Why do non-dual teachers seem to disagree so much? :-)
15 years 11 months ago #54979
by Mike.B
Why do non-dual teachers seem to disagree so much? :-) was created by Mike.B
Maybe its all this "anti-neo-AV"? [eg
www.advaita.org.uk/discourses/trad_neo/trad_neo.htm
] ... altho' a lot of this seems to be Dennis Waite setting up straw man which no-one subscribes to very much (inlcuding perhaps labelling all non-dual teachings in realtionship to AV regardelss of heritage) and then knocking them down. However there is also the general phenomenon of philsophical disagreement (eg Goode saying "consciousness only, Berkeley 'obviously' right etc, others say no free will, etc etc).
Am I the only one who finds it bizarre as well as eccentric that a whole bunch of teachers who are into oneness and say they have realised it then produce one of the best demonstrations of twoness in terms of all these sallies back and forth across the net?!?
If folks are enlightened then surely their words are genuine in reflecting their realisation and how they feel (they cant know of course) it happened causally (or at least how they got near enough to the finish line to stumble over by accident) and so pass that on.... I just dont get this other teachers taking potshots at them as if they are "wrong" somehow.
yrs mystified
Mike
Am I the only one who finds it bizarre as well as eccentric that a whole bunch of teachers who are into oneness and say they have realised it then produce one of the best demonstrations of twoness in terms of all these sallies back and forth across the net?!?
If folks are enlightened then surely their words are genuine in reflecting their realisation and how they feel (they cant know of course) it happened causally (or at least how they got near enough to the finish line to stumble over by accident) and so pass that on.... I just dont get this other teachers taking potshots at them as if they are "wrong" somehow.
yrs mystified
Mike
15 years 11 months ago #54980
by Mike.B
Replied by Mike.B on topic RE: Why do non-dual teachers seem to disagree so much? :-)
ps the best book I have read about dual vs non-dual approaches in Buddhism is Peter Fenner's "Dilemmas on the Buddhist Path" ... (poorly titled as not about many dilemmas it seemd to me) very nice discussion of the pros and cons of progressive vs immediate path-ness as it applies to Buddhism. Check it out if this thing gets you out of bed in the morning (or I guess into it to read dhamma books 
in the evening lol)
in the evening lol)
15 years 11 months ago #54982
by Mike.B
Replied by Mike.B on topic RE: Why do non-dual teachers seem to disagree so much? :-)
Hi Kenneth
Good answer
Mind you in all this huge proliferation of non-duality books these days one does rather supsect that the barrier to entry is quite low these days ... I strongly suspect that not every popular author will parinirvana when then die ... in say Zen terms many folks are just talking about having had a satori and some stern-faced abbot would perhaps just send them back for another decades meditation ... "seeing through" the "lower self" historically for all esoteric paths has tended to be the starting gate not the finishing gate ... as per Ramana the gooseberry is not that hard to see.
On a more practical/pertinent question in terms of your perspective/teaching how are you relating the absolute and the relatiuve (sorry if its in your articles I dont recall seeing precisely this one). So eg one can have a relatively pure experience of presence/rigpa/whatever-you-want-to-call-it and I think we can all agree that in such a state there is no desire arising to go and argue the toss about philosophy or whats right and wrong (my experience).
But what is your view on what happens next? Does that "absolute" kind of angle stay with you ... using Fenner's terms "it perfumes your existence" ... or does it come and go? Is one anchored there and eg never going to be absorbed fully into "personality" or a "film" or what have you ever again? Certainly the rather higher entry-level model in Tibetan circles (even Dzogchen) has a model that over time you might spend more and more time "in this 'place' " ... however the likes of Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche or the Dalai Lama seem to say that they are neither arahants or full-evolved Boddhisattvas yet [and hence arent "there" permanently]...
TIA
Uppekha
Mike
Good answer
Mind you in all this huge proliferation of non-duality books these days one does rather supsect that the barrier to entry is quite low these days ... I strongly suspect that not every popular author will parinirvana when then die ... in say Zen terms many folks are just talking about having had a satori and some stern-faced abbot would perhaps just send them back for another decades meditation
... "seeing through" the "lower self" historically for all esoteric paths has tended to be the starting gate not the finishing gate ... as per Ramana the gooseberry is not that hard to see.On a more practical/pertinent question in terms of your perspective/teaching how are you relating the absolute and the relatiuve (sorry if its in your articles I dont recall seeing precisely this one). So eg one can have a relatively pure experience of presence/rigpa/whatever-you-want-to-call-it and I think we can all agree that in such a state there is no desire arising to go and argue the toss about philosophy or whats right and wrong (my experience).
But what is your view on what happens next? Does that "absolute" kind of angle stay with you ... using Fenner's terms "it perfumes your existence" ... or does it come and go? Is one anchored there and eg never going to be absorbed fully into "personality" or a "film" or what have you ever again? Certainly the rather higher entry-level model in Tibetan circles (even Dzogchen) has a model that over time you might spend more and more time "in this 'place' " ... however the likes of Dilgo Khyentse Rinpoche or the Dalai Lama seem to say that they are neither arahants or full-evolved Boddhisattvas yet [and hence arent "there" permanently]...
TIA
Uppekha
Mike
15 years 11 months ago #54983
by Mike.B
Replied by Mike.B on topic RE: Why do non-dual teachers seem to disagree so much? :-)
Still working on this koan
Anyway some further thoughts ... "logic/philosophy" is relative domain (despite what some folks would have us think) and direct lived experience of the absolute domain doesnt seem to give greater powers/knowledge in the relative than before [the Buddha being a notable counter-example of this]. Allied to Alan Chapman's comment that many folks misunderstand what happened to them.
More interesting is perhaps the Genpo Roshi line ... taking Tozan's five stages (a good ref being slbuddhists.org/2008/06/the-5-ranks-of-tozan/ ) ... he puts the achievment of Big Mind first and only Big Heart at the end [he may have said he was stuck there for well over two decades]. On a great interview on conscious.tv he talks about the reluctance of many folks to go from 3 to 4 (as it seems a step backwards) ... and talks of folks (esp. in the non-dual traditions) having "disowned the self" ... the self which "both exists and doesnt exist" ... and like all disowned/shadow material it seeps out in other ways.
Anyway this made sense to me - might or might not make sense/use to you. So from this perspective all these disagreeing teachers (esp. the more combative/"I am right he is wrong" ones) although they are saying "there is no self" as I rather thought up front the evidence is very much of it leaking out in their behaviour ... there may be "no self" but there is certainly a personality (or the residue of one) running the show and convinced its right.
Well as mostly playing ping-pong with myself here, unless this rings anyones bells thats that!
cheers
Mike
Anyway some further thoughts ... "logic/philosophy" is relative domain (despite what some folks would have us think) and direct lived experience of the absolute domain doesnt seem to give greater powers/knowledge in the relative than before [the Buddha being a notable counter-example of this]. Allied to Alan Chapman's comment that many folks misunderstand what happened to them.
More interesting is perhaps the Genpo Roshi line ... taking Tozan's five stages (a good ref being slbuddhists.org/2008/06/the-5-ranks-of-tozan/ ) ... he puts the achievment of Big Mind first and only Big Heart at the end [he may have said he was stuck there for well over two decades]. On a great interview on conscious.tv he talks about the reluctance of many folks to go from 3 to 4 (as it seems a step backwards) ... and talks of folks (esp. in the non-dual traditions) having "disowned the self" ... the self which "both exists and doesnt exist" ... and like all disowned/shadow material it seeps out in other ways.
Anyway this made sense to me - might or might not make sense/use to you. So from this perspective all these disagreeing teachers (esp. the more combative/"I am right he is wrong" ones) although they are saying "there is no self" as I rather thought up front the evidence is very much of it leaking out in their behaviour ... there may be "no self" but there is certainly a personality (or the residue of one) running the show and convinced its right.
Well as mostly playing ping-pong with myself here, unless this rings anyones bells thats that!
cheers
Mike
15 years 11 months ago #54984
by Mike.B
Replied by Mike.B on topic RE: Why do non-dual teachers seem to disagree so much? :-)
ps isn't synchronicity a wonderful thing ... there is a brilliant interview with well-known author Tim Freke on conscious.tv ... nearing about 40mins in he talks about this combining living as oneness and separation at the same time and I think even says something about advaita big mind (to use the zen phrase) being a bit of a cold trap.
Anyway its interesting on so many more levels ... someone that ran away from home to a fransiscan monastery, professional muisician, took every drug going, stayed in ashrams, wrote best selling books about the gnostics, met ramesh balkesar and much much more. One rarely sees someone who is so *alive* as Tim.
Check it out dudes
Mike
... there is a brilliant interview with well-known author Tim Freke on conscious.tv ... nearing about 40mins in he talks about this combining living as oneness and separation at the same time and I think even says something about advaita big mind (to use the zen phrase) being a bit of a cold trap.Anyway its interesting on so many more levels ... someone that ran away from home to a fransiscan monastery, professional muisician, took every drug going, stayed in ashrams, wrote best selling books about the gnostics, met ramesh balkesar and much much more. One rarely sees someone who is so *alive* as Tim.
Check it out dudes
Mike