futerko wrote:As far as I can see, the biggest barrier to communication here is your insistence on remaining on the
side of yung (means, function, 用) despite Wonhyo's teachings to the contrary.
Even then it would be a mistake to believe those terms were equivalent to Dzogchen, however it
would be a step in the direction of understanding.
There is problem on relying on the body rather than the means, below is one example:
The body is of non-doing (無為), the means is of doing (為). If relying on 'non-doing', the form of
both 'doing' and 'non-doing' are missing. Whereas relying on the 'doing', the form of 'non-doing' is
present. Thus, by relying on the 'doing' is the true 'non-doing', but not vice versa.
This is as stated in the sastra:
"As stated in the sutra: Being separated from the 'doing', there is no 'non-doing', because of the 'doing', it is said there is the 'non-doing'."