On November 5, Jason Miller posted on FB:
“Well That Happened” Part 3 – THE BENEFITS OF SEEING THINGS OUT OF CONTEXT…
A week ago I posted that “Well that happened” and “It is what it is” point to one of the most vital types of Gnosis I know.
Folks responded by instantly engaging good/bad thinking, so I followed up with a post about how its about getting beyond good/bad and actually apprehending reality as is, with no attachment or aversion.
Folks responded to that post with variations of “AH this is Dzogchen/Baghavad Gita/Dialectal Therapy/Zen/Neti Neti/Stoicism/etc etc etc”. Let’s just call it Tradition X.
I responded yes or thumbs up to most of those, but I want to take it all back. The answer is NO. This is not those things and its actually not helpful at all to think of it in those terms.
See what I said in the original post is an articulation of a perception. The most unadulterated perception you can have. All these traditions and texts and philosophies and practices named perhaps arise from the same perception.
The problem with drawing the correlation between all these things is that it takes you FURTHER from the primordial perception rather than closer to it.
Hearing these comparisons some readers will run and think “If this is tradition X I must read all of Tradition X literature to understand this naked awareness.”
Others will say “If all these different traditions arise from this naked truth, I should throw them all in a blender or eclectically switch between them to understand the naked awareness”.
Mostly though people rush to put a name to it so that they can file it away and say “Yes, I know that” when in fact they don’t.
Reading “The Naked Lunch” by William Bourroughs, followed by more of his novels is a worthy pursuit but it will not actually bring you the perception of the Naked Lunch.
So while I think its very good to practice these traditions and know historical context, I think its also important to understand how things can operate OUTSIDE of traditions and historical context.
Now some people, knowing I have a background in Dzogchen training, will say “You are mis-representing Dzogchen! You don’t have the right! This is a Tibetan Practice!”. If I said “Rigpa” and then proceeded to call what I was saying Dzogchen, they might be right. But I didn’t. This is another reason to take things out of context occasionally.
No one can own the nature of mind, or perception. No one can own a specific way to breathe. No one can own the sun or the flowing or water or nature of reflection.
If you ONLY understand these things within a tradition, you do not understand them.
Subscribe to Jason’s newsletter, sign up for his courses: http://www.strategicsorcery.net/.