Letting Go of Good and Bad

[Apech]

1 hour ago, liminal_luke said:

Seems to me there´s a subtlety to the idea of letting go of judgments that I have yet to communicate effectively.  I´ll try again.  To me, letting go of good and bad does not mean letting go of discernment.  It doesn´t mean pretending we´re all the same.  It doesn´t mean being soft on crime and doesn´t lead to moral relativism. We can let go of good and bad without turning our brains off.

 

In Breema bodywork there´s a principle called "no extra."  Practitioners are supposed to touch their clients (and live their lives) with no extra.  What is extra?  To my mind extra is the judgment, it´s the machination of our monkey minds, always busy, always adding too.  It´s a precious thing to be touched by someone without an agenda, with exquisite neutrality, alive to what is and nothing else.

 

Despite my flippancy I do take your point about being non-judgemental.

[liminal_luke]

10 minutes ago, Apech said:

 

Despite my flippancy I do take your point about being non-judgemental.

 

Yep, I assumed you got my meaning and just added some characteristic -- and much appreciated -- humor.  Maybe it´s the playful cat in you, smart and feisty. That´s a combination of attributes that, in my judgment (cough, cough), seems to be going around.

Edited March 28 by liminal_luke

[Apech]

5 minutes ago, liminal_luke said:

 

Yep, I assumed you got my meaning and just added some characteristic -- and much appreciated -- humor.  Maybe it´s the playful cat in you, smart and feisty. That´s a combination of attributes that, in my judgment (cough, cough), seems to be going around.

I am a little mercurial but I do appreciate your ideas.  I think at one time I would easily agreed with you - but maybe it’s my age but now I am quite conscious of the bad in the world (not just extremes but the general degeneration of order) and have found increasingly that battling against it is important for us.

[Mark Foote]

On 3/28/2024 at 10:48 AM, Apech said:

I am a little mercurial but I do appreciate your ideas.  I think at one time I would easily agreed with you - but maybe it’s my age but now I am quite conscious of the bad in the world (not just extremes but the general degeneration of order) and have found increasingly that battling against it is important for us.
 

We can end this destructive conflict, and bring order to the universe! 
 

Obi-wan never told you, what happened to those vegetables...

 

 

Edited March 29 by Mark Foote

[Dedicated]

In stead of distinguishing myself from folk that are hard to be among or dwelling in pity for them, we can be free of judging others as good or bad.  However, we can still celebrate people who inspire us, their inner beauty striking a cord which moves us to tear up, making us want to try harder, elegant and poised. Giving energy to what we believe in.

Edited April 13 by Dedicated

[old3bob]

On 3/31/2024 at 10:22 PM, Dedicated said:

In stead of distinguishing myself from folk that are hard to be among or dwelling in pity for them, we can be free of judging others as good or bad. We can celebrate people who inspire us, their inner beauty striking a cord which moves us to tear up, making us want to try harder, elegant and poised. Giving energy to what we believe in.

 

Umm, that still sounds like a form of distinguishing, although not violent as much of what is happening in the world.

 

Another form of distinguishing is in speaking or thinking in a philosophically condescending way, for instance, "everyone is a Buddha they just don't know it yet",  or "everyone is the Self they just don't know it yet", etc. x100.

 

So I'd observe that as long as we are part of (or identified with) a dualistic world of divided beingness (and mind sets) we are not and can not be above or beyond good and evil, for only at the Source (and a few steps after?) that is beyond any duality and all of its permutations can we truly declare that there is not good and evil in action, otherwise to me that saying is more or less wishful & half-baked or quasi-intellectual thinking that holds no water. 

(also when impressionistically or foolishly misapplied can be dangerous )

 

 

Edited April 6 by old3bob

[Dedicated]

19 hours ago, old3bob said:

 

Umm, that still sounds like a form of distinguishing, although not violent as much of what is happening in the world.

 

Another form of distinguishing is in speaking or thinking in a philosophically condescending way, for instance, "everyone is a Buddha they just don't know it yet",  or "everyone is the Self they just don't know it yet", etc. x100.

 

So I'd observe that as long as we are part of a dualistic world of divided beingness (and mind sets) we are not and can not be above or beyond good and evil, for only at the Source (and a few steps after?) that is beyond any duality and all of its permutations can we truly declare that there is not good and evil in action, otherwise to me that saying is more or less wishful & half-baked or quasi-intellectual thinking that holds no water. 

(also when impressionistically or foolishly misapplied can be dangerous )

 

 

As far as taking criticism constructively, I'll give you half baked. 

 

Trying to slam years of study and contemplation into a relevant, conversational reply, I too felt my point would need further clarification. 

 

Transcending good and evil doesn't mean we become good and evil by embracing good and evil. 

 

We are not doing anything significant dwelling on stagnant, worse fear scenarios, that is still seeing trancendance from a dualistic mind set.

 

But I need not try to clumsily describe the essence of trancendance again.

[idiot_stimpy]

Another interesting point, brought to my attention from a facebook group post was, some people use non-dual teachings to proclaim there is no good or bad. This can be dangerous as there can be those whose ego will take advantage of this and create pain and suffering for others, then explain away their bad behaviour as being nothing.

[old3bob]

2 hours ago, Dedicated said:

As far as taking criticism constructively, I'll give you half baked. 

 

Trying to slam years of study and contemplation into a relevant, conversational reply, I too felt my point would need further clarification. 

 

Transcending good and evil doesn't mean we become good and evil by embracing good and evil. 

 

We are not doing anything significant dwelling on stagnant, worse fear scenarios, that is still seeing trancendance from a dualistic mind set.

 

But I need not try to clumsily describe the essence of trancendance again.

 

I'm commenting more on the subject and not meaning against you personally.  Anyway I'd also say transcendence is non-evolutionary  _______ and beyond the fray, but evolution is not beyond the fray and some masters (of transcended realization)  work with that, thus not in denial of it as we sometimes hear...  

Edited April 2 by old3bob

[johndoe2012]

My experience is there is good and and bad in the world, and it is foolish to abandon those ideas. Some non-dualists go too far.

 

From  "Approaching the Great Perfection" by Sam van Schaik.

 

Quote

Great Perfection texts tend to speak of rejecting the distinction between good and bad in the sphere of one's own mind, rather than encouraging unrestricted behavior. In other words, they deal with the issue of moral relativity  in the realm of thoughts and emotions (rnam rtog) rather than activities. The identification of thoughts as either good or bad is seen as a barrier to the process of meditation mentioned earlier in which all thoughts, whatever their nature, are liberated as they arise (shar grol). This is stated in DTK [Vajra Verses on the Natural State]:

 

Not falling into the extremes of 

Good, bad, or neutral discursive thought,

You will not be a scholar who distinguishes arising and liberation

 

Likely some non-dualists read such texts, misunderstand them and then spread misinformation on the internet.

[silent thunder]

For me, on a practical daily engaged level, the process is embodied by Chuangtzu's notion of walking two paths at once.

[doc benway]

Misunderstandings of the dzogchen and nondual teachings are often related to conflating the characteristics of the natural state with the characteristics of the practitioner. The natural state has no likes or dislikes but people do. We can approach wisdom in our lives but as long as we have a mind and body we are living in samsara and collecting karma and we will have likes and dislikes.

 

On 4/5/2024 at 2:18 PM, johndoe2012 said:

Great Perfection texts tend to speak of rejecting the distinction between good and bad in the sphere of one's own mind, rather than encouraging unrestricted behavior. In other words, they deal with the issue of moral relativity  in the realm of thoughts and emotions (rnam rtog) rather than activities. The identification of thoughts as either good or bad is seen as a barrier to the process of meditation mentioned earlier in which all thoughts, whatever their nature, are liberated as they arise (shar grol).

 

I think this quote is potentially misleading, at least in my limited experience and understanding. In receiving and studying dzogchen teachings, I've never encountered the advice to 'reject the distinction between good and bad in the sphere of my own mind' [sic]. Furthermore, we don't generally deal with thoughts in one way and actions in another. What the teachings are saying to me is that distinctions between good and bad exist in the mind and only in the mind. Such distinctions do not exist in the nature of mind which is free of all partiality. We cannot free ourselves of such distinctions through rejection or denial. As practitioners, we are naturally subject to partiality and we need to be honest with ourselves about that. On the dzogchen path, nothing is rejected and all experiences are taken onto the path. When we get a taste of the nature of mind through our practice we can get a sense of what it is like to be free of judgements and distinctions but that is not our ongoing condition with very rare exceptions. To the extent that we are able to allow the activity and reactivity of the mind to liberate spontaneously, we create no karmic traces and experience no distinction between good and bad. For most of us, this is not a continuous flow of self-liberation so we need to deal with the good, the bad, and the ugly in one way or another. 

 

With regards to engaging in harmful or negative actions due to a misinterpretation of these teachings it is said that the dzogchen view should be as boundless as the sky and actions should be as fine as tsampa. This means in the state of the enlightened view (that is, the nature of mind) there is no distinction between good and bad but in the actions there is only the direct manifestation of enlightened activity defined and informed by the four immeasurables - joy, compassion, unconditional love, and equanimity.

[thelerner]

Here's what comes to my mind.  Once you've attained wisdom you can 'live every second without hesitation (thought)'.  

 

On a daily basis we don't confront evil as much as ignorance.    The conditioned mind waivers and judges, considering past and future.  The wise mind acts or not, moves through life, leaving a smoother path.  Thing is, an idiot also acts without thinking and leaves chaos and trouble.  Until one has attained wisdom, thus leaving a path of peace, gaining wisdom is important.  

 

So, imo, its not just quiet mind we're after but a wise one informed by solid dharmic traditions.  

 

 

[johndoe2012]

From Daoist Meditation by Si Ma Cheng Zhen

 

Quote

'Good' is the balance between yin and yang, and 'bad' is the imbalance. If a friendship with a person of good character or a book of wisdom are considered good friendship and a good book, that is due to the fact that they have the chacteristic of balance. That is why they are good. They are neither yang nor yin; they are not in clarity, nor in obscurity: they are in a state of balance between the two. Daoism does not consider clarity as the 'good' and obscurity as the 'evil': good is the balance between natural opposites, and evil is the imbalance between them. This is the parameter adopted for all words and actions of a Daoist: rectitude is where opposites are at harmony.