice, then it seems that engaging in seminars and online programs would be a waste of time/money. That's how it seems to me with most of these martial applications--- a form of soft body physics.

Not sure it is even an argument--- the terms still have not been properly defined or agreed upon.

That sounds like a very Tantric, as opposed to Vedantic, take on in my mind. From an Advaita Vedanta POV, creation is usually characterized as the power of Maya wielded by saguna Brahman. Brahman would remain unaffected by the seeming change just as a rope remains unaffected by the imposition of a snake upon it. However, the Tantric point of view as I've come across it is much different, and the expressive nature is quite important. Interestingly, in both cases, there is a connection between ignorance and creation. Ignorance, which often in the dharmic religions plays the role of original sin--- the cause of all our problems. But in another sense, it is the expressive creative power responsible for all the glory of creation. This is one reason I like the Tantric Buddhist paradigm. The goal is not to escape samsara, but to take part in its expressive creativity as a Buddha.

For us Gen Xers, InnerSpace!

Typically due to the controversial and misunderstood nature of emptiness from a Buddhist POV and nirguna from a Vedanta POV. A true introduction should take place "from one warm hand to another" via a teacher in an established tradition. However, for public dissection, I did find you a few definitions: One source: "...the state must be non-dual, in that the experience is not structured by the duality of object and subject. It is, instead, ‘non-dual wisdom... For practitioners to experience a non-dual state, however, there must be some form of knowing or experiencing that is not structured by subject– object duality. This form of knowing is ‘reflexive awareness’." Dunne From some academics, but more problematic: Nondual awareness (NDA) can be defined as a state of consciousness that rests in the background of all conscious experiencing – a background field of awareness that is unified, immutable, and empty of mental content, yet retains a quality of cognizant bliss (Josipovic, 2014). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6265073/

Duality should not be confused with polarity. Polarity can often be a big part of nondual traditions. In fact, there is polarity because there is a shared continuum. Not so. Emotions are divine expressions of the enlightened mind. They are used to great effect in Tantra. I think this is a bit of a straw man. Just because everything is perfect as it is doesn't mean you don't do anything. If you need therapy, you get therapy. If people need help, you help them. It just doesn't alter your essential nature. The varieties of actions are expressions of innate compassion. Nonduality is dynamic.

I do think that what the historical Buddha allegedly taught in the Suttas and Abhidhamma and what is taught in Mahayana non-dual teachings do not appear to be the same.

So do Zen masters go into thukdam or manifest rainbow bodies? Theravada arhats? Jains? Christians?

To play a bit of devil's advocate, do all traditions hold to the same death states of thukdam and rainbow body? If not, why not?

An inside joke in my family: during a movie or TV show, whenever some one says "I need to find out who I am!" or "Now I know what I am!" or words to that effect I usually whisper "formless awareness?" Now I can whisper "luminous blob?"

This is hilarious but not entirely false in my opinion. It is a weird thing once one begins to stop identifying so strictly with objects, like the body and mind. And it can't really be forced, but there does seem to me to be a natural reorienting. "Luminous blob" is a good a name as any, I suppose. The luminous blob that is me acknowledges the luminous blob that is you.

My favorite is Peaceful Death, Joyful Rebirth by Tulku Thondop. In addition to teachings and traditional sources, he also draws on the experience of delogs and NDEs.

Just riffing off of this--- there are some theists who would say if you want to know God's will, just take a look around. Everything that occurs is an expression of the divine will. In fact, some go so far as to say an infinitely creative God will allow for the expression of limitation and imperfection. So you really can't f*** it up! What you can "do" (but not really) is align yourself with the truth of the way things are, or not. Aligning would be to stop taking yourself to be a body and mind, for example. Not trying to grab onto impermanent, empty things, etc.

Agency I think is apparent but illusory. We don't construct our thoughts, feelings, impulses. We don't individually construct our desires and impulses from a set of desires and impulses, they just arise. The decision making process is not apparent--- why we appear to choose one set of impulses over another is a mystery. We didn't choose whether to be born in a time and place where balls arise, nor to be interested in them. That we even have a body capable of throwing a ball depends on the right set of circumstances. I think as we look closely (as in prolonged meditation), the appearance of agency, control, or choice begins to vanish.

I would agree with this and it is the version one of my teacher uses. However, studying it without the accompanying practices will certainly limit its usefulness.

This reminds me of using a VR headset. In that case, the image is literally on the bridge of one's nose. What is amazing is how, despite the fact that only two senses are being used (and not even seamlessly) the mind sort of fills in the gaps and creates an interactive environment. If there is an in-game avatar, the mind will begin to map to it. It is interesting to watch the mind's confusion when you step out of it.

There are completion stages with and without characteristics/marks/attributes. With tends to refer to the subtle body practices, and without to Mahamudra.

I've always been taught subtle body practices in the Kagyu lineage are preparatory or supportive of Mahamudra, which is considered the higher practice (and incidentally, appropriate for lay people). But other may have it differently. I'm not really a traditionalist.

In my experience, high level subtle body practitioners tend to make it a full time endeavor (or at least the equivalent of a full time job), often requiring long term retreat.

I'm curious as to whether you think such an approach is suited to lay people, or if it is the domain of full time practitioners.

I think it is this re-orientation that is important and key to non-dual paths. Typically, the assumption is that we have to gain, or arrange, or somehow add on. Whereas in non-dual traditions, the orientation is not about gaining, but about removing hindrances and ignorance. I think the key points are well summarized in the DKR checklist @dwai posted earlier. Which is why these paths typically spend a great deal of time going over the defects of gaining, adding, seeking elsewhere, etc. No matter how much subtle body or energy work one does, anything added or gained will eventually be lost.

So I see the root of the issue. Fortunately, there is an ancient chant from the Tantra of Unspoken Words: When children do not listen to their parent's words, An evil time, when Daobums quarrel, And people read nondual philosophy but practice not When there are Mo Pai feuds and Buddhist wars alike, These provoke the one Known as Steve On the Internet Woe to the ones Upon whom he pours his well-thought posts!

I would add the same the other way around: it is never wise to foreclose something. However, I find that one may be inevitably led to the path and practice proper to this life. Traditionally, there are at least three parts to practice: 1) hearing; 2) contemplating; 3) meditating. The first two typically lead to intellectual understanding, while the third leads to realization. Then the depth and stability of realization is another matter. Some one may have glimpses, while others may be firmly established and act from the truth. Well, again it depends. Typically, ignorance refers to a fundamental ignorance of our true nature and the true nature of the world we experience. But it isn't a matter of belief, but direct realization of the truth. Once you start to see it, it cannot really be denied or argued with, only forgotten. Like gravity. Just my opinion, mileage may vary and all that.

It is not clear to me what you are referring to when you say non-dual path or philosophy. There is a broad range that can include a traditionally trained Vedantin or Tibetan Buddhist, all the way to self-proclaimed followers who may have sat with Papaji. Even in these groups there are people who study but don't practice, or practice but don't study. Lots of diversity. The proper method will depend on one's goal, and also one's karmic or energetic make-up and disposition. So if your goal is to become a Buddha, then subtle body practices, per most traditions, are secondary and supportive. But if your goal is to become an energy healer, then subtle body practices will be more relevant than nondual teachings. Of course, not everyone has capacity. Some people suck at subtle body practices. Of course, there is interplay and constant flux between the two. We are always cultivating a subtle body of one sort or the other, and also either adding to or eliminating ignorance.

This thread reminds me of the Hanuman story that Swami Sarvapriyananda often tells/cites. Rama asks Hanuman how Hanuman sees Rama. Hanuman's answer (or at least one translation): “O Lord, while I identify myself with my body, I am Thy servant (Dvaita). When I consider myself as Individual Soul, I am Thy part (Vishishtadvaita). But when I look upon myself as the Spirit (Atma), I am one with Thee Thyself (Advaita).”