'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Moderator: Tibetan Buddhism moderators

'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby mindyourmind » Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:45 pm

Would you agree that 'non-duality' is not 'neutrality'?
As bad as bad becomes its not a part of you

Talk Talk
User avatar
mindyourmind
 
Posts: 459
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 11:11 am
Location: South Africa

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby PadmaVonSamba » Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm

mindyourmind wrote:Would you agree that 'non-duality' is not 'neutrality'?


What do you mean by 'neutrality'?
In what context?
Profile Picture: "The Foaming Monk"
The Chinese characters are Fo (buddha) and Ming (bright). The image is of a student of Buddhism, who, imagining himself to be a monk, and not understanding the true meaning of the words takes the sound of the words literally. Likewise, People on web forums sometime seem to be foaming at the mouth.
Original painting by P.Volker /used by permission.
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
 
Posts: 2845
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby username » Tue Aug 02, 2011 10:28 pm

Never mind other words which mislead, what is meant by 'Non-dual' is not ultimately 'non-dual' or definitely not 'union' (implying previous and/or possible separation) or even 'inseparable', it is untranslatable into English or probably any language adequately and is a mere semantic pointer which is all that can be done. Different aspects of the same truth manifesting according to karmic visions, contemplations and stage on the path. We are told this quality or aspect or more accurately form of knowledge about ultimate reality is only understood through direct personal experience.
Dzogchen masters I know say: 1)Buddhist religion essence is Dzogchen 2)Religions are positive by intent/fruit 3)Any method's OK unless: breaking Dzogchen vows, mixed as syncretic (Milanese Soup) 4)Don't join mandalas of opponents of Dalai Lama/Padmasambhava: False Deity inventors by encouraging victims 5)Don't debate Ati with others 6)Don't discuss Ati practices online 7) A master told his old disciple: no one's to discuss his teaching with some others on a former forum nor mention him. Publicity's OK, questions are asked from masters/set teachers in person/email/non-public forums~Best wishes
username
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby mindyourmind » Wed Aug 03, 2011 7:17 am

PadmaVonSamba wrote:
mindyourmind wrote:Would you agree that 'non-duality' is not 'neutrality'?


What do you mean by 'neutrality'?
In what context?


Can non-duality and neutrality ever have a context?

Let me ask my question this way :

As a Dzogchen practitioner, do you accept the following proposition :

" I practice Dzogchen. I try to be in a state of non-duality. As such I try to avoid getting my mind involved in discursive thoughts. I endeavour not to get involved in judgmental decisions of right and wrong. As such, I do not approve or disapprove of the Nazi's killing millions of people during the Second World War. I therefore stand neutral as to the death of those people."
As bad as bad becomes its not a part of you

Talk Talk
User avatar
mindyourmind
 
Posts: 459
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 11:11 am
Location: South Africa

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby mindyourmind » Wed Aug 03, 2011 7:21 am

username wrote:Never mind other words which mislead, what is meant by 'Non-dual' is not ultimately 'non-dual' or definitely not 'union' (implying previous and/or possible separation) or even 'inseparable', it is untranslatable into English or probably any language adequately and is a mere semantic pointer which is all that can be done. Different aspects of the same truth manifesting according to karmic visions, contemplations and stage on the path. We are told this quality or aspect or more accurately form of knowledge about ultimate reality is only understood through direct personal experience.



That is my understanding also, but given that understanding, what relation (if any) is there between non-duality and neutrality?

Is my non-dual understanding / approach also one of neutrality? Can I pick a side so to speak, and still be non-dual?
As bad as bad becomes its not a part of you

Talk Talk
User avatar
mindyourmind
 
Posts: 459
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 11:11 am
Location: South Africa

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby Pema Rigdzin » Wed Aug 03, 2011 7:40 am

mindyourmind wrote:
As a Dzogchen practitioner, do you accept the following proposition :

" I practice Dzogchen. I try to be in a state of non-duality. As such I try to avoid getting my mind involved in discursive thoughts. I endeavour not to get involved in judgmental decisions of right and wrong. As such, I do not approve or disapprove of the Nazi's killing millions of people during the Second World War. I therefore stand neutral as to the death of those people."


First, there is no trying, avoiding, accepting or rejecting in terms of the meditation. In Dzogchen meditation proper, nothing is blocked or manipulated; if thoughts and experiences arise, they are just allowed to arise in their own place and self-liberate; if they don't arise, non-dual knowledge just naturally holds its own as is.

In general, however, when living one's life one definitely understands which actions cause harm to others and which actions bring about benefit to others, and one does one's best not to do harm and one tries to help others out of compassion for them. A Dzogchenpa is not apathetic towards horrible acts against sentient beings or indifferent to beings' plights. The explanation of how this conduct arises differs depending on the level of realization of the practitioner. In the case of most Dzogchen practitioners, we necessarily spend most of our time on the relative level, so we work with circumstances and we do what we recognize to be the right thing to do when we encounter a situation. For fully awakened masters, there is no deliberate activity but spontaneous enlightened responsiveness for others' benefit.
Pema Rigdzin
 
Posts: 1030
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 3:19 am
Location: Southern Oregon

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby mindyourmind » Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:26 am

Pema Rigdzin wrote:
mindyourmind wrote:
As a Dzogchen practitioner, do you accept the following proposition :

" I practice Dzogchen. I try to be in a state of non-duality. As such I try to avoid getting my mind involved in discursive thoughts. I endeavour not to get involved in judgmental decisions of right and wrong. As such, I do not approve or disapprove of the Nazi's killing millions of people during the Second World War. I therefore stand neutral as to the death of those people."


First, there is no trying, avoiding, accepting or rejecting in terms of the meditation. In Dzogchen meditation proper, nothing is blocked or manipulated; if thoughts and experiences arise, they are just allowed to arise in their own place and self-liberate; if they don't arise, non-dual knowledge just naturally holds its own as is.

In general, however, when living one's life one definitely understands which actions cause harm to others and which actions bring about benefit to others, and one does one's best not to do harm and one tries to help others out of compassion for them. A Dzogchenpa is not apathetic towards horrible acts against sentient beings or indifferent to beings' plights. The explanation of how this conduct arises differs depending on the level of realization of the practitioner. In the case of most Dzogchen practitioners, we necessarily spend most of our time on the relative level, so we work with circumstances and we do what we recognize to be the right thing to do when we encounter a situation. For fully awakened masters, there is no deliberate activity but spontaneous enlightened responsiveness for others' benefit.


So far so good.

If we are not apathetic, we make a choice, we pick a side, we prefer the one action to the other, even in a mild, subtle manner. We are not entirely neutral.

Is that a state of non-duality?
As bad as bad becomes its not a part of you

Talk Talk
User avatar
mindyourmind
 
Posts: 459
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 11:11 am
Location: South Africa

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby Sönam » Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:39 am

mindyourmind wrote:
If we are not apathetic, we make a choice, we pick a side, we prefer the one action to the other, even in a mild, subtle manner. We are not entirely neutral.

Is that a state of non-duality?


Is'nt it that neutral is a construction, in between dualities? ...

Sönam
By understanding everything you perceive from the perspective of the view, you are freed from the constraints of philosophical beliefs.
By understanding that any and all mental activity is meditation, you are freed from arbitrary divisions between formal sessions and postmeditation activity.
- Longchen Rabjam -
User avatar
Sönam
 
Posts: 1981
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 2:11 pm
Location: France

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby muni » Wed Aug 03, 2011 11:09 am

Contemplation is like the mountain or the sea:
Neither moving nor changing, it is lucent and unsullied.
All labeling that erupts
through the proliferation of perturbations
thus ceases.

Contemplate things as they really are straight away.

http://www.plotinus.com/longchenpa_copy.htm

Therefore: Pointing out.
muni
 
Posts: 2945
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby PadmaVonSamba » Wed Aug 03, 2011 12:26 pm

mindyourmind wrote:"...I try to avoid getting my mind involved in discursive thoughts. I endeavour not to get involved in judgmental decisions of right and wrong. As such, I do not approve or disapprove of the Nazi's killing millions of people during the Second World War. I therefore stand neutral as to the death of those people."


Well, I asked about the context because I wanted to know if by "neutrality" you meant political neutrality.
So, I am glad that you made that clear.
I think that, strictly speaking, making a distinction between "neutrality" and "non-neutrality" is duality.
Seeing that "neutrality" and "non-neutrality" are both mental fabrications is understanding non-duality.

If you are looking at things from a relative point of view, such as contemporary politics,
you need to relate to the particular context of a situation,
and use a different set of criteria than when you are looking at things from an ultimate point of view.
What happened in Nazi Germany was terrible for a lot of reasons.
At the same time, some day, when the Sun flares up, as all stars do, all life on Earth will perish.

Since you mentioned the Nazis, keep in mind that everybody does what they do,
even committing horrific crimes, thinking that they are doing the right thing.
They thought they would have a thousand years of happiness.
Everybody does what they do, even hurting others, for essentially the same reason.
Understanding this, I think, is non-duality.

This conversation might be better under the category of 'Engaged Buddhism'
but I would like to share the following link, about a Buddhist response to
The 1991 Bombing of Iraq by the United States.
If you take the very concept of "politics" out of the mix, what you have left over is human behavior.
People are so busy running around forming all kinds of opinions about things, they forget to look at the big picture.
The author does not take the position that the military action is either right or wrong,
but asks people on the street to merely pause for 1 minute to consider the value of human life.
The author uses the term, "forced Neutrality"
http://artclix.com/fire/doingnothing.html
.
.
Profile Picture: "The Foaming Monk"
The Chinese characters are Fo (buddha) and Ming (bright). The image is of a student of Buddhism, who, imagining himself to be a monk, and not understanding the true meaning of the words takes the sound of the words literally. Likewise, People on web forums sometime seem to be foaming at the mouth.
Original painting by P.Volker /used by permission.
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
 
Posts: 2845
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby username » Wed Aug 03, 2011 12:45 pm

Doesn't mean justifying Nazis gassing babies or watching a child drown, that is an anti Dzogchen mara state and great downfall into lower states. We are not siddhas, when you can fly, then you can talk however it comes to one to benefit others, but before that dispensing with shila and ethics only leads to painful conditions and then realms. However constant contemplation is necessary but not fantasies or over-complications which is a Western disease as some teachers say in great surprise.

Within Dzogchen cycles alone there are many methods and stages and even various prelim methods for thoughts of varying degrees as needed before that. Generally 4 stages on thought liberation often reduced to 3. Best not to over theorize or reduce to our cultural norms (neutral, talk to the hand, who cares, whatever!) and trust the guru's (and text's) exact teaching simply and no more no less as old Indians and Tibetans did to the letter due to faith after carefully chosing a guru. Often Dzogchen and Mahamudra practitioners over-convolute or make stages seem unattainable, not so.

As people are on different levels we can't generalize too much, but as a general rule watch the thoughts and emotions and 6 senses (includes mind/consciousness) as an observer. If caught up in them, repeat, in all sort of daily routines. If too involved or turbulant, try the various stages and methods of thought control within your Dzogchen lineage system first and adjust as necessary. We are told after observing and following the guru's pithy instructions, teachings slowly clarify with experience and unfold more. So if we can't liberte them by various stages' methods yet, without being carried away by monkey mind thoughts nor clinging nor fears: Let's just watch it first, dispassionately.
Dzogchen masters I know say: 1)Buddhist religion essence is Dzogchen 2)Religions are positive by intent/fruit 3)Any method's OK unless: breaking Dzogchen vows, mixed as syncretic (Milanese Soup) 4)Don't join mandalas of opponents of Dalai Lama/Padmasambhava: False Deity inventors by encouraging victims 5)Don't debate Ati with others 6)Don't discuss Ati practices online 7) A master told his old disciple: no one's to discuss his teaching with some others on a former forum nor mention him. Publicity's OK, questions are asked from masters/set teachers in person/email/non-public forums~Best wishes
username
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby muni » Wed Aug 03, 2011 1:35 pm

A wave in sea uses no algebra to just let its' selfexisting nature be like it is, being sea and so relaxing in unfabrication.
Only an expression based on "Guru Rinpoches' indivisible".
muni
 
Posts: 2945
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby Karma Dondrup Tashi » Wed Aug 03, 2011 3:00 pm

If I meet someone on the road with a broken leg it hardly benefits either of us to start teaching him about Dzogchen. His reality is too intense for him right now for that. Why should I presume that he is a mahasiddha and is OK with his broken leg? I have to take him to a hospital and fix his leg. If I then teach him about Dzogchen it would be inconsistent of me to then break his leg and put him back where I found him.

Until I can be certain that everyone I meet is a mahasiddha the conventional truth can't be abandoned. If my ethics are cr*p my meditation will also be cr*p. If the foundation of my house is sand the house will be a cr*p house. Why shouldn't this also apply to the view of Dzogchen?

Without the bodhicitta of my gracious teachers for example I would never have encountered Dzogchen in this lifetime in the first place.
Karma Dondrup Tashi
 
Posts: 1014
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2009 7:13 pm

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby muni » Wed Aug 03, 2011 3:17 pm

Dear Karma, without bodhichitta there is no Dzogchen at all. The pure love /Mahakaruna, as all appears in vastness of own nature of mind as radiance, how can there not be the care for a broken leg of a beggar, a king, a master, a stranger...? It is spontaneous and pure energy. " From within pure nature emerging the recieved teachings into daily life. That is there told.

There is no dividing practice conventional and absolute. It is inseparable Wisdom-Compassion. Those who understand are having great compassion for all!

Thank you. :anjali:
muni
 
Posts: 2945
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2009 6:59 am

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby Malcolm » Wed Aug 03, 2011 3:35 pm

mindyourmind wrote:
" I practice Dzogchen. I try to be in a state of non-duality. As such I try to avoid getting my mind involved in discursive thoughts. I endeavour not to get involved in judgmental decisions of right and wrong. As such, I do not approve or disapprove of the Nazi's killing millions of people during the Second World War. I therefore stand neutral as to the death of those people."


This is would be nihilism posing as Dzogchen. Incorrect understanding of Dzogchen.

"Non-dual" in Dzogchen in Dzogchen is no different than non-dual in Madhyamaka - it means that the categories of being and non-being are cognitive errors.

Also in Dzogchen practice one does not seek to avoid discursive thoughts. One seeks to recognize their actual state.
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

Though there are infinite liberating gateways of Dharma,
there are none not included in the dimension of the knowledge of the Great Perfection.

-- Buddha Samantabhadri
User avatar
Malcolm
 
Posts: 12145
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby username » Wed Aug 03, 2011 11:59 pm

In translations of texts and by teachers who speak English, non-dual is often used in numerous instances of various methods and view explanations within Dzogchen alone, so it depends on the context and the stage and that particuar teaching. Ultimately view-wise in English texts and teachings it is often used for non-dualness of Kadak-Lhundrob within Dzogchen though each translator or lama has his/her personal choice of words for various occasions.
Dzogchen masters I know say: 1)Buddhist religion essence is Dzogchen 2)Religions are positive by intent/fruit 3)Any method's OK unless: breaking Dzogchen vows, mixed as syncretic (Milanese Soup) 4)Don't join mandalas of opponents of Dalai Lama/Padmasambhava: False Deity inventors by encouraging victims 5)Don't debate Ati with others 6)Don't discuss Ati practices online 7) A master told his old disciple: no one's to discuss his teaching with some others on a former forum nor mention him. Publicity's OK, questions are asked from masters/set teachers in person/email/non-public forums~Best wishes
username
 
Posts: 759
Joined: Tue Mar 08, 2011 8:23 pm

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby Malcolm » Thu Aug 04, 2011 12:52 am

username wrote:In translations of texts and by teachers who speak English, non-dual is often used in numerous instances of various methods and view explanations within Dzogchen alone, so it depends on the context and the stage and that particuar teaching. Ultimately view-wise in English texts and teachings it is often used for non-dualness of Kadak-Lhundrob within Dzogchen though each translator or lama has his/her personal choice of words for various occasions.



"Non-dual" i.e. gnyis med/advaya means the absence of the duality of being and non-being.

In Yogacara, it can mean absence of subject and object, but the reason for this is that ultimately there is an absence of being and non-being.

Even when we talk about the inseparability of original purity and natural formation, kadag and lhundrup, this inseparability is actually predicated on the non-duality that I mentioned above. When we talk about freedom from the four extremes, the eight extremes and so on, it is all, in the end predicated on the absence of being and non-being. That absence of being and non-being is the essence of what the term "non-dual" means in Buddhist texts.

It is not a translation or terminology issue, it is just a basic fact of Buddhist view.

N

N
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

Though there are infinite liberating gateways of Dharma,
there are none not included in the dimension of the knowledge of the Great Perfection.

-- Buddha Samantabhadri
User avatar
Malcolm
 
Posts: 12145
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby adinatha » Thu Aug 04, 2011 1:16 am

it also means not grasping true or false.
CAW!
User avatar
adinatha
 
Posts: 886
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:07 am

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby Malcolm » Thu Aug 04, 2011 1:22 am

adinatha wrote:it also means not grasping true or false.


Whatever is asti is satya (true), whatever is nasti as mithya (false), so at base, it really is about freedom from asti (being) and nasti (non-being).

N
http://www.bhaisajya.net
http://www.bhaisajya.guru
http://atikosha.org
འ༔ ཨ༔ ཧ༔ ཤ༔ ས༔ མ༔

Though there are infinite liberating gateways of Dharma,
there are none not included in the dimension of the knowledge of the Great Perfection.

-- Buddha Samantabhadri
User avatar
Malcolm
 
Posts: 12145
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:19 am

Re: 'Non-duality' and 'neutrality'

Postby adinatha » Thu Aug 04, 2011 1:34 am

It is true that something false can harm me. For example, someone might see me as Osama bin Laden's cousin and shoot me. So a falsity is in the realm of being.
CAW!
User avatar
adinatha
 
Posts: 886
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2011 4:07 am

Next

Return to Dzogchen

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests

>