Mi'sen

That could be avoided with skilful teaching, but it’s also possible to shift the perspective a bit, so then you end up with yogis singing about stuff like the one ground of samsara and nirvana (mind itself), or the one taste of bliss and suffering, those sort of themes.

This is also probably why you get formulations such as the three kayas - where dharmakaya refers to something like the non-experience of cessation, and nirmanakaya is the full play and sensitivity of awareness during ‘normal’ experience. (One way of thinking about it, at least)

In terms of one’s practice, I think it’s good to reflect on this and try to gain some sort of visual on hidden assumptions with regards to states/stages, terminology we’re using to, desire better experience, desire for peace, revulsion, hopes, fears, etc.

Eg: I noticed that I have a pretty subtle & ingrained preference — and intentional skew — for restful states of mind, so much so that I am deliberately breaking up my meditation when I start to veer towards stillness, so that I can investigate the mind more in full-chaos mode.

Also helpful to look at imaginal elements in our practice, ritual aspects. Eg: I noticed that when I maintain a sense of lineage, the general texture of my retreat feels much more earthy, grounded, stable. I can see how one could make v.strong beliefs out of that sort of symbol.

Feedback Questions: • Does any of that make sense? • Any immediate thoughts/insights in relation to those notes? • Has your relationship to traditional goals/stages/states changed noticably as your practice matured? • Does any of the above invoke an emotional reaction?

Well here's my take. The dharmakaya is paradoxical and includes a negation as well as a clarity of opening. I've written about these two aspects of nothing.

I’m not entirely sure what either of your replies mean, Ed. Sorry freind. Miscomprehension from my side, I’m sure. I’d like to read your thing on the two aspects of nothing, if you’d be willing to share.