Seeing, Recognising & Maintaining One's Enlightening Potential II: Open Tradition Edition

[Thrice Daily]

After looking further in. I really only need to stick to the five seasons to regulate. Might be worth a look if you haven't already. The Solar Cycles are interesting though to get familiar with for more subtle intentions that may fit on a bi weekly basis.

[Mark Foote]

On 11/15/2024 at 11:07 AM, stirling said:

 

"Will" is just this, your response in this moment, colored and conditioned by the circumstances you are experiencing, and not yours. Will is impersonal. This is how things are in my experience. 

 

 

 

How to reconcile the zazen that gets up and walks around with the exercise of will?  For years, I tried to let zazen act, only.

I understand the mechanism of that action a little better now:

 

From “Genjo Koan”:

 

When you find your place where you are, practice occurs, actualizing the fundamental point.

 

(“Genjo Koan [Actualizing the Fundamental Point]”, tr. Tanahashi)

 

 

Given a presence of mind that can “hold consciousness by itself” (Nisargadatta's advice for meditation), activity in the body begins to coordinate by virtue of the sense of place associated with consciousness.  A relationship between the free location of consciousness and activity in the body comes forward, and as that relationship comes forward, “practice occurs”.  Through such practice, the placement of consciousness is manifested in the activity of the body.

 

The second line in Genjo Koan about "actualization", and my explanation:

 

When you find your way at this moment, practice occurs, actualizing the fundamental point…

(ibid)

 

 

“When you find your way at this moment”, activity takes place solely by virtue of the free location of consciousness. A relationship between the freedom of consciousness and the automatic activity of the body comes forward, and as that relationship comes forward, practice occurs. Through such practice, the placement of consciousness is manifested as the activity of the body.

 

There’s a third line about actualization in “Genjo Koan”:

 

Although actualized immediately, the inconceivable may not be apparent.

 

(ibid)

 

 

Activity of the body solely by virtue of the free location of consciousness can sometimes get up and walk around, without any thought to do so.

 

Action like that resembles action that takes place through hypnotic suggestion, but unlike action by hypnotic suggestion, action by virtue of the free location of consciousness can turn out to be timely after the fact.

 

(The Inconceivable Nature of the Wind, edited)

 

 

Over time I discovered that my beliefs could also become the source of "will-less" action, very much like hypnotic suggestion.  The moral of that story is to be completely honest about one's beliefs, and strive to ground them on reality, because one's actions will surely follow.  

My understanding is that the contemplation of a cessation of habit and volition, of will, in the activity of inhalation and exhalation was a part of the observations/thoughts that made up Gautama's way of living, before and after his enlightenment. I've summarized the actionable elements of his mindfulness for myself:
 

1) Relax the activity of the body in inhalation and exhalation;

2) Find a feeling of ease and calm the senses connected with balance, in inhalation and exhalation;

3) Appreciate and detach from thought, in inhalation and exhalation;

4) Look to the free location of consciousness for the automatic activity of inhalation and exhalation.

 

Mindfulness at some level is a necessity of breath, but in my experience to remain mindful requires the inclusion of the cessation of habit and volition in inhalation and exhalation in mindfulness--in more substantive terms, the inclusion of the experience of automatic activity of inhalation and exhalation solely by virtue of the location of consciousness. 

 

Occasionally, comes a feeling that the necessity of breath is connected to things that lie outside the boundaries of the senses, and zazen may get up and walk around, yet the extension of compassion that makes that possible is not inherently a part of the mindfulness of daily living.

"Making self-surrender the object of thought, one lays hold of concentration, one lays hold of one-pointedness."  Self-surrender is the surrender of action by habit or volition, by will.  Gautama said that he returned to that first characteristic of concentration after he lectured, presumably one-pointedness, and that would imply that the mindfulness that made up his way of living was the thought initial and sustained of the first concentration.
 

Edited November 17, 2024 by Mark Foote

[forestofclarity]

Quote

Profound, peaceful, stainless, lucid, and unconditioned‍—
Such is the nectar-like truth I have realized.
Were I to teach it, no one would understand,
So I will silently remain in the forest.

I have discovered the supremely sublime and astonishing absolute,
The ineffable state, untainted by language,
Suchness, the sky-like nature of phenomena,
Completely free of discursive, conceptual movement.

This meaning cannot be understood through words;
Rather it is comprehended through reaching their limit.
Yet when sentient beings, whom previous victorious ones took under their care,
Hear about this truth, they develop confidence in it.

 

-- the Buddha, Lalitavistara Sutra, recollecting his moment of enlightenment

[old3bob]

1 hour ago, forestofclarity said:

 

-- the Buddha, Lalitavistara Sutra, recollecting his moment of enlightenment

 

and what happened later to change things?  (rhetorical question)

[dwai]

On 11/14/2024 at 7:38 PM, Shadow_self said:

True Wisdom is also a siddhi of sorts   Thats something thats been proven to be abundantly clear to me  

That is the only Siddhi, rest are all parlor tricks of varying degrees. 

[dwai]

The mind is a mirror in which we see the reflection of our Self -- that's the seeing and recognizing part.

The dust of life settles on this mirror gradually and obscures the image.  So we clean the mirror every day -- that's the maintaining part. 

Is it necessary to keep cleaning the mirror after seeing and recognizing it? The question arises "Who is recognizing, and who is cleaning/maintaining? Who knows if the image is clear or obscure?"  That one doesn't (need to) do anything. 

[Ascetic]

45 minutes ago, dwai said:

The mind is a mirror in which we see the reflection of our Self -- that's the seeing and recognizing part.

The dust of life settles on this mirror gradually and obscures the image.  So we clean the mirror every day -- that's the maintaining part. 

Is it necessary to keep cleaning the mirror after seeing and recognizing it? The question arises "Who is recognizing, and who is cleaning/maintaining? Who knows if the image is clear or obscure?"  That one doesn't (need to) do anything. 

How do we make the mental work we do permanent? Especially if it is not included in what opening chakras would clear

Edited November 21, 2024 by Ascetic

[dwai]

2 hours ago, Ascetic said:

How do we make the mental work we do permanent? Especially if it is not included in what opening chakras would clear

What will opening chakras clear? 

[Mark Foote]

3 hours ago, dwai said:

The mind is a mirror in which we see the reflection of our Self -- that's the seeing and recognizing part.

The dust of life settles on this mirror gradually and obscures the image.  So we clean the mirror every day -- that's the maintaining part. 

Is it necessary to keep cleaning the mirror after seeing and recognizing it? The question arises "Who is recognizing, and who is cleaning/maintaining? Who knows if the image is clear or obscure?"  That one doesn't (need to) do anything. 
 

 

 

In physical terms, activity of the body solely by virtue of the location of consciousness is regulated by the stretch of ligaments and fascia.  Ligaments in particular stretch and resile, especially waking and sleeping, and each day the relationship of freedom in the location of consciousness to the stretch of ligaments and the activity of the body changes. 

I've written about the fourth jhana:

 

Things can shift from activity of the body coordinated by the free placement of consciousness, to activity that takes place solely by virtue of the free location of consciousness.  Here’s Gautama’s description of the fourth concentration:

 

Again, a (person), putting away ease… enters and abides in the fourth musing; seated, (one) suffuses (one’s) body with purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind so that there is not one particle of the body that is not pervaded with purity by the pureness of (one’s) mind. … just as a (person) might sit with (their) head swathed in a clean cloth; even so (one) sits suffusing (their) body with purity… 

(AN III Book of Fives, The Fivefold, The Five-Limbed, Pali Text Society vol. III p 18-19)

 

... In some sermons, Gautama offered a variation on his metaphor for the fourth concentration:

 

… it is as if (a person) might be sitting down who had clothed (themselves) including (their) head with a white cloth; there would be no part of (their) whole body that was not covered by the white cloth. 

 

(MN III 119 Pali Text Society vol. III p 134)

 

 

In the fourth concentration, ease in the nerve exits between vertebrae along the sacrum and spine provides an ability to feel right to the surface of the skin all over the body, such that “there is not one particle of the body” that cannot receive the placement of consciousness.

 

(Applying the Pali Instructions)

 

 

With regard to the description of the fourth concentration:

 

Gautama made clear through his choice of words (“not one particle… that is not pervaded”) that the mind can remain one-pointed, even as the body is suffused with “purity by the pureness of mind”.
 

An evenness in the nerve exits between vertebrae along the sacrum and spine is effected by a freedom of location in the one-pointed consciousness identified with the self in the body. The prior three jhanas involve particular patterns of coordination between the location of consciousness and stretch and resile in the ligaments of the pelvis, sacrum, and spine, patterns of coordination that effect the stretch and resile of ligaments necessary to open the related nerve exits and realize feeling throughout the body.

 

 

Edited November 22, 2024 by Mark Foote

[Ascetic]

1 hour ago, dwai said:

What will opening chakras clear? 

I’m not sure, things that it should but not leading the way towards self-desires to be fulfilled. Certain practices seem to be excluded out of the scope of spiritual remedies ever addressing them.

[forestofclarity]

Quote

 

The phenomena we see are curious and surprising — but the most marvellous thing of it all we do not realise and that is that one, and only one, illimitable force is responsible for:

 

(a) All the phenomena we see,

 

(b) The act of our seeing them.

 

Do not fix your attention on all these changing things of life, death, and phenomena. Do not think of even the actual act of seeing them or perceiving them but only of that which sees all these things. That which is responsible for it all. This will seem nearly impossible at first, but by degrees the result will be felt. It takes years of steady, daily practice, but that is how a Master is made. Give yourself a quarter of an hour a day. Keep your eyes open, and try to keep the mind unshakenly fixed on That Which Sees. It is inside yourself. Do not expect to find that “That” is something definite on which the mind can be fixed easily; it will not be so. Though it takes years to find that “That” the results of this concentration will soon show themselves — in four or five months’ time — in all sorts of unconscious clairvoyance, in peace of mind, in power to deal with troubles, in power all round — always unconscious power. I have given you this teaching in the same words as the  Masters give it to their intimate chelas. From now onwards let your whole thought in meditation be not on the act of seeing nor on what you see, but immovably on That Which Sees.

 

 

Ramana Maharshi as related to Frank Humphreys 

 

Also: 

 

Quote

Ramana: Gaze at your own real nature. It is immaterial whether the eyes are open or closed. Everywhere there is only the one, so it is all the same whether you keep your eyes open or closed. If you wish to meditate, do so on the "I" that is within you. It is the Self. Because it has no eyes, there is no need either to open or close the eyes. When you attain Self-knowledge, there will no longer be any ideas about the world. When you are sitting in a room, whether the windows are open or closed, you are the same person, in the same state. In the same way, if you abide in the Reality, it is all the same whether the eyes are open or closed. It matters little whether external activities go on or not.

 

trans. Natarajan

[Sherman Krebbs]

 

Quote

 

Objection:  If, as you maintain, virtue and sin are ultimately realized as nonexistent, whereas conventionally the cause and effect of actions is accepted as nondeceptive, this is neither correct in terms of reasoning, nor is it established as the Great Completeness. 

 

Response: All bon-phenomena are asserted as being natural, spontaneous occurrences, so the three poisons are also not established, and action, virtue, and wrongfulness are not asserted, either. Therefore, we do not distinguish between ultimate and conventional. This [making of distinctions] is the position of a lower vehicle. " 

 

Objection: Because you maintain that the cause and effect of virtue and wrongfulness do not exist, you would be a Nihilist Tirhika.

 

Response: We would not. Nihilist Tirthikas do not realize the principle of sameness in the two, virtuous and wrongful actions; they maintain that virtuous and wrongful actions do not exist at all.  I however, having unerroneously realized the principle of sameness, realize the fruit primordially without depending on the cause and effect of virtuous and wrongful actions. That is I realize there there are no causes or effects not included in mindnature. Hence the convention, "These do not exist"

 

- Authenticity of Open Awareness: A Collection of the Essential Reasonings. 92.2-93.1

 

Few quotes I read about bön spontaneous presence, which I think is a complement to dependent arising.  I don't have a great understanding between the two, other than dependent arising is more like a chain of occurrences, where as under spontaneous presence, all things arise from the same base.   This was from a book "Unbounded Wholeness" by  Ann Klein and Geshe Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche.   

 

[forestofclarity]

"The secondary meaning of the word sansanga is the company of holy people, sadhus, who constantly meditate on the Supreme Self, whose essential nature is Truth. The studying of books written by the great souls who are the Knowers of Truth, and the reading of their instructions, which are illuminated by their experiences, is also called satsangha. This is because through those instructions there occurs a union between the aspirant and the Supreme Self, whose very nature is truth. Therefore, the spiritual aspirant should use his time to receive the best benefit, by studying and reflecting on the scriptures penned by the great souls, even if direct contract with them is not available." 

 

Swami Dhiresananda, Nectar of Supreme Knowledge (commentary on Yoga Vasistha Sarah)

[Mark Foote]

On 11/14/2024 at 3:58 PM, forestofclarity said:

 

I've sort of changed my mind on the issue. I realized that the most important material thing isn't money, etc. but actually health. And not just for oneself, but as an offering for others. When you hear about some obstacle or issue some one is having, there's something that can be done. Or maybe we just release it out into the world as an offering. 

 

But even money for oneself--- if you use it for dharmic ends--- buying dharmic things made by people who now earn merit, or giving to teachers, or support monastics, or the poor, or supporting dharma activities--- then this is also a good thing. Plus the gains of the people who manufacture the metals, or deliver it, etc, it ripples out. Not to mention the inward ripples or the impact on those around me who may not be spiritual practitioners. 
 

 

 

As to this… right view comes first. And how… does right view come first? If one comprehends that wrong purpose is wrong purpose and comprehends that right purpose is right purpose, that is… right view. And what… is wrong purpose? Purpose for sense-pleasures, purpose for ill-will, purpose for harming. This… is wrong purpose. And what… is right purpose? Now I… say that right purpose is twofold. There is… the right purpose that has cankers, is on the side of merit, and ripens unto cleaving (to new birth). There is… the right purpose which is [noble], cankerless, supermundane, a factor of the Way.

And what… is the purpose which is on the side of merit, and ripens unto cleaving? Purpose for renunciation, purpose for non-ill-will, purpose for non-harming. This… is right purpose that… ripens unto cleaving. And what… is the right purpose that is [noble], cankerless, supermundane, a component of the Way? Whatever… is reasoning, initial thought, purpose, an activity of speech through the complete focussing and application of the mind in one who, by developing the [noble] Way, is of [noble] thought, of cankerless thought, and is conversant with the [noble] Way–this… is right purpose that is [noble], cankerless, supermundane, a component of the Way.

 

(MN 117, translation Pali Text Society vol. III pp 115-116)
 

 

"Dharmic ends" I'm guessing would fall under "purpose which is on the side of merit". And I agree that health is wealth, and purpose on the side of merit is a good thing. Unavoidable!

 

 

Edited Monday at 06:42 PM by Mark Foote

[Mark Foote]

On 10/9/2024 at 5:46 PM, forestofclarity said:

 

Self Liberation Through Seeing with Naked Awareness, trans John Myrdhin Reynolds

 

As for this sparkling awareness, which is called "mind," Even though one says that it exists, it does not actually exist. (On the other hand) as a source, it is the origin of the diversity of all the bliss of Nirvana and all of the sorrow of Samsara. And as for it’s being something desirable; it is cherished alike in the Eleven Vehicles.

 

With respect to its having a name, the various names that are applied to it are inconceivable (in their numbers).

 

Some call it "the nature of the mind" or "mind itself."

 

Some Tirthikas call it by the name Atman or "the Self."

 

The Sravakas call it the doctrine of Anatman or "the absence of a self."

 

The Chittamatrins call it by the name Chitta or "the Mind."

 

Some call it the Prajnaparamita or "the Perfection of Wisdom."

 

Some call it the name Tathagata-garbha or "the embryo of Buddhahood."

 

Some call it by the name Mahamudra or "the Great Symbol."

 

Some call it by the name "the Unique Sphere."

 

Some call it by the name Dharmadhatu or "the dimension of Reality."

 

Some call it by the name Alaya or "the basis of everything."

 

And some simply call it by the name "ordinary awareness." 
 

 

 

Or how about, "embodied self-location"?

 

Modern neuroscience now includes the study of the “bodily self”:
 

A key aspect of the bodily self is self-location, the experience that the self is localized at a specific position in space within one’s bodily borders (embodied self-location).
 

(Journal of Neuroscience 26 May 2010, 30 (21) 7202-7214; https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3403-09.2010)

 

The “self (that is) localized at a specific position in space” is commonly associated with consciousness. The Indian sage Nisargadatta spoke about “the consciousness in the body”:
 

You are not your body, but you are the consciousness in the body, because of which you have the awareness of “I am”. It is without words, just pure beingness.
 

(Gaitonde, Mohan [2017]. Self – Love: The Original Dream [Shri Nisargadatta Maharaj’s Direct Pointers to Reality]; ISBN 978-9385902833)

 

The specific position in space of “the consciousness in the body” is often assumed to be fixed somewhere behind the eyes. Zen teacher Koun Franz suggested that the location is not fixed:
 

… as an experiment, I recommend trying it, sitting in this posture (legs crossed in seated meditation) and trying to feel what it’s like to let your mind, to let the base of your consciousness, move away from your head. One thing you’ll find, or that I have found, at least, is that you can’t will it to happen, because you’re willing it from your head. To the extent that you can do it, it’s an act of letting go–and a fascinating one.
 

(“No Struggle [Zazen Yojinki, Part 6]”, by Koun Franz, from the “Nyoho Zen” site, parenthetical added)

 

Franz spoke about “letting go” to allow the “base of consciousness” to move away from the head. Gautama spoke about “making self-surrender the object of thought” in order to “lay hold of one-pointedness”:
 

Herein… the (noble) disciple, making self-surrender the object of (their) thought, lays hold of concentration, lays hold of one-pointedness.
 

(SN 48.10; tr. Pali Text Society [PTS] vol. V p 174)

 

Laying hold of “one-pointedness” is having the experience of embodied self-location wherever consciousness takes place.
 

Consciousness can be fixed in place by the exercise of will, as Gautama explained:
 

That which we will…, and that which we intend to do and that wherewithal we are occupied:–-this becomes an object for the persistence of consciousness. The object being there, there comes to be a station of consciousness….
 

But if we neither will, nor intend to do, nor are occupied about something, there is no becoming of an object for the persistence of consciousness. The object being absent, there comes to be no station of consciousness.

 

(SN 12.38; tr. PTS SN vol. II p 45; “persistance” in original)

 

A surrender of the exercise of will, of intention and deliberation, is necessary to allow the “base of consciousness” to move away from the head, to allow a laying-hold of “one-pointedness”.

(The Diamond Trap, the Thicket of Thorns)

 

 

Edited Monday at 08:12 PM by Mark Foote

[doc benway]

On 12/13/2024 at 12:05 PM, Sherman Krebbs said:

 

 

Few quotes I read about bön spontaneous presence, which I think is a complement to dependent arising.  I don't have a great understanding between the two, other than dependent arising is more like a chain of occurrences, where as under spontaneous presence, all things arise from the same base.   This was from a book "Unbounded Wholeness" by  Ann Klein and Geshe Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche.   

 

 

If you are interested in Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche's teachings, his later works are far more accessible.

Unbounded Wholeness is a bit technical and theoretical. He recommends other books first, such as Awakening the Luminous Mind.

His teachings now are all about direct experience, he avoids theoretical discussions with students.

 

I think it is a bit misleading to think of dependent arising as a chain of occurrences. Dependent arising is another way of referring to emptiness. When we carefully examine the nature of our mind and the nature of reality in our practice or in ontological debate, we find that nothing can be shown to definitively exist in isolation from all else, including our sense of self. People and things are empty in the sense that they don't have a defined "self" that is independent and separate from other things, other beings, and their environment, hence the label dependent arising, everything is interconnected, nothing exists in isolation. Not only have yogis realized this, scientific disciplines like physics, biology, psychology, sociology, etc... have made analogous discoveries and embraced the truth of it.

 

Whether through an analytical or practical approach, if we genuinely realize the meaning of emptiness we find it is not at all vacant or missing anything whatsoever. It is not some dark, imaginary, cold void. This is an error often encountered when the analytical mind thinks it understands emptiness. When we are quiet inside, alert, and open, not distracted in our thoughts, not indulging sensory experience, or feelings; we are not unconscious and blind, there is a spontaneous presence, a sense of awareness is there, a vividness, a knowing. So what we refer to as emptiness is not some sense of absence, it is more a fullness, filled with unlimited potential for anything to arise. This is what "unbounded wholeness" refers to, sometimes referred to in Tibetan as thiglé nyagcig (literally single sphere), referring to the non-dual nature of being.

 

So spontaneous presence and dependent arising are indeed complimentary. Perhaps it is more accurate to say they are different characteristics, or aspects of the nature of mind, which is not different from the nature of reality in these teachings. There is a wonderful teaching that is discussed in detail in Tenzin Rinpoche's book Awakening the Luminous Mind called the Five-fold Teaching of Dawa Gyaltsen. It is a simple, five line poem that describes the relationship between our experience and the fundamental nature of existence.

 

Vision is Mind - all life experiences are a reflection of our mind.

Mind is Empty - when we look for the mind we ultimately cannot find it as independently established.

Emptiness is Clear Light - when we discover the meaning of emptiness, there is a spontaneous presence there, a knowing (rigpa).

Clear Light is Union - when we recognize the clear light, we find it to be the union of emptiness (space) and spontaneous presence (awareness). 

Union is Great Bliss - when we discover and abide in that union, we discover the spontaneous arising of empathy, of compassion, of Bodhicitta, the awakened heart.

 

If you read this far... thanks for listening to me chatter!

[Sherman Krebbs]

13 hours ago, doc benway said:

If you are interested in Tenzin Wangyal Rinpoche's teachings, [...]

 

Wow, thanks for this.  I have been thinking about this for some time.  This is good advice.  I will look into the Awakening the Luminous Mind book.  Also good advice to try to avoid too much analytical and technical thoughts on topics such as this, although my mind is greedy for them. Always searching for deep secrets and truths, meanwhile the plumbing on my water heater is spraying water all over the place!  

 

13 hours ago, doc benway said:

 This is what "unbounded wholeness" refers to, sometimes referred to in Tibetan as thiglé nyagcig (literally single sphere), referring to the non-dual nature of being.

 

This reminded me of a thought I had the other day.  People use the term "non-dual," but isn't that somewhat of misnomer, or at least a bad name.  In using the modifier "non-" aren't we implicitly asserting the validity or reality of the non-thing, in this case dualism.  Like dualism is something that has validity or something that must be rebutted.  I am a non-Christian, a non-communist, a non-drinker, and a non-triangle. We posit a concept such as unbounded wholeness in terms as the opposite of "dualism", when it seems to me to be something much definite.  Like saying a person is a non-fish. 

[doc benway]

23 minutes ago, Sherman Krebbs said:

I will look into the Awakening the Luminous Mind book.  Also good advice to try to avoid too much analytical and technical thoughts on topics such as this, although my mind is greedy for them. Always searching for deep secrets and truths, meanwhile the plumbing on my water heater is spraying water all over the place!  

 

I have a suggestion about Awakening the Luminous Mind. The first half of the book describes a core meditation practice, a lifetime practice if it speaks to you. It is very simple but not necessarily easy. My own experience was that after years of practicing other methods, the techniques described in the first part of this book generated tangible, practical results very rapidly. I recommend you spend some real, quality time with this before getting too immersed in the second half of the book which gets into Dawa Gyaltsen's teaching. Otherwise, it will be very easy for the mind to be activated and become an obstacle to deeper, non-conceptual understanding. Everything in Dawa Gyaltsen's teachings is pointing to discoveries made through the core practices with stillness, silence, and spaciousness.

 

PS - good luck with the water heater! I had to replace mine a few years back. Of course it failed and leaked all over the basement on a Friday evening.

 

33 minutes ago, Sherman Krebbs said:

People use the term "non-dual," but isn't that somewhat of misnomer, or at least a bad name.  In using the modifier "non-" aren't we implicitly asserting the validity or reality of the non-thing, in this case dualism.  Like dualism is something that has validity or something that must be rebutted.  I am a non-Christian, a non-communist, a non-drinker, and a non-triangle. We posit a concept such as unbounded wholeness in terms as the opposite of "dualism", when it seems to me to be something much definite.  Like saying a person is a non-fish. 

 

You are correct. It is far better to not use words. I've been lucky enough to have both Daoist and Bön Buddhist teachers who emphasize practice over theory. It is the best approach for me as I tend to be too much in my head. No words can ever do justice to the nature of mind and the nature of reality. At best they are indicative and descriptive, at worst misleading. This is why the Bön teachings use so many metaphors and similes, so much poetry. The dzogchen teachings repeatedly remind us of this and refer to the nature of mind as beyond labels, ineffable, un-imputable. Nevertheless, there are times when we choose to discuss these things, whether with each other, with teachers, or students. So we do the best we can with our words. 

 

The use of "non-dual" is a reaction, some including myself would say a correction, to the the use of words like One or Oneness when describing the nature of being. When people have a direct experience of the nature of mind, it is very common is to experience a powerful, life and consciousness altering sense of being one with everything. The boundaries of our sense of self dissolve, at least temporarily, and the feeling is indescribable. These experiences are so powerful they cause substantial changes in how we view and relate to the world and to others in a long lasting manner. The tendency is to conclude that the true nature of being is One or Oneness. Without getting too much into theory and language, it is relatively easy to demonstrate, at least in Bön and Buddhist metaphysics, that One or Oneness are not an accurate description of the nature of being. For example, if the nature of mind was simply One or Oneness, then the instant one individual experiences enlightenment, all beings would be instantaneously enlightened. Clearly that is not our observation or experience. Nevertheless, there is the direct experience as well as ample basis for argument, even scientific data, that tells us we are not separate from others or from our environment in the way we appear to be, hence the genesis of the term non-dual. It indicates that while we are not separate (not dual), still we are not truly One. To make things more complicated, there are other areas in the teachings where you do find reference to unity, such as what I referred to above - thiglé nyagcig. At the end of the day, it is far more important to be exposed to the teachings and validate them through our personal practice, than to get too attached to any particular labels or concepts. I find non-dual to be a useful term but, like all of language in the realm of the boundless, it is limited.