Merging and guru yoga

[Mark Foote]

My comment:

 

Quote

 

Here's one of my favorite quotes from the late Kobun Chino Otogawa:

"Sitting shikantaza is the place itself, and things. ...When you sit, the cushion sits with you. If you wear glasses, the glasses sit with you. Clothing sits with you. House sits with you. People who are moving around outside all sit with you. They don't take the sitting posture!"

 

(from the Jikoji website, Aspects of Sitting Meditation)

 

 

Without even trying!

 

 

 

Response from Jonesboy:

 

Quote

 

Hi Mark,

 

I am a little slow this morning so please forgive me if I am missing it.

 

Are you saying that you can merge, become one with Divine beings and other people without even trying?

 

Or are you more saying that meditation isn't a doing it is a being an all the time being type thing?

 

 

 

Hi, Jonesboy,

 

Not saying that there isn't effort, for me to find my feet when I'm looking to free-style (as to rock 'n roll), but it's peculiar.

 

Like this:

 

 

I'm thinking the overcoming of the suffocation response is the sudden thing in Zen, and associated with "the cessation of in-breathing and out-breathing".  Not the same thing as "Destroyed is birth, brought to a close the [holy]-faring, done is what was to be done, there is no more of being such or so", but it's possible to enter on Gautama's way of living without enlightenment, and he recommended it.

 

... I'm thinking it's associated with this:

"[One] dwells, having suffused the first quarter [of the world] with friendliness, likewise the second, likewise the third, likewise the fourth; just so above, below, across; [one] dwells having suffused the whole world everywhere, in every way, with a mind of friendliness that is far-reaching, wide-spread, immeasurable, without enmity, without malevolence. [One] dwells having suffused the first quarter with a mind of compassion… sympathetic joy… equanimity that is far-reaching, wide-spread, immeasurable, without enmity, without malevolence."

(MN I 38, Pali Text Society volume I pg 48)

 

 

The "excellence of the heart's release" through the suffusion of compassion, in particular, is associated with the arupa jhana characterized by the "infinity of ether".  I can't dance unless the mind of friendliness and compassion suffuses the "people on the other side of the wall", as Kobun said.

 

 

(from the thread "Mind Only", here)

 

 

The same incorporation of what lies beyond the boundary of the senses can connect with someone in the same room, and I certainly can feel it when some people enter a room (sometimes), even if I don't see them.  Makes me self-conscious, and I have to look to calm my mind and relax my body, in order to breath. 

 

Are we talking about the same thing?

Edited January 15, 2018 by Mark Foote

[3bob]

4 hours ago, dawei said:

ok... I have an opinion !  

 

There is no A or B.. even forget about C and D... forget I told you to forget.... but if you read on... forget that I told you to forget.

 

3Bob lays out the logical reasoning that there is no separation... while he mentioned a guru takes one to a true essence, I might agree this is pre-no-separation understanding... once into 'no-separation' (some might call non-dual), there is no guru... no true essence.. except what words make of them.

 

It is like sleeping when injured; you feel no pain when asleep.  When you awake, you feel pain.

 

Let me ask: When you wake up to no-separation, what do you find?

 

Another question:  when awake to the realization to no-separation, what do you do?

 

I think this thread was about merge stuff...  if there is not separation, then we are all, always merged... what is the issue ? 

 

I like the Zen saying, “Before I sought enlightenment, the mountains were mountains and the rivers were rivers.While I sought enlightenment, the mountains were not mountains and the rivers were not rivers. After I attained enlightenment, the mountains were mountains and the rivers were rivers.”

 

Also the one about,  "before enlightenment chop wood and carry water, after enlightenment chop wood and carry water..."

 

and after considering those sayings one might ask or have an  issue along the lines of, is the 'First Noble Truth' true or not?

 

and another take on, "Another question: when awake to the realization to no-separation, what do you do?"  Well how about we also consider chapter 49 of the T.T.C. ?

 

"The Sage has no interests of his own, But takes the interests of the people as his own. He is kind to the kind; He is also kind to the unkind: For Virtue is kind. He is faithful to the faithful; He is also faithful to the unfaithful: For Virtue is faithful. In the midst of the world, the Sage is shy and self-effacing..."

 

and one more (if you will), although a tangent to this thread it relates in part to what has been brought up,  By Yutang Lin,

 

"Teaching of "Non-form" indicates non-attachment to form. Misinterpreted, it is adopted as holding to absence of form. Abiding in no forms at all, one falls into the abyss of void. Only in no grasping to form or non-form lies true liberation".

 

Edited January 15, 2018 by 3bob

[C T]

4 hours ago, dawei said:

ok... I have an opinion !  

 

There is no A or B.. even forget about C and D... forget I told you to forget.... but if you read on... forget that I told you to forget.

 

3Bob lays out the logical reasoning that there is no separation... while he mentioned a guru takes one to a true essence, I might agree this is pre-no-separation understanding... once into 'no-separation' (some might call non-dual), there is no guru... no true essence.. except what words make of them.

 

It is like sleeping when injured; you feel no pain when asleep.  When you awake, you feel pain.

 

Let me ask: When you wake up to no-separation, what do you find?

 

Another question:  when awake to the realization to no-separation, what do you do?

 

I think this thread was about merge stuff...  if there is not separation, then we are all, always merged... what is the issue ? 

 

The question i am considering is why the need to even postulate the term when doing that possibly leads to the creation of more mental activity, when the alternative, which is simply to first recognise and then maintain the resting in awareness of innate inseparability?

 

Seeming duality is an illusion - it has no basis. It comes about due to dysfunctional or neurotic mental tendencies (which btw are also without basis but nonetheless occur as conditioned phenomena within mindstreams). Since it is without basis, speaking about merging might do not much more than to remain subservient to the ego's need to create a seeming separateness as a kind of buffering comfort activity so that one may remain within a limited field of thoughts that (imo) has all the trappings of self-delusion - i see no other usefulness in hanging on to an idea of an assumed activity which is 'mind created' and therefore has no basis in truth. The alternative, which is to resolve what inseparability really means, and finding that, to remain in that awareness, is more conducive to spiritual growth. 

 

my 2 cents. 

[Apech]

On 1/12/2018 at 9:17 PM, Jonesboy said:

 

With regard to A helping B and working with Divine Beings a couple of ways can be used.

 

The first is to connect the student to his deity of choice. It is a powerful connection that is felt with the divine being.

 

Another method is for A to directly merge the divine being to B.

 

Another means is for B to use his connection to  A to merge into the divine being. Typically this results in a connection rather than a merge for B, but it is a means for B to directly access the divine in a much more powerful way than he could on his own and without A doing it for him.

 

With all of the above methods one can experience bliss, ecstasy, silence, energy in them, as them or around them. As well as love, tears of joy and a whole host of emotions and sensations.

 

There are other ways of A helping B but I think that gives us enough meat on the bone to chew on.

 

I would also agree that what I am describing is in no way Yidam Deity practices as described in any Buddhist texts.

 

Yet the insights and the results are the same. Dharma is Dharma just some of the means may be different.

 

I am slightly puzzled by how you know the insights and results are the same.

 

Can I ask what exactly are 'Divine beings' in your system?

[Apech]

6 hours ago, dawei said:

ok... I have an opinion !  

 

There is no A or B.. even forget about C and D... forget I told you to forget.... but if you read on... forget that I told you to forget.

 

3Bob lays out the logical reasoning that there is no separation... while he mentioned a guru takes one to a true essence, I might agree this is pre-no-separation understanding... once into 'no-separation' (some might call non-dual), there is no guru... no true essence.. except what words make of them.

 

It is like sleeping when injured; you feel no pain when asleep.  When you awake, you feel pain.

 

Let me ask: When you wake up to no-separation, what do you find?

 

Another question:  when awake to the realization to no-separation, what do you do?

 

I think this thread was about merge stuff...  if there is not separation, then we are all, always merged... what is the issue ? 

 

 

Sorry but non-separation does not equal non-dual.

[3bob]

 "The question i am considering is why the need to even postulate the term when doing that possibly leads to the creation of more mental activity, when the alternative, which is simply to first recognise and then maintain the resting in awareness of innate inseparability?"   from CT

 

umm,  by very well recorded accounts the historic Buddha postulated a great deal and even worked to develop the Noble Eight fold path as part of a process or way - besides only "resting in awareness of innate inseparability"....

 

so who would deny or dismiss another in whatever process they may be going through?

Edited January 15, 2018 by 3bob

[C T]

1 hour ago, 3bob said:

 "The question i am considering is why the need to even postulate the term when doing that possibly leads to the creation of more mental activity, when the alternative, which is simply to first recognise and then maintain the resting in awareness of innate inseparability?"   from CT

 

umm,  by very well recorded accounts the historic Buddha postulated a great deal and even worked to develop the Noble Eight fold path as part of a process or way - besides only "resting in awareness of innate inseparability"....

 

so who would deny or dismiss another in whatever process they may be going through?

 

My intention was made clear in a couple of prior posts that practitioners will inadvertently have to pass through/experience perceived 'stuff' until they reach a certain realisation that effort, after all, is counter-productive. Prior to this they will have to maintain some sort of practice regime, which btw applies to me as well, more than anyone here. Im not in any way claiming that i have reached anywhere near stable realisation. 

 

Anyway, the subject is 'merging and guru yoga' - bringing up what the Buddha postulated (or not) is besides the point since guru yoga works from a different premise altogether, which, as Ive mentioned, aims to help with recognising that the intrinsic qualities of one's body, speech and mind and those enlightened qualities iconified by buddhas, yidams and khandros have the exact same essence. 

Edited January 15, 2018 by C T

[Jeff]

On 1/13/2018 at 2:04 PM, steve said:

Intersting discussion.

 

My own experience of guru yoga is not that of a merger of my mind with the mind of another or even with the essence.

My mind has never been separate from its essence for an instant, like a wave has never been separate from the ocean, but the awareness of that essence is blocked by the very mind itself - discursive thought, grasping at form and formless, and so on...

 

In guru yoga, the mind is liberated and pristine awareness rests in its own place, that is to say that awareness and emptiness abide as inseparable, abiding as bliss.

This is resting in the Nature of Mind, it is nothing other than the nature of primordial Buddhahood.

 

For me, guru yoga is better described as a liberation of mind and a return to the source. 

Merger has an implication of a mixing or blending, a coalescence which retains elements of what is being merged.

Union with the primordial Buddha, which is resting in the Nature of Mind, retains nothing.

While the potential is there for all arising, the essence itself is stainless, allowing all to spontaneously liberate, leaving nothing but primordial purity and clarity.

It is like tossing paint into the air, nothing sticks.

 

There are several classical examples that are used to describe this.

The Nature of Mind is like the lotus flower which blossoms in mud and yet remains pure and unstained.

It is like a mirror which hosts all reflections without bias but is untouched and unchanged by anything it reflects.

It is like a crystal, clear and transparent, in which nothing is hidden.

In that space, what is there to merge or separate?

 

Not sure if my words are of any value.

I also don't defend them as being philosophically correct.

Just musings of a mediocre practitioner.

 

When a teacher/guru in your tradition introduces you to a “state of Rigpa” (or primordial purity) what does he or she do? Is it simply an intellectual description for the person?

[Jeff]

On 1/14/2018 at 5:56 AM, Apech said:

 

Just for clarity - (from Wiki)

 

Mahāmudrā is sometimes divided into four distinct phases known as the four yogas of mahāmudrā (S. catvāri mahāmudrā yoga, Wylie: phyag rgya chen po'i rnal 'byor bzhi). They are as follows:[19]

1. one-pointedness (S. ekāgra, T. rtse gcig)
2. simplicity (S. niṣprapāncha, T. spros bral) "free from complexity" or "not elaborate."
3. one taste (S. samarasa, T. ro gcig)
4. non-meditation (S. abhāvanā, sgom med) The state of not holding to either an object of meditation nor to a meditator. Nothing further needs to be 'meditated upon' or 'cultivated at this stage.[note 2]

 

 

Thanks, and very well said as describing the relative progression related to a B (perspective) in this discussion.  

[3bob]

"Anyway, the subject is 'merging and guru yoga' - bringing up what the Buddha postulated (or not) is besides the point..." 

 

hmmm,  does that mean that your entire 2nd paragraph of:

"Seeming duality is an illusion - it has no basis. It comes about due to dysfunctional or neurotic mental tendencies (which btw are also without basis but nonetheless occur as conditioned phenomena within mindstreams). Since it is without basis, speaking about merging might do not much more than to remain subservient to the ego's need to create a seeming separateness as a kind of buffering comfort activity so that one may remain within a limited field of thoughts that (imo) has all the trappings of self-delusion - i see no other usefulness in hanging on to an idea of an assumed activity which is 'mind created' and therefore has no basis in truth. The alternative, which is to resolve what inseparability really means, and finding that, to remain in that awareness, is more conducive to spiritual growth" 

 

which sounds to be heavily Buddhist biased is questionable here?  (with such being postulations per your particular school or person which some may not agree with)  just as some other posts in this thread may be;  anyway imo. we are a fairly flexible and eclectic group or site when it comes to posts with comparisons, forays, morphing, correlations, etc. as related to OPs, which granted has fouls from time to time but to me most (and as demonstrated by mods) fall within workable bounds. 

[C T]

6 minutes ago, 3bob said:

"Anyway, the subject is 'merging and guru yoga' - bringing up what the Buddha postulated (or not) is besides the point..." 

 

hmmm,  does that mean that your entire 2nd paragraph of:

"Seeming duality is an illusion - it has no basis. It comes about due to dysfunctional or neurotic mental tendencies (which btw are also without basis but nonetheless occur as conditioned phenomena within mindstreams). Since it is without basis, speaking about merging might do not much more than to remain subservient to the ego's need to create a seeming separateness as a kind of buffering comfort activity so that one may remain within a limited field of thoughts that (imo) has all the trappings of self-delusion - i see no other usefulness in hanging on to an idea of an assumed activity which is 'mind created' and therefore has no basis in truth. The alternative, which is to resolve what inseparability really means, and finding that, to remain in that awareness, is more conducive to spiritual growth" 

 

which sounds to be heavily Buddhist biased is questionable here?  (with such being postulations per your particular school or person which some may not agree with)  just as some other posts in this thread may be;  anyway imo. we are a fairly flexible and eclectic group or site when it comes to posts with comparisons, forays, morphing, correlations, etc. as related to OPs, which granted has fouls from time to time but to me most (and as demonstrated by mods) fall within workable bounds. 

 

Are you abstained from bias then?

[dwai]

4 hours ago, C T said:

 

My intention was made clear in a couple of prior posts that practitioners will inadvertently have to pass through/experience perceived 'stuff' until they reach a certain realisation that effort, after all, is counter-productive. Prior to this they will have to maintain some sort of practice regime, which btw applies to me as well, more than anyone here. Im not in any way claiming that i have reached anywhere near stable realisation. 

It happens with this method too. There is a natural falling away of effort and a natural and spontaneous residing in “bliss”. It’s hard to articulate but it’s a constant presence that one is as the mind fluctuates and flutters about. Along with the presence is a sense of completeness. 

4 hours ago, C T said:

 

Anyway, the subject is 'merging and guru yoga' - bringing up what the Buddha postulated (or not) is besides the point since guru yoga works from a different premise altogether, which, as Ive mentioned, aims to help with recognising that the intrinsic qualities of one's body, speech and mind and those enlightened qualities iconified by buddhas, yidams and khandros have the exact same essence. 

Not sure about Buddhas’ essences etc, but this way ( as practiced by jonesboy and jeff et al) in my humble experience and opinion is a genuine practice. I do think that it needs to be complemented by an “abiding in presence mindfully” type practice. For instance, one student I was working with I showed first how to abide in the “I AM” for several months and then when I introduced this practice (merging), he was able to quickly go into oneness  awareness. 

[3bob]

"Are you abstained from bias then?"

 

are you beating around the bush?

Edited January 15, 2018 by 3bob

[C T]

6 minutes ago, 3bob said:

"Are you abstained from bias then?"

 

are you beating around the bush?

 

my participation is based off the sharing of experience and study, with the hope that it can lend perspective. 

I dont know what 'beating about the bush' has to do with this intent. 

 

If you dont value it, and have no counter points to offer, its not really my problem. 

 

[3bob]

when one contradicts themselves it could be said to be a form of beating around the bush, (although side-stepping same would be better term) more so when "counter points" were already submitted and side-stepped.  

 

 

Edited January 15, 2018 by 3bob

[Jeff]

5 hours ago, C T said:

 

My intention was made clear in a couple of prior posts that practitioners will inadvertently have to pass through/experience perceived 'stuff' until they reach a certain realisation that effort, after all, is counter-productive. Prior to this they will have to maintain some sort of practice regime, which btw applies to me as well, more than anyone here. Im not in any way claiming that i have reached anywhere near stable realisation. 

 

Anyway, the subject is 'merging and guru yoga' - bringing up what the Buddha postulated (or not) is besides the point since guru yoga works from a different premise altogether, which, as Ive mentioned, aims to help with recognising that the intrinsic qualities of one's body, speech and mind and those enlightened qualities iconified by buddhas, yidams and khandros have the exact same essence. 

 

I would agree with the premise that the concept of “merging” is not the same as or really in any way directly related to Buddhist guru yoga. Merging (as I would define it) is not even really possible within the conceptual framework of Buddhist guru yoga. Additionally, if there are a B and A, then one is really more talking about what I would call “connecting” (or energy connection).

 

If one is truly interested in the concept of merging and how it is possible/works, I would recommend more the Tao Te Ching or mystical Christianity as a framework for discussion. Here is an excellent example of one who definitely knows what merging is...

 

Chapter 10 - Tao Te Ching

Carrying body and soul and embracing the one,

Can you avoid separation?

Attending fully and becoming supple,

Can you be as a newborn babe?

Washing and cleansing the primal vision,

Can you be without stain?

Loving the people and ruling the country,

Can you be without cleverness?

Opening and closing the gates of heaven,

Can you play the role of woman?

Understanding and being open to all things,

Are you able to do nothing?

Giving birth and nourishing,

Bearing yet not possessing,

Working yet not taking credit,

Leading yet not dominating,

This is the Primal Virtue.

 

Merging requires carrying the body and soul, while embracing the One. Attend fully and don’t get separated. And, you will find that then playing the role of the woman and being open to all things is way harder than you think. Jesus calls it jointly suffering and being a co-redeemer in Christ.

 

[C T]

In guru yoga one of the practices the neophyte learns is to 'play-act' or mimic the enlightened nature of his or her yidam. There comes a point when the mimicking ceases - thats when the actual qualities take root in the mind and begin to manifest externally, routing out samsaric patterns and neurotic tendencies along the way. This dropping away of old habits has got nothing to do with any sort of actual merging with one's yidam - it is merely a play initially where one adopts a role and try to get used to the characteristics incumbent in that role. In Tibet many of the dances performed by lamas, yogis and others are symbolic reminders of this purpose.

Edited January 15, 2018 by C T

[C T]

27 minutes ago, Jeff said:

 

I would agree with the premise that the concept of “merging” is not the same as or really in any way directly related to Buddhist guru yoga. Merging (as I would define it) is not even really possible within the conceptual framework of Buddhist guru yoga. Additionally, if there are a B and A, then one is really more talking about what I would call “connecting” (or energy connection).

 

If one is truly interested in the concept of merging and how it is possible/works, I would recommend more the Tao Te Ching or mystical Christianity as a framework for discussion. Here is an excellent example of one who definitely knows what merging is...

 

Chapter 10 - Tao Te Ching

Carrying body and soul and embracing the one,

Can you avoid separation?

Attending fully and becoming supple,

Can you be as a newborn babe?

Washing and cleansing the primal vision,

Can you be without stain?

Loving the people and ruling the country,

Can you be without cleverness?

Opening and closing the gates of heaven,

Can you play the role of woman?

Understanding and being open to all things,

Are you able to do nothing?

Giving birth and nourishing,

Bearing yet not possessing,

Working yet not taking credit,

Leading yet not dominating,

This is the Primal Virtue.

 

Merging requires carrying the body and soul, while embracing the One. Attend fully and don’t get separated. And, you will find that then playing the role of the woman and being open to all things is way harder than you think. Jesus calls it jointly suffering and being a co-redeemer in Christ.

 

 

The problem with me is I am unable to digest phrases like 'carrying the body and soul, while embracing the One', 'Attend fully and dont get separated'; 'co-redeemer' - all these sound quite vague to me, and there are no specific texts that one can lean on for authentic instructions, whereas in the lineage i follow there is no such vagueness - there are commentaries and specific teachings available to anyone interested enough to diligently study and apply the knowledge to reach stable realisation. No subjective interpretations are required, which reduces the potential for wrong views to arise. 

[Jeff]

2 minutes ago, C T said:

 

The problem with me is I am unable to digest phrases like 'carrying the body and soul, while embracing the One', 'Attend fully and dont get separated'; 'co-redeemer' - all these sound quite vague to me, and there are no specific texts that one can lean on for authentic instructions, whereas in the lineage i follow there is no such vagueness - there are commentaries and specific teachings available to anyone interested enough to diligently study and apply the knowledge to reach stable realisation. No subjective interpretations are required, which reduces the potential for wrong views to arise. 

 

Totally understand your confusion. The challenge is that they are not meant as simply oral instructions. Written commentaries are meaningless documents in trying to explain things like “carrying the body and soul, while embracing the one”. One cannot carry the body and soul, while embracing the one like with your example of imagining some Yidam in your mind until your mind is totally fixated on it. It is like trying to learn to swim by reading a book and then imagining water.

[C T]

1 hour ago, Jeff said:

 

Totally understand your confusion. The challenge is that they are not meant as simply oral instructions. Written commentaries are meaningless documents in trying to explain things like “carrying the body and soul, while embracing the one”. One cannot carry the body and soul, while embracing the one like with your example of imagining some Yidam in your mind until your mind is totally fixated on it. It is like trying to learn to swim by reading a book and then imagining water.

Lol instead of offering a valid and understandable explanation to my query about the vagueness of what was written, you assume that i'm confused. You make further assumptions about authentic yidam practice by almost ridiculing its efficacy, alluding to it being a mere exercise in mental fixation. I assure you that you are absolutely mistaken, and i would question the depth of your understanding wrt authentic yidam practice with such a response. 

Edited January 15, 2018 by C T

[Mark Foote]

17 hours ago, dawei said:

 

... Let me ask: When you wake up to no-separation, what do you find?

 

 

Another question:  when awake to the realization to no-separation, what do you do?

 

 

"What do you find?"--I find that my actions are not "mine", as to the current movement of breath or even perception and sensation.

 

"What do you do?"--at that point, I don't know!

 

I pretty much try to relax and stay calm moment to moment.  Doesn't sound like a merge, but there's action without intention that usually turns out to be in accord with what is to come.

Most often, like this:

And it is when the body is impelled by the windy element that it performs its four functions of walking, standing, sitting, or lying-down, or draws in and stretches out its arms, or moves its hands and its feet.

 

(Buddhaghosa "Path of Purity", translation Henry Warren Clarke "Buddhism in Translations" section 21)

 

 

I haven't talked about a teacher, but although I have mostly taught myself, I have in the past been able to pick things up seemingly by osmosis from some teachers.  I was trying hard to learn, they were trying hard to teach, yet getting the feel is always something peculiarly personal (IMO).

Edited January 15, 2018 by Mark Foote

[Jeff]

1 hour ago, C T said:

Lol instead of offering a valid and understandable explanation to my query about the vagueness of what was written, you assume that i'm confused. You make further assumptions about authentic yidam practice by almost ridiculing its efficacy, alluding to it being a mere exercise in mental fixation. I assure you that you are absolutely mistaken, and i would question the depth of your understanding wrt authentic yidam practice with such a response. 

 

Seems like you are the one making all of the assumptions here. I am making no judgement about yidam practice or its effectiveness (actually I think it I very useful), my point was that you can’t learn to “carry a body and soul while embracing the one” (or merge) by reading a book or simply following oral instructions. 

 

If you reread what I actually read, you will clearly see that the perceived “vagueness” of the TTC writing is because it is not simply an oral/written instruction. I even gave you an analogy regarding not being able to learn how to swim by simply reading a book. 

[Jeff]

A further point on “merging”. From the first part of chapter 27 in the Tao Te Ching...

 

TWENTY-SEVEN

A good walker leaves no tracks;

A good speaker makes no slips;

A good reckoner needs no tally.

A good door needs no lock,

Yet no one can open it.

Good binding requires no knots,

Yet no one can loosen it.

Therefore the wise take care of everyone

And abandon no one.

They take care of all things

And abandon nothing.

This is called “following the light.”

...

 

To be able to merge, one must be willing to take care of enery one and abandon no one. There is still a wise one who cares, and there are still other sentient beings to help. If one ceases (abandons), there is no such thing possible as merging. 

 

As the TTC says, follow the light... 

[C T]

thanks for all the interesting contributions. 

 

Im bowing out, so as to stop myself from making further assumptions. 

 

 

[Bindi]

Speaking of assumptions, there are other interpretations of the first line of the TTC ch 10 which don't assume 'merging' is being described: 

J Legge

When the intelligent and animal souls are held together in one embrace, they can be kept from separating. 

 

Derek Linn

In holding to your inner essence and embracing the oneness of your being, can your mind avoid being distracted, and thus going astray?

 

Matsumoto

Forget the separation between your mind and body. Remember you are Tao. Don't forget it. 

 

Can a text which is clearly open to interpretation be used to exclusively support a particular interpretation and method?