P a g e

 |  1

Space,  Energy  and  Imagination

James  Low

Eifel,  Germany

12-­‐15  April  2012

Transcribed  by  Anne  Conn

Edited  by  Barbara  Terris

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  2

Excerpts

The   particular   quality   of   dzogchen   practice   is   that   nothing   in   your   life   has   to   change.  
Dzogchen   is   not   saying   that   you   should   change   your   behaviour   or   your   beliefs.   Instead   you  
look   at   your   beliefs   to   see   whether   they   really   are   reliable.   Dzogchen   is   not   about   believing  
more,  or  believing  differently,  but  it  is  about  moving  from  belief  into  direct  experience.  

Helping   other   people   doesn’t   require   a   particular   bridge   between   ourselves   and   the   world  
since   we   are   always   and   already   in   the   same   world.   Our   sense   of  individual   identity   is   an  
energetic   resonance   within   a   Dield   of   energy,   that   is   to   say,   we   are   communication.   We   are  
nothing  but  energy  reacting  to  energy.  

Other   people  are  our  world.  This  is  the  most  fundamental   understanding.  For  as  long  as  we  see  
other   people   as   separate   we   will   be   making   effort   to   join   with   them,   and   that   effort   will  
condemn  us  to  artiDiciality.  As   soon  as  we  see  that   we  are   in  this  together,  then  being  available  
for  others  is  as  normal  as  breathing.

The  biggest   mistake  we  can   make  in   meditation  is  to  confuse  the  content  of   the   mind  with  the  
mind  itself.

We   can  always   cheat   ourselves  by  imagining  we’re  more  sorted  than  we  are,   which  is  why  the  
more  we  practice,  the  more  careful  we  have  to  be.  

When   you   see   images  of  the  buddhas,   their  bodies  are  translucent.   You   can   see   right  through  
them.   That   means   ‘no   secrets’.   They’re   not   hiding   their   mobile   phones   from   their   partners  
because   they  haven’t  got  any  pockets!  To  be   transparent   means  no  hiding   place.  Completely  it  
is   as   it   is.   In   our   lives   we   get   into   trouble   when   we   hide   things,   when   we   don’t   want   other  
people  to  know.  

When   we   see  a   great   teacher,   this  is   a  manifestation   of  the   ground.   When  we  see  ourselves  as  
ordinary   beings,   we   are   also   manifestations   of   the   ground.   On   the   level   of   judgement   and  
evaluation,  we  can  say,  ‘This  person  is   high,  this  person   is  low.’  but   in  terms  of  their  connection  
with  the  ground  nature,  they’re  completely  the  same.  

You   can   integrate   anything   into  the   practice.   Don’t   block  whatever   is   occurring,   don’t   enter  
into   judgement   about   it.   Just   offer   hospitality   to   it.   The   nature   of   the   mind   is   inDinite  
hospitality.  It’s  always  open,  always  welcoming.

Staying  relaxed  and  open   makes   the   world   much  more  workable.  I  think  that’s  at  the   heart   of  
it.  
 P a g e  |  3

Table  of  Contents

Get  back,  get  back  to  where  you  once  belonged  .............................................................................4
Ge:ng  caught  up  in  stories  .............................................................................................................5
Openness,  immediacy  and  parAcularity  ..........................................................................................6
Background  of  dzogchen  ...............................................................................................................11
Thought  as  subject  and  thought  as  object  ....................................................................................16
Consciousness  and  movement  ......................................................................................................19
Refuge  and  bodhiciLa  ...................................................................................................................20
Taking  refuge  in  the  dharma:  stop  cooking  ...........................................................................23
Taking  refuge  in  the  sangha:  We  are  always  and  already  in  it  ..............................................26
Bodhisa>va  vow:  other  people  are  our  world  .......................................................................27
What  dzogchen  means  by  ‘ignorance’  ...........................................................................................30
Co-­‐emergent  ignorance  .........................................................................................................30
The  ignorance  of  defining  everything  ....................................................................................32
The  ignorance  of  the  stupidity  of  not  recognizing  the  nature  of  karma.  ...............................32
Linking  the  three  forms  of  ignorance  ....................................................................................32
Garab  Dorje.  First  point:  direct  introducAon  into  your  own  nature.  .............................................34
The  ego  is  movement  but  the  mind  never  moves  ..................................................................35
Five  quesAons  to  look  at  the  nature  of  our  mind  ..........................................................................39
What  shape  is  the  mind?  .......................................................................................................39
What  colour  is  the  mind?  ......................................................................................................41
Does  the  mind  come  from  anywhere?  ...................................................................................42
Where  does  the  mind  stay?  ...................................................................................................43
Does  the  mind  go  anywhere?  ................................................................................................44
Body,  speech  and  mind  ..................................................................................................................50
Karma  ............................................................................................................................................54
Guru  Yoga:  uniAng  with  our  own  state  ..........................................................................................59
Garab  Dorje’s  second  point:  don’t  remain  in  doubt  ......................................................................60
The  mind  ...............................................................................................................................61
Common  meditaAon  problems  .....................................................................................................68
The  mind  is  always  and  already  here  ....................................................................................68
Garab  Dorje’s  third  point:  conAnue  with  confidence  ....................................................................72
Thoughts  are  the  movement  of  the  mind  ..............................................................................73
QuesAons  ......................................................................................................................................76
What  basic  competencies  are  needed?  .................................................................................76
QuesPon  about  taking  acPon  to  change  things  in  the  world  ................................................77
How  can  we  integrate  everything  into  the  state  of  meditaPon?  ...........................................79
QuesPon  about  feeling  love  ...................................................................................................81
DedicaAon  of  Merit  .......................................................................................................................81
Song  ...............................................................................................................................................81

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  4

So,  here  we   are.   We  have   a  liLle  bit   of   Ame  together   to   do  some  meditaAon   pracAce,  and  to   explore  
some  of  the  dzogchen  teachings  about  the  nature  of  existence.  

Since  the  dzogchen  approach  is  a  non-­‐dual  approach,  we’re  always  looking  at  ourselves  in  relaAon  to  the  
environment  around  us.  The  field  of  experience  is  not  something   which  is  personal  and  inside  us;  it’s  not  
that   we’re   relaAng   to   a   world   outside   ourselves,   but   through   relaxing   and   opening,   we   seek   to  
experience  the  unificaAon,   or   the   non-­‐spli:ng,   the   non-­‐division,   the  non-­‐duality,   of   the   unfolding   of  
experience.

Why   would   we  bother  doing   this?   Well,  it  makes  life   a   liLle   bit   easier.     There  can   be  a  lostness  and  
loneliness  in  living  just  inside  our   own  liLle  skin-­‐bag,  with  a  threshold  or  a  gap  between  ourselves  and  
the  world.   That  gap  fills  itself  with  lots  of  quesAons:  ‘How  will  I  be?  What  do  you  think  of   me?  How  shall  
I  speak  to  you,  or  do  I  need  to  avoid  you?   What  will  I  do   with   my   life?’  Many,  many  quesAons  come   to  
preoccupy  us  because  the  immediacy  of  being  connected  with  what’s  going  on  becomes  lost.  

Get back, get back to where you once belonged

Buddhism   points  out  how   the   root   causes  of   suffering   are   ignorance   and  aLachment,   which  in  more  
modern  language  we  could  call  ‘alienaAon’.  It’s  about  being   displaced  from  where  we   are.  When  we’re  
displaced   from  where  we  are,  it’s  not  that  we  go  somewhere  else,  it’s  just   that  we’re  not   where  we  are.  
We’re  in  a  kind   of   nowhere  place,   which   is  not   somewhere  else,   but   is  not  here.   So,   coming   back   to  
where  we  already  are  is  the  heart  of  the  pracAce.

In  some  ways  that’s  very  easy,  and  in  some  ways  it’s  very  difficult.  It’s  easy   because  it’s  not  very  far  to  go  
to  get  back  to  where  you  are,  on  the  other  hand  it’s  difficult  because  you  can’t  do  it  as  an  act  of   will.  The  
very  act   of  being   the   agent  –  the  one  who  decided,  the  one  who   makes  things  happen,  that  very  sense  
of   being   somebody   who   has   power   and  determinaAon   and   capacity   –   becomes  the  very   movement  
which  estranges   us  from   ourselves.  Paradoxically,  in  the  very   effort  of   trying   to  join  yourself,  you  lose  
yourself.  

So  what  we’ll  be  developing  together  is  a  parAcular  mood  or   way  of  aLending  which  is  both  passive  and  
acAve.  Usually  our  aLenAon  is  quite  acAve  –   we’re  looking   for   something.  We’re   looking   at   how  to  get  
the  things  that  we  want;  we’re  looking  for  ways  to  avoid  things  that  we  don’t  want.   Whereas  the  relaxed  
open   awareness,   which   is   the   central   topic   in   dzogchen   pracAce,   is   effortlessly   acAve   because   it’s  
infinitely   open,  relaxed,  passive.   So  acAve  and   passive  become  united  in  a  basic   non-­‐duality.  That’s  how  
we  find  ourselves  –  it’s  not  something  that  we’re  creaAng  as  an  abstract  construct.

So  the  first  thing   we   might  do  is   just   take  a  liLle  bit   of   Ame  to   arrive  here.   When  we  go   traveling,  of  
course,  we   have  to  aLend  to  many  things.  ParAcularly  for  the  people  who  were  driving   cars,  there’s  an  
aLenAon   which  is  about   ‘where  am  I  in  relaPon  to  that?’  And   there’s  a  kind   of  buzzy-­‐ness,  a  speediness,  
a  kind  of   mentalizaAon  of  our  acAvity  through  that.  So  just   returning   and  calmly  arriving.  A   simple  way  
to  do  that  is  basic  shamata  or  shiné  pracAce.  So  we  could  sit  and  do  that  together  for  a  while.  

Just   sit   in   a  comfortable  way,  with   your  spine  supporAng   your   weight.   The  gaze  is  slightly   down,  the  
tongue  is  on  the  hard  upper  palate,  shoulders  are  open  and  relaxed  and   breathing  is  just  going   in  and  
out  very  naturally.  And  you  can  focus  the  aLenAon  on  the  flow  of  the  breath,  or   decide  on  some  object  
you  see   on  the  ground  in  front  of   you.  You  just  decide  ‘this   is  going  to  be  my  focus’   and   keep  the  mind  
very  gently  on  that.  Whenever  you  wander  off  just  gently  bring  yourself  back  to  that.  

We  sit  in  that  way  for  about  half  an  hour.  It’s  a  way  of  seLling  back  to  where  we  are.
 P a g e  |  5

Getting caught up in stories

When  we  were   very  small,  I   imagine  most  of   us  had   the  experience  of   some  big   person   reading   us  a  
story.  Ojen  it  happens  when  you’re  lying  in  bed,  and  you  sit  and  maybe  your  mother  or  somebody  holds  
the  book  and   you   lie  with  them,   and  you  see   the  pictures  in   the  book,   and  they’re  reading  the  words  
and  telling  you  the  story.  When   you’re  very  small  you  look  at  the  words  but  they  don’t  mean  anything  at  
all  –   they’re  just  marks  on  the  page.  The  eye   of  the   adult  enters   into  the  world  of   the  words,  and  the  
words   catch  them,  and  as  they   read   the  words,   the  words  come  alive  through   them,  and  through  the  
tone  of  their  voice  and  their  gestures  they  tell  the  story  in   a  way  that  captures  the  child.  It’s  so  nice   to  
listen  to  a  story  being  told.  It  takes  you  on  a  liLle  journey  and  you  imagine  lots  of  things.  

Just  as  the  child  is  caught  by  the  story,  the  adult  is  caught  by  the  words.  The  words,  as  we  know  from  the  
history   of  alphabets,  are  something  very   arAficial.  But  once  we  learn  to  read,  these  marks  on  the  page  
are  not  just  something   that   we  read  –  that  we  have  a  kind  of   mastery  over  because  we  know  what  to  do  
with   these  marks  and  how   to  string  them  together   as  we  gradually  learn  grammar,  spelling  and  so  on   –  
but  the  words  also  have  hooks  on  them.  Words  catch  us  and  pull  us  into  their  meaning  so  that  if  you’re  
reading  a  novel,  for  example,  and   it’s  a  sad  story,   you  feel  sad.  Why  do   you  feel  sad?  Because  liLle  black  
marks  on  a  white  sheet  of   paper  have  hooked  you  into  feeling  sad.  People  go  to  the  shop  and  pay  money  
to  get  a  book  in  order  to  become  sad  or  happy  according  to  their  mood.  

That  is  to  say,  our   mind  can  be  sucked  in  to  many,  many   things  in  the  world.  Part  of  the  generosity  of  the  
heart   is   that   it   wants   to   give   itself   to   something,   so   constantly   we’re   flowing   into   situaAons,   into  
connecAons   with   people,  with   projects;   and  through   that  moving   out  into   the   idenAficaAon   with  the  
object,  a  kind  of  meaning  and  value  is  generated.  

We   experience   something  similar   to  this  in   meditaAon   because  when  we  sit,   even  if  we  decide  to  focus  
our   mind   in   a   very   simple   clear   way,   when   a   thought   arises,   somehow   we   find   ourselves   pouring  
ourselves  into  that  thought.  Why  is  this?  On  an  outer  level  we  can  call  this  aLachment,  but  that  doesn’t  
really   explain  very   much.  It’s   more  important  for   us  to   start   to  invesAgate   for  ourselves   what   is  that  
pouring-­‐ness?   What  is  that  giving  of  a  subject  to  an  object?  In  the  unificaAon  of   the  subject  and  object,  
a  parAcular  quality  of   idenAty  and  value  and  meaning  is  generated.  In  fact   it’s  quite  cozy,   because  we  
know  what’s  going   on   when  we  give  ourselves  to  something   that’s  meaningful.  Say,  for   example,   you  
turn  on   the   radio,  and  you   hear  a  song   that  you  like.  If  you  like  it,   it  means   you  already  know   it,   you’ve  
heard  it  before  and  you   go   into  that.  So  you’re  going  into  the  song  in  the  very  moment  that  the  song  is  
coming  into  you.  Subject  and  object  are  flowing  together,  and  we  find  a  happiness  in  this.  

This   basic   principle   is   something   at   the   root   of   a   lot   of   tantric   pracAce,   because   in   tantra   we   get  
concerned   with   the  unificaAon   of   the  dualized   polariAes,   whether  these  are  good   and  bad,   right  and  
wrong,   male   and   female,   wisdom   and   compassion.   Whenever   things   get   separated   off   into   some  
isolated  posiAon,   there  is  a  kind  of  deadening.   That   is  to   say  that  we  need  to  be  touched  and  moved   to  
come  into  life.

You  know,  when  we  walk   out  here   and   we  see  the   flowers   of  spring,  something  beauAful  happens.  We  
see  the   incredible   yellow  of   the   daffodil,  and   ‘Oh!’  We  go   out   to   it,   and  it  comes  into  us   and  our   life  
starts  to  shine  more.  When  we’re  si:ng   inside  the  bubble  of   ourselves,  there  is  a  stasis,  a  flaLening  out  
of  our  feeling-­‐tone.  We  might  become  a  bit  dull,  a  bit  bored,  a  bit  turned  off.  Life’s  just  kind  of   going  on  –  
nothing   much  doing.  And  then  suddenly  you  hear  the  blackbird  singing   again.   ‘Oh!’  You  stop  and  ‘Oh!’  
The  world  is  suddenly  very  big  and  you’re  pulled  into  the  world;   and  the  bigness  of  the  world  becomes  
the  bigness  of  your  heart!  

In  tantra,  through   visualizaAon,  we  seek   to   experience   the   divine   forms  and   merge  into   these   forms.  
Object   goes   into   subject   and   subject   goes   into   object.   Something   very   similar   happens   in   dzogchen  
where,   by  opening  and  relaxing  into   the  basic  spaciousness  which   is  the  mind  itself,  all  that  manifests  is  
immediately   integrated  in  that  spaciousness.  To  put  this  in  other   language,  communicaAon  is   the  basis  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  6

of   the  vitality   of  our  existence:   as   we  manifest  moment  by  moment,  we’re  doing   so  in  relaAon  to  the  
environment  around  us.

Why  is  that?  It’s  because  we  are  recepAve.   If   we  open  to  the  world,  the  world  shows  us  how   to  behave.  
This  is  very,  very   important   because   it  means  you  don’t  need  to  have  so  many  rules  in  your  head.  You  
don’t  have  to  control  yourself  if,  by  opening  to  the  environment  around  you,  you  start  to  experience  the  
co-­‐emergence  of  your  own  existence  –  that  we  are  exisAng  with  the  environment.

The   more   trapped   we   are   in   our   personal   world   –   our   habits,   our   longings,   hopes  and   fears   –   this  
preoccupaAon  can   easily   cut   us  off   from   what  is   going   on   around   us.  When   that  happens,  we’re  not  
available  to  what’s  outside.

Dzogchen  means  the  great  compleAon.   CompleAon,  or   perfecAon   means   there’s  nothing   more   to   be  
done.  What  does   that  mean?   Here  and   now,   at  this  moment,  whatever   is  required   for  this  moment  is  
already  here.  When  we  are  looking  out  into  the  future,  when  we  are  caught  up  in  memories  of  the  past,  
both  of  these  funcAons  cause  a  de-­‐centering,  or  an  off-­‐balancing  whereby  we  lose  our  availability  to  the  
moment.  We’re  not  quite   here.  And   when   we’re  not  quite  here  we  don’t  get  it.  We’re  somewhere  else.  
Where  are  we?

If  you’re  in  the  past,  where  are  you?  If  you  could  write  a  clear  descripAon  of   where  you  are  when  you  go  
into  the  past,  and  of  how  you  got  there  and  then  you  took   it  to  the  Patent  Office,  you  would  become  
very  rich  because  you  will  have  invented  the  Ame  machine.  In  fact  we  can’t  go  into   the  past.  The  past  is  
always  vanishing.  It’s  the  same  with  the  future  –   its  always  vanishing.  When   you  think  you’re  in  the  past  
what  essenAally  is  happening  is  that  you’re  not  here.  You’re  not  anywhere  else,  but  you’re  not  here.  The  
memory  is   here.   The  memory  is  your   experience   of   being   here.   ,  but  it’s  like   me  pu:ng   my  hands  in  
front  of   my   face  and   peeping  through  the  la:ce  to   see  you.  I  see  just  liLle  bits  and  pieces.  You’re   sAll  
here  and  I’m  sAll  here,  but  some  kind  of  obscuraAon  has  arisen.  So  that’s  what  we’re  trying  to  explore  in  
the  meditaAon  –  the  nature  of  obscuraAon.  What  does  it  obscure?  Who  is  the  one  who  is  obscured?  

Openness, immediacy and particularity

From  the  point  of  view  of   dzogchen,  one  way  of  understanding  our  experience  is  to  see  three   different  
aspects:  openness,  immediacy,  and  parAcularity.

Regarding  the  basic  openness,  or  indeterminacy,  we  cannot  define  precisely  who  we  are  –  of  course  we  
can  say  lots  of  things  about   ourselves,  tell  stories  about  our  lives,  things  we’ve  done  or  not   done  and  so  
on  –   yet   none  of   these  quite  catches  us,  because  there’s  always  more.   There’s  always  more  because  we  
keep  manifesAng   in  different  ways.  Now  where   does  this  manifestaAon  come  from?   Since  you  woke  up  
this  morning,  you  have  done  many  thousands  of  things.   All  the  different  percepAons  you’ve  had,  all  the  
different   sounds  you’ve  heard,  the  ways  your   face   has  changed   when  you’re   connecAng  with   different  
people,  whether  you’ve  opened  to  them  or  closed.  So  many  different  things  have  gone  on.  

That  is  possible  because  the  heart  of  our  being  is  spaciousness.  If  we  were  made  up   of   solid  substances,  
then  each  moment  of   experience  would  be  si:ng   on   the  previous   one,  compacAng  it  more  and  more  
and  more,  and  we  would  become  very  dense.  We  may   have  had  that  sort  of   experience  and   said,  ‘Listen.  
I’ve  had  it  up  to  here.  Back  off.  Leave  me   alone.’   We  can  feel  filled  up  with  stuff   –  and  that’s  just  what  it  
feels  like,  stuff.  Bits  of  the  world  that  are  heavy,  that  are  indigesAble,  seem  to  fill  our  being  and  we  get  so  
constrained  that  we   can’t  move,   and  we  just  say,  ‘Give   me   some   space.’   This  is   what  occurs  when  we  
don’t  recognize  the  space  inside  ourselves.  

So   a   basic  principle  of   dzogchen  is  to  aLend   directly   to  the  moment  of   experience  –   we   do   it  in  the  
meditaAon  and  out  of   the  meditaAon.  In  the  moment  of  experience,  where  is  the  experience  occurring?  
By  experience  I  mean  all   that  you  take  to  be   your  body,  your  personal   thoughts,  the  colours  and  shapes  
 P a g e  |  7

around   you,   the   sensaAon   of   the  warmth   of   the  room,   and   so   on.   All,   all,   all   –   everything   that   you  
experience  is  experience.  So  whenever  you’re  in  contact  with  something,  where  is  that  occurring?

For  example,  we  may  say   that  we’re  si:ng  together  in  this  room.  Each  of   us  is  si:ng  in  a  parAcular  place  
so  we  are  closer  to  some  people  than  to  others.  We  see  the  different  shapes  of  different  peoples  bodies,  
so  we  could  provide  a  spaAal  descripAon  about  where  we  are  si:ng  in  this  room.  But  this  room,  itself,  is  
a  space  which   we  are  part  of.   If,  instead   of   conceptualizing  the  various  things  that   we  can   see  we  just  
relax  to  the  presencing  of  whatever  is  here.  It  is  arising,  and  what  is  it?

We  say,  ‘Oh,  this  is  a  painPng.  This  is  a  person.’  We  say  that.  That  is  to  say,  we  go  out  like  a  colonialist,  to  
a  land   where  nobody  is,  and  we  declare,  ‘I  name  this   America.  I  name  this  Africa,’  and  we  put  a  liLle  flag  
on  it  and   say,   ‘This   flag  says   James  on  it,’   and  we  sAck   it  in  here  and   we  say,   ‘This   is   James.  This   is   a  
painPng.  This  is  a  lamp.’  

The  lamp  doesn’t  say  it’s  a  lamp.      The  painAng  doesn’t  say  it’s  a  painAng.  We  tell  the  painAng  what   it  is.  
It’s  a  fundamental  importance   in   dzogchen  to   realize   that   it’s  the  acAvity   of   your   own  mind   which  is  
generaAng   your   experience   of   the  world.   Because   how   we  name  the  world,  not  just  in   terms  of   red,  
blue,  green,  and  so  on,  but  with  the  intensity  with  which  we  name  it  –  ‘This  IS  a  painPng.  This  IS  a  lamp.  
This  person  IS  James.’  –  that  creates  a  way  of   catching   these  objects  as  if  they   are  self   exisAng  and  then  
we  know  what  they  are  and  what  to  do  with  them.  

That  gives  us,  as  a  subject,  a  sense  of  power  and  competence.    which  is  the  normal  operaAon  of  the  ego.  
You   can  get  a  sense   of   mastery   if   you   learn   many   many   words,  many   idenAficaAons.   All  of   these   are  
mental  events  happening   in  Ame,  because  once   you   say,  “This   is   a  lamp,’   once  you’ve  said   it,  do   you  
need  to  say  it  again?  ‘This  is  a   lamp,  This  is  a  lamp.  This  is   a  lamp...‘   It  gets  kind  of   boring.  Some  people  
stand  on  the  street  all  day  long  with  two  wooden  boards,  one  in  front  and  one  behind,  saying,  ‘This   way  
McDonalds.  This  way  McDonalds.   This  way  McDonalds,’.  We  might  think   that’s  a  lousy  job  since  it  would  
drive  you  mad.  In  the  same  way  to   repeat,  ‘This   is  a  lamp,’  ‘I   am  James,’   ‘This  is  a  painPng.’  –  how  come  
we  don’t  get  Ared  of   this?  Well,  of   course  we  do.  It’s  quite  a  burden  being  the  master  of  the  universe,  
endlessly   having   to   tell  the  universe  what   it  is.   It   requires  endless  mental   acAvity.   When   the   mental  
acAvity   stops,   when   we   do   some   basic   meditaAon   suddenly   the   world   is   more   simple.   There’s   just  
something  –  doesn’t  bother  us  very  much,  we  don’t  need  to  know  –  we  just  trust  it’s  okay.

The  deeper  we   can  go  into  meditaAon,  that  is  to   say,  the  more  we  open  ourselves,  the  less  we  need   to  
name  what’s  going   on  around  us,   and  the  more  we  trust  that  it  will  be  okay.   Because  actually,   as  we  
move  towards  engaging  with  the  phenomena  in  the  world   –  with  tables,  chairs,   knives  and  forks  –  there  
is  an  immediacy   of  meeAng  these  objects.  That  is  to  say,  you  pick  up  the  fork,  you  pick  up  the  knife,  and  
your   body  moves  in   the  direcAon  of   cu:ng  the  vegetable.   The  sight  of  the  vegetable  mobilizes  the  body  
in  that  direcAon.   It’s  not  something   you   have  to  think  about  a  great  deal.   There  is  an  immediacy.  This  
immediacy   is  arising  out  of   space,  because  when  we  are   available,  when  we’re  not  in  our  thoughts,  we  
see  the  tomato,  and  the  very  texture  of  the  skin  of  the  tomato  means  you  have  to  angle  the  fork  and  the  
knife  in   a  parAcular  way.  The  skin  of  a  tomato  is  quite  strong  and  if   you  stab   it  the   wrong  way  it’ll  shoot  
off  the  table!  So,  in  that  way,  by  seeing  the  tomato,  the  tomato  will  tell  you  what  to  do.

One  of   the  things  we’ll  be  exploring  together  is  how  to  look.  How  to   look  outside,  but  also  how  to  look  
at   our   mind.  How   to   see   our   mind   in   a  fresh  way   –   not  by   telling   ourselves  what  is  going   on,  but   by  
allowing  the  experience  to  show   itself,   so  that  awareness,  as  something  naked  and  recepAve,   is  able   to  
be  fully  touched  by  the  experience.  You  have  the  opAmal,  the  maximum  registraAon  of  what  is  going  on,  
as  opposed  to  the  selecAve  aLenAon  that  comes  from  having  pre-­‐conceived  ideas.

To   recap,  spaciousness,  openness,   is  the  first  basic  principle  or  aspect  of   experience.  The  mind  itself,   our  
awareness,  is  just  open.  As  we’ll  start  to   explore  together,  it  doesn’t  have  a  shape,  it  doesn’t  have  a  form  
or  a  colour,  it’s  not  located  anywhere,  it  doesn’t  have  a  limited   capacity.  A   glass  like  the  one  in  my  hand  
can  only  hold   so  much  water  because  its  shape  determines  its  capacity.  But  the  mind  itself  doesn’t  have  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  8

a  shape  and  therefore  its  capacity  is  infinite.  In   Buddhist  language  this  is  called  the  dharmadhatu.   Dhatu  
means  domain,   or  space,  or  extent;  and  dharma  means,  in  this  context,  all  phenomena.  So   it   means  the  
space  within  which  phenomena  occur,  within  which  everything  occurs.  This  space  is  your  own  mind.

We  can  say,  ‘my  mind,’  but  its  not  like  how  I  can  say  ‘my  hand’.  ‘My  hand’  refers  to  some  object  which  we  
can   see,   with   a   shape   and   colour   and   funcAon   and   so   on.   We   have   to   be   very   careful   not   to   trick  
ourselves  linguisAcally   and   imagine  that   when   we   say,  ‘my  mind,’   we’re  referring   to   an   object   in  the  
same  way  as  when  we  say,  ‘my  watch’  or  ‘my  shoes.’  

My   mind   is  not  a  thing.  My   memories  –   we  can  get  a  sense  of   the   shape   of  them.  My   mood  –   we  can  
describe   our   current   mood.   My   sensaAon   –   we   can   be   aware   of   sensaAons  in   our   body.   These   are  
parAcular   events   which   can   be   described.   But  the   mind   itself,   awareness  –   which,   as  it   were,   is  the  
medium   through  which   experience  is  occurring  –   what  is  that?  This   is  one   of  the   main   things  we’ll  be  
exploring.

Buddhism   says  everything   is  empty.   Empty   means,   ‘its   not   a  thing;   it’s  not   a  self-­‐exisAng   substance’.  
There   is   no   fixed   defining   internal   essence   to   any   phenomena.   None   the   less,   appearance   occurs.  
Appearance   and   empAness   are   inseparable.   Just   like   a   rainbow   in   the   sky,   or   a   mirage   in   the  
summerAme,  we   see  something   –   that  is  to  say   we  have  an  experience  which  is  undeniable  –  and  yet,  
we   can’t   find   any   essence   behind   it.   There   is   nothing   there,   except   a   parAcular   coming   together   of  
circumstances,  a  paLerning  of  circumstances,  which  creates  that  effect.

In  this   room  where  we   all  are,  there  are   many  things  and  they  have  been  brought  together  by   causes  
and   circumstances,  including   by  the  fact  that   many  Tibetans  lej  Tibet  due  to  the  Chinese  invasion.   It  is  
affected  by  the  various  sponsors  who  have  offered   money  to  buy  books  and  other  things.  It  is  influenced  
by   the   customs   of   the   Kagyupa   order,   the  grouping   whose  monastery   this  is,   with   chairs  at   different  
heights  for  lamas  who  have  different  amounts  of  presAge.

Everything  in   this  room  can  be  read.   It  is  a   liLle  semioAc   feast.  There  are  infinite  signifiers  in  this  room  
and   if   you   know   enough   about   them   you   could   tell   many   stories   about   everything   here.   This  is  the  
acAvity  of  the  mind.  When  we’re  busy  telling  these   stories,  we  don’t  see  the  immediacy   of   what’s  here.  
This  is  here.  In  the  here-­‐ness  of   what  is  here  –   colour,  shape,  instantly   present  –   this  is  the  radiance  of  
empAness.   Once  you  start   telling   stories  about   it,   you   put  the  essence  into   it.   You   say,   ‘Oh,   this   is   a  
statue  of  the  Karmapa,   and  around  him  are  statues   of  all  the  previous   Karmapas.  There  is  the  Buddha.  
There   is   a  bowl   of   flowers.   There   is   this,   there   is   that.’   Once  you  start   naming   and   labeling,  all   these  
phenomena  start  to  become  solid.  You  also  become  solid,  because   you  become  the  one  who  knows  all  
these  things.   The  expert.  How  clever  you  are!   Of   course,  that’s  a  comfortable  prison   because  now  we  
are   locked   up   inside   our   own   thoughts.   Instead   of   our   gaze   and   our   experience   being   fresh,   we’re  
trading  the  brief  seducAve  pleasure  of  knowledge  for  being  immediately  present  with  what’s  there.  

In  dzogchen,   we  try   to   relax   our   reliance  on   knowledge,   which  has   both  this  Aghtening   quality  on  the  
subject,  making   us  the  one  who  knows,  and  also  this  ediAng   quality  of  the  experienAal  field,  as  we  put  
all  our  different  names  and  interpretaAons,  so  that  we  experience  everything  happening  just  at  once.  

However  that  doesn’t  make  it  a  chaoAc  field  where  we  don’t  know  what’s  going   on,   since  awareness  has  
a  clarity  which  is  much  greater  than  that  of   cogniAve  knowledge.  You   don’t  get  confused,  because  there  
is   a   natural   clarity,   or   a   natural   light   that   illuminates   whatever   is   going   on.   Within   this   field   of  
manifestaAon,   moment-­‐by-­‐moment   we’re   moving   this   way   and   that,   we’re   experiencing   our  
embodiment   –  the  sensaAon  we   call  our  body  –  and  we’re  experiencing  what  is  around  us.  For   each  of  
us,   moment-­‐by-­‐moment,   that   is   unique  and   unrepeatable.   Nobody   can   have   your   experience.  That’s  
where   the   parAcular   historical   determinants   of   karma,   of   causes   and   circumstances,   bring   us   into  
parAcular  constellaAons,  because  we  have  bodies  of  parAcular  shapes,  weight  and  so  on,   our  breathing  
is  relaxed   and   open  or   Aght,  our  eyesight  is  twenty-­‐twenty  or   not.   In  that  way,   many,  many   different  
experiences  are  here.
 P a g e  |  9

ParAcularity   is  the  third   level:   so   you   have   the  openness,   the   immediacy,   and   then   the   parAcularity.  
ParAcularity  is   changing   moment  by   moment,  and   yet  remains  part   of   the  field.  That   is  to  say,  I  don’t  
need  to  retreat  into  myself,  to  separate  myself  off,  to  then  see  what  is  going  on  out  there.  But  rather,  my  
experience  of  me  in  the  world,  is  a  field  phenomenon,  is  part  of  the  shared  field  of  experience.

In  Buddhist  language   we  can   say  that  this  is  like  the  experience  of   the  bodhisaLva.   The  bodhisaLva  is  
one  who  turns  the  orientaAon  of  their  existence   towards  the  welfare  of   others:  ‘May  all  senPent  beings  
be   happy.   May   I   work   for   the   benefit   of   others.’   How   will   I   do   that?   ‘I’ll   help   these   people.’   Which  
people?   ‘These   people.’   Yes,   but  which   ones?   ‘The   ones   who   are   not   me!  Everybody   else!   I  will   help  
them.’  So  you  have  a  dualisAc  vision  there  whereas  from  the  point  of   view   of  dzogchen,  self   and  other  
are  always  arising  together.  We  are  already  part  of   the  same  field  of   experience.  Helping  other  people,  
being  connected  with  other  people,  doesn’t  require  a  parAcular  bridge  between  ourselves  and  the  world  
since  we  are  always  and  already  in  the  same  world.  

In  that  way,   our  sense  of  individual  idenAty  is  a  kind  of  energeAc  resonance  within   a  field  of  energy,  and  
these  movements,  ceaselessly,  can  either  move  towards  closure,  condensaAon,   Aghtness  and  density,  or  
relaxaAon   and   communicaAon.   By   experiencing   open   spaciousness   out   of   which   this   unified   field   of  
experience  occurs,  the  funcAon  of   our  pracAce  is  to  ensure  that  all  experience  of  movement  is  seen   to  
be  inseparable  from   the  open  ground.  That  is  to  say,  we  are  communicaAon.  We  are  nothing  but  energy  
reacAng  to  energy.

Being  part  of   the   world  may  sound  terrifying  because   ‘Everyone   can  get   to  me  if  I  open  to  everyone’.   It  
might  feel  quite  enough   just  having  our  family   and  friends  to  sAr  us  up!  The  idea  that  everyone  is  going  
to  touch  us   and  move   us  around,  would  be  too  much.  Again,   it   comes  back  to  this  point:  do   I  have  a  
limited   capacity?  If   I   think  I   am   a  thing,  I’m   going   to  get  overwhelmed.  That   is  to   say,   on   the   level  of  
energy,   parAcular  vibraAons   can  only  do  so   much.  That  doesn’t  mean  that  I  am   a  fixed  enAty   who  can  
only  cope  with  so  much   stuff.  It  simply  means  that  the  parAcular  resonances  of  our  being  can  only   do  
parAcular  things.   When  we  were  five   years   of  age,  we   had  a  lot  of   energy   and   were  fairly  wild.  By  the  
Ame  you   get  to   fijy   you  have  a  lot  less  energy;  you  may  sAll  be   a  bit   crazy,  but  you  usually  have  a  lot  
more   responsibiliAes.   At  each   stage  in   life,   your   resonance,   your   energeAc   capacity,   will  vibrate  with  
different  factors  of  the  field  around  you.  Some  things   will  be   very  real  and  important,  and  other  things  
will  recede  into  the  background.

This  is  not  a  problem  if  you  can  be  connected  with  what’s  going  on.  Of  course,  if  you   have  a  game   plan  
that  says,  ‘I  should  be  able   to   do   that’  and  you’re  always  telling  yourself  who   you  are  and  what  you  have  
to  do,  you  will  be  contorAng  yourself   to   fit  into   a  shape,   and  serve  that  up  in  a  reliable  way   into  the  
world.   And   as   we   know,   mechanized   labour,   whether   it’s   in   a   factory   or   in   an   office   in   front   of   a  
computer  screen,  means  that  people  are   being   trained  into  repeated  acAons   again  and   again.  There’s  
plenty  of   evidence  that  this   is  not  good   for  the  body.   The   body  was  born   to   move   and  in  more   simple  
cultures  people  are  moving  a   great  deal  of  the  Ame.   Our  culture  is  highly  arAficial,  highly  arAficial.  We  
tell   ourselves,  ‘You   have   to  fit  in  with   the   system,’  but  systems  are  just  like  big   machines,  they’re  just  
whacking  through.  

The   more   you   do   that,   the   more   you   start   to   think   of   yourself   as  a   commodity,   because  society   is  
certainly   thinking   of   you   as   a   commodity.   You   are   a   commodity,   everything   you   encounter   is   a  
commodity  –   that   is  to  say,  a  thing   that  can  be  traded.   Some  people  trade   their   brains,  some  people  
trade  their  looks,  some  people  trade  their  voices.  Everybody’s  selling  some  aspect  of  themselves  to   find  
a  way  of  surviving  in  the  world.

So,  one  of  the  things  that  dzogchen  is  inviAng   us  to  do,  is  to   see  how  objecAfied  our  lives  are,  how  easily  
we  objecAfy  ourselves,  and   how  willing   we  are  to  compress  ourselves   in   order   to  survive.   It’s  not  that  
one  shouldn’t  do   that;   it’s  that,  if   you   don’t  recognize  the  contracAon   that’s  required,  maybe   to   keep  
your  job,  you  don’t   know  that   you  have  to  release.  If  it’s  normal  to  be  contracted,  you’re  going  to  start  
buzzing  and  vibraAng,  which  of  course  many   people  do.  So  then  they  use  alcohol  and  drugs  and  so  on  to  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  10

try  release  themselves.  The  more  we  can  observe  this  movement  of   contracAon,  and  bring  the  pulsaAon  
of  release  into  it  in  an  automaAc  integrated  way,  then,  if  you  have  to  work  and  do  something  quite  Aght,  
you  can  do  that,  but  bringing  release  into  that.  

From  the  point  of  view  of  dzogchen  there’s  nothing  which  is  forbidden  to  do  since  in  order  to  survive  we  
need  to  do  all  sorts  of  things.  There’s  nothing  that’s  inherently  wrong   in  an  acAvity  if  you   know  how   to  
come  back  into  spaciousness;  and,  in  parAcular,  to  bring   spaciousness   into  contracAon.  Because  every  
form   your  body  takes,  whether  you’re  asleep,   or   you’re  awake,  is  a  movement  of   energy  within  space.  
When  we  get  very  buzzy  and  busy,  we  forget  spaciousness,  and  then  it’s  all  just  a  lot   of  stuff.  There’s  so  
much  to  be  done.  Most  people  have  very  busy  diaries,  and  of  course  the  plans  that  we  make  never  quite  
land  in  the  way  we  had  expected.  So  there’s  extra  to  be  done,  and  extra  to   be  done,  and  we  run  around  
catching   up  with  ourselves.  Very,  very  busy.  All  of  this  is  movement  in  space,  because  without  space  you  
couldn’t  have  the  movement.  

When  you  forget  the  space,   the  gentle  massage  that  space  can  give  to   movement  is  then  missing.  Space  
is  always  whispering   in  the  ear   of   movement:   ‘It’s   okay,   sweePe.  Not   so  important.   Don’t  worry.  This  
moment  will  pass.’  [in   a  gentle  voice].  ‘No,  no,  I  must  get  it  done!’  [In  a  hurried  voice]   ‘Well,  what  is  so  
important?’  [in  a  gentle  voice]  There  are  adverts  all  over   London  just  now  showing  a  young  person  lying  
dead  in  the  middle  of  the  road.   The  message  says,  ‘They  thought  that  talking  on  their   mobile   phone  was  
so  important.’  There  are  a  lot  of   accidents  now  with  people  so  caught  up  on  their  phones  that  they  don’t  
look  at  the  cars.  ‘But  it’s  so  important.’  But  it’s  not.  

This  retreat  is  a  chance  for  us  to  observe  how  we  contract  into  something.  How  we  throw   ourselves  into  
moments  in  the  world,   like  a  child  falling   into   a  story,   and  how  in  that   moment   there’s  a  kind  of   lost-­‐
ness.       Where  has  my  life  gone?’  ‘Oh,  I   spent  it  listening  to  stories  –   so  many   stories.’  That’s  what  it’s  like.  
There’s  always  something  going  on,  always  something  to  be  involved  in.

It’s  not   that   we   acAvity.   You  don’t  have   to  go   and   live  in   an   ashram   or   go   and   live   in   a   cave   in   the  
mountains.   It   is   about   the   integraAon   between   movement   and   sAllness,   between   spaciousness  and  
manifestaAon.  When   these  two  are   united,  relaxed  spaciousness  is  there  with   all   the   movement   that  
occurs.   This   means   you   can   be   present   in   the   movement   without   being   lost   in   it;   you   won’t   have  
collapsed  into  it.

The  key   thing  is   for  you  to  observe  how   you   are.       It’s   not   about   forcing   yourself   into   any   shape,  but  
rather  observing  –  what  is  my  situaAon?  If  you’re  Ared,  what  is  the  nature  of  that  Aredness?

Buddhism   includes  methods   which  are   about   alignment,   which   propose   a   parAcular   way   of   acAng   or  
behaving.  They   come  with  the  suggesAon  ‘If  you  do  this,  then  something  good  will  happen.’  For   example,  
‘If   you  become  a  monk  or  a  nun,  life   will  get  easier.’  Or,  ‘If   you  do  your  meditaPon  pracPce   every  day   at  
the   same  Pme,  then   that   regular  discipline   will  make  it   easier.’  Or,  ‘If   you  do  a  three   year  retreat,  then  
this  will   give  you   such-­‐and-­‐such  qualiPes.’  Or,  ‘If   you  do  ngondro  pracPce,   doing  one   hundred  thousand  
of   many  different  acPviPes,  then  you  will  be   ready  to  do  tantra.’   Who  knows  what  the  outcome  will  be?  
However   one   thing   we  can   be   sure   of   is   that   human   beings   are   not   standard   issue.   OrganizaAonal  
structures  come  up  against  the  chaoAc  factor  of  karma.  

We  each  have  our  own  karmic  history,  and  the  problem  is  we  don’t  quite  know  what  bit  of   our  history  is  
going   to  pop  up  all  of  a  sudden.  For  example,  you  can  have  a  lot  of  enthusiasm  –  and  then  lose  it!  People  
can  have  faith  full  on  for  five  years  –  Bam!  Bam!,  doing,  doing,  doing  –   and  then  suddenly  they  vanish.  
They  never  go  back  to  their  buddhist  group  again;  that  was  just  a  liLle  chapter  in  their  life.

So  karma  means  that  who  I  am  is  something  which  will   be  revealed  to  me  in  the   moment  of   my  being  
with   you.   But   if   I   keep   imposing   discipline   on   myself   then   I   do   not   have   the   chance   to   experience  
whatever  spontaneous  feelings  might  arise.  There  are  many  arAficial  techniques  and  disciplines  that  you  
can  use  whereby  you   learn  to   control  and  direct  your  mind  but  in  dzogchen  these  are  considered   not   to  
 P a g e  |  11

be  so  important.  Rather,  we  want  to   allow  the  experience  of  our  lives  to  unfold  itself,  so  that  we  observe  
the  many  different  possibiliAes  of  our  being,  and  keep  integraAng  them  in  open  awareness.  There   is  no  
form  which  is  inherently  beLer  than  any   other  because  all  forms  are  empty.  There  is  no  intrinsic  value  in  
any  parAcular  structuring  of  the  world.  

However,   if   you   can’t   integrate   with  empAness,  or   openness,   you  are   in   the   realm  of   being   a  limited  
subject  in  a  world  of   objects.  InteracAons   will  generate  consequences,  or  karma,  and  then   we  have   to  
live  with  the  consequences.  Hopefully  this  will  get  clearer  as  we  do  more  pracAce  together.  

The   key  thing   is  observing,  again   and  again,   how   you  are  in   situaAons   and  to  get  the  immediate  sense  
that  ‘I  am  a  dynamic  unfolding.  I’m  not  a  thing.’  

[Break]

Background of dzogchen
I’ll  now  say  a  liLle  bit  about  the  background  of  dzogchen.

Indian   cosmological   theory   is   very   interesAng,   presenAng   as   it   does,   a   completely   different   vision   of  
existence  from   the   modernist  European,   post-­‐European   enlightenment  raAonalist   view.  In   Europe,  it’s  
completely   normal   now   to   think   that   we   have   only   one   life,   that   we   are   basically   material   in   our  
structure,  that  the  mind   is   a  phenomena  generated   by   electrochemical   acAvity   in   the   brain,  and   that  
there  is  no   parAcular   purpose  to   life.   That  is  to   say,  when  you   die,   you’re   dead,   so  there   is   nothing  
beyond  life  that  you   can  aim  for,  and  in  this  life,  things  are  up  for   grabs.  You   can  live  whatever  way   you  
like  –  you  can  be  hardworking  or  lazy,  you  can  drink  all  the  Ame,  do  what  you  want  within  or  without  the  
law.  There’s  a  lot  of  freedom  around.  

In  that  sense,  modern  Europe  and   large  parts  of  America  are  completely  commiLed   to  meaninglessness  
as   the  meaning  of   life.  In  some  ways  of  course,  that’s  very   nice  because  meaning   always  comes   with  a  
price.  If  you  go  to  chrisAans  for  meaning,  they  say,  ‘Oh,  yes,  when  you  die  you  can  go  to  heaven.’  But  you  
can  also  go  to  hell.  ‘Well,  I  don’t  want  to  go  to   hell.’  Well  then,  you  can’t   go  to  heaven,  because   heaven  
and  hell  go  together.  

Buddhists  and  hindus  have  a  similar  idea,  which  is  that  samsara  is  a  state  of  endless  movement.  Samsara  
basically  means  turning,   revolving.   What   is  moving?   The  mind   is  moving.   Hinduism   says   that   at  death  
the  soul  changes  its  body   the  way   a  Brahmin   changes  his  shirt.   A   Brahmin  should  put  on  a  clean  shirt  
every  day,   ajer  having   had   a   bath  and   before  doing   his  puja.   It’s  as  simple   as  that.   The  soul,  atman,  
moves  out   of   the   body,   has  a   brief   interacAon   with   the   Brahman,   and   then   comes   back   in   another  
embodied  form.  The  buddhist  idea  is  that   we  exist,  not  as  a  thing,  but  as  a  kind  of  paLerning  of   energy.  
In  Sanskrit  it’s  called  santana,  or  Tibetan  rang-­‐rgyud.  It  means  your  own  linking  or  your  own  conAnuity.  

So,  for  example,  if  we  look  back   and   think   of  our  childhood,  clearly  our  bodies  were  very  different,  the  
kind   of   things  we   were  caught   up  in,   the   kind   of   foods   we  liked,   the  games  we   wanted   to   play   are  
probably  very  different   from  what  we   do  now.  And  yet,  there  is  a  conAnuity.  People  who  knew  us  when  
we  were  children  will  sAll   recognize  us  ‘Ah,  haven’t   seen  you  for  a  long  Pme,  but  I  remember  when  you  
did  that...’  And  immediately  you  can  see  that  there  is  a  link  across  all  these  stages.

So,   although   the   past   has   gone,   somehow   paLernings   of   ways   of   behaving,   ways   of   running   and  
jumping,  and  so  on,  even  though  the  body  is  no  longer  wanAng  parAcularly  to  run  and  jump,  come  out  
through  the  way   the  person  walks  and  moves.  When  you  die  this  kind  of  vibratory   form  takes  on  another  
body.

In  the  Tibetan  teachings  on   the  bardo,  as  the  body  is  moving  towards  death,  then  the  body’s  outer  form  
starts  to  collapse.   The  earth   element  goes  into  the  water  element,  the  water  into  the  fire,  the  fire  into  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  12

the   wind,   and   the   wind   is   the   subtle   movement   that   is   the   holder,   or   the   vehicle,   of   consciousness.  
When  consciousness  merges  into  space,  we  then  say  that  the  person  has  died.

So  in  the  yoga   system,  by  controlling  the   breath  and  taking   it  from   the  minor  channels  into  the  major  
side  channels   and  then   into   the   central   pathway,   the   avadhuP,   you   integrate  energy,   movement  and  
spaciousness.   If   you   can   learn   to   also  do   that   while   you’re  alive,   then   the   process   of   death   is  much  
easier.

When   the  mind  goes  into  space,  there’s  a  great   openness,   then   nothing   at   all,   then  some  light,  then  
various  forms  arise,  first  some  peaceful  forms,   then  some  wrathful  forms,  and  then   the   winds  of  karma  
blow  you  and  you  find  yourself  tumbling  into  a  new  life.  This  goes  round  and  round  and  round  –  if   you’ve  
done   very   good   things   you  can  go  up  into   the  heaven   realms,  and   if   you   do  many  bad  things  you  go  
down   into   the  hell  realms,  but  not   forever.  These  are  just  illusory   manifestaAons,  just   as   this  life   is  an  
illusory  manifestaAon.  (Illusion   here  means  without  inherent  self-­‐nature.  It  doesn’t   mean  it’s  not  there  
at  all,  because  clearly  we  are  constrained  by  these  parAcular  paLerns.)

The   important   thing   about   this  vision   of   the  world   is  that   it’s  grounded   in   ethics.   The   form   of   your  
existence   is   determined  by   the  ethical  nature   of   your   acAvity.   That’s  very,  very   profound,   because   it  
means  that  you  may  be  able  to  cheat  the  Inland  Revenue,  you  may   be  able  to   cheat  the  police,  you  may  
be  able  to  cheat  your  partner,  but  you  can’t  cheat  karma,  because  karma’s  not  something  outside  that’s  
coming  to  get  you;  karma  is  the  paLerning  of  your  own  existence.  If  you  behave  in  a  convoluted,twisted,  
not  straighvorward  way,   that   turning,   which   comes  with   lying   and  cheaAng  and   so  on,  brings  about  a  
parAcular  spin  which  then  manifests  in  restricted  forms.

Now,  that’s   quite  a  challenging   idea.  EssenAally   what  it’s  saying   is  that   life  doesn’t  stop  at   death.  You  
could  have  hope  or  fear  at  that  proposiAon.        ‘Where  will  I  go  when  I  die?’  Up.  Down.  Nice  to  go  up,  but  
you’re  only  up  for  a  while;  sad  to  go  down,  but  you’re  only  down  for  a  while.

Who  is  it  that’s  moving?

This  is  where  there  are  many  different  explanaAons,  and  now  I  am  speaking  only  from  the  point  of  view  
of   dzogchen.   The   one   who   is   moving   is   movement.   That’s   all.   Movement   is   moving.   Some   of   the  
movement   we  call  ‘me,’   some  of   the  movement  we  call  ‘you.’         You  are  moving,  I   am  moving.      This  
movement  is   moving.   Well,  that’s  not  very  surprising  but  when   we  think  ‘Me,  I  am  moving  –  why   am  I  
having   to   move  where  I  don’t  want  to  go?’  ‘This  ro>en  karma,  pushing  me,   pulling   me.  I  don’t  like  it.  Let  
me  pray  to  the  Buddha  –  Please  intervene  between  me  and  my  karma.’  

Buddha  says,  ‘Ah,  possible...  but  I  can  only  come  in  between  the  two  if  you  stop  sPcking  them  together.’  
Which,  most  of   the  Ame,  is  what  we  do.  We  are  so  idenAfied  with  our  movement,  that  the  movement  is  
us,   and  is   the   basis  for  what  we  call  rebirth,  reincarnaAon.   That   is  to   say,   we  take  this  form,   and  the  
forms  of   our  memories  and   thoughts,   as  being  our   abode.  This   is  our  house.  This  is  what  we  idenAfy  
with.  We  say,  
—This   is  me.  This   is   me  and  this  is  going  to  die.  I  am  going  to  die.   This   is  terrible.  What  will  
become  of  me?’  
—Well,  you  won’t  be  there  any  more.  
—  ‘Wh  …  where  will  I  be?’  
—You’ll  be  somebody  else.  
—‘What  will  I  be?’  
—‘You  could  be  a  crow,  or  a  pig,  or  a  dog.’  
—‘Oh,  but  why  would  I  want  to  be  that?’  
It  doesn’t   depend   on  what   you  want.  Samsara’s  not  a  restaurant.  You  know,   you  don’t  select  something  
off  the  menu  –  it’s  not  like  that.
 P a g e  |  13

The   importance  of   this  kind   of  reflecAon  is  to   show   that  the  ego  is  not   omnipotent.  This   is  the  big   ego  
fantasy  of   our  Ame   –   that   we  can  sort  things  out.  Of   course,   when  we  see  what’s  happening   with  the  
poor   people   of   the  Middle   East   and   Syria  we  can  see   that   this   is  nonsense.   Human  beings  have  very  
limited   power.   PoliAcians   are   cowardly,   lying   and   cheaAng   and   thinking   about   their   own   long   term  
interests.  A  lot  of  dishonest  behaviour  goes  on  where  people  could  be  rescued  but  are  not  rescued.

We’re  not  very   strong  and  brave  and  powerful.  Nor  can  we  be,  because  we  are  movement.  Movement  is  
not  strong.  Movement  is  linked  to  the   wind  element.  Since  you  were  born,  you  have  been  nothing  but  
change.  Of  course,  one  of  the  first  things  you  get  to  say  when  you  are  small  is  ‘my’.
 —‘My  teddy.  My  bedroom.  My  mummy.’  
—‘Leave  it!’
—‘Mine!’
That  becomes  our  definiAon,  doesn’t  it?  ‘My  body.’

All  will  vanish.  This  is  alarming.  It’s  like  what  I  was  suggesAng  earlier   –  when  we  read  a  novel  or  we  see  a  
movie,  we  pour  ourselves  into   it   and  we’re  caught  up  in  it.  Likewise  we  pour  ourselves,  that  is  to   say   our  
capacity  for   idenAficaAon,  we   pour   that   into   our   body,   our   acAvity,   our   jobs,  our  family,  relaAonships,  
and  we  say,  ‘This  is  me.  This  is  my  world.’

But   we   don’t   own   our   world.   Our   world   is   held   in   place   by   all   kinds   of   extraneous   factors.   As   the  
European  economic  situaAon  manifests  more  and  more  instability,  it’s   very   difficult  to  know  what  the  
long-­‐term  future  will  be.  Unemployment   rates  in  Spain   are  going   up   and   up  and   up,  and   this  is  very  
frightening.  People  start  out  with  the  idea  ‘I’ll  study  hard,  then  I’ll  go  to  university,  then  I’ll  get  a  job,’  and  
now  ‘I  got  my  diploma,  I  got  my  degree  and  I  can’t  get  a  job.’  So  degree  equals  job.  No.  Degree  has  been  
devalued  just  in   the  way  the  Euro  is  being  devalued.      ‘How  could  this  be?‘  ‘Everybody  knows  it’s  a  good  
idea   to   study   hard  and   then   you   help   your  life.’  Not   necessarily.   Due  to   causes  and   condiAons,   under  
certain  circumstances  it  may  be  a  good  thing,  and  under  other  circumstances  it  may  not  be  good.
—‘What  can   I  rely  on?’  Well,   probably   not   what  poliAcians  tell   you.        Perhaps  not  even    
what  school  teachers  tell  you.
—‘Who  can  I  trust?’  Well,  you  have  to  look  around.  What  is  trustworthy?
—‘How  would  I  know?’  You  have  to  trust  yourself.  ‘But  I  can’t  trust  myself.’
This  is   our   exact  existenAal  dilemma.   Other  people  cheat  us,  we  cheat  ourselves.  And  we  cheat   other  
people.  Why  do  we  do  this?  Not  necessarily  because  we’re  bad,   but   because  we  always  have  to   pretend  
that  we  know  more  than  we  know.  

Nobody  can  read  the  future.  The  French  presidenAal  elecAon  is  coming  soon.   The  candidates  are  making  
their   speeches;   I   was   reading   some   them   on   the   airplane   coming   over.   Very   impressive.   When   Mr  
Obama  became  President  Obama  and   everybody’s  hope   and  dream,   people  were   crying  in  the  street  
and  saying   ‘At  last,  dear  God,  at  last.’   At  last  what?  At  last  another  guy  who’s  compromised  and  cannot  
or  will  not  fulfill  his  promises  for  health  care,  or  pensions,  or  Guantanamo,  or  world  peace.

This  is  the   heart  of   the  Buddha’s  teaching  and  is  why  our  pracAce  generally  begins  with  taking   refuge.  
When   you  look  around   in  samsara,   you  don’t  really   find  anything  which   is   reliable.  We   put  an  awful  lot  
of  our  energy  into  building  up   castles  in  the  sand.  Building   them  on  the  edge  of  the  sea,  and  when  the  
Ade  shijs,  our   liLle  construcAons  are  just  washed  away.  This  is  terrible.  Why  don’t  we  build  it  away  from  
the  sea?   Because   we  can’t.  We   live  on  the  edge   of  the  sea.   That’s  what   impermanence  is.  That’s  what  
samsara  is.  It’s  just  a  beach  with  big  waves,  and  we  never  know  when  a  big  wave’s  gonna  come.  

So  people  work  very  hard  and   they  get  their  job,  and  their  success,  and  then  aged   twenty-­‐eight  they  get  
cancer  and  they   die.   And  this   happens  –   we  go  into   any   hospital   and  we   can  see  that  this  happens   to  
people.

What  are  we  going  to  rely  on?

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  14

We   live  in  a  world,  where  in  a  simple  way,   we  could  say   there   are  two  aspects.  There  is  the  subject  and  
the   object.  The  objects  are  the  things  out  there,   but  the  object   can  also   be  our   own   body.  You   could  
start   with  your   body;  you  could  have   a  good  diet,  you   could  do   yoga  and  so  on,  and  you  could  have  a  
very  healthy  body.  But  that  body  can  also  get  sick  and  ill.  The  fact   that  you  do  yoga  doesn’t  protect   you  
from  arthriAs  and  accidents,  and  so  on.  Injuries  occur  whatever  you’re  trying  to  do.  

You   can  put  your  energy  into  building  up  relaAonships,  having  children,  and  so  on.  Children   can  turn  out  
well,  or  badly.  They  can   take  care  of  you,  or  they  can  go  off   and  travel  around  the  world  and  not  come  
back.  

What   will  you  invest  yourself  in?  Think  how   much  of   your   life  has  been  spent  on   object  manipulaAon.  
For   some  people  that’s   their  wardrobe,  and   they   open  it,  and  they  look,  ‘Oh,  there’s   the  red  ones,  and  
the   blue   ones,  and  these   shoes  are   so  pre>y!’      ‘Now,  if  I   have  the  grey  dress  with  the   pink  top  and  the  
pink  shoes!   But  I  just  had  my  hair  done  and  the  colour’s  not  …‘      I  know  people  who  live   their  lives  like  
that.  It’s  also  quite  nice,   because  you  can   spend  hours  just   cha:ng  and   looking   and...   ‘the  cloth  –   Ohh,  
that’s   gorgeous.’       It’s  fascinaAng,  but  then  two  hours  have  gone,   by   and  what?   Well,  you  look   really  
good.   And   you   wear   it  for  two  hours  and  then   you   have   to   take   off   all   this   makeup,  and   take  off   the  
lipsAck  and  clean  the  eyes.  Then  you  have  to  put  on  the  night   cream,  put  the  hair  up.  Full  Ame  business,  
eh?      A  whole  life  can  be  poured  into  that,  and  then  ajer  a  while  you  look,  ‘I  don’t  like  this  mirror  very  
much  because  it’s  got  lines  on  it‘  !  

So  the  body  is  not  reliable,  and  our  acAvity  is  not  reliable,  but  we  have  spent  our  lives  doing  these  things  
as   if   life   was  a  big   game  of   chess  and  we  could  somehow  work   out  the  right  moves  to  make  to  ensure  
that  we’ll  have  happiness  and  health  and  so  on.  

Instead  of   pu:ng   the  energy  into  manipulaAng   the  paLerns  of   the  world,  from   the  buddhist  point  of  
view  we  have  to   start  looking   at   the  subject  rather   than  the  object.   Who  is  the   one  who  performs  the  
acAvity?   What  is  the  basis,  or  the  matrix,  out  of  which  our  acAvity  arises?  Is  there  anything  we  can  do   to  
stop  our  acAvity   creaAng  these   energeAc   charges,  these  contracAons  and  turns  that  bring   about  a   spin  
that  causes  further  shaking  and  movement  into  the  future?

This  is  a  central  funcAon  of   meditaAon.   MeditaAon  is  designed   to   help   us  recognize  where  we  already  
are,   in   the   unborn   sAllness   which   never   moves   and   never   changes.   So   that   the   movement   of  
manifestaAon  –  which  simply  means  our   being  in  the  world  with  other  people,  looking  through  our  eyes,  
listening   with   our   ears,   walking,   talking   lijing,   bending,   and   so   on   –   all   of   this  movement   which   is  
occurring  in  space,  is  the  movement  of  space.  

So   we  don’t  have  two  categories  back  to  back  –   there   is  space  on   the   one   hand,  and  movement  on  the  
other,  but  movement  is  the  expression  of  space  itself.

When  we  relax   and  open   into   this   spacious   awareness,  we  are  the  ground   of  being;   we  are   the  open  
nature  of   the  universe  itself.   Out   of   that,   arise  all  of   the  phenomena  of   the  world,  within  which   this  
parAcular  form  is  moving  at  this  Ame.  This  may  seem  a  mad  thing  to  say.  It  sounds  incredibly  grandiose  
to  say   that  each   of   us  is  the  ground  of   the  universe.   How   could   that   be?   Well,  it’s  because,   from  this  
dharma  point  of   view,  the  world  is   constructed   by   thoughts:  this  is   a  building,  in  a  piece  of   land,  in  a  
village,  in  Germany,  and  all  around  there  are  people  who  are  not  buddhist,  living  in  their  nice  bungalows  
having   their  own  parAcular  kinds  of  lives.  This  is  the  social  structure  of  this  environment  here.  We  can  go  
to  the  local  council  and  get  informaAon  about  the  lifestyles,  and  so  on,  of  the  different  people.  That  is  to  
say,  if  we  want  to  know  about  this  place,  that’s  what  we  do  –  we  find  out  about  it.  

Knowing  about  something   and  knowing   it  are  not  the  same.  To  know  about  something  is  to  have  a  lot  of  
informaAon  about  it.   To  know  something,  that  is  to  say,  to  be  directly   present  with  someone,   doesn’t  
require  knowledge  which  is  added  on,  but  requires  an  opening  to  the  immediacy  of  the  presentaAon  of  
the  situaAon.
 P a g e  |  15

So  the  funcAon  of   meditaAon  is  to  observe  how  our  addicAon  to  thought,  and  with  that,  our  addicAon  
to  feeling   and  sensaAon,   merge  together  into   a  construct  which  gives  us  a  sense  of  ‘This  is  happening  to  
me.  This  is  who  I  am,’  in  a  very  concrete,  seemingly  reliable  way.  ...and  then  it’s  gone!

When  you   sit   in   the  thought   it  seems  to  be  showing   you  something  definite,  and  then  that   thought’s  
gone.  Each  thought  is  going  and  going   and  going,  and  each  one  is,  ‘I’m  the   truth,  I’m  the  truth,  I’m  the  
truth!‘        Then,  Going,  going,  going,  going.

Would   you  really  want  to  believe  something  that   unstable?   But  we  do!   We  believe  what  our  thoughts  
tell  us,  because  we  merge  into  the  thought.  So  the  funcAon  of  meditaAon  is  to  provide  space  in  which  to  
see  the  procession  of  the  thoughts  –  not  blocking  them,  not   interfering  with  them,   because,  in  order   to  
be  in   the   world   with   others,  we   need   to   use   thought   because  this   parAcular   dimension,   the   human  
dimension,  is  mediated  through  thought.  If   you  can’t  think,  you  can’t  speak.   You  can’t  make  sense  of  
what  someone  else  is  saying.

It’s  not   that  thought   is  wrong,   it’s   just  that   you   can  use  it   for   the   wrong   purpose.   Just   as  you   have  
different   kinds  of   screwdrivers,   and   different  kinds  of   spanners,   and   different   kinds   of   saws,   each   of  
which   has  a  parAcular  funcAon.  ParAcular  tasks  require  this  kind  of   screwdriver  –   if  you  use   the  wrong  
kind,  the  screw   will  just  bend  the  edge  off   the  screwdriver.  We  know  that  from   pracAcal  experience.  If  
you  use  your   thoughts  to  give   you   a  true   sense   of  who  you  are,  you  will  cheat  yourself,   because  your  
thoughts  tell  you  about  yourself  as  if  you  were  an  object.  

Does   that   make   sense?   So,   we   may   think   ‘I’m   not   very   good   at   learning   languages.’   So   you   know  
something  about  yourself,  you’re  defining   yourself   to  yourself.   Implicit  in  that,  embedded  in  that,  is  the  
idea,  ‘I  can  be  defined.  I  have  a  fixed  permanent  shape,  about  which  definite  statements  can  be  made.’

From  the  buddhist  point  of   view,  and  this  includes  dzogchen,  this  is  the  key  point  where  you  can   really  
taste  ignorance  –  because  we  are  this  ceaselessly  changing  flow  of  manifestaAon.  

Think  about  how  many   things  have  happened  today.   All  that  we  did  is  gone.  Gone  forever.  Will  never  be  
revisited.   If   you  go  back  into   the  kitchen   or  into  the   office,  you’re   not   going   into  the  same  kitchen   or  
office,  because  the  actual  room  you  enter   will  have  different  people  in   different  paLerns.   That  is  what  is  
there.  That  is  experience,  and  it   is  unpredictable.  The   ideas  we   have  about   it  we   can  string  together  in  
nice  liLle  paLerns  to  give  us  the  sense  that  we  know  something  definite.  

Here  is  the  main   shij  that  meditaAon  can  make,  and  it’s  a  very   big  shij   to  experience  that  if   I  let  go  of  
these  controlling  structures,  which  help  to   seLle  some  of  my  anxiety   about  what’s  going   to  happen   to  
me,  I  won’t   fall  apart,  I  won’t   go   mad.  Because  there  is  a  different  kind  of  clarity.  There  is  the  clarity  of  
presence  which  is  different  from  the  clarity  of  cogniAon.

Samsara  operates  on  the   aLempt  to  generate  the  clarity  of   cogniAon,  wherein  we  think   we  get  more  
understanding   of   what’s  going   on.   But   the   meditaAve   tradiAons   such  as  hinduism   and   buddhism,   all  
speak   of  an  inner  light,  the  light  of   the  mind,  the  natural  clarity  of  awareness  which   illuminates  what  is  
going  on  without  having   to  work  it   out  through   linking  together  parAcular  concepts.  This  is  the   basis  of  
meditaAon,  and  if  we  see  this  clearly  it’s  very  helpful,  because  it  means  when  we’re  meditaAng  and  get  
caught  up  in  thoughts,  we  start  to  understand  how  we  could  release  ourselves  from  them.  

When  we   believe  we  need  to  have  thoughts  to  keep   us  afloat,  we  are  a  bit  like  a  child  who’s  learning   to  
swim  and  has  inflatable  armbands  put  on  them.  Then  mum  says,  
—‘Oh,  you’re  doing  fine,  let’s  take  them  off.’  
—No,  no.  I’ll  drown  –  ahahah.’
—‘Come  on,  you  can  do  it!’
—‘Ahhh!’

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  16

We’re   like  that  –   we  want  our  thoughts,  and  if   we  can  hang   onto  our  thoughts  we  keep  afloat,  doggie  
paddling  around  in  life.  ‘Ahahah.  I’m  doing  okay.  Ahhhh.’  

So  the  big   thing   in  the  meditaAon  is  ‘Whoo!  Take   these   off.’  See  what  happens,  all  this  stuff   –  thoughts  
coming,  going.  If   you  relax   and  open,  you’re  sAll  here  but  you’re  not  here  as  ‘I,  me,  myself,’  you’re  not  
here   as   the   constructed   self,   created   out   of   parAcular   paLerns   of   thoughts,   but   you’re   present   as  
presence   itself,   open   awareness,   vidya,   rigpa.   Just   the   natural   luminosity   of   the   mind,   revealing  
whatever  occurs.

So,   when  that  clarity   is  there,  the   more  you  pracAce,  you   start  to  see  that  that  clarity   is  truly  reliable.  
Our  thoughts  are  not  reliable.  If   you   try  to  remember  some  events  from  your  past  and   write  an   account  
of  them,  and  then  two  months  later   you   remember  them  again  and  write  another  account,  if  you  look  at  
these   two  accounts,  they’ll  be  slightly  different,  because  the  memory  is  not   a  fixed  thing;  it’s  not  like  a  
Swiss  band  vault.   It’s  a  constant  re-­‐turning  and   reworking  of  that   informaAon.  The  self  that  is  generated  
out  of   thoughts   and   feelings,   memories,  hopes  and   fears,  and   so   on,  is  like  a  house  made  of   playing  
cards.   It   doesn’t   have   any   essence   to   it,   and   it’s   fundamentally   unstable.   But   the   basic   clarity   of  
awareness  is  very  stable  –  it’s  unchanging.  

This  is  the  primary  Alt  which  allows  us  to  move  from   samsara  to  nirvana  –  to  see  that  they  both  have  the  
same   ground,   which   is   empAness.   Samsara   comes   into   being   because,   as   we  start   to   lose   our   own  
ground,   we   immediately   want   to   grasp.   We   think,   ‘Oh   my   God   I’m   going  to   slip!’   so   we   grasp   onto  
something.  This  is  aLachment,  in  Tibetan  it’s  called  nyi-­‐dzin  or  dag-­‐dzin.  Dzinpa  means  to  grasp,  and  you  
grasp  at  a  self-­‐essence  or  you  grasp  at  duality;  you  hold  onto  things  and  then  you  start  to  move  these  
things  around.  You  become  like  this  and  your  freedom  to  move  is  diminished  because  you’re  holding  on  
to  so  much.

Thought as subject and thought as object

The   one  who   idenAfies  with  the  thought  is  a  thought.  Thoughts  arise  in  two  forms:  someAmes  it  looks  
like  subject  and  someAmes  it  looks  like  object.  We  talk  of  ‘I,  me,  myself.’  When  a  thought  is  arising  in  the  
subject  form,  it’s  more  like  ‘I.’   When  a  subject  is  arising   in  the  form  of   an   object  it’s  more  like  ‘me.’  I  
noAce  something   about  myself.  In  that  way   we  can   talk  about  ourselves  as  a  subject  talking  about  an  
object.   ‘One   of   the  things   I’ve   noPced  is  that  I   tend  to  …’  By  linking   these  signifiers  together,  you  create  
this  paLern   as  if   there  is  something   really  there,   but   you’re   not   describing   something   that  exists.  We  
speak  ourselves  into  existence.  We  think  ourselves  into  existence.  We  are  gossamer,  we  are  dreams,  we  
are  rainbows.  But  we  make  them  very  solid  by  the  way  that  we  think  about  them.

You   can   experience  that  for  yourself.   When  sit  in   the  meditaAon,   and  you   get   caught  up  in  a  thought,  
and  somehow  you’re  in  it,  and  then  you’re  out  of  it.  What  was  that  thing  you  were  in?  It’s  gone.

It’s  like,  you  know,   falling  in  love  and   being   caught   up   in   some  dream  love  story,  and  then   the  bubble  
bursts.  Or  in  a  movie,  and  it’s  all  very  real  and  then  the  movie  ends  and  you  come  out  of  the  cinema  into  
the   street,  and  cars  are  going  by  and  ‘Oh,  wow,’  –   because  you  have   been  in  another  world.  SomeAmes  
we’re  in   big  worlds,   and  someAmes  we  go  into   very  small  worlds  and   in  our  meditaAon  we  can   see  that  
‘When  I  become  small  I  get  caught.’  

This  is  where  language  become  a  bit  strange.  The  small  me,  is  the  one  who  gets   caught.  That  is  to  say,  
the   subject   as   an   enAty   can   always   be   caught.   ‘I   don’t   feel   so   well   today,’   or   ‘I’ve   got   this   terrible  
headache,’  or   ‘I  feel  really  Pred,’  or  ‘Oh,  I  know   what  I’m  going  to  do  in  the   summer.’  You   hear  people  
talking  like  that,  on  and  on.  Then  suddenly,  ‘I’ve  had  this  idea!  Yeah!’  ‘Hang  on  a  minute,  we  were  talking  
about  this,  and  suddenly  you’re  off  on  that  one.’

Whoosh!  Like   a  greyhound  or  something,  they’re  off!  Very   hot  and  excited.  That’s  what  happens  –   we  
get  carried  away.  And  then  ajerwards,  where  are  we?  Don’t  worry,  another  thought  will  come,  and  then  
 P a g e  |  17

another  thought.  And  so   our  lives  are  zigzagging  here  and  there   as   we’re  carried   by   these  momentary  
enthusiasms.  When  you  become  more  aware  of  this,  you  can  start  to  see,  ‘Oh,  here  I  go  again.’  

At   that   point,   two   things   are   there,   there’s   sAllness   and   there’s   movement.   At   first   it’s   seems   just  
movement  because   we’re  completely   merged   in   it.   By  calming   the   mind  a  liLle  we  start   to   get   some  
perspecAve,  and   in  the  buddhist  tradiAon   that’s   called   shamata   meditaAon,   which  is  a  calming   ,  and  
then  develops  vipassana  meditaAon,  which  is  the  clarity  of   being  able  to   keep  an  eye  on  what’s  going  on  
–  to  observe  how  things  are   arising.   When  we  start  to  see  ‘Oh,   I’m  calm,  and  my  energy   is   moving’,  that  
is  sAll  quite  dualisAc.  Then  we  see  that  the  experience  of  being  calm  is  itself  an  arising.   So,   calmness  and  
movement  are  both  experiences.  

The  central  quesAon  is:   who  is  the  experiencer  which   is  why   the  heart  of   dzogchen  meditaAon  is  to  just  
stay  with  whatever   is  occurring,  and  focus  on,  ‘Who  is  the   one  who  is  having  this  experience,’  or   ‘Who  is  
the  one  who  is  experiencing  this?’

Of  course,  we  can  sAck  in  the  stupid  answer,  ‘I  am,’  and  then  be  back   in  the  series  of  thoughts.  But  if   you  
just  look,   when   that   thought  ‘I   am’   arises,  then   you  experience  ‘”I  am”   is   arising.’  And   then   another  
arising,  and  as  each  experience  is  arising,  it  is  revealed   through  the   presence  of   the  experiencer.  In  the  
Tibetan  tradiAon  they  call  this  ‘the  mind  itself,’  semnyid  or  ci>ata.

This  kind   of  meditaAon  is  actually  very  simple,  because  you  don’t  have  to  visualize  mandalas,  you  don’t  
have  to  remember   many  prayers  and  chants  and  so  on,  but  it’s  also  difficult  because  it’s  very  subtle.  You  
have  to  be  sharp  and  clear.      You  have  to  pay  aLenAon  to  what  is  going  on  because  it’s  happening  always  
[snaps  fingers]   in  the   moment,  in  the   moment,  in  the   moment….  It’s   just   there,  just  there,  just  there.  
You’re   not  building  something  up   that  you  can  go  back  and  correct,  you’re  not   moving   across  Ame.  You  
are   just   in   the   moment   of   the   arising   of   experience.   Who   is   the   experiencer?   The   answer   to   that  
quesAon   is  by   being  the  experiencer.  It’s   not   a  quesAon  that  seeks  a  cogniAve   answer.  It’s  a  quesAon  
which  is  designed  to  summon  us  into  being  present  as  our  open  awareness.  

By  resAng  in  that  open  awareness,  we  find  that  we  get  less  and  less  caught  up  in  the  parAcular   paLerns  
of  thought.  We  don’t  have  to  block   thoughts,  we  don’t  have  to  pull  in  good  thoughts  and  push   away  bad  
thoughts.  Through  that,  we  have  more  confidence  in  the  self-­‐liberaAon  of  experience.  

Moment   by  moment,  experience  is  arising   and  passing,  arising  and  passing,  and   by  experience  here  we  
mean  the  intersecAon   of   subject  and  object.  In  some  Tibetan  painAngs,  thangkas,  you  see  the  deiAes  in  
sexual   union  –  this  symbolizes  the  ongoing  integraAon  of  subject  and  object.  Subject  and  object  always  
arise  together  in  space,  which  is  why  we  imagine  such  deiAes  against  a  background  of  the  clear  blue  sky.  

So,  we’re  si:ng:  subject  side  is  arising;  object  side  is  arising.  Together.  Subject  and  object  together,  and  
together,  and  together.   You  don’t  have  to   change  things,  you  don’t  have   to  make  beLer  things  happen.  
Whatever  arises  is  okay.  SomeAmes  you’re  sad,  someAmes   you’re  jealous,  someAmes  you’re  hopeless,  
someAmes  you’re  happy  –  it’s  all  just  experience.  

Then  we  start  to  see  that  the  whole  world  is  only  experience.  One  mode  of   experience  is  to  imagine  that  
the  world  is  made  of  real  enAAes.   When  you  fall  into  that  kind  of  experience,  you  forget  the  experiencer.  
When   you   remember   the   experiencer   you   don’t   fall   into   the   experience.   Nothing   changes   in   the  
content,  but  you  start  to  see  that  it’s  without  essence.  It’s  illusory,  it’s  maya.  That  is  to  say,  it’s  there,  and  
not  there.  The  classical  example  is  the  reflecAon  of  the  moon  on  water.  On  a  full  moon  night,  you  go  out  
in  the  country,  you  see  a  sAll   pond  and  there,  in  the  pond,  is  the  moon.   The  surface  of   the  water  is  so  
clear;   you  see  the   details  of   the  moon.  The  moon   is   there.   Of   course  it’s  there  –  you   see  it.  But   it’s  not  
there.   In  the  same  way,  we  see  the  world  as  made  up  of  enAAes,  but  it’s  not.  But  it   is!  But  it’s  not   –  it’s  
an  illusion.  The  more  you  see  it  as  illusion,  the  easier  life  becomes.

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  18

So  to   recap,   just   before   our   break,   there  are   these  three   basic  aspects:  relaxed   openness,   the  natural  
spaciousness   of   the   mind,   which   gives   rise   to   clarity,   which   reveals   everything   instantly   [and]   all  
together.   Within   that   clarity   there   is  the   movement   of   energy,   which   is   our   becoming   in   the   world,  
whether   we’re   walking   on   our   own   in   the   country   or   cha:ng   with   someone   over   a   meal.   It’s   the  
movement  of  energy  within  the   field  of  disclosure  –   the  unveiling,  or  the   revealing,   of  the  potenAal  of  
the  open  ground.

 [Break]

Sitting  practice

A  very  simple  kind  of  pracAce  –  we’re  just  si:ng.  That  is  to  say,  there  is  no   agenda,  there  is  no  parAcular  
acAvity  required.  ‘Who  is  the  one  who  is  sikng?’  We  are.  

This  sense  of   being   alive,  being  a  person,  being  ourselves,  is  always  AlAng  in  two  direcAons.  It   Alts  into  
limitaAon,   into   being   a   specific   ‘this   is   me,’   and   it   Alts   out   to   being   open.   Whenever   we’re   si:ng,  
experience  is  going  on.  You  can  do  it   with  your   eyes  open  or  closed.  Generally  we  do  it   with  eyes  open,  
but  make  some  experiments,  see  which  is  good.  

So,  we’re  just  si:ng.  Stuff  is  going   on,   maybe  somebody  coughs  or  somebody  moves,  or   there’s  shapes  
moving.   You   have   different   sensaAons   in   your   body,   maybe   some   digesAve   experiences,   thoughts,  
feelings.   Things  are  occurring.  Inside  that  you’ve  got  your  own  commentary  –   your  thoughts  and  your  
interpretaAons.

To   put  it  another   way,  idenAficaAon  is  an  effort.  If  a  thought  arises  and  I  become  involved  in  it,  that  is  an  
effort,  that  is   a  movement.  That  is  why  the   most  basic  meditaAon  instrucAon  in  dzogchen  is  to  not  do  
anything  at  all.  Life  is  going  on   by  itself,   thoughts  are  coming,  but   we  don’t  have  to  put   ourselves  in  as  
the  thinker  or  the  doer  or  the  maker.

We’re   just   si:ng.   Stuff   is   happening.   Whenever   you   find   yourself   wrapped   up   in   that   and   going   off  
someplace,  as  you   would  do  in  the  shamata  pracAce,  just  gently  bring   yourself  back   to   being   present  
with  whatever’s  occurring.   You’re  just   with  it.   That  ‘being  just   with   it’  someAmes  may  Aghten  into  the  
felt  sense  ‘I  am  with  It,’  and  at  other  Ames  it’s  more  open.

For  most  of   us,  the  only   way   to  get  to  know  this  is  to  keep  doing  it.  Just  keep  observing   that  the  open  
clarity  of  the  mind,   and  the  narrowing  fixaAon  of  being  a  parAcular  subject,  are  not  two   separate  things.  
You   can’t   take  a  pair   of   scissors  and   slice  down   the  middle  and   put  them  in   two   boxes.   They   are  the  
same,  because  the  clarity  of  the  mind  is  the  illuminaAon  of   ‘I,  me,  myself.’  That  is  to  say,  I  know  that  I  am  
being   me.  When  I   fall  into  being  me,  I  don’t  know  it   –  but   when   I   do  know  it,  it  is  the  natural  clarity  of  
the  mind  that  knows  it.

As  some   of   you   know,   we  use  the  example   of   the   mirror   here.   The  reflecAon   is   always  in  the  mirror.  
Whatever  thought  are  arising,  they’re  like   a  reflecAon  in  a  mirror.  They   have  no   substance.  We  want   to  
remain  calm  and  spacious,  being  just  like  the  mirror,  le:ng  whatever  happens  happen.

Whenever   you   find   yourself   drawn   into   judgement  or   prejudice  –   ‘I  like   this.   I   don’t   like   this.  This   is  
terrible.  I  want  more  of  that’  –  just  allow  these  thought  to  go  by.  

No  thought  can  provide  the  soluAon  to  the  problem  since  every   thought  is  the  problem.  That’s  may  be  
difficult  to  believe.   When  the  alcoholic   wakes  up  in   the   morning  and  knows  that  ‘A  li>le  glass  of  whisky  
is  just  what  I  need’  –  that’s  like  our  relaAonship  to  thinking.  

We  will  do  this  now  for  a  while,  about  forty  minutes,  so  just  take  your  ease.
 P a g e  |  19

[PracAce]

That’s  a   kind  of   si:ng  you  can  do  whenever  you  have  some  free   Ame.  It  allows   the  experience  of  the  
movement  of   the  object  and  of  the  subject  to  come  together.   It’s  also   a  way  of  starAng  to  observe   how  
we  become  pulled  into  the  subject-­‐point  or  subject-­‐posiAoning  as  if  it  were  something  constant.

Consciousness and movement

Buddhism  describes  the  mind  as  having  eights  kinds  of  consciousness.  We  have  the  five  consciousnesses  
of   the   senses,   each   sense   having   its   own   consciousness.   Then   we   have   mental   consciousness,   or  
mentaAon   consciousness,   which   organizes   the   informaAon   that   comes   from   these   consciousnesses.  
These  six  are  called  unreliable  because  they   are  situaAonal  and  condiAonal.   For  example,  if   we  suddenly  
hear   a   noise   then   the   ear   consciousness   comes   into   play.   If   there   is   no   sound,   there   is   no   ear  
consciousness.   Or  you  could  be  si:ng   reading  a  book  and   get  so  very   involved  in   it   that   you   lose  the  
consciousness  of   your  body.   Then  suddenly  you  become  aware  that   it’s  ge:ng  late,  and   you’re  back  in  
your   body.   These  consciousnesses  are  moving.  That’s  not  normally  how  we  think  about  our   mind,  but  
that’s  the  tradiAon,  and  it’s  something  to  examine  for  yourself.

Then   there   is   a   seventh   consciousness   which   is   called   the   consciousness   which   is   the   mental  
consciousness  of   the  afflicAons.  The   afflicAons  refer  to   the  three  posiAonings  of   stupidity,  desire  and  
aversion.   Stupidity   is  reificaAon,   taking   experience  in  a  solid  way,   whether  on   the   subject   side   or  the  
object   side.  Then  there  are  the   two   secondary  a:tudes  that   move  out  from   stupidity.  ALachment   or  
desire  is  a  going   toward  something.  Aversion,   anger,   repulsion   is  a   moving   away   from  something.  So  
once  you  have  a  fixed  object  and  a  fixed  subject,  these  side  movements  or  reacAons  start  to  happen.

This  is  always  available  to  us.  It  is  seen  as  being  the  basis  of   the  sense  of   self,   of  an  individual  self.  You  
can   recognize   in   your   meditaAon   how   this   is   funcAoning,   when   suddenly   you’re   caught   up   with  
something  and  you  like  it  or  you  don’t  like  it.  You’re  going  ajer  if  or  you’re  trying   to  go  away  from  it.  This  
propensity   –  which  is  a  kind  of  reiteraAon  ‘This  is  who  I  am.  I’m  here.  I  like.   I  don’t  like.  This  is   good  for  
me,  this   isn’t,’  –  is  a  kind  of  illusory  substratum  on  which  the  felt  sense,  an  illusory   yet  felt  sense,  of  the  
conAnuity  of  a  personal  ego  idenAty  conAnues.  

The   eighth   consciousness   is   called   the   ground   consciousness,   or   the   storehouse   consciousness   or  
alayavijnana.  Alaya  just  means  the  basis  or  ground.  It’s  the  most  subtle  consciousness,  the  potenAal  for  
the  manifesAng   of  all  the  other  consciousnesses.   It’s  like  the  root  form   of   consciousness,  and   it’s  seen  
also  as   a  kind  of   conAnuous  sense  of   something’s   happening,  something’s  going  on,  a  basic  ‘I’m  alive’–
ness.

Different  meditaAon   tradiAons  describe  the  many  ways  you   can  get  lost  in   meditaAon  and  it  can  be  easy  
to  get  trapped   in  the  alayavijnana  as  a  subtle  sense  of  an  enduring  self.  Also  the  theravadin   system  of  
the  dhyanas  describes  very  very  subtle  states  and   from  the  mahayana  point  of  view,  these  can  become  
ways  of   ge:ng  caught  up  in  the  ground  consciousness.  Or,  in  the  buddhist  criAque  of   hinduism,  when  
Shiva  is  si:ng   on   top   of   Mount   Kailash   in   his  meditaAon   that   lasts  for  ten   thousand  years,  Buddhists  
would   say   that   he   is  fused   into   this  basic   conAnuity   of   presence   (alayavijnana),   but   that   it’s   a  self-­‐
reflexive  presence  in  which  ‘I  am  meditaPng.‘  That’s  why   you  get  these  images  of  Shiva  as  the  great  yogi.  
He  is  doing  it!  So  you  can  see  how  even  in  that  meditaAon,  there  is  a  subtle  self-­‐referencing  involved.

What   we  want  to  do  is  to   bring  the  understanding   of  openness  or   empAness  into  that.  In  the  Tibetan  
tradiAon  they  say  this  ground  nature,  kun  zhi  du  ma  ché  –  ‘du  ma  ché  means  uncompounded   –  so,  if   you  
take   it   at   face   value,   it   seems  to   be   just   your   basic   aliveness   or   presence,   but   actually   it’s   a   subtle  
construct,  and  you  get  caught  up  in  that.

So  that’s  what  we  have  to  look   at  again  and  again,  and  the  best   guide  for  that  is  the  impermanence  of  
phenomena,  because  anything   which   manifests  will  have  a  kind   of   subtle  form  which  will  change.    So  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  20

whenever  something  seems   to  be  ‘Ah,  this  is  the  bo>om  line,   this  is  what  it  is.   Now  I’m  really  open,’  if  
you  then  lose  it,  since  it’s  not  the  boLom   line.         It  was  a  momentary  experience  which  was  held  in  place  
as  a  concept  and  a  construct.  In  the  very  act  of  grasping  it,  you  lose  it.

So   this  not  aLending  to  anything  in  parAcular  is  very  useful  for  starAng  to  explore  these  different  levels  
of  consciousness.  If  you  get  lost,  if  you  start  spiraling   around  in   yourself,  don’t  worry   about  that  –   just  
relax.  You   can  relax   into   the  out-­‐breath  and  stay   present   with  it,  and  then   start  to  see  no  situaAon  is  
final.  It’s   always   moving.   Because  empAness  is  unborn  and  manifestaAon  is  unceasing,  and  the  unborn  
and  the  unceasing  are   inseparable,  we  have  there   the  real  freedom.  But  if  we  take  something   which  is  
actually  a  movement  and  turn  it  into  an  essence,  then  we  start  to  construct  the  whole   world  of   ‘I  exist.  
You  exist,’  and  all  of  the  many  many  things  that  flow  from  that.

Refuge and bodhicitta

སངས་$ས་ཆོས་དང་ཚ)གས་+ི་མཆོག་.མས་ལ།
SANG GYE CHO DANG TSOG KYI CHO NAM LA
buddha dharma and sangha of supreme, best (plural) to
assembly
To  the  Buddha,  Dharma  and  Assembly  of  the  excellent

1ང་2བ་བར་5་བདག་ནི་7བས་8་མཆི།
JANG CHUB BAR DU DAG NI KYAB SU CHI
enlightenment until I refuge for go
I  go  for  refuge  until  enlightenment  is  gained.

I go for refuge to the Buddha, Dharma and Assembly of the excellent until enlightenment is gained.

So,  we  begin   in  a  tradiAonal   way  by   reciAng   the  refuge  and   bodhiciLa   prayers.  The   refuge  links  with  
what  we  looked  briefly  at  yesterday,  about   finding  an   orientaAon  to  that  which  is  truly   reliable.  Outer  
things  in  the  world  change,  our  own   thoughts  and  feelings   are  not  so  reliable  either  –   so  what  can  we  
cleave  to,  what  can  we  hold  to?  In  the  tradiAon,  it  is  by  taking  refuge  in  the  Buddha,  the  dharma  and  the  
sangha.  

Taking  refuge  in  buddha(hood)

On   one   level   we   can   see  Buddha  as   a  historical   person   who,   through   the   efforts   of   his   meditaAon  
pracAce,  gained   an   understanding  into  his  true  nature,  and   through  that  began  the  lineages  of  buddhist  
teachings.

On   another   level,   from   the   dzogchen   point   of   view,   each   of   us   has   buddha   nature,   or   primordial  
buddhahood,  present  as  the  substratum   or  the  dimension  within  which  we  are  actually  living.  So  when  
we  take  refuge  in  the  Buddha,  this  is  forming  an  intenAon  to  rest  and  relax  into  our  own  natural  state.

In  dzogchen   there  is  a  lot  of  aLenAon  to  relaxaAon,  to  the   natural,  to  what  is  given.  Because,    although  
there  are  many   phenomena  in  our  world   and  daily   life   which  we  take  to  be  just  as  they   are   –   in   fact,  
these  are  constructs  created  by  our  own  conceptualizaAon.

Now   that  we  have   more  freedom  to  travel  around  many   of  us  have  been  in  different  cultures,   different  
countries,  and   through  that  we  have   seen   how   people  in  different  places  live  in  different  ways.   What  
was  very  normal  for  us  in  our  family  when  we  were  growing  up,  when  we  go  to  school  we  see  that  this  is  
not   normal   for  all  the  other   kids.  As  we  move   out   into  the  world,   we  start  to  see  that  what  we  have  
 P a g e  |  21

taken  for  granted,  what   we  believe  is  how  it  actually   is,   is  in   fact  just  one  possibility.  That   way  we  can  
start  to  see  that  what  we  take  to  be  a  given,  is  actually  a  construct.

Then,  maybe,  we  come  in   contact  with   buddhism,  and  it   seems  to  be   an  interesAng  idea,  seems  to  be  
something   constructed  in  the  East   –   another   import   that  we’re  ge:ng   –   and  it  seems   in   some  ways  
arAficial,  because  when  you  become  involved  at   first  it’s   quite  strange.  As   you  try   to  fit  it  in  with  your  
own  life  it  doesn’t  quite  fit.

The   more  we  come  into  the   pracAce,  the  more   we  can  see  that  this  is  speaking  to   something  which  is  
true  in  itself.  You  don’t  have  to  make  effort  to  make  it  true.   We  have  to  make  effort  to  make  most  things  
in  life  true.  Although  we  don’t  see  that  because  we  get  used  to  making  the  effort.  However   when  we  see  
that  other  people  use   their  effort,  their  potenAal,  to  make  very   different  things  true  for  them,  then  we  
can  see  that,  relaAvely,  all  the  construcAons  of  our  lives  are  indeed  just  that  –  construcAons.  

Sangye

But  buddha   nature  is  not   a  construct.   What  does   Buddha  mean?   The  Tibetan   word   is  sangye   and  is  
made  of   two   parts.  Sang  means  pure,  purified,   and   gye   means  expanded  or   increased   or   full,   which  
means   that   limitaAons   are   removed   and   all   good   qualiAes   are   revealed.   The   limitaAons   which   are  
removed  are   taking   the  moment  for  the  totality   so  that  we  get  caught  up  in  what’s  happening  in  the  
moment  and  believe  that  that’s  really  really  important.  

Part  of  purificaAon  is  to  have  a  large  perspecAve.  Most  of  us  in  our  lives  have  been  in  difficult  situaAons,  
we  may   have   done   things  that   we’re   not   proud   of,  or   things   have   happened   that   make  us  feel   very  
strange  inside.  We  shrink  when  we  remember   these   moments;   we  feel   shame  or  regret.   It’s  as  if   that  
moment  was  condensed  and  very  intense  and  so  that  when   we  remember  it  we  become  trapped  in  it  
and  we  go  ‘Ugh!  Egh.’  There  we  see   this  freezing  into   a  moment   in   Ame   which  is  already  gone.  Even  
when  the  terrible  thing  was  happening   it   was  just  a  moment   in  the  infinity  of  Ame,  just  as  every   gesture  
that  we  make  is  a  gesture  within  the  infinity  of  space.

The  limitaAons  that  arise  are   from  our   grasping,  or  aLachment,  whereby  we  seize  onto  something  with  
the  judgement  ‘This   is   good,  this   is   bad,’  and  squeeze   it  so  that  it  condenses  into  something  solid,  and  
then  build  on  each  solid  construcAon  to  create  the  parAcular  palace  of  our  own  existence.

In  taking  refuge  in  the  Buddha  we  are   looking  into  the  natural  purity  of   our  mind.  Of  course  our  mind  is  
full  of   thoughts  and  feeling,  memories  and  so  on,  but   these  are  transient,  they’re  just  passing   through.  
They’re   not  building   blocks  for  construcAng   anything.   Rather  these  are  aestheAc  moments   –   these   are  
moments  of   being   touched  and  moved,   moments  of   responsiveness  into   the  unfolding   dimension   of  
existence.  So,   in   saying   that  we  have  a   natural  buddhahood,  it’s  an  encouragement  not  to  be  so   busy,  
and,  in  parAcular,  not  to  be  desperate.  

In  the  tradiAon,  this  world,  samsara,  comes  into  being  through  ignorance.  Ignorance  means,  essenAally,  
not  ge:ng   it.   Something   is   going   on   and   you   don’t   get   it,   and   when   you   don’t   get   it  you’re   on   the  
outside  –  like  when   you’re  young   at  school  and  big   kids  are  telling  a  joke  and  you  don’t  get  what  they’re  
talking  about,  and  you  look  a   bit  stupid.      But  then  you  don’t  want  to  not  get  it,  so  you  get  something  
else   instead.   If   you   mistake   something,   if   you   get   it   the   wrong   way,   you   can   conAnue   to   use   the  
ingredients,  but  you’re   creaAng  a  false  confecAonary.  It’s  false,  not  in  the  sense   of  not  exisAng,   but  it’s  
false  in  the  sense  of  not  being  necessary.  

If   you  forget  where  you  are,  if  you’re  out  walking  in  the  country,  you  walk   and  walk   and  walk,  looking   to  
try   to   find   out   where   you   are,   but   ojen   you   don’t   even   know   what   the   landmarks   are,   what   the  
significant  signs  are,  so  you  can’t  rescue  yourself.   In  fact  the  more  you  walk,  the  more   you  can  get  lost.  
The  effort  that  you’re  making  to  find  yourself  becomes  the  very  means  by  which  you  become  more  lost.

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  22

In  the  same  way,  when  the  natural  ground  of  being,  the  natural  openness  of  the  mind  is  lost  sight  of,  and  
the  thoughts,  feelings,   and  so   on,  all  the  experiences  that  we   have  are  no  longer  completely  integrated  
with  that   openness,  or   non-­‐dual  with  that  openness,  we  then   take  them  as  being  parAcular   separated  
essences  or  substances,  and  then  start  to  move  them  around  to  make  paLerns.   This  effort  is  an  effort  to  
make  sense  of   things   –   to  make  meaning.   Why?   Because  we’ve  lost  meaning.   We   don’t  feel   intrinsic  
meaning.  We  don’t  feel  intrinsic  value.

All  of   us  have  probably   spent   Ame  and  money  on   personal-­‐development  groups  of  some  kind,  going   to  
sit  in  an  encounter  group  or  something  like  that  in  order  to  develop  ourselves,   to  find  ourselves.  And  of  
course   you  get  lots  of   experiences  there   and  you   can   open  your  personality  in   various  ways.  However,  
what  you’re  doing  there  is  accumulaAng  experiences.  You’re  building  a  richer,   perhaps  more  arAculated,  
a  more  joined-­‐up   sense  of   your   potenAal,  but   it’s  directed   towards   manifestaAon   –   ‘How   will  I  be?’  
Especially,  ‘How  will  I  be   with  others   so   that  they  think  I’m  okay’,   because  this  is   the  root  anxiety  of  the  
isolated  ego.  Being  full  of  self  doubt.  ‘Am  I  acceptable?  How  can  I  know  that  I’m  okay?‘  

However  because  the  ego  is  a  construct,  that  is  to  say  something  arAficial,  it  can  never  be  okay.  This  is  a  
real   problem.  No   maLer   how  much  effort   you   make  to  improve   it,   it   cannot  be  perfect.   It  cannot  be  
complete  because  it’s  born  from  a  fissure,  it’s  born  from  a  tear,  from  a  crack,  from  a  separaAon  between  
the   ground  of   existence  and  the  moments  of   manifestaAon.  No  moment  could  be  complete,   because  
each   moment  links  with  other  moments.   Moments  are  part  of   a  picture.  It’s  like  if   you   were  to   take  a  
jigsaw   puzzle,  and  you  have   one  piece  of  it   and   you  really  like  the  liLle  bit   of  the  picture  that’s  on  that  
piece,  and   you   think   ‘Oh,  this   is   the   whole   story.’  It   can’t  be  the  whole  story.   It  needs  to  be  put   in   its  
context  to  take  on  a  meaning.

So,  no   maLer   how  many   qualiAes   we   develop  in   ourselves,  they   need   a  context  to   come  into   being,  
because   we   show   ourselves   through   being   with   others.   Moreover   we   find   ourselves   through   our  
showing.  You  can  sit  in  your   room  and  think   about  being  compassionate,  but  it’s  only  when  you  try   to  
help  people  and  you  realize  how   stupid  they  are   and  how  they   just  refuse  to  be  helped  –   that  you  then  
start   to  understand   what  compassion   is.      It’s  through  their  applicaAon  that  our  own  limitaAons  –  and  
twists  and  anger  and  rage  and  jealousy  and  so  on  –  get  manifested.

So,   if   we  say   we  take  refuge   in  this  buddha   potenAal  –  which  is,  from   the   dzogchen   point  of  view,  the  
actuality  of   our  being  –   we  are  not  taking   about  a  potenAal   as  something  far  away  that  you  have   to  go  
on  a  big   journey  to  find.  It’s  something  which  is  exactly  here.  Then  we  have  to  think,  well,  how  do  we  get  
to  that   refuge?   If  it’s  raining,   you  might  see  a  tree  in   the  distance  and  you  run  to  stand  under  the  tree,  
and   then  you  get  some  refuge.  So  where  is  this  buddhanature  that  we  can  take  refuge  in  it?  Because  if  
we  don’t  actually  get  contact  with  it,  the  idea  of  taking  refuge  is  something  abstract  and  theoreAcal.

This  brings  us  back   to  the  central  quesAon  of   meditaAon:  if   the  mind  is  pure  from  the   very  beginning,  
yet   if   we  as  individuals   are  ojen  disturbed   by   what’s  happening   in   our   mind,   something’s   not   quite  
right.   We  are  out  of   kilter,  we’re   off  balance.  And  yet,  the  teaching   is  saying  the  mind  is  pure  from  the  
very   beginning.   ‘Well,   if   the   mind   is   pure   from   the   very   beginning,   how   come   I’m   so   fucked   up?  
Something  must  be  wrong.  What  is  that?  What  is  alienaAon?  Where  have  we  gone  when  we’re  not  at  
home  in  ourselves?

So,  the  first   part   of   the  refuge  which  we   will  be   doing   is  looking  for   the  primordial   ground  present  in  
ourselves.  That  looking  requires  not  being  so  caught  up  in  thought.  There  is  nothing   wrong  with  thought,  
all  the  thoughts  we  have  have  some  kind  of  funcAon  or  use.  However,  the  thought  is  an  effulgence,  it’s  a  
display  or   manifestaAon  of  our  potenAal.  If   you   take  the  manifestaAon  to  be  the  true  nature,  or   the  true  
quality  –  because  there  is  so  much  or  it  and  it’s  always  changing  –   there  is  always  a  lot   to  be  caught  up  
in.  

What  is   the  ground  of   the  thought?  In  other  words,  where  does  the   thought  come  from?   The  thought  
itself  is  both  the   means   of  distracAon  –   since   you  get  caught  up  in  it  and   then   it  takes  you  here,  there  
 P a g e  |  23

and  everywhere  –   but,  if   you  really  stay  close  to   the  thought,  and   you  observe  how  it  funcAons,  it   will  
show  you  its  own  ground.  Because  the  thought  never  leaves  the  ground.

The  mind  is  the  ocean   in  which  we  are.   Everything  that  we  have  is  an  experience.  The  noAon   of  subject  
owning  the  object  is   just  a  kind  of   experience.  Everything   in  this  room  is  experience   –   the   colours,  the  
shapes,  being   in  our  own  body,  how  our  knees  feel,  how  our   back  feels,  and  so  on.  This  is  the  revelaAon  
of  experience.

So  what  is  the  ground  of   that  experience?  That  is  our  mind   –  without  your  mind  you  wouldn’t  have  any  
experience.  So  to   find  in  our   meditaAon   the   sang  bit  of  sangye,  the  pure  nature  in  the  buddha,  we  stay  
close  to  the  thoughts  as  they  arise,  and  we  observe  them  –   where  they   come  from,  the  translucency  of  
their   manifestaAon,  and  then  their  passing.  And  the  thoughts  themselves  illustrate  the  ground.  Just  as  in  
the  tradiAonal  example,  if  you  want  to  understand  what  a  mirror  is,  you  look  into  the  mirror,   and  what  
you  see  is  a  reflecAon.  You  can’t  see  the  mirror   itself,  because  the  mirror  is  always  full  of  reflecAons.   But  
if  you   see   that   the  reflecAon   is  a  reflecAon,  then   you   see  the  nature  of   the  mirror.   The  nature  of   the  
mirror  is  to  show  reflecAons.  

In  the  same  way,  if   you  look  for  your  mind  as  if  it’s  some  special  substance  hidden  somewhere  else,   you  
won’t  find  it,  because  you’re  looking  for  your   mind  as  if  it’s  a  special   kind  of   thought,  a   special  kind  of  
experience.   The  mind   reveals  itself   through  its  own  revelaAon  in  terms  of   experience.   Whenever   you  
have  experience,  you  have   the  basic  pure  open  nature  of   the  mind  itself.  So   rather  than  try  to  scrape  
away   thoughts  as  if   they   were  some  kind   of   scum  on  the  surface,  to  get  to  this  pure  nature  which  is  
underneath,  the  pracAce  is  to   relax   into  the  non-­‐appropriaAon,  the   non-­‐grasping  of   opening  to  what  is  
there.  And  in  that  very  moment  you  find  that  you  are  both  the  mirror  and  the  reflecAon.

So  in  this  Tibetan  word,  sangye,  the  sang,  the  purity,  is  like  the  mirror,  and  the  gye,  the  expression  or  the  
expansion,  is  like  the  reflecAon,  and  these  two  are  inseparable.

Taking  refuge  in  the  dharma:  stop  cooking

We  take  refuge  also  in  the  dharma.  Dharma  has  many  meanings.  In  this  context,  it  means:  that  which  is  
given,  that  which  just   is.  If  we  want  to  know  how  something  is,  we  have  to  find  it  before  it’s  altered.  We  
have  to  find  what  it  would   look  like  before  we  interfered  with   it.  In  some  tradiAons  this  is  called  finding  
your   original   face,   seeing   the  face  you  had  before  you   were  born.  It   means  being   aware  of   how   our  
intelligence   becomes   turned   into   the   task   of   preparaAon.   That   is  to   say,   the   raw   ingredient   of   our  
potenAal  is  constantly   being  grasped  and  cooked   to   present  ourselves  into  the  world  in  ways  that  we  
feel  are  acceptable.  We  come  to   experience  arAficiality  as  usual,  as  normal  –  indeed,   as  natural.  This  is  
the  basic  understanding  of  samsara,  where  the  fundamental  confusion  is  that  you  think  that  a  construct  
is  something  natural.  

If  you  want  to  get  back  to   the  given,  or  the  natural,  or  that  which  just  is,  you  have   to  stop  cooking.  You  
have  to  stop  doing   things,  which  is  why  the  heart  of   the   meditaAon  pracAce  is  to  relax,  to  cease  from  
engagement,   and   just   be   with   whatever   is   occurring.   Don’t   enter   into   judgement.   Don’t   enter   into  
limitaAon.   That  means   when  some  thought  arises,  or   some  feeling,  and  you  think,   ‘This   is   intolerable.  I  
don’t  like  this.  This  can’t  be  me,’   we  have  two  choices.  We  can  believe  that  reacAon  and  therefore  have  
to  change  the  thought,  or   we  just  stay  relaxed  and  open  and   the   irritaAon,  the  feeling   of  impossibility,  
goes.  All  arising  things  are  passing.  Everything   is  impermanent.  The  openness  of  the  mind  means  there  
is  space  for  everything.  The  closed-­‐ness  of  the  ego  means  there  is  space  for  very  liLle.  

So  the  heart  of   the  meditaAon  is  to  relax  out  of  the  ego  into  the  spaciousness  of   awareness,  or   rigpa,  or  
natural   presence.   What   is   the   ego?   The   ego   is   a  nexus   of   energy.   It’s   a   set   of   vibraAons   which   are  
constantly  discriminaAng  between  me  and  not  me,  like  and  not  like.  It’s  a  process  of   triage  or  sorAng  out  
of   self,   other,   self,   other   all   the   Ame.   This   is   why   the   ego   is   very   acAve.   It   is   a   parAcular   kind   of  
posiAoning  within  the  unfolding  flow  of  experience.  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  24

We  can  experience  that  for  ourselves.  Just  go  down  for  breakfast,  sit  at  a  table,  and  look  around.  You  see  
that  other   people  aren’t   eat  the  same  as  I   do.  Some  people  want   to   have  bread,   some  have  muesli,  
some  have  porridge,  some  have   porridge   plain,  others   put   a  lot  of   fruit  on   it.   Why   do   they   do   that?  
Because  they  are  them.  What  does  it  mean  that  they  are  like  that,  but  I  am  like  this?   It  means  that  there  
are  certain  paLerns  which  I  take  to   be  me,   which  then  influence  my  percepAon   of  the   world  and  what  I  
go  towards  and  what  I  go  away  from.

This  is  what  the  ego  is.  It’s  a  paLerning  of  energy  which  is  involved  in  our  discriminaAons  in  the  world  all  
the  Ame.  It’s  clearly  unreliable,  because,  if  the  ego’s  basic  agenda  is  to  survive  –  which  I  think  it  is,  even  
though   it   doesn’t  really  exist  –   it   will   do  anything   to   survive.  You  can  observe   that   in   how  vulnerable  
teenagers  are  to  peer  pressure.   In  wanAng  to  belong   to   the  group,  the  anxious  teenager   goes  along  with  
the   group   and  does  things  that   maybe  they   don’t   parAcularly   want  to  do.   So  they   dress  the  same   as  
other  people,   and   they   get   really   into   this  music,   or  they   think   they   have   to   drink   a  lot  of   vodka,   or  
whatever  it  is,  but  they  want  to  belong  in   the  group,  because   that  kind  of   belonging  gives  a  temporary  
shelter.

And   then,  through   experience,  we   become  ‘our   own  person.’         We   individuate,  and   as   individuated  
individuals,  we  now   have  the   full  confidence  to  have  porridge  with  our  kind  of   fruit  on  it.          We  look  at  
other  people  and  think  ‘You  are  welcome  to  your  breakfast.  I  am  at  home   in  my  own  skin.’  There  is  a  kind  
of  security  in  that,  because  you  now  can  predict  more  what  it   is  you’re  going   to  do.  But,  of   course,   how  
we  make  these  decisions  depends  on  the  environment  around  us.  The  environment  may  not  provide  the  
kind  of  breakfast  buffet  that  you  want,  and  so  there  is   a  kind  of   longing:  ‘How  can  I   be   myself   if   I   don’t  
have  some  nice  ham  for  breakfast?’  

So,  the  more  you  know  about  yourself,  there  comes  a  kind  of  confidence  in  the  definiAon  but  also  a  less  
certain  interface  with  the  environment  around  you,  because  now  you  have  more  of  an  agenda,  more  of  
a  menu,  in  which  you  need  parAcular  ingredients  to  prepare  the  dish   of  yourself.  That  can  set  us   going  
off  in  all   sorts  of   direcAons.  Because  you   can   meet  someone  and   fall  in  love,  and   then  suddenly   think,  
‘Hmm.   They  don’t  have   quite   enough  salt.  They  don’t  have  enough   of   this,   enough  of  that.   How  can  we  
cook  a  nice  dish?   I  thought  they  would  have   exactly   what  I  needed,   but  it’s  not  true.’   And  so  there   is  a  
disappointment,  because  the  more  you  formulate  a  fixed  shape,  the  more  limited  you  become.  

This  is  a  central  understanding   in  buddhism:   that   the  very  pathways  through  which  the  ego  develops  
confidence  and   certainty   and   a  sense   of   security   is  in   fact   the  producAon   of   a  prison,   because  real  
freedom  lies  in  adaptability.  

Wisdom  and  compassion

That   is  why   in   the   general  mahayana   tradiAon  we  talk   a   lot   about   the   relaAon  between  wisdom  and  
compassion.  Wisdom,   generally  speaking,  is   understood  as  the  experience  of   empAness  –   to   see  that  
there  is  no   inherent  truth  or  self-­‐substance  in   any  phenomena.  Not  in   our   body,  not  in  our  memories,  
not   in   the   people   around   us,   or   parents,   our   children,   and   so   on.   Compassion,   arising   from   that  
empAness,   is  the  willingness  to   become   whatever   is  necessary.   So   in  the  bodhisaLva  understanding  we  
take   a  vow  and  we  say,   ‘In  this  and  all  my  future  lives,  I  will  work  for  the  liberaPon   of   all  beings.’  Beings  
are  very  very  different.  If  we’re  going  to  help  different  people,  we  have  to  be  able  to  meet  them  as  they  
are,   otherwise  we’re  doing   a   violence  on   them  in   pulling   them   into  our  world.  To   meet   people  where  
they  are  means  we  have  to  change.  If  we’re  going  to  offer  ourselves  in  different   forms  for  others,  that  is  
easier  if   we  don’t  have  a  home  base  of  thinking  ‘this  is  who  I  am.’  Because  otherwise,  we  start  to  feel  it’s  
a  sacrifice:  ‘I  am  doing  this  for   you.  I  am  going  out  of  my  comfort  zone,  I’m  going  out  of  where  I  feel  okay  
in  order  to  help   you,   and  you  should  be   humble  and  grateful,’  ‘Because   I  am  a   good  person.’  And  when  
you  do  that,  the  whole  thing  loses  it’s  meaning.
 P a g e  |  25

So,  the  movement  of   generosity,  to  be  relaxed  and  easy,  has  to  be   cut  free  of  a  home-­‐base.  That  is   to  
say,  there  is  no  parAcular  shape  of  ‘I,  me,  myself.’  ‘I,  me,   myself’  manifests  in  different  ways  according   to  
different  circumstances.  What  does  it  manifest  from?  The  open  nature  of  the  mind.

The   wisdom   of   recognizing   there   is   no   fixed   essence   in   myself,   or   in   other   beings,   means   that  
compassion  is   a  ceaseless  movement  of   developing   ourselves  in  different  ways.   That  becomes  a  great  
holiday,  but  in  order  to  do  that,  we  have  to  loosen  up  our  experience  of  the  ego.

Clearly,  we   all   have  our   own   kind   of   body.   Some   people’s  bodies   are  very  healthy,   others  are   not   so  
healthy.  Some  people  have  young  bodies,  some  people  have  older  bodies.  We  have  different  knowledge  
bases  that  we  built  up,  some  people  know  many  languages,  others  not  so  much.  Some  people  have  skills  
that  they  can  make  money  very  easily  with,  other  people  find  that  very  difficult.

So,  the  kind  of  profile  that  we  have,  gives  us  access  to   the  world  in  different  ways.  We’re  not   like  angels  
flying   in  the  sky   and   just   float  down  and   become   anything   at  all.   So,  there  is  a  kind   of   dialecAc   here  
between  the  openness  of  the  heart  in  its  availability  to  meet  the   other  as  they   are,  and   the  actuality  of  
our  embodied  situaAon.  This  is  important  to   pay   aLenAon  to  because   if   you   don’t  support  the  body,  
that’s  not  helpful,  but  if  you’re  overprotecAve  of  the  body  you  never  manage  to  achieve  very  much.

We  need  to   remain  aware  of  the  impermanent  nature  of  our   manifestaAon.  None  of  us  knows  how  long  
we’re  going   to  live.   At   any  moment  some  aberrant  form   can  transform  our  body  –   we  get  a  stroke,  we  
get  a  cancer.  There  are  endless  numbers  of  diseases  which  exist   in  the  world  whereby  we  can  become  
crippled  and  die.

That  means  that   what  we  are  now  is   not  some  self-­‐exisAng  form,   rather  we  are  being  held   in  place  by  
the   invisible  threads  of   dependent   co-­‐originaAon.   Even   the   diseases  we   get   are  context   determined.  
With  some  diseases,  if  you  are  living  in  the  West  you   can  get  treatment  and  recover  but  if  you  are  living  
in  Africa  that   is  not   so   likely.   How   will   I  stay   open   to  the  world?   You  can’t   do   that   as  an   act   of   will,  
because   deciding   ‘I   am  going  to   help   other   people,’  although   it  sounds  sweet,   has  embedded  in   it   a  
limitaAon  of  ‘I  am  the  one  who  is  going  to  do  it’.  

Meditate  sky  to  sky

That   is  why  the  central   point   in   all   the   schools  of   dharma  is  to  invesAgate  what  is  the   meaning   of   ‘I.’  
What  is  self  idenAficaAon?  Or,  in  other   language,  what  is  the  ground  of   my  being?  When   we  see  that  the  
ground  of  being   is  unborn  empAness,  then  this  form   which  arises  is  just  a  small  part  of   the  potenAal  of  
experience.  So,  if   you’re  out  walking  and  you  see  the  beauAful  mist  in  the  valley,  in  the  moment  of  being  
touched   by   the   gorgeousness   of   the   trees  just   poking   though   the   mist,   that   is   your   world.   Perhaps  
someone  could  have  wheeled  you  out  there,  if  you   were  in   a  wheelchair,  and  you  would   sAll  have  that  
experience,  as  long  as  you  can  open  to  what  is  there.  That’s  a  central  point.  

So  in  the  meditaAon  instrucAon,  the  basic  encouragement   is  to  meditate  sky  to  sky.   That  is  to  say,  in  the  
centre   of  your   heart  is  an  infinite  sky,  and   in  front   of  you  is  the  infinite   sky.  Moving  in  the  external  sky  
are  all  the  colours  and  shapes  of  the  world,  and   moving  in  the  internal  sky   are  all  the  thoughts,  feelings,  
and   sensaAons.   These   are   movements   in   space.   Outer   space,   inner   space   –   it’s   the   same   space.   In  
Sanskrit   that’s  called   the  dharmadhatu,   the  spaciousness   within   which   all   dharmas,   all   phenomena,  
arise.

So   when   we  take  refuge  in   the   dharma,  we’re  taking   refuge   in   how   things  are   in   themselves,   which  
means  observing   the  drivers  of   our  own  acAvity,  observing   the  spirals  of  our   habitual  obsessions  –  what  
we  get  caught  up   in,   and  observing   how  –   although   they’re  very  intense  –   they  rapidly   vanish.   If   we  
aLend  to  the  intensity,  it’s  like  a  demand,  we  have  to   follow  them,  we  have  to   do  what   they  say.  But,  if  
we  just  sit  sAll  and  observe,  they  vanish.  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  26

So   now   we   have   two   aspects  in   all   arising   experience:   intensity   and  transience.   Which   one   do   we   Alt  
towards?   Once  you   start  to  see   the  transience,  you  don’t  have   to   take  it  so  seriously.  It’s  just  passing  
though.

If   you  think   of  the   last  three  years  of   your  life,   most   of  us  have  had  some   fairly   intense  experiences   –  
sickness  in  the  family,  or  children,  or  something  or  other.  There’s  been  something  to  worry   about.   Then  
ajer   a  while,  what  we  were  worrying  about  is  not  something   we’re  worrying   about  any  longer.   Why?  
Because  we’re  worrying  about  something  else.  So,  what  we  were  worrying   about  had  an  intensity,  which  
acted   like   a   powerful  hook   –   ‘you  have   to   pay   a>enPon   to   this,   it’s   very  important’   –   but  even   in   its  
importance  it  was  already  going.  

This   is   why   impermanence   is   taught   in   all   the   buddhist   schools,   because   it’s   such   an   important  
understanding.  If  you  see  the   impermanence  of  things  it  doesn’t  mean  that  they’re   not  there  at  all,  but  
that  they   are  there  and  therefore  don’t  over  invest  them   with  too  much  importance.  Just  allow  them   to  
be  there,   and  they  go.  Be  there,  and   they  go.  You  can  have   a  full  phenomenological   aLenAon  –  you  can  
see  the  shapes,  the  colours,  the  smells;  you  can  be   fully  in  touch  with   the  moment,   but  it’s  not  being  
invested  with  the  significance  that,‘This   is   so  special.   I’ll  die   without  this.  This  is  the   meaning   of   my  life,’  
Thinking   back  over  the  years,  many  many  things  have  been  the  meaning  of  our  life,   and  then  they  have  
gone.

We  pour   ourselves  into  different  moments  like  water   into  jugs  of  different  shapes.  When  the  water  is  in  
that   jug,   that   seems  to  be  the  thing   itself.   Then  the  jug   breaks  and  the   water  goes  out  and  flows  into  
something   else,  and  something   else.   This  is  the  history   of   our   lives.  So   the   key   thing   is:   ‘Don’t  worry  
about  the  jug,  be  with  the  water’.  The  water  is  the  presence  of   the  one  who  experiences  the  aliveness  
which  is  the  conAnuing  factor  through  all  our  experience.

Taking  refuge  in  the  sangha:  We  are  always  and  already  in  it
Then   we  have  the   sangha,   or   the  assembly.  To   take  refuge  in  the   sangha  means,   tradiAonally,  that  we  
take   refuge  in  the  bodhisaLva  sangha,   the  group  of   people  surrounding   the  Buddha,  those   who  have  
high   aLainment  and   good   qualiAes.  More  generally,   it   means   the   associaAon  of   all  that  is  associated.  
That  is  to  say,  everything  in  this  room  is  linked,   and  everything  in  this  room  is  linked  to   what  is  outside.  
There  are  no  self-­‐exisAng  phenomena  in  the  world.  

So,  in   taking   refuge   in   the   sangha  –   sangha  in   Sanskrit  simply   means   ‘to   join’  or   ‘to   meet’  –   to  take  
refuge   in   the   meeAng   means   you   take   refuge   in   everything   that   meets,   which   is   the   heart   of   the  
Buddhist  teaching  on  dependent  co-­‐originaAon.   On  the  basis  of  this  arising,  that  arises.  Each  thing   leads  
into  another  thing.   Each  moment  of  our  lives  is  connected  with  the  other.  Each  thing  that’s  happening  in  
the  farmers’  acAvity  out  in  the  fields  affects  us,  because  the  farmers  are  affected  by  the  cost  of  ferAlizer,  
and  by  the  business  people  in  Frankfurt  who  are  trading  on  corn  futures,  and  so  on.  The  cost   of  corn  for  
the  farmer  is  determined  by   the  hedge  funds,  and   the  hedge  funds  are  determined  by   the  narcissisAc  
fantasies  of   the  bankers  and  so  on.      There  are  many  many   factors  that  lead   into   parAcular  ways  that  
people  operate,  and  all  of  us  are  caught  up  in  this  interlinked  matrix  of  co-­‐emergence,  of  arising.  

This  is  the  real   meaning   of   taking   refuge  in   the  sangha.   It’s  not   so   much   that   we’re   relying   on   holy  
people  who  are  going  to  save  us,  it’s  an  awakening   to  the  fact  that  we  are  always  and  already  in  it.  We’re  
not  standing  on  the   threshold,  on  the  doorstep  of   life,   deciding   will   we  go  in   or  not.   We  don’t  have  a  
private  world  from  which  we  go  out  to  be  with  other  people.  Our   world  is  always  the  world.  The  idea  
that  you  can  live  in  a  private  bubble  is  a  complete  illusion.   Our  world  is  other   people,  is  the  animals,  the  
insect,  the  weather,  and  so  on.  So  we  are  in  it  together.

In  taking   refuge   in   the  sangha,   is  a  sense  of   having   to  parAcipate,   of   taking   your   place,  of   being  with  
others.  That  then  raises  all   sorts  of   quesAons  for   us:   ‘How  will   I  manifest   with  other  people?   What  is  
required?  Do  I  follow  the  invitaPons  of  others?  Do   I  take   a  leadership  role?   What  will  be  right?’  Nobody  
 P a g e  |  27

can  tell  you.  There  is  no  rulebook.  ‘So  what  will   I  do?’  Well,  you  have  to  be  there  to  work   it  out  –   and  if  
you  really  are  there  you  don’t  have  to  work  it  out.

Once  you  are  more  at  ease  and  you   trust   it   will  be  okay,  you   don’t  need  to   have  rules  and  regulaAons  in  
your  mind.  If  you  hang  onto  them,  they’ll   get  in  the  way  of  being   there.   Once  you’ve  been  doing   these  
kind   of   acAviAes  for  a  while,   and  somebody   asks  what  you  do,  you  can   say   even  less  than   somebody  
who’s  in  the  first  year  of   their   training,  because  the  beginners  have  all  their   rule  books  ready   to   hand  
and  can  spout  it  out  like  a  parrot,  but  the  experienced  person  says,  ‘Well,  I  just  see   what’s  necessary  and  
…’  

That’s  the  real  confidence   in  life,  isn’t  it?  Will  we   trust  it  will  be  okay?   Why  will  it  be  okay?  Because  we  
are  part  of   it.   This  is  the  basic   principle  of  taking   refuge   in  the  sangha,  is  trusAng   parAcipaAon  –   which  
means   being   in   our   bodies,   feeling   all   the   sensory   input,   and   allowing   that   to   feed   into   our   free  
response.   Not   as   a   kind   of   taking   it   in,   processing,   and   feeding   it   back,   but   just   in   the   automaAc  
movement  of  the  response.

If   you  play  tennis,  once  you’ve  hit  the   ball  and   it’s  passing   oer  to  the  other   person,   you   see  the  other  
person  running  towards  the  ball,  and   how  their  body   is  moving   to  prepare  to  hit  the  ball  towards  you   –  
your   own  body   is  already  starAng   to   move,   because   you’re   ge:ng   an  immediate  embodied   sense  of  
how  the  pressure  in   their  arm  is  going  to  return  the  ball  towards  you.  It’s  like  one  connected  system  is  
flowing  through.

This   is   the   heart   of   what,   in   dzogchen   is   called   lhundrup.   Lhundrup   means   effortlessly   arising   or  
immediately  manifest.   It  means  that  the  world  is  not   made  up  of  separate  enAAes  who  have  to  meet  as  
strangers  but   that   by  relaxing   any   estrangement   from  grasping   at  individual  essences,   we’re  then   not  
strangers,   we’re   not   estranged,   we’re   not   alienated.   It   is   actually   the   basis   of   dissolving   ignorance,  
because  ignorance  is  alienaAon.

So  taking  refuge  in  Buddha,  dharma,  and  sangha,  can  be  understood  on  many  different  levels.  

Bodhisattva  vow:  other  people  are  our  world

We  also  make  an  intenAon   to   be  available  for  all  senAent  beings  and  to  offer  whatever  qualiAes  we  have  
in  their  service.  Why  would   be  do  that?   Why  shouldn’t   we  privilege   ourselves  first?   Well,   number  one,  
you  get  very  lonely  when  you  do  that.  Loneliness  and  boredom  are  very  important  experiences.  They’re  
the  feeling   tone   or  the  taste   of  being   cut  off.   We  get   bored   when  we   can’t  find  a   connecAon  with  the  
world.  

Other  people  are  our  world.  This  is  the  most  fundamental  understanding.   For   as  long  as  we  see  other  
people   as  separate  we   will   be   making   effort   to   join   with   them,   and   that   effort   will   condemn   us   to  
arAficiality.  As  soon  as  we  see  that  the  one  thing  that  is   not  a   construct  is  that  we  are  in  this   together,  
then  being  available  for  others  is  as  normal  as  breathing.

Being  connected  to  others   is  the  on-­‐going   possibility   of  offering  them  the  space  within  which  they   can  
integrate  their   manifestaAon   with  the  ground.   We’re   not  taking   people   from  one  place   to   some  other  
place.   It’s  not  like   being   a  kind   of   travel   agent  and  giving   people   nice  dharma  holidays.         There  is  
nowhere   else   to  go  except   where  you   are.  So  the  quesAon  is  always  ‘How  can  we   help  other  people  be  
where  they  are?’  and  the  best  way  to  do  that  is  to  be  where  we  are.  The  more  relaxed  we  are,  that  gives  
people  a  confidence  that  it’s  okay   to   relax,  that  it’s  okay   to  be  less  defended.  Whereas  if   we’re  selling  
something,   if   we’re   proposiAonal,   if   we’ve   got   some  dogma   or   some   truth,   people   may   have   some  
hunger   for  that,  but  at  a  certain  point  it   feels  a  bit  much,  because  in  order  to   fit  in   with   your  noAon  of  
my  salvaAon,  I  have  to  change  myself.  

The  parAcular  quality  of  dzogchen  pracAce  is  that  nothing  in  your  life  has  to  change.   It’s  not  saying  that  
you  should  change  your  behaviour   or  your  belief  system.  Instead  you  look  at  your  beliefs  to  see  whether  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  28

they’re   really  reliable.  It’s  not   about  believing  more  or  believing   differently.   But  it  is  about  moving  from  
belief  into  direct  experience.

In  the  tradiAonal  example  they  say  a  belief  is  like  a  piece  of  cloth   that’s  sewn  onto  a  torn  garment,  like  a  
patch.  The  patch  and   the  cloth  are  never   the  same;   the  patch   will   come  off   –   it’s   not   woven  into  the  
texture  of   the  garment.   But  if   you   have   direct   experience,  then   your  own   life  is  the  living   texture  of  
awareness,  and  that  then  is  strong  and  robust  and  can  deal  with  all  situaAons.

Now  we  will  recite  this  verse  together.  The  pracAce  is  to  recite  it  slowly,  to  be  present  in  the  sound  as  it’s  
arising.   Although  the  semanAc  meaning,  the  meaning   of   the  words,   is  important,   in   some   ways  more  
important  is  the  energeAc  experience  of  expressing  sound  and  seeing  sound  arising   from  silence.  Out  of  
this  open  empty  silence,  sound  arises  and  vanishes.  So  there  you  have  the  illusory  nature  of  phenomena  
revealed.

བདག་གིས་9ིན་སོགས་བ:ིས་པའི་བསོད་ནམས་+ིས།
DAG GI JIN SOG GYI PAI SO NAM KYI
I doing generosity other perfections doing, practicing virtue through
Through  the  virtue  of  practicing  generosity  and  the  other  perfections

འ=ོ་ལ་ཕན་?ིར་སངས་$ས་འ@བ་པར་ཤོག།
DRO LA PHEN CHIR SANG GYE DRUB PAR SHO
all beings to benefit in order to buddha accomplish may it happen
May  I  attain  buddhahood  for  the  bene?it  of  all  beings

Through the virtue of practicing generosity and the other perfections

May I attain buddhahood for the benefit of all beings.

Sitting  practice

Now  let’s  do   some  basic   si:ng  pracAce.  We  do  this  si:ng   in  a  comfortable   way.   Generally  in   dzogchen  
we  do   the   pracAce  with  our   eyes   open,  le:ng   the   gaze   rest   in   the  space  in   front   of   you.  We’re  not  
staring  at  the  wall  or  at   something  like  that,  but   trying   to  let  the  gaze   just  rest  in  space.   If  you  find  that  
kind  of  pracAce  difficult  you  can  just  lower  your   gaze  and  run  it  down  the  line  of  your  nose  with  the  eyes  
slightly  open,  or  you  can  close  your  eyes.   The  main  thing  is  that   you  can  find  a  pathway  for  yourself  into  
the   experience.  This  opens  us  up  to  the  field  of  what’s  occurring,  because  all  the   Ame  we’re  working   to  
dissolve  the  arAficial  disAncAon  between  inside  and  outside,  between  self  and  other.  

Then  we  relax   into  the  out-­‐breath,  we  support  this  by  making  the  sound  of  Aa.  Aa  is  a  releasing  sound,  it  
allows  the  tensions  in   the   body   to  release   out   so   that  various  things   that   we’re   holding   through   our  
musculature,   through   our   sensaAons  and   thoughts   and   so   on   are   just   released.   Symbolically,   in   the  
tradiAon,   Aa   represents   empAness   –   Aa   is   the   seed   syllable   of   the   prajnaparamita,   and   of   the  
prajnaparamita  literature,  the  literature  on  empAness.

So   in   releasing   we’re   seeing   that   all   that   we’ve   held   to,   all   that   creates   tensions   in   ourselves,   is  
generated  because  subject  seems  real,  object  seems  real,  and  the  connecAon  between  them  seems  real.  
In   the   tradiAon   these   are   called   the   three   wheels,   or   the   three   circles,   and   when   they’re   moving  
together  they  generate  the  sense   of  a  fixed  solid   world.   So  when  we  say  Aa,  just  open  that  up,   into  a  
state   of   not  knowing   anything  at  all,  because,  again,  it’s  about  le:ng  go  of  cogniAon.  CogniAons,  linked  
thoughts,   thinking,   is   very   helpful   for   making   paLerns;   it’s   helpful   for   communicaAon.   But   in   being  
caught   up  into  that  thinking,  we’re  caught  up  into   the  realm  of  acAvity  and  movement.  If  we  want   to  be  
close   to   that   which   is  given,   to   the  natural  state   of   the  mind   itself,   we  have   to   release   this   web   of  
 P a g e  |  29

constructed   meaning,  in   order  to  appreciate  intrinsic  meaning,  or   intrinsic  value  –   that  which   is  there  
from  the  very  beginning,  which  is  the  natural  state  of  the  mind.

So  we  say  this  syllable  Aa  three  Ames,  and  we  can  do  it  in  various  ways,  but  this  Ame  we’re  just  releasing  
into  the   open  space  in  front  of   us,   and  then   we  sit,  and  whatever   arises,   we  just   allow  it  to  be  there  
without  any  interference.  Not  pushing   away,  not  pulling   toward  ourselves.  As  before,  if   you  get  caught  
up  in  any   parAcular   thoughts  or   feelings,   as  soon  as  you   recognize  that,  you  just  release  them.  Don’t  
worry   about  where   you’ve  gone  or   why   you   went  there  or   whether   it’s   important.   SomeAmes  when  
we’re  relaxed  like   this  we  get   some  very  interesAng  ideas,  and  we  might   think  ‘Oh,  I  have   to   remember  
this,  this  is  very  important.’  This  is  very   tempAng,  but   it’s  important  just  to   let  everything  go.  It  doesn’t  
maLer  at  all.  Just  let  it  go.

This  is  a  point,  a  crossroads,  where  we   really   are  making  a  decision  that  openness  is   more  important  
than  parAcular  substances.  There  will   always  be  interesAng   ideas,  there  will  always  be   things  which   are  
important.  Why   is  this  important?   It’s  important   for  me  in  the   parAcular   shape  of  my  life.  This  beauAful  
tempAng   thought  is  confirming  my  individual  idenAty,  which  may   be  very  sweet,  but  it  is  the  complete  
opposite  of  what  the  meditaAon  pracAce  is  about.        The  meditaAon  pracAce  is  to  dissolve,  to   give   us  a  
holiday   from,   a  moment  of   space  from,  the  preoccupaAon   with  our   habitual   karmic  shape,  and  to  see  
the  open  dimension  of  awareness.

So,   in  the   text  it  says,  ‘Whatever  comes,  comes,  whatever  goes,  goes.’  Don’t  block  it  in   its  arising,  and  
don’t  block  it  in  its  passing,  and  in  that  way   the  free  pulsaAon  of  movement  in   the  space   of  becoming  
starts  to  become  clear.

In   this   kind   of   pracAce   the   main   thing   is   awareness   rather   than   concentraAon.   If   you’re   doing   a  
concentraAon  pracAce  it  can  be  important  not  to  move  your  body.  However  many  of  you  are  not  used  to  
si:ng   on  the  floor,  so  your  hips  and  your  knees  are  likely  to  get  sore  so  in  this  type  of  pracAce,  you  may  
move   your  body.  Moving  your  body  does  not  mean  that  you   also   move  your  mind.        If   you’re   trying   to  
hold   your   body   in  place   and  are   in   pain,   not   only   will  your  body  be  twitching,   but   your   mind   will  be  
acAvated  by  that  as  well,   and   it  will  develop  into   some  kind   of  ego   struggle,   a  kind  of  pushing   through  
with  strength   and  resilience   and  so  on.  These  are  not  the  qualiAes  that  this  parAcular  kind  of  pracAce  is  
going  for.  So  if  your   leg  gets  sAff  you  can  just  stretch  it.  But  in  the  moment  of   stretching   your  leg,  it’s  just  
an  impermanent  occurrence,  and  you  can  integrate  the  movement  of  the  body  into  space.

[PracAce]

So,   we’ll  do  this  pracAce  many   Ames.  Since  it’s  a   pracAce   which  is  not  about  effort,  we   do  it  for  fairly  
short  periods  of  Ame  in  order  to  maintain  a  freshness.  As  soon   as  you  get  into  struggling,   and  trying   to  
moAvate  and   mobilize   yourself,  you’re  already   back   in   a  dualisAc  structure:   ‘I   have   to   make  myself   do  
this.’   Although   that   kind   of   understanding   can   be   very   helpful   for   doing   some   kinds  of   pracAce,   for  
example  prostraAons  or  mandala  offerings,  it’s  not  at  all  helpful  here.

In   de-­‐centering   the  ego,  the  ego  doesn’t  have   to   die.  That   is  to  say,  our  sense  of  being  an  individual  is  
not  a   fundamental  problem  –   rather  it’s  a  contextual  problem.  When  you  lose  the  context  of  your   own  
openness,  all  you’ve  got  is  your  noAon  of  who  you  are,  which  is  built  up  of  memories  and  thoughts  and  
so   on.  In   loosening   that,   you  get  more  sense  of   openness  and   empAness,   but   also   more   freedom   to  
become   whatever   is  required.  It’s   not   that  we’re  hoping   to   get  a   state  where   there   is   no   self.   In  the  
Tibetan   they   say  dag  me   which  you  could   translate  as  ‘no  I’  or  ‘no  self.’   EssenAally  what  it   means  is  no  
intrinsic  self,  that  is  to  say  no  self-­‐exisAng  self,  no  self-­‐proving  self,  no  enAty  which  exists  in  and  of  itself.  
Whatever   we  are  is  historically  developed,  contextually  developed.  It  doesn’t  mean  that  we  don’t  exist,  
but  we   exist   as   par.cipants.   We  exist   as   part   of   something   which   is   unfolding.   We   speak   parAcular  
languages  because   of   our  educaAon  and  the   families  we  grew  up   in.   We’re  drawn   to  certain  colours,  
shapes,   acAviAes   because   of   the   influences   from   our   environment.   So   what   I   call   ‘myself’   operates  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  30

harmfully  in  that  it  seals  us  inside  a  kind   of  egg  where  we  don’t   remember   the  fact  that  all  that  we  have  
belongs  to  the  world.  

For  example,  everything  in  this  room  has  come  from   somewhere   else.  We  could   say,   ‘Everything  here  
belongs   to  this  monastery  so  they  belong  here,’  but  they’ve  all  come  from  different   places,  some  of  the  
painAngs  from  Nepal,   maybe  some  of   the  statues  from   Tibet,   some  of  the  paints  have  come  from  the  
local   paint  shop,   some  of   the  furniture  from   Ikea   perhaps.   Everything   is   imported.   When   it’s   here,   it  
seems  to  be  here,  and  in  its  here-­‐ness  –   in  the  appropriateness  of   it  being  here  we  forget  that  it  came  
from  somewhere  else.  

This  is  exactly  the  same   posiAon  with  ourselves.  All  the  knowledge  and   skills  we  have,  we’ve  acquired  
through  relaAons   with  others,  whether  it  was  from  parents,  or  in  schools,  or  from   books  or  televisions,  
or  whatever.   We  are  communicaAve  creatures.   The  world   nurtures  us  and   we   nurture   the  world,  and  
this  is  the  on-­‐going  interacAon  of  our  being.

To  say  that  I   exist  as  an   independent  enAty   is   an  illusion.  To   say  that   I  don’t  exist   at  all  would  be  quite  
false.  So  we  have  to   be  very  careful.   Buddhist   books   may  say  that   there  is  ‘no   self’.   So  what  does  this  
mean?  To   say   there’s  nothing  at  all  is  a  nihilisAc  view,  which  is  one  of  the  extreme  views  which,  from  the  
earliest   teachings  of  the  Buddha’s  Ame,  is  seen   as  unhelpful.  If   we  way  that  we  truly   exist  is  eternalism,  
the  other   extreme  view  of   believing  that  there   is   a  conAnuity  to  a  self  substance  through  Ame.  Rather,  
we  emerge  in  context,  we  are   co-­‐emergent,  and   that  co-­‐emergence   is  arising   as  the  creaAvity   of   the  
ground.

So   again,   we   have   these   three   aspects   we   touched   on   yesterday:   the   openness   of   the   ground;   the  
immediacy  of   the  richness  of   the  field  of   experience;  and  within  that  the   parAcularity  of   our   gestures,  
and  our  gestures  are  part  of  our  connecAon  with  others.

The  more  self-­‐referenAal  we  are,  the  more   restricted   the  range  or  repertoire  of  our  moves  with   others.  
The   more   connected   we   are  with  others,   the  more   we  find   ourselves  doing   new   things.   Truly,   other  
people  are  a  holiday  from  the  self,  and  for  most  of  us  having  a  holiday  from  ourselves  is  preLy  nice!      

What dzogchen means by ‘ignorance’

I  will  say  a  liLle  more  about   the  understanding  of  ignorance  in  the  nyingmapa  reading  of  dzogchen,  and  
through   that   we  can   get  more  sense  of   how   this  view   illuminates  the  quesAon  of   being   a   conscious  
individual,  an  agent,  one  who  can  do  things.

Co-­‐emergent  ignorance
TradiAonally  it’s  explained  that  there  are  three,  or  four,  stages  of  ignorance.  In  the  first  stage,  the  relaxed  
openness  of  the  ground  and  the  closure  arise  simultaneously.  This  is  called  co-­‐emergent  ignorance.  That  
is  to  say,  the  openness  of  the  mind,  and  closure  –  absorpAon  into  a  thought  or  a  feeling  –   are  happening  
at  the  same  Ame.  

If  the  energy  of   the  closure  cuts   it  off   from  the  ground   there  is  then  the  sense  of  ‘I’  and  ‘you,’  self  and  
other.   For  example,  say  you  have  a  piece  of  paper,  and  you  take  a  pen  and  make  a  dot  on  the  paper.  The  
paper  is  clear  underneath  the  dot,  but  the  dot   seems  to  have  done  something  to  the  paper.  Now  your  
aLenAon  is  going  onto  the   dot,  and  the  shape  of   the  paper  is   changed.   Or  if  you  are  going   to  paint  or  
draw,  you  have  a  clear  piece  of  paper  and  anything  is  possible.  Any  kind  of   mark,  any  colour,  any  shape  is  
possible.  As  soon  as  you  make  that  first  small   mark,  the  potenAal  of   the  paper   is  now  changed.  You   are  
working   with   the   potenAal   of   the   paper   to   show   marks   yet   paradoxically   every   mark   you   make   is  
diminishing  the  potenAal  of  the  paper.  

This  indicates  what  buddhism  means  by  ignorance.   The  more  you   try  to  make  sense  of  what  is  going  on,  
that  is  to   say,  the   more  thoughts  manifest,  the  more  reliance  there   is  on   thoughts.  Although  each  of  
 P a g e  |  31

these  thoughts,   being   the  flower,   or  the  display,  or  the  radiance   of  the  open  mind   –  as  these  thoughts  
start  to  weave  together  into   paLern   and  they   become   the  means   by  which   we  lose   contact   with  the  
openness  of  the  mind.  

Mind   is  hidden   from   itself   by  its   own  creaAvity.   The  mind   is  not  intending  to  create  this.  It’s  not  like  a  
creator   god   who   has   some   master   plan,   so   in   that   sense   it’s   not   a   voliAonal   intenAonality.   It’s   a  
happenstance  –   it  just   happens.  Think  of  the  two  main  theories  of  life:  we  have  conspiracy  theory  and  
we’ve  got  the  fuck-­‐up  theory.        Buddhism  belongs  to  the  fuck-­‐up  theory.        It  just   happens,  and  all  this  
stuff  is  going  on,  and   in  the  midst  of   it  all  what  does  it   mean?   And  that’s  what  it’s  like  to  be  alive  isn’t  it?  
We  do  things,  and  we  don’t  really  know   why,  and   yet   other  people  say,  ‘You  did   it.’  ‘Yeah,  okay,  I  did  it.’  
but  our  agency  is  not  usually  raAonal  or  logical.  

I  live  in  London,  and  I  travel  in   the   rush-­‐hour  where  there  are   many  many  people  moving  together,  and  
it’s  like  a  kind  of  elaborate  dance.  When  I  come  out  of  the  staAon  at  the  hospital,  there’s  probably  two,  
three  thousand  people  moving   very  quickly,  and  mostly  we   don’t   bang  into  each  other.  But  we  have   to  
move  in   strange  direcAons  because  you  have  to  go  around  people.  You  go  around  some  person  and   you  
find   you’re   drijing   across   and   then   you   have   to   try   to   get   back   through   the   people.   That   kind   of  
movement  is  because  we  react  in  specific  situaAons.   You  can’t  just  say,  ‘I’m  going  in  a  straight  line’  and  
try   push   through   people.   It   wouldn’t   be   very   efficient   because   this  group   movement   is  bigger   than  
yourself,  so  we’re  adapAng  into  the  circumstances,  and  in  each   moment  of  adapAon,  we’re  re-­‐placed.  So  
the   phenomenology   of   our   existence   is   based   always   on   the   view   from   here.   We’re   actually   being  
relocated  moment-­‐by-­‐moment  according  to  circumstances.

However,  we  also  develop  a  game  plan.  That  is  to  say,  we  have  an  intenAon  to  achieve  something.  In  fact  
mental  health  depends  on  a  balance  between  the  capacity  to  be  situaAonally  adapAve  and  the  capacity  
to  have  an  intenAon.   If   you’re  always  adapAng  to  other  people,  you  get  very  placatory  and   you  get  lost.  
If  you’re  always  trying   to  impose   your  will,  you’ll  have  a  lot   of  conflict  since  you’re  living   in  a  monologic  
world,  a  world  of   your  own  discourse,  which  is  non-­‐relaAonal.  So,  once  self   and  other  come  into  being,  
self  –  because  it’s  actually  in  the  world  with  the  other  –  has  to  relate  to  the  other.  

This  can  lead  to  the   familiar  dynamic  of   dominance  and  submission.  Do  we  coerce  other  people   to  do  
what  we  want,  or  do   we  submit  and  go  along  with  what  they  want?  Usually   there  is  some  pulsaAon  of  
that   in   an   average   life,   but   some   people   take   a   very   dogmaAc   posiAon   and   always   seek   to   assert  
themselves.

Theravadin   and   mahayana  buddhism   places  a   lot   of   aLenAon   on   conscious  intenAonality:   ‘I   will   get  
enlightened  and   then  I  will   help  all  senPent  beings.’  There  is  this  clear  sense  of   agency,  that  is  to  say,  ‘I  
can   make   things   happen.’  But  that,  of   course,   is  an  aspiraAon,  actual   life  doesn’t  live   in   this  abstract  
domain   of   aspiraAons;  it  lives  in  a  world   with  real  other   people,  and   then  real  other   people  become  
obstacles  to  the  path.  

The   more  you  formulate  a  clear  intenAon   and  see  yourself   as  somebody  who  can  carry  it  through,  the  
more  you  will  have   obstacles.  Obstacles  arise  with  intenAon.  If  you  don’t  have  any  intenAon,  you  won’t  
have  any  obstacles.   This  is  one  of   the   reasons  why  old  people  are  happier.        There’s  a  very  interesAng  
piece  of   research  which  shows  that  when  people  are  in  their  early  twenAes  they   tend  to  be  very  happy,  
and   by  the  Ame  they  reach   forty  they  become  very  sad   and  depressed   and  average  mental  health  goes  
down,   and   by   the   Ame   you   get   into   your   fijies   and   sixAes,   it   goes   back   up   again.   I   find   that   very  
interesAng.  When  you’re  in  the  middle  of  your  life  everything   seems  very  important;  you’ve  got  to  hold  
it  together,  got  to  do  it.  Got  to,  got  to...  And  that,  of  course,  brings  a  lot  of  tension.  

As  you  get   older   and  you  noAce  that  you  are  beginning   to   forget   words,  or   that  you  have  gone   into  a  
room   but  you   don’t  know  why  you’ve  gone   into  it,   this  is  very   wonderful  because  then  you  can   hand  
back  your  card  that   says,  ‘I  am  a  raPonal  agent’.  Instead  you   think,  ‘Well,  let’s  see   what  happens.‘        You  
have  a  lot  of  freedom  then.

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  32

The  ignorance  of  deAining  everything

The   second   level   of   ignorance   is   called   the   ignorance   of   naming   everything,   or   defining   everything.  
Mental   acAvity   starts   with  working   out  what   is  what   –   what   is  occurring   objecAvely,  and  what   is  the  
reacAon   subjecAvely.  As  we  come  into  language  we   develop  more  and  more  skills  in  making  these  kind  
of   differenAaAons.  The  more  we  do   that,  the  more  the  world   is  cluLered,  because  we  now   see  the  fixity  
of  things.  The  world  is  now  full  of  solid  things  you  have  to   locate  yourself  in  relaAon  to.  What  that   does  
is  it  brings  your   horizon  closer  to  you.  When  you  see  a  child  of   about  two-­‐and-­‐a-­‐half,   once  they  are  able  
to   move  around   on   their   own,  when   they’re  moving   they’re  just  going.  That’s  very  amazing   –   and  the  
mother  is  thinking   about   all  the   dangers,   ‘Agh!   There’s   a  road,   the   cars   are   there,’  but   for  the  child,  
they’re  just  going.  But  as  we  get  bigger  the  world  is  becoming  more  dense,  more  close  to  us.

The  ignorance  of  the  stupidity  of  not  recognizing  the  nature  of  karma.
And  then  you  come  into  the  third  level  of   ignorance,  which  is  called  the  ignorance  of  the  stupidity  of  not  
recognizing  the   nature   of   karma.   Karma  says  every   acAon  has  a  consequence.  But  the  more  your  world  
is  in   front   of   your  nose,   the  more  your  immediate  concerns  feel   like  ‘this   is  it,‘and  you  don’t  think  about  
consequences.  You’ve  got  shopping  that  has  to   be  done,  and  planning  for  the  weekend,  and  you  need  to  
remember  to  phone  a  friend…  There   you  are,  just  in  the  acAvity:  ‘I’ve   got  to   do  these  things.’  Then   you  
look   in  your  diary,  ‘Oh  shit,  I  forgot  that.’  It  as  if  the  world  is  coming  at  you  and  you’re  trying   to  fill  what  
you  can  in  it.  Then  everything   closes  down  and  you  have  run  out  of  Ame.   There  is  just  the  facAcity  of  the  
given  moment.  ‘This  is  it.’  

However   from  the   point  of   view   of   karma,  this  is   it,   and   it   has  a  consequence.  What   then  about  the  
future?  ‘I   don’t  care,  I’ve  had  it  up  to  here!  Leave   me  alone,   I   just  have   to  finish  this.’  Everybody’s  very  
fraught,  just  full  of  stuff  and  in  that   vibratory   state  there’s  a  huge  accumulaAon  of  karma  since  we  don’t  
have  the  space  to  think  clearly  about  what  we’re  doing.  

Then  if  life  is  very   nice,   we  slip  to  the  other   side  and   become  complacent.   ‘Oh,   things’ll  be   fine.  Life’s  
good.  I’ll  always  be  happy.  I’ll  never   die.   The   banks  won’t  collapse...’  In  that  state  also  we’re  not  thinking  
in  terms  of  karma.

Karma  is  saying  samsara  is  like  a  spider’s  web  and   you  are  like  a  fly.  Every  Ame  the  fly  moves  in   the  web,  
something  is  happening.  Maybe  the  spider  is  coming   closer,  or  you  move  and  you  get   more  bound  into  
the  sAcky  substance  of   the  web.  Best  not  to  move.         ‘But  I’m  a  fly!  I  have  to  fly!’  That   is  very  hard  for  us  
because  we  believe,  ‘I  have  to  do   something.  I  have  energy,  I  have  to  express   myself.’  As  soon  as  babies  
are  born,  they’re  moving,  aren’t  they?  Movement  is  part  of  our  existence.  

Linking  the  three  forms  of  ignorance

So,   linking   these   three   forms   of   ignorance   together,   once   the   ground   spaciousness   of   awareness  
becomes  separated   experienAally   from   the  arising   of   experience,  experience   becomes  a  world   of   its  
own,  a  seemingly  self-­‐exisAng  world,  within  which  I   am  having   my   life,  and  I  feel  that  it   is  it’s  all  up   to  
me.   That   self-­‐referenAal   looping   becomes   the   basis   for   interpreAng   what’s   going   on   and   the   more  
contracted   our   world   becomes,   the   less   we   see   the   conAnuity   through   Ame   and   space   of   the  
consequences  of  our  acAons.

So  one  of   the  reasons  for  studying   impermanence  and   karma  is  to  see  that  our  frame  of   reference  is  
much  too  small.  We  have  to   think  in   a  very  big   way.  Being   reborn  –  if  we  just   imagine  that  you’re   going  
to  be  reborn!  This  body  that  you  have  now  will  die.  All  the  knowledge  that  you  have,  connected  with  this  
body,   will  vanish.   The  knowledge  you  have  of  where’s  the  best  place  to   buy   good  cheese  and  so   on   –  
these  very  important  facts  of  life...  All  gone!  

So   the  mind   goes  off,  carrying   very  liLle  with   it   except   vibraAons   and  charges,  which,  in  another   life,  
manifest  as  parAcular  energeAc  qualiAes.
 P a g e  |  33

There   is   an   English   expression,  ‘Don’t   put   all   your   eggs   in  one   basket.’   Hmm?   So,   don’t   put  all   your  
thoughts  into  a  vision   of   one   life.  As  soon  as   you   start  to  consider  the  possibility   of   more  lives,  then  
that’s  going  to  influence  what  you  do.

If   you’re  a  farmer  at   the  end  of  the  harvest  you  gather  the  crop,  the  wheat  or  whatever,  and  you  have  a  
big  pile.   You  have  to  decide  what  to  do  with  it.   Usually  you  to  divide  it  in   three  parts:  one  part  to  take  to  
the  market  to  sell  so  you  can  buy   other  things,  or  trade  with  it;  one  part  for   eaAng   through  the  winter;  
and   one  part   for  planAng  as  seed   the  next   spring.  If   you   forget  about  spring,  and   just   eat  a  lot,  then  
when  springAme  comes  you’ve  nothing   to   plant.  As  we  know,  from  many   poor   farmers  in   Africa,  that  
becomes  a  problem.  If  you  get  a  very  poor  harvest,  what  do  you  do  when  the  children  are  hungry?  You  
have  to  feed  them  the  grain  –  but  that’s  the  seed  grain.  So  this  is  really  a  problem.

When  life  becomes  very  intense,  we  forget  about  the  future.   We  don’t   put  something   aside.  ReflecAng  
on  karma  reminds  us   to  put   something  aside.  It’s  a  bit  like  raising  a  tent-­‐pole.  You  lay  your  tent  out  on  
the  ground  and  you  put   the   pegs  in  for  the  corners;  then  you   have  to  put  the  pole  in  the  middle  and  it  
lijs  the  tent  up.  So  karma  does  that,  it  lijs  it  up  –  gives  a  bit  more  space.  

Then  we  have  to  think,   ‘What’s  the  consequence  of  living  the  way   I  do?  How   will  I  survive  if   I’m  going  to  
create   all  these  twisted,   narrow,  negaPve  funcPons?’  There  are  various  things  you  can  do.  You  can   work  
on  the  outer   level  to  change  behaviour  and  to  live  life  in  a  beLer  way  and  to  calm   your  mind.  This  would  
be  dealing   with   this  third  level  of   ignorance.  You   can  start  to  look,  through  meditaAon,  at  the  way  your  
thoughts  arise,  and  explore  how  to  be  less  invested  in  them,  less  caught   by  them.  This  would  be  dealing  
with  the  second  level  of  ignorance.  

However   to   deconstruct   or   dissolve   the  first   level   of   ignorance,   you   have   to   look   at   the   mind   itself,  
because,  on  that  level  of   ignorance,  confusion  and  clarity   are  there  together.  For  example,  imagine   you  
are  in  front   of  you   a  mirror.  When   you   look  in  the   mirror,   what   do  you  see?   You   see  yourself   –   that’s  
obvious.  Yes,  it’s  obvious,  but  it’s  completely  stupid,  because  that’s  not  you.  That’s  a  reflecAon.  We  don’t  
see   the   reflecAon   as   a   reflecAon,   we   take  the   reflecAon   to   be  almost   like  a  kind   of   photograph,   as  
something  real  and  substanAal.   There  is  no  solidity  in   the  reflecAon.  The  reflecAon  is  not  contaminaAng  
the  mirror.

Metaphor  of  marks  on  a  sheet  of  paper  and  a  mirror

  If  you   have  a  piece  of  paper  and  you  have  a  pen,  and  you  make  a  mark  on  the  paper  with  the  pen,  it’s  
difficult  to   get  that  mark   out  of  the  paper.  The  paper  has  been  changed,  and   there  are  consequences  of  
what   you  can  do   with   that.  As  we  looked  earlier,  your  freedom   to   make  other  marks  is  constrained   by  
the  nature  of  the  first  mark  you  make.  But,  if   you  look  in  a  mirror,  and  you  see  this  parAcular   reflecAon,  
and   it’s  very  precise,   you  see  your  ears,  your   nose,  and   so  on;  if  you  then   turn  the  mirror  around  it   will  
show  everything  in  the  room.  There  will  be  no  mark,  or  no  trace,  of  the  image  of  your  face  on  the  mirror.

Like  a  piece  of  paper,  the  ego  has  been   marked,  and  marked,  and  marked,  with  a  great  accumulaAon  of  
marks  but  the  mind  itself,  awareness,  is  like  the  mirror.  It’s  not  an   illusion  that  we  get  marked  by  events.  
If  somebody   upsets  us  we  get  hurt   –  we  cry,  we  get  frightened,  we’re   not  sure,  we  become  mistrusvul,  
and  so  on.  These   are  normal  reacAons  to  what’s  going  on.   The  ego  is  a  shape  which  is   influenced   by  
other  shapes.   Shapes,  when   they  meet  together,  are  mutually  influencing.  The  reflecAon  and  the  mirror  
are   not   mutually   influencing   because   the   nature   of   the   mirror,   the   capacity   of   the   mirror   to   show  
reflecAons,   is  not   altered   by   the   reflecAon.   As   the   reflecAons   come   and   go   and   change,   the   mirror  
maintains  its  own  quality.

If  this  image  makes  sense  to  you,  it’s  can  be  useful  in  your   meditaAon.  Whenever  you  find  yourself  being  
marked   by   events   –   perhaps   being   worried   or   anxious   or   excited   or   depressed   –   that’s  paper   being  
marked.  It  got  to  you.  You  are  impacted  and  effected  and  changed.  That  is  a  sign   you’re  not  relaxed  and  
open.  As  soon  as  you  noAce  that,   you  can   relax   into   the  out-­‐breath  ‘Ooo,’   and   that   liLle   paLern   will  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  34

vanish  –   both   the  object  bit,   the  thoughts  that  were   in  your   head,   and   the   subjecAve   response,  the  
despondency,  the  physical  symptom.  All  of  that  vanishes.

In  that  moment  you  have  exactly   the  first  level  of   ignorance.  You   have  these  two   possibiliAes:  to  stay  
with  and  develop   the  thought  or  to  stay  with  the  experience.  If  you  stay  with  the  experience  –  even  if  it  
feels  terrible  and  exactly  what  you  don’t  want  –  it  goes.  The  dzogchen   tradiAon  says  there  is  one  ground  
and  two  paths.  So  in   that   moment,  if  you  go  into  the  thought,  believing  the  thought,  it  takes  you   on  the  
path  of   samsara.  If  you  relax   and  open  and  allow  the  experience  of  the  object-­‐side  and  subject-­‐side   to  
arise  and  pass,  it  cleans  the  mirror  as  it  goes  by.  It  leaves  no  trace.

That’s  what  is  meant  by  ‘the  self-­‐liberaAon  of  phenomena’.  Self-­‐liberaAon  is  a  term  that  you   find  a  great  
deal  in   dzogchen.   It   means  that  because  everything  is  impermanent,  you   don’t  have   to  be   the  editor,  
you  don’t  have  to  be  the  gardener,  you  don’t  have  to   be  Adying  things  up,  organizing  things  in  the  ‘right’  
way.   An   ego-­‐agency   is   not   required   because   all   arising   phenomena   are   impermanent.   Everything  
vanishes,  everything  vanishes.  

I   was   listening   on   the   radio   to   an   interview   with   a   man   in   America   who   had   been   in   a   solitary  
confinement  for  twenty-­‐seven  years  in  a  maximum-­‐security  prisons.  That’s  a  long  Ame.  He  said  that  the  
main  thing  is  each  Ame  you  get  up  in  the  morning  to  think,  ‘It’s  a   new  day.’  He  said,  ‘My  room  was  nine  
foot  by  six  foot  and  nothing  was  changing  inside  it,  but  each  day  is   a  new  day.’  Thinking  like  that,  he  said,  
was  the   reason  he  stayed  healthy.  I  find   that  very  wonderful,  very   clear.  In  some  old  movies  you  see  a  
prisoner’s  making   a  mark  on   the   wall  to  count  each  day’s  passing.   In  this  way  you  burden  yourself  with  
hopelessness,  as  week  piles  on  week,  months  on   month,  years  on  year.        Whereas  if  you   say,  ‘Oh,  new  
day!   Right.   Oh,   what   a   funny   li>le   room.’   then   you   are   keeping   some   spirit   of   freshness,   which,  
essenAally,  is  the  a:tude  of  dzogchen.  Dzogchen  is  concerned  with  freshness.

Garab Dorje. First point: direct introduction into your own nature.
We  will  now  talk  about  the   mind  more  directly.   The   teachings  of   dzogchen   in   the  human  world   come  
through  Garab  Dorje.  The  lineage  goes:  the  Primordial  Buddha,  Samantabhadra  or  Kuntu  Zangpo,   gave  a  
mind  transmission  to  the   Buddha  VajrasaLva,  or  Dorje  Sempa.  Garab  Dorje  got  teachings  directly   from  
VajrasaLva,  and   he  brought  these  teachings  into  the  human  world.  He  gave  many  teachings  but  not  very  
much  of  what  he  taught  has  come  down  to   us.   His  main  teachings   are  contained   in  these  three  verses,  
or  three  statements.  The  first  is  concerned  with  direct  introducAon  into  your  own  nature.

Direct  introducAon  means  to   be  able  to  see  your  own  nature.  This  can  be  described  in   words  and  with  
images,  but,  essenAally,  the  transmission  of  this  comes  through  meditaAon  pracAce.  Words  can  do  some  
of  the  work,  but  only   you   can  see  yourself.  Nobody  else  can  ever  see  your  mind,  and  in  fact,  even  you  
cannot  see  your  mind!

Buddhism  talks  a  lot  about  seeing   and   about   light,   but   in   fact  you  can’t  see  your  own  mind,   because  
your   mind  is  not   a  thing.   What   you   can   do   is   be   your   own   mind.   You   can   return  from   alienaAon   to  
presence   as  yourself.   Nowadays  many   people   translate  rigpa,  or   awareness,   as   ‘presence’.   What   it  is  
referring   to   is   not   to   be  anywhere  other   than   where  you   are.   Using   the  word   ‘Presence’   is  a   gesture  
towards  ge:ng  away  from  a  mentalisAc  language  of  cogniAons,  even  including  wisdom.

So,  what  is  this   mind?  Here  we  are;  we’re   all  alive.  We  can  register  things  going  on,  we  can  hear  these  
sounds  coming   from  outside.  To  be  alive  is  to  be  having   experience.  Who  is  the   experiencer?  Well,  I’m  
having  the  experience  so  it  must  be   me.  Who  is   the  one  who   says,  ‘I  am,  myself,   the   experiencer?’  You  
can  go  into  an  infinite  regression  with  this,  but  in   the  pracAce,  we  want  to   look  directly,  and  be  present  
as  the  experiencer.

This   experiencer   has   certain   qualiAes.   Firstly,   it’s   primordially   pure.   That   is   to   say   from   the   very  
beginning,  through  all  the  various  permutaAons  of   our  existence,  our  mind  has  been  like  the  mirror:  not  
 P a g e  |  35

touched   or  marked   by  any   event.   No   maLer   what  has  happened  to   us,  it  has  gone.  It   has   gone.   The  
traces  that  seem  to  remain  are  also  manifesAng  phenomena.

Going   back   to  the  prisoner,  of   course  some  days  he  would  be  remembering,  I’ve   been  here   ten   years.  
This  is  crap,  I  hate   this.’  When  these  thoughts  arise,  if  he  goes  into  that   bubble  his  world  will  become  
very  small.  What  he  was  able  to  see  is  that  if  you  let  go  of  something,  it’s  gone.  If  you  hang  onto  it,  it  will  
stay.

So,  the   natural  purity  of   the  mind,   what  in   Tibetan  is  called  kadag,  is  the  indestrucAble  nature  of   the  
mind.   The   mind  is  vajra,   means  like  a   diamond,  it’s   not  something  which   can   be  marked  or  harmed  or  
limited  in  any  way.  If  you  look  at  your  own  life,  there  are  many  marks  that  you  carry  around  your  heart  –  
many   wounds  and   bruises.   The  heart  itself   is   open   and   empty.   Where  are   these   bruises?   These   are  
paLerns  of   repeAAon,  of   repeAAon-­‐compulsion.  When  evoked,   these   movements  someAmes  grab   us  
around   the   neck,   someAmes   squeeze   our   belly.   We   get   trapped   ,‘Awh,   Oww,   Ugh.’   These   are  
movements.  A   movement  is  moving,  it’s  not  a  fixed  thing.  Due  to   certain   hooks  in  the  environment,  the  
limiAng  movement  arises  for  a  while,  and  then  vanishes.

Who  is  the  experiencer   of   the  experience?  As  long  as  you  don’t  recognize  the  nature  of   the  experiencer,  
you   are   trapped   in   the   flow   of   experiences   –   someAmes   up,   making   you   happy,   someAmes   down,  
making  you  sad.

However  the  mind  itself   is  never  changing.   The  mind   is  fresh  –   soma.  Soma  means  not   condiAoned  by  
anything   –  just  like  a  beauAful  fresh  peach,  it’s  just  fully   itself.  The  mind  is  also  naked  –  it’s  not  covered  
by  anything.

The  ego  is  movement  but  the  mind  never  moves

The  ego,  our  ego   sense  of   self,  is  covered  by  lots  of   things:  by  our  habits,  our  hopes,  fears,  intenAons,  
and  so  on,   but   each  of  these  is  just  a  movement   in  Ame,  and  when  you  start  to  invesAgate  the  ego,   you  
won’t  find   any  substance  in   it.  The   ego  is  movement   but   the   mind  itself   never   moves.   This  is  the   big  
difference.   If   you’re   caught   up   in   movement,   you’re   in   the   ego   terrain   of   duality,   and   you   will   be  
accumulaAng  karma.  If  you   really  relax   and  open,  and   you’re  just  being   with  the  movement  …  the  mind  
is  like  space.  The  thoughts  and  feelings  are  coming  through  space.

My  body,  because  it  exists  in   the  world,  is  in  this  room   in  a  parAcular  place.   So  I’m  si:ng  here,  and  I  see  
the  room  from  here.  Each   of  you  is  in   your   body,   and  due   to   that,  from   where  you’re  si:ng,  you  see  
parAcular  bits  of  the  room.   It  is  impossible  for  any  one  person  to  see  the  whole  room  at  once  because  if  
you  look   to   the  right,   you   see  that,  if   you  look   to   the  lej,  you   see  that.  To  be  embodied  through  the  
senses  means  you  get  a  parAcular  take  on  the  world,  a  parAcular  quality  of  experience  comes  to  you.  

But  the  mind  itself  is  not  a  thing  –  it’s  not  posiAoned   anywhere.  It  is  like  space.  Whenever  an  experience  
is  arising,   the  mind  is  there.   It’s  not  there  because  it’s  got  a  presidenAal  jet;   it’s  not   there  because  it’s  
got  a  chauffeur-­‐driven  car;   it’s  not  tele-­‐transporAng  itself  across  like  in  Star  Trek.  It’s  not  going  from   here  
to  there,  because  the  mind  is  always  here.  It  never  goes  ‘there.’  

When  we  get  caught  up  in  a  thought,  the  thought  takes  us  from  here  to  there.  One  minute  we’re  looking  
at  the  breath,  the  next  minute   we’re  off.  We  go  from  here  to   there.  But  the  mind   never   moves.  That  
doesn’t  mean  the  mind  is  nailed  down  and  fixed   someplace,  like  a  rock.  It  doesn’t  move  because  it’s  like  
space.  The  wind  moves  through  space;  the  rain  falls  through   space;  airplanes  go  through  space.  Space  is  
the   dimension   within   which   movement   occurs.   Similarly   the   mind   is   the   dimension   within   which  
everything   is  occurring.  Mind  itself  is  not  an  enAty.  For  that  reason   you  cannot  find  your  mind  but   also,  
you  cannot  lose  your  mind.

From  the  very  beginning  the  real  agent,   the  one  who  is  the  experiencer,  has  always  been  the  mind  itself.  
Unlike  ordinary   agency,  the  mind  does  not  have   to   work.  When   the  mirror  shows  a  reflecAon,  it’s  not  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  36

having  to  work  hard.  A  camera,  whether  it’s  an  old-­‐fashioned  one  or   a  new   digital  one  is  having  to   work  
to  make  a  photograph,  but  the  mirror  doesn’t  have  to   work  at  making  a  reflecAon.  The  reflecAon  is  just  
there,  because   the   potenAal  of   the   mirror  to  show  the  reflecAon,  and  the   object,   these  two  create  the  
reflecAon.  In  a  similar  way,  the  mind  itself  is  not  moving,  is  not  working.  The  mind  is  free  of  work.  

That’s   why   one   descripAon   of   these  great  yogis   is   ‘chatral’,  or   a   ‘chatralpa’   –   they   have  ceased   their  
work,  they  don’t  have  to  do  anything   any  more.  That  doesn’t  mean  that  things  don’t  happen.  It  means  
they’re   not   making   things   happen.   We   spend   a   lot   of   Ame   making   things   happen   because   they’re  
important  for   us  …  we’re  doing  things  as  a  means  to  an  end.  That  is  to  say,  we’re  caught  up   in  dualisAc  
intenAonality.  When  you’re   at  school  you  have  to  write  essays,  and   if   you  go  to  university   you’ve   got  
projects   and   things   to   do   because   you   want   to   get   a   degree.   You   want   to   and   you   want   to   –   it’s  
mushrooming  off  desires  into   the  future.  This  acAvity   is  taking  you  from  here  to   there.  People  say,  ‘That  
was  a   good   career   move,’  that  it  has  developed   your   career,  because  you   went   from  this   post  to  that  
post.  ‘Oh,  I’ve  had  promoPon.  I’ve  been  moved  up.’  So,  this  is  our  ordinary  domain  –  that  we’re  moving  
somewhere.  

Being   busy,  in  itself,  is  not  the  problem,   according  to  the  dzogchen  view.      Being  busy  as  the  one  who  is  
busy  –  that’s  the  problem.  The  busyness  is  movement  within  the  space  of  the  mind.  The  mind  is  sAll  and  
calm  and  open.   In  the  course  of  the  day,  many  many   things  happen  whether  you’re  teaching   in  a  class,  
or   seeing   paAents,  or  working  in  an  office  with  many  many  accounts  and  so  on   to  be  processed.  All  of  
this  is   movement.   Where  is   the   movement   occurring?   It’s  occurring   in  space.  Who   is  the  one  who  is  
making   it  happen?   Now   this  is   a  very   interesAng   quesAon,  because   this  is   a  real   point  of   temptaAon  
since  it’s  very  easy  for  us  to  come  back  into  our  sense  that  ‘I  am  making  it  happen.’

Think  of  a  tennis  compeAAon,  say   the  men’s  final  at  Wimbledon.   You  have  two  aggressive,  testosterone-­‐
driven  men,   each  determined  to  annihilate  the  other.  One  smashes  the  ball.  The  other  smashes  it   back.  
Who   is   the   master   of   the   game?   The   ball.   The   ball   determines   who   is   moving   where.   Now,   one  
descripAon   of   that  event   is  ‘FantasPc   stroke!  What   a   backhand.   Amazing!  How   did  he  do  it?’  The  ball  
made  him  do  it.   We  imagine  the  agency  as  being   inside  a  person,  but   the  agency  is  co-­‐emergent.   The  
person  is  linked  with  the  ball,   they  move  toward  the  ball,  they   have  a  repertoire  of   moves,  and  they  hit  
the   ball.  The  ball  made  them  hit.  So   that’s  the  important  thing  –   to  see  that  the  connecAons  determine  
the  acAon.  Say   you’re  in  your  kitchen  preparing  food.  You’ve  probably  got  different  knives.  Depending  on  
what  you’re  chopping  you  might  choose  different   knives.  A  big  turnip   is  quite  difficult  to  cut  into,  so   you  
probably  need   quite  a  strong,  broad-­‐bladed  knife  and  you  might   push  it  down  with  two  hands.  If  you’re  
chopping   liLle  green   beans   you   might   use   a  different   knife.  You   decide  which   knife   to  use?   No!   The  
vegetable  tells  you  what  kind  of  knife  to  use.  Hmm?      The  knife  arises  in   the  relaAonship  between   you  
and  the  vegetable.

The  central  thing   is  to  de-­‐centre  the  ego  and  experience   yourself   as  a  parAcipant.  If   the  mind  is  open,  
the  field  of  experience  includes  yourself.  We  emerge  in  the  world,  and  because  we’re  in  the  world,  we’re  
connected   –   the   knife,   the   chopping   board,   the   tomatoes,   the   carrots,   whatever   it   is   –   and   we’re  
chopping.  We’re  chopping  according   to   the  nature  of   the  dish  we  want  to  prepare.  So  we  don’t  say,  ‘I  
always  cut  carrots   this  way.’  That  would  be  stupid,  because  you  cut  carrots  in  different   ways  according  
to  what  you’re  trying  to  achieve.  

This  is  not  rocket   science,  but  it’s  ojen  hidden  from  us  because  we  live  in  a  world  of  a  personal  agenda,  
of   being   the   one   who   decides,   the   one   who   makes   things   happen.   All   of   that   is   actually   not   very  
necessary  because,  in  being  non-­‐dual  with   the  circumstances,  the  acAvity  arises  spontaneously.  We  talk  
in  different  ways  to  different  people.  If  you’re  talking  to  a  young  child  or   an   old  person,  if  you’re  talking  
to  someone   above  you   or   below   you   in   a  hierarchical   organizaAon   if   you’re   at   all  wise,   you’ll   talk   in  
different  ways.  That’s  just  how   it’s  done.  That  is,  the  words  come  out  of  you  according   to  who  you  see  in  
front  of  you.
 P a g e  |  37

So,  the  openness  of   the  mind  is  the  basis  for  the  arising   of  these  different  forms  of  behaviour.  It’s  not  
that  the  mind  has  a  parAcular  kind   of  agency  –  it  just   displays.  It’s  ready  to  display,  and  how  it  displays  
depends  on  the  context.  

The  difference  between  this  percepAon  and  ordinary   percepAon  is  that  if  I  am  living  in  my  skin  bag,  if  I’m  
living  in  my  isolated  self,  I  will  be  coming  towards  you,  or   I  will  experience  you  coming  towards  me.  That  
is  to  say,  there’s  a  spacial   differenAaAon,  which  means  that  there  are  two  separate  things,  two  separate  
beings.  Exactly  the  same  phenomena  are  revealed  differently  if   we  see  that  we’re   in  the  same   world   –  
that   we   start   from   the   ‘between’,   and   the   between   is  always   located   in   the   ground.   I   am   both   an  
experiencer  and   an   experience.  When  mind  as  the  mirror   reveals  whatever  is  occurring,  that  includes  
myself.  All   that  I  take  myself   to  be  is  experience.  This  is  not  an  abstract  proposiAon;   you  can  check  this  
out  for  yourself.  

I  have  just  moved   my   leg  because  my   hip  was  a  liLle  bit  sore.  The   pain  in  the  hip  told  me  to  move  my  
leg.  That   is  to  say,  my  experience  of   my  body  is  something  unfolding.   When  I  was  walking   around  the  
stupa  this  morning   my   hip   wasn’t  hurAng.  Si:ng   here  on  this  cushion   it   starts  to  hurt  a  liLle   bit   so  I  
move  my  leg.   I  don’t  have  a  fixed  body.  Of  course,  if  somebody   showed  me  a  photograph  taken  of   me,  I  
would  say,  ‘Oh,  that’s  me’   because  I  would  recognize  some  shape  of   my  body,  but  my  actual  experience  
of  being  alive  is  the  body’s  always  changing.  Is  that  the  same  for  you?

The  body  is  movement.  Our  emoAons  are  movement.  Our  mental  processes  are  movements.   This  is  the  
key   thing,   and   out   of   that   movement,   ego-­‐grasping,  or   duality,   or  belief   in   a  self,   concreAzes  certain  
paLerns  and  features,  and  through  that  we  create  the  sense  ‘This   is  me.  I  am  this.’  Of   course  we  have  to  
revise  whatever  proposiAon  we  make  again  and  again,  so  we’re  endlessly  telling  the  story  of  ourselves,  
because  it  only  exists  in  the  moment.

When  you   take  a  small  child   to  the  park  they’ll  run  to  the  swings,  then  to  the  slide,  then  to   the  climbing  
frame  and  from   Ame  to   Ame  they  will  look  or  call  to  you  to  make  sure  you  are  looking  at  them.  They   will  
insist   that   you   see   what   they   are   doing.   That’s   very   interesAng.   Why   do   children   want   to   be   seen?  
Because  it’s  only   real   when  it’s   shared.   We  exist  in  the  world  of   others.  The  child   is  very   wise  in  that  
moment  –   it  knows  ‘I  am  not  self-­‐validaPng.  I   need   your  validaPon.’  All  though  our  lives  we  seek  other  
peoples’  validaAon.

This  is  not  a  sign  of  some  kind  of  immaturity;   we  do  actually   share  the  world  with  others,  and  how  they  
are  with  us,  and  how  we   are  with  them   is   vital.  Being  connected,  being   seen,  responding,  is  part  of  the  
movement  of  existence.   If  you   don’t  see  the  child  coming  down  the  slide,  it’s  not  shared,  and  then  it’s  
gone,   and  it   doesn’t  come   back.   Each   moment   is  important.  So   if   the   child   wants   to   be  seen   twenty  
Ames  going  down  the  slide,  and   the  parent  says,  ‘But  I’ve  already  seen  you  doing  it,’  that’s  not  the  point.  
See  me  doing  it  again  and  again  because  each  Ame  it’s   different,  each  moment  is  fresh.  There  you  can  
see  how  difficult  it  is  for  many  adults  to  enter  into  the  world  of   the  child.  We  spend  much  more  Ame  and  
energy  as  a  culture  ge:ng  children  to  go  into  the  world  of   the   adult  than  ge:ng  adults  to  go  into  the  
world   of  the  child,   but  we   would  benefit   a  lot  more  going  into  the  world  of   the   child,  because  there  is  
such  a  lot  of  immediate  truth  in  that.  Shared  moments.

Can  you  see  with   fresh   eyes?  Is  it  happening   as  if   for  the  very   first   Ame,  or  are  you  within  a   world  of  
accumulaAon?  Generally  speaking,  in  buddhism   the  world  of  accumulaAon  is  the  world   of   ignorance.  So  
in   terms   of   the   five   skandhas,   the   five   basic   heaps   or   building   blocks   according   to   the   theravadin  
tradiAon,  the  fourth  one,  samskara,   means  compounding,  bringing  together.  In  Tibetan  it’s  called  duché;  
du  means  to  gather,  and  ché  means  to  make,  so  it’s  a  bringing  together  of  things.  

Samskara,   duché   is  represented  in  painAngs  of   The   Wheel  of   Life  as  a   poLer  working   on  a  his  wheel,  
taking   the  clay   and  turning   it  into   objects.  Once   the  object  exists,   once  it’s  removed  from  the   lump  of  
clay  and  takes   on  a  life  of  its  own,  then  you  know  what  it  is.  As  long   as  it’s   in  the  mass  of   the  clay,  the  
clay   could  be   anything.   Once  it  becomes  a   cup   you   think   ‘Oh,   it’s   a  cup.’   Unless  it’s  a  very  beauAful,  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  38

unusual  cup,  you’re  probably   not  going  to  look  at   it   very   much;  you  just   think,  ‘A  cup’s  a  cup.  I’ve  seen  a  
cup   before.’  In  this  way,  knowledge   makes  you   stupid,  makes  you  dull  because  you  know,  and  therefore  
you  don’t  have  to  look.  This  is  very  very  important.  

The   pracAce  is  to  keep   looking   with  fresh   eyes  because   fresh   eyes   are  open.   As  I  was   saying   earlier,  
there’s  a  saying  that  we  should  meditate,  and  also  live,  sky  to  sky.  In  front  of  you  is  this  infinity  of  vibrant  
experience   potenAal,   and  you   yourself   are   this  infinite  availability,  this  awareness,   which   is  open  and  
fresh,  and   empty  like  the  mirror.  And   there’s  this  moment,  and  this  moment,  and  this  moment,  and  this  
moment...  Each  of  these  is  fresh.

QuesAon:      Although  everything   is  arising  together,   we  ojen  find   ourselves  looking  for  something   extra.  
Is  it  the  ego  or  the  mind  which  is  searching?

James:                The   ego  is  the  mind  as  well.  Everything  is  the   mind.  So,   when   the   subject  loses  the  object,  
then  the  subject  will   seek   for  the  object,   because  a  subject  and  object  are  born  together,   and  this  is  
what  we’re   always   looking   for.  For  example,   in  the  story  Ovid  tells  about  Eros  he  describes  how  at  one  
Ame  all  human  beings   were  both  male   and   female,  and  then  as  a  punishment  they  got  separated.  And  
so   each   part,   the   man   and   the   woman   are  always   looking   for   their   missing   half   –   the   half   that   will  
complete  them.  And  you  could  take  that  as  a  story   about  the  nature  of   the  self,   or  that   we  recognize  
something’s  missing,  but  we’re  looking  in  the  wrong  place,  and  all  the  effort  that  we  make   to  find  that  
missing   bit,   when  its  projected  out  –   whether  it’s  in  a  love  story,   or   in  possessions,  or   in   children,   or  
ge:ng  a  nice  house,  or   a  good   holiday  or  taking   drugs,  it   could  be   anything   …  but   ‘Now  I’ve  found  this  
good  thing,  and  if  I  have  this  good  thing,  then  I  will  be  okay.’

However,  it’s   very   difficult  to  find   a  thing  that  will  always  be  with   you,  because  even   if   you  get  a   nice  
house,   in  order  to  pay   for  your   nice  house  you   have  to  go  out  to  work,  and  when   you’re   at  work  you’re  
not  having  your  nice  house.  So  it’s  like  that.  The  object  is  always  going  to  be  vanishing  in  Ame.  Which  is  
why   we’re   always  on   this   treadmill,   looking   for  some   new   object  and   some   new   object,   because   no  
object  can  complete  the  subject  for  long.  It  can  for  a  while,  and  you  get  an  immersion,  and  then  it’s  gone  
–  the  moment  is  gone.  And   then  what?  Do  it  again,  do  it  again.       The  object  will  always  be  vanishing,  and  
the  subject’s  parAcular  need  for  the  object  will  also  vanish.  

The  divorce  rate  is  very  high  now  but  let’s  say,  two  people  do  manage  to  stay  together.  It’s  highly  unlikely  
that  they  stay  together  without  some  degree  of  dissaAsfacAon,  because  this  beloved  other  is  somehow  
not  quite  what  we  had  ordered.  How   can  this  be?  I  mean,  it  necessarily  would  be  the  case,   because  the  
subject   is   looking   for   a   parAcular   thing   and   the   object,   the   other   person,   will   change.   We   too   will  
change,   so  what  we  are  looking  for  now  is   no  longer  this  person.  Then  we  feel  sad  and  ask,  ‘Why  can’t  
you   give   me   everything   I   need?’   The   soluAon   to   this   endless   problem,   from   the   point   of   view   of  
dzogchen,   is   to  look   for   the   bit   that   is   really   missing,   which   is  the   ground   of   our   being.   The  subject,  
instead   of   projecAng   out   a   fantasy   of   compleAon   onto   the   object,   experiences   its   own   natural  
compleAon   through  integraAng   with   the   ground   of   its  being.   In   fact  the  term   dzogchen  means  great  
compleAon.  It  means  that  like  a  full  circle,  nothing  is  missing.  Everything  that’s  required  is  there.  

Our  hungry  longing   to  find  the   perfect  other  is   the  source  of   a  great  deal  of   suffering.  It’s  also,  in   our  
modern  culture,  the  energy  that  drives  the  scienAfic  revoluAon  and  the  whole  modernist  transformaAon  
of   the  world,   which   has   many   advantages,   but,   as  we  know,   also   many   disadvantages.   For   example,  
chemists  are  looking   for  the  missing  object  in  looking   for  cures  for  cancers.  The  pharmaceuAcal  company  
is  happy  to  offer  these  preparaAons  for  sale  at  a  price.  People  are  living  longer,  more  people  are  needing  
these   medicines  and  the  insurance  companies  or  the  health  services  cannot  afford  to   keep  paying  that  
for   these   medicines.   So   the   insurance   premiums   increase   resulAng   in   fewer   people   able   to   pay   the  
premiums.  That’s  what  happens.  Good  things  bring   bad  things.  Bad  things  bring   good  things.   Round  and  
round   and   round.   You   can’t   get   a  perfect   soluAon   in   samsara.   So,  a  lot   of   busyness  arises  from   this  
a:tude.  
 P a g e  |  39

MeditaAon  is  to  shij  the  focus  from  idenAfying  with  the  subject,  who  has  a  lack  and  is  therefore  seeking  
compleAon,   to   recognizing   ourselves   as   an   energy,   which   is   itself   the   energy   of   the   ground,   and  
therefore  is  inseparable  from  the  ground.  So  we  shij  from,  ‘I  am  a  thing,  and  I  miss  something.’  to,  ‘I  am  
a  reflecPon  –   I   am  form  and   empPness,  taste   and  empPness,   sound  and  empPness,   and  so  on.   Like   a  
rainbow   in  the  sky,  I  am  this   manifesPng  movement  of   energy.’  Where  am  I  manifesAng   from?   What  is  
my  ground,   and   what   is  the  sphere   within   which   I   manifest?   This  is   the   dharmadhatu.  So,  within  the  
natural  purity  of  the  mind,  I  am  the  radiance  of  the  mind.  

Then  the  ego  is  at  peace,  because  the  ego  recognizes  it  has  a  place  at   the  feast.  It  is  not  the  king  or  the  
queen,  but  it  is  the  radiance   of   the  dharmakaya.  Should  the   ego   pretend   to   be  the  dharmakaya  itself,  
pretend  to  be  the  truth  of  our  idenAty,  then  you  really  have  a  problem.  For  this  reason  the  main  focus  of  
the  meditaAon  is  on   relaxing  and   opening,  relaxing  and  opening,  so  that,  hopefully,   we  can   start  to  see  
that  what  I  take  to  be  ‘myself’,  is  a  movement.   It’s  always  a  movement,   therefore  it  can’t  be  the  thing  
itself.  The  thoughts  and  sensaAons  and  colours   and  so  on  that  I  see,  they  also  are  moving   and  so  they  
can’t   be  the  soluAon   either.   The   ground   is  stable   and   unchanging,  therefore   it   is   not   a   thought  or   a  
colour  or  a  memory  or  a  hope  or  an  anxiety  or  a  fear,  because  these  are  all  transient  phenomena.

So,  when  you   have  that  experience  in  your   meditaAon   it’s  very   useful  to   noAce,  ‘Oh,  I  am  looking   for  
something.’  Then   look  to  see:   who   is   the  one  who  believes  they  need  something;  who   is  the  one   who  
has  a  lack;  who  is  the  one  that’s  looking  like  a  snail  for  a  shell  to  live  inside.

Five questions to look at the nature of our mind

In  meditaAon  if  we  want  to  see  our  own  face  or  our  own  nature  directly,  then  we  have  to  look.

You   can   look  with   a  telescope,  you  can  look   with  a  microscope.   In   these  situaAons  you’re  focusing   on  
something  in   parAcular  –   something  far  away,   something  very   small.  In  the   act  of   looking,  you  stand  in  
relaAon  to  what   you’re  looking   at.  Perhaps  you   have  a  problem  at   work   and  tell  yourself   ,‘when  I   get  
home   I  need  to  sit  down  and  think   about  it.’   So  you   sit   there,  maybe   with  paper   and  pencil,  or  just  in  
your   head,   and  you  track   across  what   you   said,  what  they   said.  It’s   as  if   you’re  doing   a  replay  of   that  
situaAon  and  trying   to  see  it  more  clearly  or  see  it  from   another  point  of   view.  That   again   is   a  dualisAc  
seeing.  There  is  a  subject  aLending  to  something.  But  we  are  the  one  who  is  alive.  We  are  experiencing  
something.  

What  we   want  to  do  is  to   see  the  one  who  is  seeing.  Seeing  the  one  who   is  seeing   is  not   the   object;  in  
order   to   see   the   one  who   is   seeing   you   have   to   catch   yourself   in   the   act   of   seeing.   You   have  to   be  
present  with  yourself   as  you  are,   being  the  one  who  is  present.   This  involves  a  looking  without   looking.  
It’s   a   ‘not-­‐looking   for   something.’   So,   when   we’re   si:ng,   we   relax   into   an   open   presence   which   is  
registering  what  is  occurring.  If  there  was  nothing  registering  we  would  just  be  unconscious.  Something  
is  happening  and  it’s  happening  to  me.  The  quesAon  then  is,  ‘Who  is  this  one  that  we  call  me?’  

There  are  five  tradiAonal  quesAons  in  order  to  explore  this.  I  suggest  we  take  them  up  one  at  a  Ame  and  
sit  with   them  for   about  ten   minutes  each.   Unless  you’re   very   experienced   in   meditaAon,  si:ng   for   a  
long  period  of   Ame  is  usually  not   helpful,  because  the  mind,  the  ordinary  mind,  is  an  energeAc  system,  
and  it  becomes  Ared.  There   are   two   main   faults  which  can  develop   when  you  try  to  force  your   mind.  
One   is   sinking   through   Aredness   –   becoming   foggy   and   unclear   and   losing   the   freshness   of   what’s  
arising.  The   other  is  becoming  agitated   and  excited,  having  a  mind  buzzing  with  too   many  thought.  It  is  
important   to   remain   calm   and   clear,   with   a   steady   gaze   is   important.   Although   there   are   buddhist  
methods  where  that  capacity  is  developed  through  discipline,  in  dzogchen  we  want  to  enter   that  path  as  
the  natural  state  of  the  mind.  

What  shape  is  the  mind?

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  40

The  first  quesAon  to  take  up   when  we’re  si:ng  is  ‘What  shape   is   the  mind?’  That  is  to   say,  is  the  mind  
big   or  small?   Is  our   mind  something   inside  us?   Is   it   something   outside   us?   Is  it  coterminous  with   our  
skin?

These  are  not  intellectual  quesAons,  these  are  quesAons  of  examining  the  phenomenology  of  your   own  
existence  as  it’s  occurring.  For  example,  say  you  were  dancing,   and  your  body’s  moving  –   you   know  your  
body’s   moving.   You’re   not   observing   your   body,   you   are   being   your   body   in   the   process   of   the  
movement.   You  can  feel  whether  your  gesture  is  graceful  or   not,  you  can  feel  whether  your  limbs  have  a  
line  or  not,  you   can  feel  your  centre  of  gravity.   You  don’t  have  to   think  about  what  you  are  doing  –  it’s  as  
if  the  propriocepAve  registering  from  the  inside  is  showing  you  immediately  how  it  is.

That   the   sort   of   looking   that   we  want.   Not   looking   at   something,   but   finding   it   by   inhabiAng   it.   By  
actually  being  the  presence,  the  presence  will  reveal  itself   as  it  is.  That  is  to   say,  the  mind’s  nature  is  self-­‐
luminous,  it  has  a  natural  clarity  –  and  that  clarity  is  not  the  same  as  the  illuminaAon  based  on  concepts.

Concepts  build  up  a  picture  of   something.  They  tell  us  about  something,  the   give  us   bits  of   the  jigsaw  
which   we   then  put   together  and   make  a   composite  picture,   but   the   natural   clarity   of   seeing   what  is  
going   on  …  it’s  just  revealed.  Say  for  example,  you’re  si:ng   talking   with   a  friend  and  you  suddenly   are  
aware,   ‘Oh,   I’m  talking   too   much.’  It’s   a  sudden   …   it   almost  comes  up   through   the   body,   doesn’t   it?  
Suddenly   you  feel,  ‘This   is   a  bit   much!’  So   it’s  in   that   way   you  catch   yourself   in  the  moment   of  being  
yourself,   not   by   being   a   judge   on   the   outside   examining   like   a   policeman,   but   suddenly   you   allow  
yourself   to   register   with   yourself.   You’ve   gone   from   being   caught   up   in   what   you’re   saying   to   just  
suddenly  being  with  yourself  in   the  act  of  being  yourself.   It’s  a  kind  of  non-­‐dual  clarity.  This  is  what  we  
aim  for.  

So,  when   we  look   at   the  mind  –   what  shape  is  it?  We  do  the  pracAce  with  the  eyes  open,  which  helps  
you  to   quesAon,   ‘Is   this   room  inside   my   mind,   or  not?’   Again,   not   a  conceptual   thing   but   you’re  just  
si:ng,  ‘Am  I   …  is  the  mind  small,  is  the   mind  big?’  Different   concepts   will  arise   and   pass.  Just  stay  with  
them.  See  what   they  do.  ‘Is  the  mind   above   me,  below  me?  Does  it  stand  in  relaPon   to  my  sense  of  this  
shape?’   Keep   looking   and  looking  in  this  way.  Because  this  is  us.  We’re  talking   about   ourselves.  If   you  
think,  in   your   life,   how   many   things  you   have   learned   –   thousands  and   thousands   and   thousands  of  
things.  We  know  about  a  lot  of  things,  but  we  don’t  really  know  ourselves.  

This  is  something  very  very   strange,  because  we  make  all  sorts  of  decisions  about  our  lives  without  really  
having   a  sense  of  ‘Who  is  the  liver  of   our  life?  What  is  this   mind?’  Without  the   mind  we  would  just  be  
like  a  piece  of   wood.   The  mind  means  to  be   alive.   What   is   this  lively   awareness  which   is   registering  
experience?  This  is  the  heart,  the  centre,  the  nature  of  our  existence.  So  it’s  quite  a  good  idea  to  get   to  
know  it  a  liLle  bit  beLer.

We’re  just   si:ng,  relax   into   a  slow  out-­‐breath,  and   when  you’re   in   that   state,  just   very  gently  take  up  
this  quesAon.  If  you  take  it  up   too  strongly,  you  start  judging  and   invesAgaAng  in  a  differenAated   way   –  
you   want   to   avoid   that.   Just,   ‘I   have   a   mind,   I   am   the   mind.   The   mind  is   aware.   What  shape   is   this  
awareness?’  Okay.

[PracAce]

If  you  found  that  difficult  to  do  you  might  think,  ‘Why  is  it  difficult?’

Most   of   the   Ame   we   are   concerned   with   representaAons   and   representaAons   of   representaAons.  
RepresentaAons   are  very  fascinaAng  because  they   show   aspects  of   something,  and   we  can  go   through  
the   details  of   the  representaAon   to   get   an   impression   of   something.   So,   for   example,   someAmes   a  
photograph  of   someone  seems  to,  as   it  were,  capture  them.  They  seem  to  just  come  right  through  the  
photograph,   the   whole   of   them   is   just   in   that   glance   or   gaze   or   whatever.   But   the   photograph   is   a  
 P a g e  |  41

representaAon,  a  re-­‐presentaAon.   And  what  we  are   concerned   with   here   is  presence  itself   –   presence  
presenAng  itself.  Not  as  something,  it’s  not  mediated  or  re-­‐presented  through  anything  else.

Maybe   we  start  to  see  that  I  can’t  catch  it,  that  every   Ame  I  think  I’ve  caught  something,   it  goes  away.  
What  would  it  mean   if  my  mind   was  uncatchable?  Uncatchable  by  me.  Well,  how   come  I’m  not  in  charge  
of  my   mind?  I   can  scratch  my  ear;  when  I  scratch  my  ear,  my  ear   doesn’t  move  away  and  sAck  itself   on  
my  nose.   ‘Help,   help,  he’s  scratching  me!’         Things  stay   where  they  are.  Our  feet  stay  down  there,  and  
our  nose  stays  on  our  face.  But  our  mind  doesn’t  do  that.   This  is  very   important  –   the  mind  is  not  like  
anything  else.   One  of  the  reasons  it’s  so   elusive  is  because  we  keep  looking  in  the  manner  of   trying   to  
find  the  mind  as  if  it  would  fit  into  our  exisAng  categories.

The  path  to  wisdom  lies   through  not  knowing.   These  subtle   traces  of   knowing   create   pigeonholes,   or  
categorizing  systems  in  our  mind,  which  then   hide  the  mind   from  itself,  because  we’re  seeking   to  locate  
this  experience  into  a  frame  of  reference  we  already  have.  

So  when  we  say   Aa  and  are  relaxing,  we  also  relax  the  mental  categories  we  use  to  formulate  narraAves,  
story  lines.   So  in  a  sense   the   pracAce  is  to  renounce,   or  abandon,   the   will  to  power,  the  desire  to   know  
what  is  going  on,  in  order  to  be  with  what  is  there.  That  is  part  of  the  challenge  of  this  pracAce.

What  colour  is  the  mind?

The  second  quesAon  we  can  ask  I,  ‘What  colour  is   the  mind?’  We’re  dong  this  through  all  the  senses  so  if  
you  were  thinking   of   sound   it  would   be,  ‘Does  the   mind   have   a  rhythm   or  a  melody?   Does   it   have   an  
intensity?   Is   it  blue?   Is   it   red?   Is   it   green?   Does   it  have   a   smell,   does   it   have   a   taste?’   Are  there  any  
definite  markers  which  you  can  find,  which  you  can  say,  ‘This  is  a  property  of  the  mind?’

In  relaAon  to  our  body  we  know  that  there   are  definite  markers.   Bodies  have  weight,  they  have   shape,  
they  have  smell.  They  have  effecAve  force  –  strength  to  impact  on  the  environment  around  them,  and  so  
on.  Our  voices  have  volume,  resonance,  pitch,  and  so  on  –  but  does  the  mind  have  idenAfiable  features?  

EmoAons  have  idenAfiable  features.   We  know  when  we’re  sad.  We  know   the  difference  between  feeling  
jealous  of  someone  or  feeling  happy  for  them.   We  have  a  sense  of   what  these  feelings  are   like.   We  can  
even  describe  unpleasant  feelings  such  as  shame,  jealousy,  stupidity  because  somehow   they  are  almost  
palpable.   They   have   a  kind   of   resonance   or   a   shape.   But   the   one   who   experiences   jealousy,   pride,  
happiness,  the  one  who  is  the  experiencer  of  experience  –  does  that  have  a  shape?   This  is  the  quesAon  
we  will  look  at  now.  So  we  do  it  in  the  same  way,  we  just  relax  into  the  out-­‐breath.

[PracAce]

One   of  the  common  experiences   we  have   is  of  standing   in  relaAon  to  other   things.  We  know  from   our  
body   that  we   look   outside  to   see  what   is  going   on.  Inside  our   own   head,  we  can   also  have  a  dialogic  
relaAonship.  We  can  think  about  our  past,  we   can  think  about  our  future.  The  future  doesn’t  exist,  but  
we  can  plan,  ‘What  will  I  do  in  the  summer?  What  will  I  do   next   weekend?  When  I  get  back  home,  what  
do  I  have  to  do?’   So  in  that  way  it’s  as  if  we’re  situated  somewhere,  thinking   about  something   else.  So  
here  we  want  to  really  look   into  the  mind  –  does  it  have  a  shape?  –  because  everything   that  has  a  shape  
is  located  somewhere.  We  can’t  imagine  a   shape  which  isn’t  located  somewhere.  Even  a   cloud,  we  can  
describe  it  as  being  in  the  north  or  in  the  south,  as  looking  dark  or  light,  as  moving  fast  or  slowly.  We  can  
deduct  from  that  whether  it’s   going  to  rain  or  not.  Shapes  not  only  tell  us  something  about  what’s  out  
there,  but  they  allow  us  to  posiAon  ourselves  in  relaAon  to  them.  

The  quesAon  then  is,  ‘Who  is   the  one  who  is  posiPoned?’  For  example,  if  somebody   says,  ‘I  like  chocolate  
ice-­‐cream,’  and   there   is  chocolate   ice-­‐cream,  then  their  shape  expands.  ‘Oh!  I  like  chocolate  ice-­‐cream!’  
But  if   they   say,   ‘I  like   chocolate   ice-­‐cream,’  and   they   look   in   the   freezer   but  there’s   no   chocolate  ice-­‐
cream,  then  they  shrink.  They  ask,   ‘Who  ate   the  ice  cream?  Who  finished   it?  I  wanted   it!’  and   the  shape  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  42

of  the  person  changes  –  the  psychological  shape.  We  are  a  bit  like  an  accordion,  expanding  on  the  good  
days  and  contracAng  on  the  bad  days.  

Who  is  the  one  doing   the  expanding  and  contracAng?  Is  this  the  content   of  the  mind?  That   is  to  say,  is  it  
paLerns  of   experience?  Or  is  it  the  mind  itself,  the  one  who  is  aware?   That’s  what  we  are  looking  at  –  at  
the  difference  between  the  mind  and  the  content  of   the   mind,  which  creates  the  familiar  sights  of   our  
idenAficaAon,  because  we  are  usually  idenAfying  ourselves  with  our  mood.  ‘I  am  happy  because…  I  feel  
in  a   good   mood  today  and  I   feel  like   running  and  dancing.’   Or  ‘I  felt   like   staying  in  bed.’   These   moods  
give  us   a  parAcular   shape,  which   is   to  say,  the  things,   the  mental   and  emoAonal  experiences  we  have,  
have   shapes.  The  quesAon  is,  does  the  one  who   experiences  these  shapes,  be  they   inside   or  outside,  
have  a  shape  or  not?

So  that’s  what  we’re  looking   at:   does   the  mind   itself,  the  one  who  tastes,   who   smells,  who  sees,   who  
touches  –  is  there  any  shape  in  that?   There’s  clearly  a  shape  in  what  is  touched,  seen,  smelled,  and  so  
on.  

Perhaps  you   experience  some  pain  or   discomfort   in   your   body   when  you  are   in   meditaAon.  There’s  a  
sense  that,   ‘This  is   happening  to  me.’  This  pain  is  coming  to  me.  This  pain   is,  as  it  were,  aLacking   me,  or  
disturbing  me.      ‘It’s  happening  to  me’  seems  to   be  self-­‐evidently  clear,  but  our   quesAon  is  always,  ‘Who  
is   the   one   who   calls   themselves   “me”?’  Because  ‘me’  is  like  a   frosted-­‐glass  door.  You  can’t   really   see  
through  it.  You  may  imagine  that  there  is  access  but  actually  it’s  blocked.  

So,   the   pain   is  happening   to   ‘me.’   What   shape   is   ‘me?’   That   shape   could   seem   to   be   anywhere   –  
someAmes  outside  the  body,   someAmes   inside  the  body.   What  is  ‘me?’   It’s  a  concept.   The   pain   is  a  
sensaAon  which  is  giving  rise  to   a  concept.  The  pain,  ajer  some  Ame,   vanishes.  The  concept,  ajer   some  
Ame,  vanishes.  And  then  something  else  is  happening,  and  something  else  is  happening...  

The  concept  ‘me’  is  not  my  mind.   It’s  not  what   is  called  my  true  nature,  or   my  real  nature,  or  my  natural  
face,  or  my   buddha  nature.   It’s  just  another  phenomena.  This  is   what  makes  this  enquiry   very  difficult  
because  our   tendency   is   to   give  habitual  answers,  linguisAc   answers,   conceptual  answers  rather   than  
just  registering,  ‘Is  there  a  shape?’  

Does  the  mind  come  from  anywhere?

All   the   phenomena  of   the   world   seem   to   have   sequences  –   they   come   from   somewhere,   they   stay  
somewhere   for  a  while,   and  then  they  go.  For  example,  we  came  from  our  homes,  at  the  moment  we  
are  staying  here  in  Kamalashila,  and  then  on  Sunday  ajernoon  we  will  go  back  some  other  place.

This   is   the   general   paLern   in   life,   that   things   are   moving   through   Ame   and   space.   The   quesAon   is  
whether  the  mind  is  something   similar  to  that?  Does  it  have  the  qualiAes  of  other   objects?   Does  it  come  
from  someplace,  stay  someplace,  go  someplace?  So  the  first  quesAon  we  look  at  is,  ‘Does  the  mind  come  
from  anywhere?’

We’re   si:ng  here.   Our  mind  is  here,  we  are  present.   So  when  we  go   into  the  pracAce,  is   this  sense  of  
presence   coming   from   someplace?   Is  something   causing   it,   generaAng   it,   making   it   happen?   This  is  
someAmes  not  a  very   easy  kind  of  quesAon.  The  first  thing  is  to  seLle,  open  and  relax,  and  observe  what  
is  movement  and  what  is  sAllness.

Movement  is  fairly  easy  to  determine,   because  it’s  moving.  However   movement  may  appear  sAll  if   you  
idenAfy   with  it.  For   example  when   you  have  a  mood.   Let’s  say  you   feel  depressed,   and  you  have  felt  
depressed   before.   Now,   you   can’t   really   take   a   sample   of   your   depression,   and   compare   it   to   the  
depression   from  yesterday.  Is  it   the  same  or  is  it  not?  You  just   think,  ‘I’m  sPll  depressed,’  so   it  feels  as  if  
there  is  a  conAnuity.  It’s   the   same  with  pain.  You   wake   up  in   the   morning   and   you   think,   ‘Ouch,   my  
back’s  sPll  hurPng.  It’s  that  same  old  pain.’  No,   it’s  not  the  same  pain  at  all.  Pain  has  a  wide  variaAon  of  
ways  of   registering.   SomeAmes  biAng,  someAmes  cu:ng,   someAmes  turning.   It’s   very   rare  to   have  a  
 P a g e  |  43

fixed   form   of   pain,   say   all   the   pain   clinics.   Nowadays   the   main   intervenAon   in   Britain   is  meditaAon,  
because   almost   nothing   else   works.   The   main   funcAon   of   the   meditaAon   is   to   help   to   disrupt   the  
narraAve  of   the  conAnuity  of  the  pain,  because  that’s  the  thing  that  makes  us  feel  terrible:  ‘I’ll  never  get  
out  of  this.   I’ll  always  be  trapped  by  this,’  where  ‘this’  is  this  conAnuing  same  phenomenon   of  ‘a  pain’  or  
‘a  depression.’  The  more  one  can  aLend  to  the  experience,  the  more  we  see  that  it  has  fluctuaAons  and  
movements.  So  all  these  contents   of  the  mind  are  coming  and   going,   coming   and  going.   It’s  when  we  
fuse  into  them  that  they  feel  fixed  and  seLled.

So  the  first  bit  of   our  work   is  just  to  separate  out  from  the  content  of   the  mind,  and  in   a  relaxed  way,  
observe  the  movement  of   thoughts,  feelings,  and   sensaAons.       ‘Who  is   the   one   observing   this?’  ‘Is   it  
always  here?’  ‘Has  it  come?’  ‘Has  it  just  arrived?’  Say  your  mind  goes  off  in  a  liLle  riff  of  thoughts,  you’re  
wandering   off  and   then,   ‘Oh,  here   I   am.’  Have  you   come   back?  If   so,  where  did  you   go?  Because  then  
you   have   the   thought   that   my   mind   goes   from   here   to   there   and   that’s  why   I   got   lost.       ‘I   went  
somewhere.’   This  kind  of   quesAoning   is  very   important   for  the  mediaAon.  Did   the   mind  actually   ever  
move?  Because  if  the  mind   moves,  then  it’s  just   like  another  thought-­‐formaAon  and  we’ll   always   be  at  
the  mercy  of  circumstances.  

So,  one  again  just   relax  into  the  out-­‐breath.   When  you  seLle,   take   up  this   first  quesAon  ‘Does  the   mind  
come   from  anywhere?   Does   it  have   a  source?   Is   it  arising?   Are   there   casual   factors?’   Just   see  if,   as  it  
shows  itself,  because  it’s  showing  itself  through  the  presence  of   you   being  alive,   is  it  coming  and   going?  
Is  it  coming  and  arising?

[PracAce]

Where  does  the  mind  stay?

As  we  look  around   us   we  can   see  many   things.  All   of   these  things  that   we  can   see   are  due  to  the  
hospitality  of  space.  If  there  was  no  space  in  this  place  we  couldn’t  be  in  it,  and  these  things  couldn’t  be  
in  it.   When  we  come  into  the   place,  what  we  see  is  things.  We  don’t  see  space.  If   you  were  trained  in  
painAng   or   photography,  you  get   used   to  seeing  background   spaces,  but  that’s  not  our  normal  kind  of  
percepAon.  

The   next  quesAon   we   look   at  is  ‘Where   does   the   mind  stay?   Does   it  rest  anywhere?   Does   it   rest   on  
anything?   Does  it  occupy  a  parPcular  situaPon  when  it’s   here?’  If   we’re  talking  about  the  contents  of  this  
room,  we  can  have  lots   to  say;  we   can   describe  the  colours  in  the  painAngs  or  the  shapes  and   colours  
and  names  of  the  flowers  in  the  vase.  There  are  so  many  stories  we  could  tell  about  everything  we  see  in  
this  room.   What   sort  of   vocabulary   do   we  have   to   describe  the  space   in   this  room?   When   you   look  
around,   you  can  see  above  the  shapes  of   peoples’   heads  liLle  kind   of  pockets  of   space.        I  don’t   know  
that  we  have  any   words  for  that   because  they’re  not  squares  or   circles  or  rectangles,  they’re  weird  liLle  
shape-­‐y  bits.  

So,  something  which  is  there  –   which  is  the  container,  or  the  medium  within  which  we  are  having   our  
existence  –   is  also   ungraspable.  We   can’t   get   a  handle  on  it.  The   reason   why   I  am  highlighAng   this  is  
because   I   am   suggesAng   that   this  is  something   very   similar   to   the  mind.   The   mind   is   the   facilitaAng  
medium   through   which   all  experience  is  occurring,  but   it  itself   it   is  not  an  object   of  consciousness,  so  
you  can’t  catch  it.  

When  you’re  looking  for   where  the  mind  is   staying,  you  learn  to   look   in  a  different  way.   Just  try   for  a  
moment.  Look  around   the  room,  look   at  some  definite   things  like  the  lamp,  or  the  back   of  someone’s  
head,  and  allow  yourself  to  give  a  liLle  descripAon  of  that  in  your   head.  Choose  any  object  you  like.  It’s  
not  very  difficult,  is  it?  And  then   look  at  a  liLle  bit  of  outline  shape  around  someone’s  head.  What  would  
you   say?   Become   aware   of   that   shape.   Have   a   feeling   tone   about   it.   Have   a   sense   of   how   the  
formlessness  of  the  shape  of  the  space  and  the  shape  next  to  it,  coexist.

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  44

You  can   take  this  flavour  into  the  meditaAon.  You  are  si:ng,  stuff  is  happening.  Some   of  the  stuff  feels  
like  the  subject,  feels  like  me.  Some  of  the  stuff  feels  like  the  object.  Then  you  may  think,  ‘I’m  having  this  
experience.  What  is  that?’  That  is  a  thought.  ‘Is  the  thought   “me”   or  is   it   a  thought   that  I  am  having?‘  If  
it’s  a  thought   I’m   having,   it’s  then   not   me,  because  if   you  have  been  at  all  alive  in  the  last  ten  years,  
you’ve  had  more  than  one  thought.  

You’ve  had  many  many  different  thoughts,  just  as  this  glass  has  water  in  it  at  the  moment,  but  you   could  
put  any   kind  of   juice  into   it  or  beer  or  wine  or  urine  or   whatever  you  like.  It’s   a  container,  so  anything  
can  go  in  this.  The  glass  fills,   the   glass  empAes.  The  glass   fills,   the   glass  empAes.  In  the  same  way,  your  
mind  has  had   many  thoughts  in  it,  many  experiences.  Some  of  these  experiences  have  seemed  to  be  the  
object.  When  we  look  around  the  room   we  see  many  things  and  everything   we  see  is  the  content  of   our  
mind.  This  is  our  experience.  Everyone  in  this  room,   whoever  they  think  they  are,  we  know  that  they   are  
our  experience.  We  don’t  have  anything   else,  we  just  have  our  experience  of  the  people;  we   only  have  
access  to  other   people  through   our  experience  of  them.   Experience  is  what  we  have  –  we  don’t  have  an  
objecAve  access  to  the  world.  

Our   subjecAve   experienAal  access  can  be  formulated   in  pseudo-­‐scienAfic  language   to   give  it   different  
parameters,  but  none  the  less,  it’s   always  about  opinions,  its   always  about  interpretaAon.  So,  when  we  
have  an  experience,   and   the  experience  seems  to   be  ‘me,’   what  does   that   mean?   That   me-­‐ness  is  a  
consAtuent   of   my   personality;   it   becomes   part   of   my   history,   my   repertoire   of   responses,   which   is  
triggered,   or  evoked,  or  called  into   being   by   certain  circumstances.  It’s  not  permanent,  but   it  seems   to  
be   a  kind  of   resource  that   I  have  around   me,  and   if   the   hook   is  right   from  the  outside,  this  aspect  of  
myself  will   arise,  whether  it’s  happiness,  or  sadness,  or  confidence,   or  confusion.  This  is  the  content  of  
the  mind.

Confuse  the  content  of  the  mind  with  the   mind  itself  is  the  biggest  mistake  we  can  make  in  meditaAon.  
Returning  to  the  image   of  the  mirror   and   the  reflecAon,  the  reflecAon   is   in   the  mirror,   but  it’s  not  the  
mirror.   When  you  look  in  the  mirror,   you   don’t  see  the  mirror,   you   see  the  reflecAon.  That’s   why   this  
tradiAonal  example  is  used   again   and   again.  When  we   sit  in  the  meditaAon,  ‘Where   is   my  mind?’   What  
we  see  is  our  experience,  or  what  we  get  is  our  experience.  In  the  moment  when  we  experience  this  or  
that,   this  is  the  content  of   our  mind.  It’s  filling  us  up  and   then   it’s  gone,  just   like  the  reflecAon  in  the  
mirror.

What  is  the  mirror  of  the  mind?  What  is  this  lucidity  of  the  mind?  This  is  the  quesAon.  What  is  this  mind,  
and  does  it  rest  on  anything?  Is  it  a  substance  among   other  substances?      Our  bodies  are  here  in  this  
room,   standing   in   relaAon  to   the  posiAon  of   other   people’s  bodies  in   the   room.  Our  minds,   are  they  
similar?  For   example,  when  we  have  a  break  and  we  all  go  out  of   the  door,  the  door  is  quite  narrow  and  
we  have  to  be  careful  as  we  go  past  people.  We  take  our  place,  we  take  our  Ame,  we  aLend  to  the  space  
available   for  us   to   pass  through,  because  as  bodies,  we  occupy  space.  We  are  fillers  of   space  and   our  
thoughts  fill  our  mental  space,  our  emoAons  and  sensaAons,  and  so  on.  

Is  the   mind   something   which  fills  space,   or   is  it  more   like   space  itself?   That  is   the   real   focus  for   this  
enquiry   just   now.   We   breathe   out,   we’re   here,   experiences   are   arising.   ‘Who   is   the   one   who   is  
experiencing  this?’  And  where  is  it?  Is  it  situated  in  a  parAcular  place?  Is  it  resAng   on  something?  Does  it  
stand  in  relaAon  to  anything  else?  Is  it  bigger  than  other  things,  smaller  than  other  things?   Where  does  
it  abide?  Where  does  it  stay?  

So  that’s  what  we  can  look  at  now.

[PracAce]

Does  the  mind  go  anywhere?

 P a g e  |  45

Then  the  last  of   the   quesAons  is,  ‘Does   the   mind  go   anywhere?’  We  know  that  our  aLenAon  can  move  
about.   Our  aLenAon  can  go  into  parAcular  thoughts,  or   people,   or  projects,   and  then  it  can   be  taken  
out.   We  can   invest   beings   with   significance   for   us,   and   then   we  can   take  that   significance   back.   We  
project  bits  of  ourselves  into   other  people,  as  described  by  psychoanalysis.  But  in  terms  of  the  mind,  in  
terms  of  the  basic  noeAc  capacity  –  the  capacity  to  be  present,   to  be  aware,  to  be  open,  to  register  what  
is  going   on  –   does   that  go  into  the  object?  Does   it  go   anywhere  else?   Does  it  vanish?  This  is  what  we  
need  to  become  clear  about.

This  is  not  some  abstract  theoreAcal  quesAon.  This  is  about  ge:ng  to  know   who  we  actually  are.  This  is  
the   basis  of  our  own  existence.  Because,  if  we  live  in  a  series  of  category  confusions,  if  we  can’t  tell  the  
difference  between  a  paLern  of  thought  and  the  one  who  is  aware  of  the  paLern  of  thought,  then  we’re  
not  doing  very  well.  

Thoughts  are  very  useful  as  thoughts,  but  thoughts  create  idenAAes  which  are  unreliable.  For   example,  
German  idenAty  has  changed  enormously  in  the  last  two   hundred   years.  It  Ames  in  some  places  people  
resisted   a  noAon   of   German   idenAty   and   at   other   Ames   in   other   places   there   were   proponents   of  
German  idenAty,  and  so   on.  So  what  it  means  to  be  German  has  been  reinvented  many  many  Ames,  and  
it’s  sAll  in  the  process  of  being   reinvented.  So  you  have  a  situaAon  where  many   people  here  would  have  
to  say,  ‘I  am  German,’  but  what  that  means,  you  can  redefine  for  yourself.  

So  that’s  a  very  interesAng   thing.  We  can   build   our  house  on  sand.   As  long   as   the  sand  is  stable  for  a  
while,   we  know   what   we’re  talking   about,   then   something   happens  and   it  starts  to   crumble.   Luckily,  
we’re  preLy  quick.  We  reinvent  some  new  noAon  as  to  who  we  are.  

So  that’s  observing   the  movement  of   the   mind,  and   the  quesAon  is  always  –   is  the  movement  of   the  
mind   the  same  as  the   mind   itself?   We  need   to   know   this   directly.   We   need   to   taste   it   on   our   own  
tongue.  Reading  it  in  a  book  and  knowing   the  right  answer  and   Acking   the  box  –   that’s  not  going  to  help  
us.  

These  are  very  pracAcal   quesAons  because  if  you  know  directly  the  openness  of   the  mind,   then   le:ng  
go   of   phenomena  is  very  easy.  But   if   you  build  your  idenAty   on  transient  phenomena  –   on  paLerns  and  
habits,   and   the  way   your  personality   has  developed   –   you  are   tying   yourself   into   something   which  is  
fundamentally   unreliable.   In   situaAons  of   interacAon   with   other   people   we’re   likely   to   get   confused,  
because,  fundamentally,  we  don’t  know  who  we  are.  We  create  a  confecAonary,  a  construct,  and  then  
take   that  to  be  who  we  are,  and   act  as  if   that’s  the  case  for   a  while.  When   that   no   longer  works,  we  
change  it.  And  then  we  change  it.  And  then  we  change  it...  

In   our   life   so   far,   we’ve   had   many   many   different   idenAAes   –   someAmes   expansive,   someAmes  
contracAng.  Some  people  spoke  one  language  when  they   were  young   and  now  they’re  speaking  another  
language.  Many  things  like  that  will  have  changed.  Where  is  the  solid  ground?  

If  the  teaching   is  right,  that  the  mind  itself  is  vajra,  is  indestrucAble,  that  sounds  preLy  reliable.  Since  we  
know  that  the  content  of   the  mind  is  always  changing,  that’s  not  such  a  good  investment.   So  where   are  
we   going   to   put   our   money?   In   the   bank   of   change,   or   in   the   unchanging   bank?   That’s   a   serious  
quesAon.  

Looking  into  this  point  is  important.  So  we’ll  do  some  more  si:ng  now  and  ajer  we  can  see  if  there  are  
any  quesAons  or  thoughts  about  this.  

[PracAce]

These   quesAons   are   methods,   and   we   keep   applying   the   method   unAl   we   get   some   clarity.    
Unfortunately   there  is  no  other  way   to  do  it.  No   one  else  can  do  this  for  you.   You  can  get   instrucAons  
again  and  again,  but  only  you,  yourself,  can  get  that  understanding.

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  46

You   may  have  heard  the  story  about  Gampopa  and  Milarepa.  Gampopa  was  a  close  student  of  Milarepa  
and   ajer   he   had   been   with   him   some   years,   and   he   asked,   ‘Master,   how   can   I   become   like   you?’  
Milarepa  answered,   ‘This   is   something  you  don’t   want  to  know.’  but   Gampopa   insisted,  ‘Please,  please  
tell   me.   Please   show   me   the   way!’   So   Milarepa   stood   up  and  turned   around   and   lijed   his  skirt,  and  
showed  Gampopa  his  bum  –  and  his  bum  was  covered  with  very  thick  calloused  skin  because  he’d  been  
si:ng  for  many  many  years.  That  was  the  secret  of  his  success!  

QuesAon:    You  don’t  want   to  see  my  bum!  My  quesAon  is,  ‘What  is  the  purpose,   what  is  the  meaning  of  
the  mind?’

James:          Well,  maybe  it  has  no  purpose  at  all.  It   just  is,  and  in   the   openness  of   the  mind,  many  things  
arise.  The  sAllness  of   the  mind   just   is.  It’s  there  always.   This  is  the  essenAal  issue  with   quesAons  such  as,  
‘Where  does  the   mind  come  from?  Where   does   it   go  to?’  because   if   it’s  not  coming  from  anywhere  and  
not  going   anywhere,  it’s  always   here.  It’s  both   the  substratum  of   everything  and  the  medium   through  
which  everything  is  operaAng.  It  has  no  purpose  at  all.

However,  the  nature  of  the  mind  is  to  be  radiant  –  that  is  to  say,  we  have  experience.  The  mind  is  empty,  
which  means  we  can’t  grasp  it,  but   it  has  clarity,   which  is  the  revelaAon  of  all  the  experiences  we  have.  
Inside   that   clarity,   we   have   the   light   or   luminous   sheer   presence   of   things,   and   then   we   have   the  
specificity  of  individuals.  The  energy  manifests  as  we  communicate  with  each  other.  And  the  purpose  of  
that  is  –  if  there  is  no  lack  there’s  no  need,  and  if  there  is  no  need   then  there  is  play.  So,  in  the  buddhist  
tradiAon,  they   have  a  word,  rolpa.  Rolpa  means   play;  it’s   the  same  as  the  Hindi  word  leela,   meaning  a  
dance.  So  this  is  a  cosmic  dance.  It  has  no  parAcular  meaning.  

Life  only  becomes  serious  when  you  have  a  lack,  because  then  you’re  looking  for   something  to  deal  with  
your   lack.   But   since   the   mind   is   present   and   full   from   the   very   beginning,   there   is   nothing   to   be  
achieved.  That’s  why  it’s  called  ‘the  great  perfecAon’  –   it’s  already  fine,  so  there  is  nothing   parAcular   to  
be  done.

QuesAon:  What  happens  when  we  die?

James:     The  Tibetan  tradiAon  has  many  stories  about  what  happens,   but  these  are  essenAally   stories.  
What  you  can   experience   for  yourself   is  the   infinite  calmness   of   the  mind,   and  the  movement  of   the  
mind.  SomeAmes  the  mind  is  moving,  and  someAmes  it’s  calm.  

One  noAon  of   death  is  that  movement  goes  down   and   then  you   have   the  calmness.  The   calmness  is  
indestrucAble,  because   it’s  not   a  thing   and   therefore   it   conAnues,  and   something   else  will  arise,  and  
something   else  will  arise,  and  something  else  will  arise…  ManifestaAon  is  always  occurring.  The  quesAon  
is,   ‘Why  do   I  manifest  in   this  parPcular  way?‘      ‘What  is  my  purpose?   What   is   my   intenPon?’  If  it’s   my  
purpose   and   my   intenAon,   the   base   is   quite   small   but   if   we   relax   into   this  non-­‐dual  state,   then   the  
purpose  is  given  in  the  moment  of   the  interacAon,   so  we  don’t   need  to  impose  our  own  agenda  on  the  
situaAon.  

QuesAon:  When  we  are   asleep  or  unconscious   we  are  not  having   experiences.   SomeAmes   we  have  an  
accident  that  causes  us  to  go  unconscious.  Is  there  an  explanaAon  for  having  no  experience?

James:     When  we  look  around  this  room  there  is   all  this  space   and  the  space  is  always  there  but  we  
don’t  see  it.  It  doesn’t   mean  anything  to  us  because  we’re  fixated  on  people,  and  colours,  and  cushions,  
and  so  on.   The  more  Ame  you  spend   being   sAll,   the  more  it’s   possible   to   have  a  sense  of   presence  in  
sAllness  when  nothing  much  is  going  on.  

If  you  take  small  children  to  an  art  gallery,  at  first  they  look  but  soon  they  say  they   are  bored  and  want  to  
leave.   This   is   how   we   are,   we   have   a   kind   of   children’s   mind.   As   long   as   life   is   exciAng,   we   think  
something   is   going   on   and   we   feel   alive.   However   there   are   many   more   subtle  levels   of   experience  
 P a g e  |  47

which  only  reveal  themselves  when   we  aLend  to  them.  So  part   of  the  pracAce  of  meditaAon  is  learning  
to  sit  when  nothing  is  happening,  and  not   sArring   it  up.  Just:   ‘I’m   not  asleep,  but  there’s  nothing   going  
on.  The  mind   is   empty,   yet   I’m   sAll  here.’  In   Tibetan   it’s   called   mitogpa,  the  state  of   no   concept,   no  
thought.  We  are  not  unconscious.  Nothing  is  happening,  but  we’re  sAll  present.

QuesAon:    You  compared  the  mind  with  a  glass.  The  mind  can  be  filled  and  it  can  be  empAed.  If  my  mind  
can  be   filled   and  be  empAed  I  am  containing  experience   but  are  any  traces  lej  when   the  glass  /mind  is  
empAed?  

James:     As   long  as  our  surface  is,  if   you  like,  porous  then  we’re  absorbing   experience.   So  long   as  the  
ego,  or   the  personality,  is   constantly  wanAng   experiences  or   rejecAng  experiences,  that  going   forward  
and  going  away   makes  liLle  holes  in  the   surface  of  our  psychic  skin  which  get  filled   up   with  stuff.   The  
more   equanimity   we  have,  the  less  uninvolved   we  are   in   hopes  and   fears,  the  smoother   the   surface  
becomes.  

In  a  mahayana  descripAons  of  the  ten   bhumis,  the  ten  levels  towards  enlightenment,   you  have  to   get  up  
to  the   seventh  stage  before   you   stop   having   traces,  and  even   then  traces  …  subtle  traces  remain.   For  
example  in   the  descripAon  of   the   life  of   Buddha  Shakyamuni,   they   say   that   when   he   got  enlightened  
under  the  Bodhi  tree,  from  that  moment  onward,  he   didn’t  do  any  bad  things  at  all,  he   didn’t  have  any  
of   the  five   poisons  or  the  lesser  poisons   operaAng  in  his  mind,   but  he  sAll  had   subtle  traces  lej   from  
before.   These   subtle   traces   were   the   reason   that   he   had   many   difficult   experiences   even   ajer   he  
became  enlightened.  So  that   will  give   us  a  sense  that  subtle  traces  last  for  a  long   Ame.  But  they  arise,  
and  if  they’re  not  fed  into,  or  not  aLended  to,  then  they  won’t  be  acAvated.

So,  for  example,  you  might  have  smoked  for  some  years  and  then  you  stop.   Then  one  night  you’re  at  a  
party  and  someone  next  to  you  is  smoking  a  Gauloise,  and  ‘[sniffing]   …  nice,’  Suddenly   you  want  to  have  
a  cigareLe.   Why   do  you  want  to   have  a  cigareLe?   You  don’t  smoke.  Because  there  is  a  subtle  trace  of  
the  habit  of  smoking  which  just  gets  hooked.  It’s  similar  with  mental  phenomena,  and  so  you  have  to  be  
aware,  ‘I  don’t  smoke.’  That  doesn’t  stop  the  trace  acAvaAng,  but  as  long  as  you’re  clear  not  to  jump  into  
it,  it  won’t  lead  you  into  a  path  of  conAnuity.  

But  it’s   a  very   important   point   that  you’re   raising.  We  can   always  cheat   ourselves  by   imagining   we’re  
more  sorted  than  we  are  which  is  why  the  more  we  pracAce,  the  more  careful  we  have  to  be.  

QuesAon:  In  zen  they  refer  to  ‘when  the  mind  moves’.  Is  this  the  same  as  ‘the  movement  of  the  mind’?  

James:     Yes,   ‘When  the  mind  moves   the   ten  thousand  things  arise.’      EssenAally  what  that  means  is  
that  when  mental  acAvity  starts,  then  you  start  to  perceive  all  the  phenomena  around   you,   for  example  
in  this  room.  If  mental  acAvity  is  not  funcAoning,  if  you  are  unconscious  say,  you  won’t  experience  the  
differenAaAon   of   the  room.  If   you  really  relax   your   mind,  you  just  have   some   sense   of   colour,  but  it’s  
even  prior  to  the  differenAaAon  of  colour.  There  is  a  luminous  field,  and  in  order  to  make  sense  of  it,  in  
order  to  put  it  in  its  places,  the  mind  has  to  move.  What  does  that  mean?  These   are  just  words  used   to  
describe.  

From  this  point  of  view,  the  mind  itself  doesn’t  move,  but  the  mind  moves.   Language  becomes  very   odd  
here.   So,   the   mind   as   the   mirror   doesn’t   move,   but   the   mind   as   the   potenAal   which   reveals   the  
reflecAon,   is   an   energeAc   movement.   In   the   Tibetan   language   they   talk   about   rigpa   as  the   state   of  
presence  or  awareness,  and  rigpa  itself  as  the  energy  of  the  awareness.

SomeAmes  the   image   used   is   that   awareness   is   like   the   sun.   The   sun   is  just   in   the   sky,   peacefully,  
seemingly  always  the  same,  but  it’s  radiaAng  light.  So  light  comes  out  and  when   the  light  comes  to  us,  it  
touches  us  and  we  feel  the  heat.  The  expressive  movement  of  sun’s  rays  coming  out  is  the  image  for  the  
creaAvity   of   the  mind.  The  sun  doesn’t  have  to   come  to  deliver  its  heat  to   us  –   just   being   in  itself,  it  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  48

freely,  generously  releases   this  energy.  In  the  same   way  awareness  in  its  sAllness,  from  its  shimmering  
surface,  manifests  energy  into  the  world.  

Tonglen practice of integrating wisdom and compassion

Compassion,  in  the   dzogchen   tradiAon,   is  not  seen   as  something   which   has  to   be  developed,   because  
the   open   quality   of   the   natural   state,   or   rigpa  itself,   is  automaAcally   compassionate.   So   it   might   be  
appropriate   now   to   do   a  different   kind   of   pracAce   and   in   parAcular,   one   which   is  more  focused   on  
compassion.  

TradiAonally  it   is  said  that  the  dharmakaya,  meaning   awakening   to  your  own  natural  state   of  purity,  is  
for   yourself,   and   the   rupakaya   or   form   kayas,   namely   sambhogakaya   and   nirmanakaya,   are   for   the  
other.

As  soon  as  the  mind  is  open,  energy  has  no  parAcular  purpose,  unlike  in  our  ordinary  ego  state  when  our  
energy  is  harnessed  for   our  own  personal   concerns.  Once  we   have  some   openness  to  feeling  clear  and  
relaxed  and  at  ease,  there  is  a  saAsfacAon.  SaAsfacAon  in  Tibetan   is  called  sim  pa.   It  is  not  the  same  as  
happiness  or   joy;   it’s   just   a   kind   of   calm   okay-­‐ness.  A   slightly   posiAve   flavour   of   tranquillity   with   no  
feeling  of   lack,  no  need  for  anything  more.  However  there  is  sAll   all  this  energy,  this  potenAal  so  what  
will  we  do  with  it?  It  flows  out  into  the  world  in  being  with  others.  

Now   we   will  do   some   tonglen   pracAce   using   movement   and   sound.   Tonglen   is   a   general   mahayana  
pracAce  integraAng  wisdom  and  compassion.  The  wisdom  aspect  is  empAness.

Another   way   to   express  this  is  that  you   can  have   compassion  without  empAness.  We  all  know   many  
good-­‐hearted  people  who  have  no  understanding   of  empAness,  people  who   are  caring   and  concerned  
about  the  welfare  of   others  and   are  troubled   when   they  hear   stories  about   other  people’s  suffering.  
That   is  to  say,  the  story   they  hear  about  somebody’s  situaAon  affects  them,  and   upsets  them,   and  so  
they   want  to  do  something.  It  is  as  if   the  situaAon   is  real;  the  response  or  feeling  is  real;  and  the  desire  
to  do  something  is  also   real.  So   you  have  these   three   wheels   where   subject,   object,  and   the   relaAon  
between   them   are   all   real.   Although   this   generates  some   virtuous  karma,   it   also   generates   a   lot   of  
ignorance,  because  it  is  holding  subject  and  object  as  real.  

What   we   want   to   do   is   develop   open   responsive   compassion,   but   within   the   understanding   of  
empAness.  EmpAness  simply   means  that  from   the  very  beginning   all  the  forms  that   we  see  including  
ourselves,   are   devoid   of   any   internal   defining   essence.   We   and   all   the   forms   of   the   world   arise   in  
relaAonship;   there   are   no   self-­‐discreet   or   autonomous   enAAes   at   all.   Everything   is   already  
interconnected.  

AnalyAc  examinaAon  is  also  used   to  discover  empAness  and  we  look  again  and  again  to  see  whether  we  
can  find   any   essence  in  anything.   If   we  look   at   all  the  objects  in   this  room,   they   are  all  destrucAble,  
because  all   are   composite.  Whether   it’s   the  lamps,   or   the   walls,   or  the  ceilings,   or  the  floor,   all  have  
been  put  together  from  different  bits  and  pieces.  That  indicates  that  they  are  not  self-­‐sufficient,  they   are  
not  living  in  a  world  of  their  own.  

Similarly,   when   we  think   of   people   who   are   suffering,   their   pain   may   seem   terrible   but  what   is  that  
suffering?  It’s  a  moment  of   momentary  arising.   That  doesn’t  mean   that  we  say,  ‘Oh,  it  doesn’t  ma>er.  
Never   mind,   it   will  pass.’  That   would  be  rude  and  insulAng   because  when   people  are   suffering,  that’s  
suffering.  

However,  when  we  can  see  there  is  no  real  person   who  suffers,  and  that  the  suffering  itself  is  transitory,  
then   we  can  respond   to  the  suffering   without  validaAng  or  strengthening  any  sense  that  there   is   a  real  
person  who  is  suffering.       So,  on  our  side,  our   nature  is  relaxed,  open,  and  responsive.  On  the  side  of  the  
other,  we  see   that  there  is  no  essence.  What  unites  us  is  the  empAness  in  our  heart  and  the  empAness  
 P a g e  |  49

in  the  hearts  of  all  beings.  At   the  centre  of  every   being  is  not  some  essence  of  John,  or  Mary,  or   Peter…  
It’s  just  the  leLer  Aa,  it’s  just  empAness,  manifesAng  that  parAcular  form  for  a  while.

Practicing  Tonglen

Tonglen  means  giving  and  receiving.  Tong  means  to  give,  and   len  means  to  receive  or  to  take.  We  begin  
by   imagining   all  senAent  beings  in   the  world  and  that  rays  of  light   are  spreading   out  from  our  heart   to  
them   offering   them   infinite   happiness.   We’re   offering   them   long   life,   good   health,   supplies  of   food,  
everything   they  would  need.  Beneficence,  goodness,  is  spreading   out  from  us  to  them.  We  experience  
the  centre  of   our  being,  our   heart,  as  an  infinite  cornucopia,   a  horn  of   plenty,  out   of  which  an   infinite  
amount  of  light  and  love  can  move  out  to  all  beings.  We’re  giving  out  love  to  all  beings.  

As   we  do   this,   we   make  a  movement   with   our   hands   together   at   our   heart,  opening   out   our   arms,  
offering   out.  Again  and   again,  offering   out,   and  as  we  do  it   we   make   the   sound   of   Aa.   We  make  the  
sound  of   Aa  conAnuously  all  the  way  through,  because  Aa  is   the  sound   of   empAness.   Do  this  in  your  
own  rhythm.  At  a  certain  point  we  become  aware  of  the  suffering  of  all  beings.  We  then  start  to  invite  all  
the   pain  and  all  the  misery  of  all  senAent  beings  to  come  into  us.    Open  you  arms  and  draw  them   in  so  
that  your  hands  are  back  at  your  heart.

Lest  we  get  overwhelmed  by   this,  imagine  that  in  the  centre  of  your  heart  there  is  the   leLer  Aa,  or  an  
infinite  sky,  and   that  as  the  difficulty   and   pain   are  coming   in,   they  flow   into  your  heart  and   dissolve.  
There  is  no  limit  to  the  amount  of  universal  pain   that  can  be   brought  into  us.  And  we   make  the   gesture  
of  bringing  it  into  the  heart,  bringing  it   into   the  heart.  You   make  these  gestures  in  your  own  speed,  at  
your  own  Ame.  

When   you  feel  to,  you  just   reverse  it  so  that  you  are  offering  out  light,  and  offering   out  light   and  again,  
you   reverse  into  receiving   the  negaAve.   You  are  alternaAng  radiant  light   with  happiness  and   goodness  
going  out  to  all  beings,  and  the  gathering  together  of   all  the  sufferings  of   the  world  which  dissolve  into  
the  empAness  of  your  heart.  Infinite  spaciousness  in  your  heart  takes  everything  in,  and  dissolves  it  into  
light.  

This  is  something  we  can  pracAce  together  for  a  liLle  bit.  If  you  feel  you  don’t  want   to  do  it  you  can  just  
sit   quietly,   but  I   think   it’s  a  very  helpful  way   of  feeling   a  connecAon  with  all  beings.  You  can   do   it  with  
your  eyes  open  or  closed.  

QuesAon:  James,  is  this  not  dangerous?

James:     Dangerous  for  whom?  

QuesAon:    No,  I  mean  the  exercise.

James:       If  you  start  to  make  it  very  strongly   real  for  yourself,  and  think,  ‘I  am  being  infected.  I  am  being  
contaminated  by  all  of  this,’  then  you  open  up  your  heart  into  the  space,  and  just  let  it  pass  through.  The  
pracAce  is  not  saying  that  you  are  a  receptacle   like  some  kind   of  waste  disposal  mechanism.  Tonglen  is  
not  a  disposal  system.  It’s  that  we’re  dissolving  the  negaAve  into  space,  into  space.  

Out  of  space  all   goodness  comes,  back   into  space  all  difficulAes  go.  With  that  a:tude   there  is  no  harm  
or  danger.  Okay?

So,  in  your  own  speed,  in  your  own  Ame,  with  the  sound  of  Aa.

[PracAce]

Practice:  silence  and  sound

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  50

We  will  begin  with  some  quite  si:ng,  and  from  that,  we  will  move  into  the  refuge  and  bodhiciLa  prayers  
and  then  into  the  three  Aa  pracAce.  

From  being   calm   and   quiet,   as  we   move   into   the  sound   of   the   refuge  and  bodhiciLa,   see  if   you   can  
experience  sound  arising  out  of  silence.  This  is  a  chance  to  invesAgate:  what  is  the  nature  of  sound?

We   know   that   the   breath   comes   up   and   goes   through   the   throat   where   the   various   posiAons   and  
contracAons  lead  to  vibraAons,  which  we  hear  as  parAcular  sounds.  The  breath,  which  can  be  very  silent,  
through  it’s  shaping  in  the  tube  of   the  throat,  takes  on  resonances  which  we  hear  as  parAcular  sounds.  
Sound  is  just  a  vibraAon.      The  whole  of  our  world  is  really  constructed  out  of  vibraAons  of  various  kinds.  
Some  vibraAons   register   with   us,   and   some   not.   We   know   that   animals   hear   and   smell   frequencies  
which  we  don’t  hear  or  smell.  All  of  these  are  actually  simply  vibraAonal  qualiAes.  

So,  as  we  move  from  silence  into  movement,  it’s  a  chance  to   have  a  sense  of  the  integraAon  of  the  two.  
In  parAcular,  is  silence  destroyed  by  sound?  Or  is  there  a  more  non-­‐dual  or   integraAve  relaAon   between  
them?   Is  there   actually   the   sound   of   silence   itself,   just   as  we   have   movement   as   the   movement   of  
space.  Although  space  itself  never  moves,  it’s  not  eliminated  by  movement.  

The  heart  of   non-­‐duality   is  to   hold  what   appear   to  be  opposites   at  the  same   Ame,   and   see   that   this  
opposiAon   is  an  illusion  based  on  the  intensity  of  the  conceptual  categories  that  we  make.  ‘Now  we’re  
doing   this,   now   we’re   doing   that.   When   we   stop   doing   this,   then   we   begin   to   do   that.’   When   we  
experience  in  this  way  we  get  a  sequence,   a  juxtaposiAon  of  different  forms,  each  of  which  has  a  hiatus  
–  a  tear  or   a  gap  in  between  them,  rather  than  there  being  an   open  field  of  infinite  non-­‐blocking.   In  the  
Tibetan   language  there   are   very   many   words  to   indicate   ‘direct’   or   ‘unblocked,’   the   idea  that   space,  
silence,  the  unmoving  indestrucAble  vajra  nature,   is  not   something  which  is  at  the   mercy  of  any  kind  of  
transformaAon.

Remember  the   image  of   the  mirror   and  the  reflecAon?   We’re   si:ng   very   quiet,  minimal  acAvity,  and  
then  we  start   to  make  sound.  The  sound  is  like  the  reflecAon  arising  in   the  mirror.  It  doesn’t  destroy  the  
mirror  –   it  appears  in  the  mirror,  as  the  mirror,  but  it’s  not   the  mirror.  It’s  neither  the  same,  nor  is  it  
different.  That’s  a  quality  we  can  explore  a  liLle  in  our  own  experience.  

So,  silence,  quiet  si:ng,  and  then  we  recite  the  refuge  and   bodhiciLa  prayers,  and  then  we  do  the  three  
Aa’s.

[PracAce]

Body, speech and mind

We   have  a  body,  we  have  speech,  and  we  have  mind.  These  are   the  aspects  of  our  existence.  When  we  
say,  ‘our  existence,‘  that  may  seem  like  something   very  self-­‐referenAal,  as  if  it  seals  us  into   a  parAcular  
private  world,  but  the  body  is  part  of  the  world.  It  is  breathing   in   and  out,  all  the  Ame  in  and  out,  in  and  
out.  If  we  stop  breathing   we  die.   The  blood  is  circulaAng  around  us,  and  that’s  part  of   the  breathing  in  
and   out.   The   blood   wouldn’t   need   to   circulate   if   we   didn’t   need   to   have   something   from   the  
environment  –namely  more  energy  –  and  to  release  something  into  it.  

We   eat  and  drink,   we  piss  and   shit,  we  sweat,  we  secrete  waxy   things  in  our  noses  and  in   other  places,  
and   so   on.   That   is  to   say,   the   movement   of   the  world   and   the   movement  of   the   body   are  not   two  
different  things.   The  body  is  consAtuted  out  of  that  which  is  available  in  the  world  –  the  same  chemicals  
coming  into  their  various  combinaAons  to  make  bones  and  lungs  and  hearts,  and  so  on.  

We   can  say   that  ‘We   have  a  body’  and  that  it   makes  it  seem  like   a  possession,  but  actually  moment-­‐by-­‐
moment,  our  body   is  revealed   to   us  as  an  experience.   For  example,  you  might  be  si:ng  in  meditaAon  
and   become  aware  that  your  body  is  slouching  a  liLle  bit.  So  you  pull  yourself  up  and  sit  more  straight,  
 P a g e  |  51

and  you  feel  your  spine  ge:ng  straight  and  your   weight  hangs  more  easily.  You  tell  your  body  what   to  
do.  How  is  that  possible?   You  think,  ‘My  body’s   not   right,’  and   somehow  that  thought  makes  muscles  
contract  –   pulls  you  up.  ‘I   am  going   to  liu  my   hand’  …  how   does  this  happen?  It’s  completely  amazing,  
because  if  the  body  was  one  thing  and   the   mind  was  another,  how   would  that   work?  There  would  be  a  
border  guard   in  between  who  might  say,  ‘Our  factory’s  closed  at  the  moment.  Go  away  now.  Leave  us  
alone,’  but  the  mind  says  something  and  the  body  does  it.  The  body  is  an  experience.  

Our   speech   is   also   an   experience.   We   hear   ourselves   speaking.   It   is   the  vibraAon   of   sound   which   is  
interpreted.  We  have  to  interpret  what  we  are  saying.  SomeAmes  we  are  even  surprised   at  what   we  are  
saying.   ‘How   is   it   that   these   words   are   coming   out   of   my   mouth?’   So   we   experience   that   and   we  
experience  our  thoughts  and  our  emoAons.  We  experience  propriocepAon,  a  sensaAon  inside  the  body.      

Our  world   is   a  world  of  experience.  This  maybe  seems  very  obvious,  but  I  would  suggest  that  it’s   really  
something   quite  radical,  because  it’s   the  point  that  frees  us  from   the  manipulaAon  of   objects.   It’s  the  
point  where  you  can  move  towards  non-­‐duality.  

In  the   Tibetan  tradiAon  it’s  called   rigpai   rangjung.  Rigpa   is   wisdom  or   awareness;  rangjung  means  self-­‐
appearance.  Appearance  here  means  ‘experience’,  because  we  may  that  say  the  world  appears  around  
us,   but   rigpai  rangjung  refers  to   our   experiencing   that.  It’s   not   a  thing   out   there,   it   is  the   vitality   of  
existence.

This  is  the  point  where  the  world  becomes  alive.   There  are  no  dead  things  at  all,  because   our  access  to  
everything   is   in   the   moment   of   living   experience.   In   the   registering   moment-­‐by-­‐moment   of   tastes,  
colours,  touch,  smells,  arising  and  passing,  arising  and  passing.  Ceaseless  waves  of  experience  –  and  who  
is  the  experiencer?  This  is  the  mind  itself.

The  experience   arises  as  the  kind  of   health.  In  the  tradiAon,  you  have  three   terms  for   describing   this.  
The  first  is  ngowo  –  ngo  means  our  own  nature,  but  it  also  means  our  face.  We  recognize  people  by  their  
face.  Their   face  is   something,  as  it  were,  very   descripAve.  It’s  how  you  know  what  some  thing   is  –   you  
see   its   face.   But   the  face  also   has   its   own   moods.   These  are  our   complexion;   we  talk   of   the   bloom  of  
youth,  and  bloom  is  also  used   for  a  flower,  so   when   a  flower  is  blooming  it’s  spreading  out,  expanding,  
showing  that  gorgeous  freshness.  You  see  all  the   life  and  vitality  coming  through.  Children  who’ve  been  
running   around  and  playing,  their   cheeks  are  shinning  and  their  eyes  are  so  excited  …  whoo.  The  term  
for  this  is  rang  zhin,  and  rang  zhin  is  like  the  radiant  complexion,  also  called  rang  dang,  which  means  the  
radiance.  So  the  radiance,  or  the  health,  of  the  mind  or  the  body  is  showing  itself  in  this  complexion.  

The  mind  is  calm  and  peaceful,  but  it’s  not   dead.  It’s  a  vital  capacity,   a  potenAality,  which  shows  itself  in  
this  luminous  shimmering   world   that   we   live  in,  the   world  of   vibrant   experience.  Within  that   field  of  
experience,   we   have   our   precise   gestures   moment-­‐by-­‐moment.   This   is   called   thug   je,   and   can   be  
translated  as  compassion.  Thug  means  heart,  and  je   means  kind  of  noble.  It’s  the  energy   of  the  heart,  
the  quality  of   the  heart.   So,  we  move   into   the  world  in  a  heart-­‐felt  way,  making   gestures.  The  body  is  
always  already  part  of  the  world.  

Speech  has  no   other  funcAon  but  communicaAon.   Our  thoughts  and  emoAons  are  relaAonal  –  we  think  
about  things;  we  have  emoAons  in   response  to  things.  We  feel   fear  or  love  or   tenderness  in  relaAon   to  
something  else.  We  can  do   it  in   relaAon  to  ourselves  when  we’re   feeling  in  a  dualisAc  relaAon  towards  
our  own  being.  The  central  point   is  that  our  world  is  nothing  but  communicaAon.  It’s  a  matrix   in  which  
every  part  is  connected,  and  the  moments  of  connectedness  shimmer  and  flicker  across  all  the  Ame.  

The  sun  shines  in  the  window  and  we  think,  ‘Oh,  I’m  glad  it’s  a  good  day.  If  it’s   sPll  nice  in  the  auernoon,  
I   can  go  for   a  walk.’  Just  a  liLle  bit  of  sunlight  coming   in  triggers  a  whole   set  of   responses.  In  that  way,  
we  are  part   of   the  world.   Just   as  when   you  are  by   the   sea,  you   can   someAmes   see  seaweed  moving  
around  in  the  waves.  Or  liLle  jellyfish  being  washed  around.  We’re  also  like  that.  The  Ades  of   the  world  
are  blowing  us  here  and  there;  we  open,  we  close.  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  52

There  is  no  solidity   in   anything  we  encounter   and  experience  is  always  transient.  There  is  nothing  to  rely  
on,  but,  why  do  we  burden   ourselves  with  seeking  something  solid  to  sit   on?  There  is  something  in   our  
way  of   experiencing   the  world  that   is  seeking   for  solidity,  because   we   feel  solid.   We  don’t  like  things  
being  unclear,  however  a  central  point  in  dzogchen  is  that  our  world  is  essenAally  unknowable.  

Unknowable   is   not   the   same   as   unknown,   as   something   which   is   beyond   knowledge.   Rather,  
unknowable   means  things   reveals  themselves  through   parAcipaAon.   Knowledge,   in   a   sense,   is  like   a  
doggie  bag;  you  take  something   away.  You  have  a  pizza  and  you  can’t  eat  all  of  it  so  they  put  it  in  a  liLle  
box   and  you  can  take  it  home  with   you.   There  was  too  much;  you  couldn’t  digest  what  was  there.  In  the  
same  way  knowledge  is  an  accreAon,  an  excess.  We  have  all   these  excesses  and  then  want  to  use  them  
and  we  put  them  onto  the  situaAon;  but  situaAons  themselves,  we  don’t  know.

In  my   private  psychotherapy   pracAce  I  see  many   women  whose  primary  preoccupaAon  is  how  to  get  a  
man.        So  I  hear  many  stories  about  women’s  mental  processes  in   relaAon  to  men.         Ajer  the  first  date,  
there  is  the  quesAon,   ‘Will  he   phone?   How   long   do   wait   before   I   phone   him   …‘   I   see   this  incredible  
movement  of  the  female  mind  trying   to  figure  out,  ‘How  do  I  catch  this   fish?‘      The  thing   is,  you  don’t  
know,  nor  can  you.  What  I’m  say  is,  ‘Why  don’t  you  wait   and  see?’  You  can’t   know,  and  it’s  anxiety.  So  
the  anxiety  says,  ‘I  need  to  know  what  is  going  on,  and  therefore   I’m  going  to  go  out  into  the  world  to  try  
to  get  one   object  or  the   other  to  give   me  the   answer  which   will  then   let  me  se>le.’  But  the  quesAon  is,  
‘Why   am  I   not   se>led?’  Why   do  I  feel  that  not  knowing  is  something  unusual,   when  in  fact  every  day  of  
our  lives  we  don’t  know  what’s  going  to  happen?

How  to  stay  seLled  and  calm  in  a  world  that  you  don’t  know?  Well,  we  have  to  trust  it  will  be  okay.  It  will  
be   okay   however   it   is,   which   means  we   integrate   experience  as   it   arises.   We   find   enough   space   in  
ourselves  to  work  with  whatever   is  there.  If   you   fill  the  space  of   your   mental  capacity   with   hopes  and  
fears,  they  clunk  in  like  heavy  old  fashioned  furniture  made  of  oak   and  ebony,  and  so  on.  Then  you  bang  
your  knees  on  them,  and  you  can’t  move  them  around.  

So,  waiAng  for  the  man  to  phone.  ‘Why  hasn’t  he  phoned  me?  Why  not?   Maybe  he  doesn’t   like  me.  Was  
it  a  mistake   to  have  gone  to  bed   with  him  or  not?  What  should  I  do?’  Who  knows  what  you  should  do   –  
you  don’t  know.  ‘But  I  want  to  know.’  You  can’t  know.  Life  will  be  as  it  comes.  ‘That’s  too  bad.  I   refuse  to  
accept  this,  I  will  control  what  happens.’   People  will  do  what  they  do.   This  fantasy  that  we  can  control  
other  people  is  part  of  our  confusion  that  we  can  only  feel  okay  if  things  are  a  certain  way.  Not   only   are  
we  separated  in  our  loneliness  and  anxiety,  but  we’re  desperately  linked  together  out   of  a  demand  that  
the  other  person  becomes  the  way  we  want  them  to  be.  

This  is   the  taste  of   suffering  embedded  in  duality,  with  no   tolerance  or  acceptance  of   how  things  are.  
Dzogchen   challenges   this.   It   says   if   you   want   to   have   freedom,   you   have   to   open   your   mind   to   the  
infinite  complexity  of   the   world  around   you.  There  are  endless  factors  in  operaAon  which  will  generate  
paLerns   you’ve   never   imagined,   paLerns   you’ve   never   dreamed   of.   ‘How   can   you   be   present   with  
however   life  is?’   That’s   the   quesAon.  If   you   start  from   a  noAon  that  you   are  a  limited  person  with   a  
parAcular  shape  and  that  there  are  only   certain  shapes  in  the  world  that  will   fit  with  you,  then  you   will  
have  a  long  and  difficult   journey  trying  to   find  these  shapes.   It’s  very  rare  that  things  really  fit  together  
for  long.

Yesterday  we   were   starAng  to  look   at  the  nature  of   the  mind   itself,  and   finding   that  it’s  not   a  thing.   It  
doesn’t   have  a  shape.  It’s  not  resAng   on  anything.  Because  it’s   not  heavy,  it’s  not  a  burden.   Space  and  
awareness  are  inseparable.  In  Tibetan  they   say  ying   rig   yerme   meaning  that  dhatu   (ying)  and  vidya  (rig)  
are  inseparable.  

All   of  space  is,  if   you  like,   intelligent,   or   alive.  It’s  not  that   there  is  dead  space  with   a  few  living   things  
inside  it.   Space  itself  is  luminous,  and   this  is  the  space  of   the   mind.  There  is   no  other  space.  When  we  
look   for   our   mind  we   don’t  find  a   thing,  and  yet   there’s   not  nothing   because   we  have  experience.   Yet  
 P a g e  |  53

when  we  try  to  catch  the  experience  it   falls  away,  because  it’s  an  illusion.  It’s  an  appearance  without  an  
essence.  

There  is  no  essence  anywhere.  An  essence  is  like   a  disAllaAon   –  you  take  the  grapes,   you  squeeze  them  
and   you   have   the  juice,   you   make  the   wine,   then   you   disAll   the   wine,   and   you  get   the   brandy.   The  
brandy  is  the  essence  of   the  grape,  it’s  a  condensaAon.  Or  you  squeeze  the  lemon  and   get   the  juice  and  
the  juice  is  the  essence  of  the  lemon  –  it  expresses  the  life  of  the  lemon.  You  can   evaporate  some  of  the  
water  from  it  and  get  a  more  concentrated  form.

But  there  is  no   essence  in  us.   We  arise  in  relaAon  to  the  other.   For  example  our   bodies  are  in  relaAon   to  
how  we   are.  Most  of   us  are  used  to  si:ng  in   chairs.  When   we  come  to  a   Buddhist  place  we  tend  to  sit  
on  the  ground  on  cushions,  and  then   our   bodies  get  a  bit  achy   because  we’re  not   used  to   doing  that.  
Why   do   our   bodies  start  to  ache?   Because  of   the  nature  of   the  cushion,  because  of   the  nature  of   the  
joints.  These  angles  are  not  the  usual  angles  the  joints  are  in  when  you’re  si:ng  in  a  chair.  That  is  to  say,  
my  body  and   the  cushion   are  having   a  conversaAon.  They’re   in  communicaAon.   In   the  same   way,  the  
light  of   the  sun   coming   in   the   window   has  a  communicaAon   through  our   eyes.  Or  we   suddenly   hear  
church  bells  and   there’s  a   communicaAon.   Or   suddenly   we  want   to   scratch   ourselves  because   some  
nerve  ending  is  sending  a  liLle  message.  

Since  you  woke  up  this  morning,  there  has  been  nothing  but  communicaAon.   You’ve  had  messages  from  
inside  your   body   about  whether  you   felt  supple  or   Aght,   you’ve  had  messages  when  you   went   to   eat  
about  what  you  wanted  to  eat  –   maybe   your  hand  went  towards  something   but   then  you   thought,  ‘No,  
not   today.’   So   there’s  a  sense   in  which,   if   we  stay   present  in   the   world,  that   communicaAon  will   be  
shaping  our  body,  what  we  eat,  how  we  eat,  who  we  eat  with  and  so  on.  

We   start  to  see  that  the  world  is  pulsaAons.  PulsaAons  inside  what  we  call,  ‘my   body’,  the  pulsaAons  of  
our  speech,  the  pulsaAons  of  our  thoughts  and  feelings.  This  is  the  radiance  of  awareness.  

When   I  was  si:ng  in  the  meditaAon,  I  became  aware  my  back  was  slumping  a  liLle   bit,  and  I  said,   ‘Oh,  
up  we  go,’  and  so  then  I’m  si:ng  more  upright.  A  message  arises,  and  the  message  is  communicated   to  
the  body,  and  the  body  does  something.  For  a  while.  

Look  around   and  see  if   you  can  discover  any   aspect  of   your  experience  which  is   not  a  communicaAon.  
We  think  about  other  people  –  we  like   them,   we  don’t  like  them.  We  think   about  our  work.  We  think  
about  the  future  –   we  might  think  about   dying,  we  might  think  about  the  summer  holidays,  we  might  
have  to   think  about  money.   There  could  be  all  sorts  of   thought  we  have.  Thoughts  are  about  something,  
that  is  to  say,  they  link  us  to  the  world  in  parAcular  paLerns,  in  parAcular  ways.

Because  there  is  no   essence  in   the   subject  and  no  essence  in  the  object,  the  communicaAon  is  not  like  
sending  a  leLer  from  someone  in  one  town  to  another   town,  where  a   parAcular  object  is  sent  across  
Ame   and   space   to   arrive   in   another   place.   There   is   no   Mr   A   and   Mrs   B   between   whom   this  
correspondence  is  going  on.  Mr  A,  in  wriAng  a  leLer   to   Mrs  B,  is  a  movement  of  the  body.  Once  we  start  
to  see   things   in   that   way,  there  is  no   stability.   This  is   not  a  punishment.   Impermanence   is   not   some  
terrible   curse   that   has  been   put   upon   us  and  that   we   have  to  struggle  with.   Feeling   that   way   comes  
about  when  we  think,  ‘I  exist  as  this  thing,  and  I  have  to  resist  fate’.  

From  Ame  to  Ame  I  go  to  a  liLle  place  in   the  middle  of  France.   When  I  walk  in  the  fields  and  look  at  the  
stone  walls,  which  are  incredibly  thick,  I   ojen  imagine  the  peasants  who   went  around  the  fields  picking  
up  stones,  and   pu:ng  them   on  their   backs  and   taking   them   and  building   these   incredible   walls.   The  
fields  are  sAll  preLy  full  of  stones.  Now,  you   can  take  two  readings  of  this.  One  is,  ‘This  is  back-­‐breaking  
work,   this   is  terrible  work   in   the  rain   and  the  cold,  but  it  must  be   done.’  The  other  reading  is,  ‘This  is  the  
movement  of  the  body  in  space.’  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  54

Now  that  may  sound  idealisAc  and   very  romanAc  ,  but  it’s  also  the  story   of  Milarepa.   When  you  read  
these  stories  of  the  great  Tibetan  saints,   and  they’re  walking  in   the  caves  or  going  out  and  finding  their  
neLles,  they’re  always  working  with   circumstances.  All  we   have  is  circumstances.  Circumstances  means  
the   environment  we  are  in   is  not  predictable   and   not   stable,  and   working   with  it  means  we  are  also  
moving.  So  the  field  of  experience  is  moving,  and  we  are  moving.  If  you  see  it  in  those  ways,   then  we’re  
always  working  with  whatever  it  is.   When  the  weather  gets  cold  you  put  on  a  coat;  when  the  sun  starts  
to  shine  you  take  your  coat  off.  That’s  just  working  with  circumstances.

Since  we  can’t   stop   the  world  being  as  it  is,   all  we  can  change  is  ourselves.  So  the  main  thing  we  have  to  
look   at  is:  what  is  this  contracAon  in   ourselves?   What  is  my  sense  of  hosAlity?  That’s  the  taste  of  duality  
–  me  against  the  world,  rather  than  me  parAcipaAng  with  the  world.  

Think  back   to  these  three  principles,  these  three  aspects  of  existence  someAmes  called  the  three  kayas.  
Infinite  spaciousness,  which  is  vibrant  and  alive.  Within  it  is  the  field  of  experience  as  its  own  display.  We  
are  in  that,  we  are  part  of   the  field  of  display.  We’re  not  coming  from  the  outside  in,  we’re  in  the  world,  
and   in   the   world  we’re  moving   with  the  world.  That  is   the   meaning   of   compassion   –   to  move  in  the  
world,  with  the  world,  as  part  of  it.  

So  as  we  need  to  move.  Say   you  get  a  call  from  a  friend   and  they’re  sick.  You  think,  ‘Oh,  I  need  to  go  and  
visit  them.’  Their  communicaAon  of   their  difficulty  causes  your  body  to  get  up  and  go   on  a  journey  to  be  
with  them.  That’s  preLy  understandable  and  straight  forward,  but  it’s  a  wave,  isn’t  it?  Some  wave  comes  
to  you,   and   you   have  a   corresponding   wave  across  to   them.  And  so   you   might   go   out  and   do   some  
shopping   for  them,  or  you  might   cook  for  them,  or  you  might  phone  some   other  friends  and  organise  a  
rota  of   people   who   could   help.   All   of   that   is   movements   of   energy,   and   the   movement  of   energy   is  
happening  in  Ame  and  space.  

[Break]

Karma
Now  would  be  a  good  Ame  to  return  to  the  topic  of  karma  and   the  tradiAonal  explanaAon  of  how  karma  
funcAons.

Karma  means  acAvity,  in  parAcular,  acAvity  which  has  a  consequence.   So  in  Tibetan   it’s  called  le   gyu   dre.  
Le  means  doing,  or  acAon,  gyu  means  a  cause,  and  dre  means  a  result.  So,  it’s  an  acAon  which  is  a  cause  
for  a  future  result.  

Take  an  acAon   which   has  an   immediate  result,  for   example,  I  hit  someone.  The  police  are   called,  and  
they   take  me   to   the   police   staAon,   and   maybe   I   have  to   go   to   court.   Clearly   there   is   an   immediate  
consequence  which  is  unpleasant.  I  get  my  name  in  the  newspaper,   and   so  on,   but  that’s  not  what  we  
call  the  karma,  although  each  stage  of  that  acAon  could  generate  its  own  karma.   In  the  act  of  hi:ng  the  
person,   I   have   some   kind   of   moAve   or   feeling   towards   this   object,   some   intenAon.   I   am   enacAng  
something  onto  them.   Having  done  that,  I  then  think,   ‘Good,  I  got  you,  you  nasty   bastard.‘      There   you  
have  the  four  stages  of  karma.  

The  first  stage  is  called  the  basis,  and  the  basis  is  duality.  As  long  as  we  live  in   a  split  sense  of   a  subject  
and   an  object  –   ‘I   am  real.   You  are   real.’   –   these  two  points  have  a  kind   of   vibraAon   between   them.  
Maybe  in  school  you  looked   at  the  Van  Der  Graaf   generator.  Did  you  ever   see  this?   Big   columns  with  
glass  balls  on  the  top,  and   you  turn  a  handle  and   it  starts  to  spark  between  the  two  points.  That’s  what  
subject  and  object  is  like;  subject  and  object  are  not  truly  self-­‐exisAng,  they’re  the  result  of  a  tear.  There  
was   not  a  real  tear,   but   it  is   as  if   there  had   been   a  tear.  Or   it’s  like  pulling   an   elasAc  band;   these  two  
polariAes  are  held  with   a  tension  between  them,  a  vibraAon.  So  the  first  stage  of   karma  is  to  feel  that  
you  are  an  individual  self,  operaAng  in  a  world  of  real  separate  people,  and  real  separate  things.
 P a g e  |  55

The  second  step  is  called  sampa  or  thought.  That  is   to  say,  ‘I  develop  some   intenPon  towards   it.’   If  it’s  
something  I  like,   I  have  desire,  if   it’s  something   I   don’t  like,  I  feel  an  aversion  or  an  aggression.  I  might  
think  that  you  are  my  enemy  and  so  I  am  going  to  hurt  you  or  block  you.

The  third   stage  is   the   enactment.   In  Tibetan   it’s  called  the  consummaAon,   or   jorwa,  and   is  the  same  
word   as   is  used  for   having   sex.  In   sex   two   bodies   come  together  –   subject  and  object   come  together.  
When   you   have   the   act,   whether  it’s  punching   someone,  or   stealing   something,   or  helping   someone,  
subject  and  object  are  now  connected.  

The  fourth  stage  is  called  the  compleAon,  or   the  fulfillment,  tagtuk.   It  means  you  are  aware  of  what   you  
have  done,  and  you  think,  ‘Good,  I’m  glad.’  

If  these   four  stages  are   present,  then  you   get  the  full  impact  of  karma  being  built  up,  because  now   you  
have,  as  it  were,  built  up   a  big  charge,  a  polarity  inside  yourself  –  an   energeAc  vibraAon   which  manifests  
at  some  Ame  later.  

However  if,  having  done  the  acAon,  you’re  filled   with  regret  and  you  think,  ‘Shit,  what  have  I  done.   That  
was   terrible,’  and   you  want   to   apologise,  then   you  lessen   the   impact.  If   in  the  moment  of   doing   the  
acAon  you  think,  ‘What  am  I  doing,  this   is   crazy,’   and   you  stop,  that  lessens  it  even  more.  If,  when   you  
have  the  iniAal  intenAon,  you  think,  ‘Oops,  I  be>er  not’  and  stop,  then  that  also  lessens  it.  However  each  
of  these  is  a  counteracAon;  you’re   having  to  counter-­‐act,  to  be  conscious  and  then  acAve.  So  it’s  like  a  
conAnuous   ediAng   of   what’s   going   on,   which   requires   a   mindful   vigilance   about   your   own   mental  
acAvity,  and  the  acAvity  of  your  body,  and  so  on.

The  best  way   not   to  develop  karma  is  not   to  enter   into  the  first  stage,  which  is  the  separaAon  of  subject  
and  object.  That  is  why  they  say  that  if   you’re  in  the  state  of   contemplaAon,   or  if   you’re  integraAng  all  
phenomena  in  the  ground,  there  is  no  karma.  When  you’re  not  doing  that,  there  is  always  karma.  

Karma   is  not   a  kind   of   punishment,   it’s   just   how   things   are.   If   you’re  living   in   a  world   of   separated  
objects,  every  interacAon  you  have  with  them  is  an  energeAc  communicaAon  which   produces  a  residue  
–  and  it’s  this  residue,  or  this  excess,  which  is  the  quality  of  karma.  

In  the  theravadin  and  mahayana  tradiAons,  they  spend   a  lot  of  Ame  thinking  about  morality,   about  what  
is  good  or   bad  to  do.  This  heightens  an  awareness  of  having  an  aLributed  value  in  the  world.  There   are  
two  kinds  of   value:  intrinsic  value   and  aLributed  value.  Intrinsic  value  is  the  value  which  is  there  in  and  
of   itself,  which  is  to   say,  the  value  of  empAness  and  awareness.  This  is  a  given.  All  human  constructs  are  
aLributed  value.  We  like  certain  kinds  of  people,  we  don’t  like  other  kinds  of  people.  We  like  some  kinds  
of  food  and  not  others.   Different  people  like  and   dislike  different   things.   The  value  that  I  may   impute  as  
being  intrinsic   in   the   object  is  not  intrinsic,  it’s  extrinsic.  I   am  pu:ng   it  on   the  object,   but  I   see   it   as  
inside  the  object.

The  openness  of  the  sky,  the  openness  of  the  mind,  the  natural  purity  of  the  mind,  the  freshness,  and  so  
on   –   these   are   seen   as   inherent,   as   intrinsic.   In   Tibetan   they’re   called   rangjung   or   in   Sanskrit  
swayambhu.  It  means  coming  of  itself,  not  produced  by  anything  outside.  

So  we  might  meet  someone  and   think,  ‘Oh,  they’re   lovely.’  That’s  an  aLribuAon.   That  doesn’t  mean  that  
they  are  lovely.  For   example,  you  meet  someone  and  you  think  that  they   are  gorgeous.  You  get  to   know  
them,  talk  to  them   a  bit,   and  then  they  tell  you,  ‘I’m   very  sad.  I   just  broke  up  with  my  boyfriend.  He  leu  
me.  I   don’t  know  why.’  What   we  don’t  think  is  if  they  really  were  intrinsically  gorgeous  everybody  would  
love  them  so  they   cannot  be  intrinsically  gorgeous,  it  is  just  that  I  find  them  so.  We  are  pu:ng   the  value  
into  the  person  –  we  are  reading  something  in  there  that  we  want  to  be  in  there,  but  it’s  not  in  there.  

“There  is  no  virtue  in  the  family”

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  56

One  of   the  major   reasons  that   we   accumulate  karma  is  because   we  consider   that  ‘This   person   is   my  
enemy  –  I  hate  them.  This  person  is  my  friend  –  I  must  help  them.’  

My   teacher,  C   R   Lama,   used  to   say,   ‘There   is   no   virtue   in   the   family.’   Family   is   obligaAon,   so   to   help  
people   in   your   family   doesn’t   make   any   virtue   at   all.   Virtue   begins   with   strangers.   That’s   quite  and  
interesAng  idea,  because  it’s  a  way  of   asking  ourselves,  ‘What  is  the  nature  of  my  self-­‐interest  in  helping  
this  person.’  Only  when  there  is  no  real  self  interest  does  it  really  become  an  altruisAc  gesture.  

Developing  the   paramitas,  generosity,   paAence,  endurance,  meditaAonal  strength,   wisdom,  and  so  on,  
these   are  very   good  qualiAes,   but   they   are  arAficial.   We   have   to   develop   them  and   then   we   have   to  
remember   them,   and   remember   to   mobilize   them.   They   are   ways   of   being,   part   of   an   extending  
repertoire  of  responses  which  you  apply  as  an  anAdote  to  another  response  which  is  arising  inside  you.  

Why  do  we  invest   the  object  with  so  much  importance?  Why  do  we  rely  on  such  things?  There  is  a  very  
beauAful   liLle   meditaAon   prayer   by   Rigdzin   Godem   in   which   he   says,   ‘I’ve   given   up   all   my   worldly  
possessions,  and  I’m  living  a  very  simple  life,  but  I  find  that  I’m  sPll  gekng  caught  up  in  the   objects  of   my  
daily   use,’   and  he   wrote   this   when   he   was   thinking   about  the   bowl   he   was   eaAng   his  tsampa  out  of,  
because   he  realized,  ‘I  like  my   bowl.’  You  know,  ‘I’m   living   like  a  yogi,  I   don’t  have  any  possessions,  but  
my  bowl   is   now,  well…  “my   bowl.”  ‘   There  is  a  desire  for   the   object   to   be   special,   the   desire   to   have  
something  reassuring  around  us,  is  like  a  liLle  soj  toy  that  comforts  us  because  we  know,  ‘this  is   there,  
this  is  my  companion.’  It’s  like  that.  

There  is  also  a  very  nice  song   from  Milarepa  about  the  clay  pot  that  he  used  to  cook  his  neLle  soup  in.  
He  had  cooked  it  for  a  long  Ame,  and   then  one  day  the  clay   pot   broke   leaving   just   the  outline  of   the  
dregs  of  the  neLle  lining.  Milarepa  was  very  sad  because  he  had  lost  his  pot,  and  he   sang   a  nice  song  
about  the  impermanence  of  objects.  

That’s  what  we  have  to  look  for  in  ourselves  –  how  we  give  ourselves  to  others.  Say   for  example  you  buy  
potatoes,  and  you  keep  them  in  the  kitchen   and   you  don’t  eat  them  for  a  while.  Ajer   some  Ame  liLle  
sprouts  start  to   come  out.  Why?  Because  the  potato  says,  ‘I’m  alive.       UnPl  you  boil  me   I  will  go  on  living!  
’  and  they  put  out  their  liLle  things  …  So,  even  though  they’re  not  in  the  soil,  and  they  don’t  have  a  good  
environment,  and  there’s  nowhere  for  these  liLle  hopes,  these  liLle  movements  to  embed   themselves,  
there’s   nowhere  for  them  to  go,   the  potato  knows,  ‘I  need  to  be   planted.  I  belong  in  the  earth.  I   don’t  
belong  in  a  bowl.  What  am  I  doing  here?  I’m  a  displaced  person!  I’m  a  refugee!  I  demand  my  rights.‘      

In  the  same  way,  the  ego   is  looking  for  an  environment   to  be  in.   The  ego,  as  this  isolated  self,  is  always  
sending  out  these  tendrils   trying  to  plug  itself   into  the  world,  because  we  don’t  do  well  by  ourselves.  
This  is  why   prisons  use  solitary   confinement  as  their   worst  punishment.  To   cut  people   off  from   others  
makes  them  feel  very  bad.      

Our  desire  to   connect  with  others  operates   on  two  levels.  On  one  level,  it’s  showing  exactly  the  nature  
of   non-­‐duality   –  that  subject  and  object  belong  together.  They’re  actually  born  together,  and   the  illusion  
of   separaAon   is   a   kind   of   fantasy   which   creates   a   non-­‐recogniAon   of   the   actual   integraAon   of   all  
phenomena.

On   the   second  level,   our   yearning   to   be   plugged  in  takes  us  into   situaAons  which   are   not   very   good.  
People  may  stay   in  jobs  that  are  not  very   saAsfying   for  them  too  long,   because  they’re  worried  about  
security   or  safety.   The  fantasy   in   their   head  about  the   future  means  that   they  don’t   aLend   to   what’s  
actually   happening   in   the  moment.   ‘My   life   is   not  very   good.  But   never  mind,   in   the   future   it   will  be  
be>er.’  So  the  quesAon  would  be,  ‘Why  am  I  doing  this?   Is  this  really  the  only  opPon  open  to  me?  Where  
is   my   niche?   Where   in   this   world   is   the   environment   where   I   will   thrive?’   That’s   a   really   important  
quesAon.  And,   of  course,  you  have  to  know  your  own  shape  to  find  out  where  you  fit.  Once   you   find  
where  you  fit,  then  of  course  you  have  to  work  a  way  to  make  that  thrive.  Being  plugged   in   is  a  vital  part  
of  our  existence.  
 P a g e  |  57

When  we  move  towards  the  environment  we  tend  to  try   and  make  it  more  comfortable.  ‘What  I   need  is  
more   cushions.  No,   not  that  cushion,  I  need  that   firmer  one  over  there...‘      So  we   have  desire,   and  we  
have  aversion.  These  are  the  primary  movements.  In  buddhism  when  they  talk  of  three  root  poisons,  the  
first  is  stupidity,   which  is  to  recognise  non-­‐duality.  Out  of  that  two   forces  arise  –   pushing  away  what  we  
don’t  like  and  trying  to  pull  in  what  we  do  like.  We  see  that  going  on  all  the  Ame.  

So   when   people   accumulate   karma,   it’s   not   that   they   are   fundamentally   bad,   it’s   not   that   they’re  
infected   by  evil  –   but  they  find  themselves  living  in  a   vision  of   the  world   which   is  erroneous,  which  is  
wrong,  which  is  confused,  and  on  the  basis  of  that,  they  do  the  best  they  can  in  order  to  be  happy.  

For  example,  when  I  was   six   or  seven  I  got  stung   by  a  wasp.  I  had  gone  out  into  the   garden  with  a  golf  
club  from  my  father,  and  I  was  looking  for  all  the  wasps  and  was  trying  to  hit  them.  My  mother  came  out  
and   she  asked   me  what  I  was  doing.  I  said,   ‘These  wasps  that  stung  me  …  I   hate  these  wasps.  I’m  going  
to  kill  them.’  She  said,  ‘This   is   terrible,  the   world  is  full  of   wasps.  How  many  do   you  have   to  kill?’  I  said,  
‘I’m  going  to  kill  them  all.   I  hate  them.’  She  was  a  very  very  peaceful  person,  so  she  was  very  upset,  and  
gradually  I  could  see,  from  her  face  that  this  was  not  a  good  thing  to  do.  However   for  me,   in   being  angry  
with  the  wasps,  it   had   seemed  exactly   the  right   thing  to  do:  remove  my  enemies  and  once  they  are  all  
destroyed  I’ll  be  happy  because  they  won’t  be  aLacking  me  any  more.

And   then,   of   course   we  want   to   get   other  things.   You   know   how   children   are   ojen  taking   other   kid’s  
toys?  You  ask  them,  ‘Why  have  you   taken  that?’  ‘Because  I  like  it.’  That  seems  preLy  obvious  to   a  child:  
‘If  I  like  it  why  shouldn’t  I  have   it?’  ‘Because  it’s   not  yours.’  ‘Well  it’s  in  my  hand  now.  I  want  it,  I  like  it,  It’s  
mine.’   It’s  all  very   very   obvious.   When   countries  do   that,   we   object.  The  history   of   the  world   is  this  
endless  movement   of  people  provoking  and   goading  each  other,  taking  what  is  not  theirs.   So  karma  is  
the  dynamic  of  duality.  

As  soon  as  you’re  separated   from  the  environment,  you’re  going  to   be  acAng   on  the  environment  to  try  
to  shape  it  in   the  way   that  best  suits  your  interests.  MeditaAon   is   so  important  because  trying   to  resist  
each   of  these  movements  in  the  moment  is  very  very  hard  work.  You   have  to  be  so   alert,   so   quick   to  
stop  yourself.  

The  tradiAonal   example  is  that  if  you  have  a  tree  and  you   want  to  get  rid   of  it,  you  could   climb  the  tree  
with  a  pair  of  scissors  and  start   to  cut  off  each  leaf.  That  would  take  a  very  long  Ame,  because  as  you’re  
cu:ng  off   some   leaves,  new  ones  are  growing.  And   that’s  what  we  tend  to   do  when  we  focus  on  the  
level   of  outer   behaviour,  while  you’re  trying  to  control   one  bit  of  your   behaviour,   another  bit  is  coming  
in.  

We  tell   ourselves,  ‘I  mustn’t  do  this,’   which   may  be   a  good  way   of  controlling   ourselves,  but  when  we  
say,  ‘mustn’t’  and  ‘should,’  this  words  are  a  violence  against  the  situaAon.  These  superego  formulaAons,  
these   controlling   definiAve   true   statements,   act   in   a   rough   crude   way   causing   a   disturbance   in   the  
environment.  So,  even  when  we’re  trying  to  be  good,  we  end  up  creaAng  parAcular  charges.  

Cu:ng  the  root  is  the  best  way  to  get  rid  of  the  tree.  What  is  the  root?   The  root   is  ignorance.  Ignorance  
means  experiencing   the  world  in  terms  of   me  living   in   my   own   skin-­‐bag,   me   looking   out   of   my   sense  
organs  to  what  is  going  on  out  there.  I  am  centred  somewhere  inside  myself.  For  that  reason  we  have  to  
go  back  into  the  spaciousness  again  and  again.  

One   way   we   can   support   this   is   through   breath.   Through   the   centre   of   the   body,   runs  this   empty  
channel,  the  avadhuP,  and  when  out-­‐breath  is  moving  it  tends  to  get  side-­‐tracked  into  the  side  channels  
and   then  into  the  minor  channels,  and  because   of  this,  we  are  dispersed  in  our   body.  That  is  to  say,  we  
are  not  grounded  and  centred,  and  since  we  are  over-­‐   sensiAve  to  what’s  going  on,  we  react  very  quickly  
to   things   that   are   happening.   The   reacAons   happen   without   a   space   of   contemplaAon   and  
consideraAon.  We’re  on  a  knife-­‐edge.  We  move  very  quickly.

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  58

Through  controlling   the  breath,  and  centering   it  into   the  central  channel,  you  can  have  the  sense  that  
dispersal   can  be   reunited   in  the   ground   of   spaciousness,   and   therefore  the  movement   out  is  always  
movement  from  space.  That’s  a  yoga  pracAce,  but  it  is  also  a  metaphor.  

The  more  energy  is  grounded  in  space,  the  more  it’s  movement   into  the  world  is  always  from  space  and  
within  space.  That  is  to  say,  in  non-­‐duality  we  don’t  move  out  of  space  into  contact,  we  move  in  space,  
in  contact  with  other  movements  in  space.  Does  that  make  sense?   That’s   the  central  point.  Because  if  
you  feel  that  you’re  going  out   of  sAllness  into  movement,  then   you’ve  got,  again,  a  dualisAc  split.  So  the  
whole  world  is  illusion.  

There  are   different  techniques  for  controlling  and   direcAng  the  breath.  Techniques  have  to  be  applied,  
so  a  technique  is  as  good  as  the  energy  of   applicaAon.  When   you  start  to  apply  a  technique,  ajer  the  
first  burst  of   enthusiasm  what   you’re  likely   to  experience  is  resistance.  You  know   what   you  should  do,  
but  you  don’t  do   it.  Saint  AugusAne  said,  ‘The  good  that  I  would  do,  I  don’t  do.  The  ill   that  I  would  not  
do,  I  do.’  That  was  two  thousand  years  ago,  and  nothing  much  has  changed.  

IntenAon  is  highly  problemaAc.  Certainly  you  can  aLend  a  workshop  and  learn  a  technique,  but  then  you  
don’t  apply  it.   You  then   have  a  piece  of   useless  knowledge  which  stands   as  a   persecutor   because   you  
keep   thinking,   ‘I   should   do   this.   I   know   I   should   do  it,   but   I   don’t  do   it.’   Well,   why   don’t  you   do   it?  
Because  it’s  arAficial.  Perhaps  you  would  be  more  likely  to   do  it  if  it  led  to  a  job,  or  if   other  people  were  
to  pay   you   to  teach   them  to  do   it.   However  you   probably   already   have   a  busy  life,   maybe  a  job  or   a  
family  already  and  so,  not  much  space.  

It  is  interesAng   to  reflect  on  the   dilemma  that  ‘the  road  to  the   natural   lies   through  becoming   arAficial’.  
Why  would  you  have  to  be  arAficial  to  be  natural?  If  you   were  at  school  and  the  teacher  set  that  as  an  
essay  topic,  what  would  you  write?   The  road  to   the  natural  is  by  means  of  becoming   arAficial:   discuss.  
Two   thousand   words.   It’s   a   very   interesAng   quesAon.   The   basic   teaching   in   dzogchen   is   don’t   do  
anything  at  all.   It   doesn’t  say   do  something   be>er,   or   do  something  different.   UnAl  the  mind   itself   is  
clear,  doing  things  in   parAcular  ways  is  a  form  of   arAficiality.  Once  the  mind   itself   is   clear,  everything  is  
clear,  and  you  don’t  need  to  be  arAficial.  

The  dzogchen  approach  is  not  one  of  pu:ng  more   thoughts,  more  concepAons  in  our   mind.  It   is  rather  
to  be  spacious  enough  to  allow  the  movement  to  be  occurring  without  being  disturbed  by  it.  

Our  work  is  to  see  clouds  as  rainbows

You  are  si:ng  on  the  beach,  looking  out  at  sea.  Many  people  come  walking  along  the  beach,  and  they’re  
walking  in  front  of   you,  between  where  you’re  si:ng   and  the  sea.  They  are  interrupAng  your  view  of  the  
sea,  but  they  are  also  part  of  what   is  there.  You  can  integrate  them,  noAcing  that,  ‘I  see  the  sea  through  
the   gaps   between  the   people.’   This  is   an   interesAng   perspecAve.  If   you  have   a  camera,  you  may   even  
take  a  photo  of   them.  That  could  be   interesAng.  So  it’s   always   like  that,  can  we  integrate  what   is   going  
on?  

When  we’re  si:ng  in  meditaAon  pracAce,  thoughts  and   feelings  and   sensaAons  arise.  Don’t   try  to  push  
them  away.  They’re  not  aLacking  you,  they’re  not  defining  you  –  in  any  case,  who  are  you?   You  are  the  
one  who  is  aware.  This  awareness  has   no  parAcular   content.  Relax   and  open,  and  if   you  allow  space   to  
everything,  you  will  find  that  it’s  moving  through  space,  it’s  not  blocking  space.

When   we  are  outside   and  see  a  big  dark  cloud,  we  think  that  the  dark  cloud  is  hiding  the  blue  sky,  that  
it’s  hiding  the  sun.  When  we  see  a  rainbow,  the  rainbow  is  not  hiding   the  sky,  because  we  can   see  the  
sun’s  rays  shining   through.  Our  work  is  to  see  clouds  as  rainbows.  When  we  sit  in  the  meditaAon,  stuff  is  
arising.   It   feels   like   a   cloud   because   it’s  ge:ng   in   the   way.   ‘I   get   caught   up   in   all   this   stuff.   It’s   so  
annoying.’   Actually,   everything   is   the   radiance   of   the   mind   so   instead   of   being   annoyed   with   this  
parAcular  form  of  radiance,  just  allow  it  to  be  there,  and  it  passes.  Allow  it  to  be  there  and  it  passes.  
 P a g e  |  59

Returning  to  the  issue  of   intrinsic  value,   if   something   is  truly   of   value   in   and  of   itself,   it  doesn’t   need  
something   on  top.  It  doesn’t  need   any  extra;  it’s  just  delicious,  sufficient.  A   fresh  piece  of  fruit,  it  doesn’t  
need  any  sugar  or  salt  or  anything  added  to  it.  It’s  just  mmm,  as  it  is.  

When  we  see  the   intrinsic  value  of   all  the   phenomena  which   are   arising   and  passing   in  the  mind,  we  
don’t   have   to   enter   into   judgement   with   them,   and   we   don’t   have   to   change   them.   This   it   the  
fundamental  point   in   terms  of   the   three  aspects:   the  open   nature,   the   field   of   experience,   and   the  
parAcularity  of  experience.

The  field  of  experience  arises  in   the  open  field  of  empAness;  it’s  the  shining   quality  of  the  open  field.  So  
when  we  sit  in  pracAce,  if  we  think,  ‘I  don’t  like  this   thought,’  or  ‘I   have   to  be  involved  in  this  thought,’  or  
‘Shit,   here   I   go   again   in   these   thoughts’   –   all   these   kind   of   judgements   and   interpretaAons   and  
descripAons  are  ways  of  us  adding  value  to  something  which  is  already  full  of  value.   Moreover  by  adding  
our  value,   we  hide  the  intrinsic  value  from  ourselves;  and  therefore  we  see  that  there  is  a  lack  of   value,  
which  then  encourages  us  to  add  more  value,  and  the  more  value  we  add,  we  make  it  forever  impossible  
to  see  the  intrinsic  value.  

This  is  why  the  basic  instrucAon  is,  don’t  do  anything   at  all.  Just  relax.  Be  open  which  whatever  is  there.  
The   more   you  open,  the  more  you  can  experience  what  we   looked  at  yesterday,  namely   that  the  mind  
has  no  shape,  no  colour,  no  form.  It  is  unspeakable.  Nobody  can  ever  put  into  language  what  the  mind  is  
however  you   can  be  your   mind,   you  can  be  the  openness  within  which  all  this  amazing  stuff  is  coming  
and  going,  coming  and  going.

Guru Yoga: uniting with our own state

We  will   now   do  this  three  Aa  pracAce  again   and  this  Ame  we  will  do  it   in  the  form   of   guru  yoga.  Guru  
yoga   means  resAng   in  the  state  of   the  guru.   Yoga  in  Tibetan   is  naljor.   Nal   means  relaxed,   and   jorwa  
means  to  join.  So   it  means  ‘to  stay   in   a  relaxed   state’.   It’s  a  means  of   uniAng   with   the  state  of   all  the  
teachers  of  the  lineage,  which  is  our  own  state.  It’s  not  a  hierarchical  system   in  which  one  is  worshiping  
someone   who   is   up   there,   hoping   that   they   will   give   something   down;   but   rather,   it’s   to   remind  
ourselves,  or  to  open  a  door,  into  the  natural  state  of  existence.

There  are  many  different   versions  of  this.  A   very  simple  one  is  to   imagine  in  front  of   us  a  white  leLer  A.  
You  can  imagine  a  Tibetan  leLer  if  you  know  it,  or   just  a  capital  A.  Aa  represents  empAness,  the  ground  
of  existence,  out  of  which  all  the  wisdom  of  all  the  lineage  masters  through  the  generaAons  have  come.

We   imagine  this  white  leLer,  about  a  fist  with  the  thumb  high,  inside  a  rainbow  ball  of   light,  and  about  
two   arms  length  away.  As  we  say  the  Aa,   we  imagine   that   our   state  is   integrated   with  that   state.  By  
integrated,  it  simply   means  that  there’s  no  difference  between  the  two.  Here  is  something   in   front  of  us,  
an  object,  here  is  ourselves,  a  subject  –  but  when  we’re  saying  Aa,  the  fact  that  our  ground  is  empAness,  
and  the  ground  of  all  these  teachers  is  empAness,  means  that  they  have  the  same  nature.  

For  example,   if   you  have  a  great   ocean…  in  the   ocean   many   different  waves  arise.   These   waves  have  
different  shapes  according  to  the  wind,  the  rocks  underneath  the  sea,  and  so  on.  But   all  the  waves  have  
the  same  nature;  they  are  manifestaAons  of  the  sea.  

So   when   we   see   a   great   teacher,   this   is   a  manifestaAon   of   the   ground.   When   we   see   ourselves   as  
ordinary   beings,   we  are  also  manifestaAons  of   the  ground.  On  the  level  of  judgement  and  the  dualisAc  
evaluaAon  of  different  qualiAes,   we  can  say,  ‘This  person  is  high,  this  person  is  low.’  but  in  terms  of  their  
connecAon  with  the  ground  nature,  they’re  completely  the  same.  

So   sit  in  this  relaxed   way,   saying   Aa.   Have  this  visualizaAon,   in  the  sense  of   the  idenAficaAon,   or  the  
unificaAon,  of   our  state  with   the  state  of   the   teacher.   Then  ajer  a  short  Ame,  the   ball  just   dissolves  in  
light  and  you’re  back  in  the  state  of  openness.  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  60

You   might  think,   ‘Why  do  we  need  to  use  something   in   that  state?  Why  don’t  we  just  always  go  into  this  
by  ourselves?’   The   quesAon  is  really  asking,   ‘Why  do  we   need   transmission?’   Because  of   the  nature  of  
duality.  Duality  means  that  we  are  cut  off   from  the  environment  around   us.  We  exist  in  relaAon  to  other  
things  –   things  which   are   other.   The  way   back   from   that  is  non-­‐duality.   Two   has  to   become   one,   to  
become   not-­‐two.   The  one  who   feels  apart,   has  first  of   all  to   become  part   of   two,   and  then   they   can  
understand.  

So  here  we  are  as  one;   now  there  is  two;  one  and  two  have  the  same  nature,   which  is  nothing  –  infinity.  
Out  of   infinity  everything  arises.  As  long  as  we  stay  as  something  in  parAcular,  inside  that  bubble,  the  
only  way  out  is  by  trying  to  get  out,  because  it’s  up  to  us.  

When  you  make  use   of  the  other  –  whether   in  a  more  dualisAc  way   by  praying  to   Padmasambhava  and  
asking   for  blessings,  or  whether  you  do  it  through  dissolving  with  the  tantric   deity,  or  whether  you  do  it  
through  direct   integraAon   with  this  visualized  form   of   Aa  –   essenAally,   we’re   always  starAng   with  the  
posiAon:  one  plus  one;  two,  who   are  not  two.  All   of  these  are  methods  of   dissolving   the   experience  of  
duality  into  the  actuality  –  that  which  is  always  there  –  of  non-­‐duality.

Okay,  so  we  will  try  this  and  then  we  just  sit  for  some  Ame.

[PracAce]

Garab Dorje’s second point: don’t remain in doubt

Garab   Dorje’s   second   statement   is   to   not   remain   in   doubt,   not   to   enter   into   thinking   about   the  
experience,  or  be  led  astray  by  appearances.  For  this  reason  it  is  translated   as  ‘being  clear  it  is   this’.  By  
resAng  in  natural  clarity,  all  distracAon  is  self-­‐liberaAng.

Even   if   you  find  yourself   caught  up  in  the   experience,  first  of   all,   don’t  take  it  that  you  got  lost.  Every  
Ame   we   become   caught  up   in   something,   it’s  just   a  moment,   and   then   it’s  gone.   Wherever   you   go,  
you’re  always  within  the  dharmadhatu.  You  can’t  get  lost.  You  can’t  go  anywhere  else.  

It  is  like  suddenly  falling   asleep  during  the  day;   so  you  fall  into  a  parAcular  thought  paLern.  But  you   fall  
asleep   where  you  are,  and  then   when   you  wake  up,   you’re   back   in   exactly  the  same  place.   So  don’t  
despair  if  meditaAon  is  difficult  and  you  feel  you  can’t  do  it  and  you  feel  you’re  not  making   any  progress.  
These  are  ideas.  These  ideas  themselves  are  empty,  and,  moreover,  they  are  themselves  the  energy  of  
the  open  state.

So  the  quesAon  is  always  not  to  take  things  the  wrong  way.   If   you  take  them  the  wrong  way  they’re  not  
very  useful.  For  example,   if   you  have  a  very   sharp  knife,   pick  it  up  by  the  handle  and  not  by  the  blade.  
That’s  obvious.  If   you  have  some   thoughts  in  your  head,  how  should  you  take  them?  Very  lightly.  If   you  
grasp  at  them,  that  grasping,  itself,  creates  the  second  thought  which  is,  ‘I  am  grasping  the  thought.’  

So,   in   terms  of   not  remaining   in  doubt,  it  means  to  trust  that  the   mind  itself  has  no  shape,  no  colour,  
doesn’t   rest   anywhere,   doesn’t   come   from   anywhere,   and   doesn’t   go   anywhere.   What   are   the  
implicaAons  of  that?

When  we  look   around  this  room,  we  see  that,  as  far  as  we  can  tell,  there  is  no  machinery.  So  this  glass  in  
my  hand  was  not  made  in  this  room.  This  glass  came  from  somewhere  else.  Somehow,  it  came  to  be  in  
this  building  and   it  came  to  be   in  this  room,  next  to  me.  That  is  to  say,  there  was  somewhere  else  for  it  
to  come  from.  This  dharma  centre  where  we  are  is  not  the  whole  world.  Some  of   us  went  for  a  walk,  and  
we  saw   –  whoa,  there’s  a  big   world  our  there  –  the  trees  go  on   and   on  and  on,  beyond  where  you  can  
see.  The  world  is  very  big.  Even  so,  at  a  certain   point,  if  you  follow  the  trees  you  come   to  the  ploughed  
fields,  eventually  you  will  come  to  a  town,  and  then  you  come  to  the  sea.  There’s  a  kind  of  limit.  
 P a g e  |  61

Everything   which  has  a  shape  will  have  a  limit.  That’s  what  a  shape  is  –   when  we  think  of  the  shape  of  an  
orange,   we  think   of   something   round.   When   we  think   of   a  banana,  we   think   of   something   long   and  
curved.  We  can  draw  the  outline  of  it  very  easily  because  the  outline  defines  the  shape.  But   if   the  mind  
has  no  shape,  it  means  it  has  no  limit.  This  is  enormously  important.  No  limit  means  there  cannot  be  an  
edge  to  it.  If  there  is  no  edge,  there  is  nothing  outside.  

The  mind
The  mind  is  ojen  compared  to  a  ball,   like  when  we  were  looking  at  this  Aa  with  a  ball  of  light  around  it.  
This   ball   is   someAmes   called   a  Pgle.   There   are   many   different   kinds  of   Pgles;   Pgles   are   essenAally  
representaAons  of  the  fact  that  there  are  no  corners  and  edges  on  a  ball.   In  front  of  me  is  a  table,   it   has  
a  shape.  Here  in  my  hand  is  a  glass;  we  can  see  what  is  the  top  and  what  is  the  boLom  of   the  glass.   But  
if  you  have  a  ball  which  is  made  out  of  exactly  the  same  material  in  all  its  aspects,  when   you  look  at  it   –  
at  the  ball  –   where  is  the  top  and  where  is  the  boLom?  You   turn  it  upside  down  and  upside  down  and  
upside  down.  Where  is  the  top?  There  is  no   marker  on  a  ball  that  says  this  is  the  top,  this  is  the  boLom,  
this  is  the  lej,  this  is  the  right.  It  is  undifferenAated,  without  any   corner  that  you  could  grasp  hold  of  and  
say,  ‘Ah,  if  I  look   from  here,   then  this  and  this,’  because  each  place  you  look  at  in  a  ball  takes  you  in  the  
same  direcAon.  This  is  how  the  ball  symbolises  the  ungraspability  of  the  mind,  that  wherever  you  extend  
your  awareness,  the  mind   is  already  there.  Because  you  can’t  find  any   limit,  therefore  nothing  is  outside  
it.  

When   a   thought  arises,   where   does  the   thought  come   from?  You  can   provide   an   answer   based  on   a  
thought  such  as,   ‘Well,   it  comes  from  the  acPvity  of  my  brain,’  and   then,  if   you’ve  studied  neuroscience,  
you  can  have  many  many   thousands  and  hundreds   of  thousands  of   words  about  that,   how  that  may  or  
may  not  be  happening.  This  is   the  pracAce   of  thought  chasing   thought.  This  is   the  pracAce   of  samsaric  
producAon.   In   every  branch   of   science  there  are   millions  and   millions  of   ways   in   which  the  mind   can  
move,  proving  or  disproving  hypotheses.  

The  issue   for  us,  though,  if   there  is  only  the  mind,  or,  that  is  to  say,   if   there  is  nothing   which  is  bigger  
than   the  mind,  nothing   which   encloses  the  mind,  or   nothing  which  cuts  up  the  mind,  then  the  mind   –  
although  it  has  no  shape  –  is  the  ground.  Ground  here  doesn’t  mean  something  underneath,  it  means  a  
base,  a  basis;  or  in   another  language,  it’s  a  sphere  of   operaAons.  It’s   not  really  a  dimension,  because  a  
dimension  is  a   measuring  across  two  points,   and  this  is   an  infinite  complexity  of   vectors  such  that   you  
can’t  imagine.  

So  the  mind  is   space,  with  no   limit;  everything   is  in  the  mind.  Everything   is   in   the   mind.   That  makes  it  
very   easy.   It  means  whenever   something  happens,  where  did  it  come  from?  The  mind.  ‘Oh,  where  did  
you  get  these  socks?’  ‘Oh,  the  mind.’  

So,  when  we’re   si:ng   in  meditaAon,   and  thoughts  and  feelings  and  sensaAons  are  arising,  they  present  
themselves   as   if   they   are   coming   from   somewhere   else.   They   are   coming   from   the   factory   of   our  
memory,  or   the  factory  of  our  hopes,  or  the  factory  of  our  self-­‐hatred  and  our  doubt  and  our   confusion.  
Each  of  these  liLle  factories  seems  to  be  pumping  out  parAcular  kinds  of   thoughts,  and  then  we  try   to  
change  it  and  switch   off   producAon  in   that   factory,  and   increase  producAon  in  the  happy  factory.  But,  
really,  if  we  can  see   thoughts,  feeling,  sensaAons,  percepAons  –   all  of   this  is  from  the  mind.  What   does  
that  mean?  

If  you  look   at   something  concrete  like  a   motorcar,  what  does   it  mean  to  say  the  motorcar  comes  from  
the   mind?  Clearly   you  have  to  buy   it,  so  it  costs   money.  It   was  produced  in   a  factory,   which  involves  
labour  and  acquisiAon  of  raw  materials,  and   their  preparaAon  and  so  on.  Okay,  so  the  car   seems  to  be  
something   I   can  know  about  –   something   out  there.   I  have  thoughts  about  the  car.  Where  are   these  
thoughts  about   the  car?   In  the   mind.  When   we  see  the  car,   it’s  clearly  outside  of   our  body,   but  then  
we’re  back  with  the  quesAon,  ‘Is  the  mind  in  the  body?’  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  62

We  are  very,  very  used  to  the  sense  that  we  are  in  here,  in  this  skin-­‐bag,  in  this  bone-­‐box,  looking  out  at  
stuff  in  the  world.  ‘I  am  stuff.  I  am  a  thing.  This  is  all  stuff  –  lots   of  different  things.’  When  you  really  look  
in  the  mind  in  the  meditaAon  you  see  this  is  an  illusion.  This  is  all  a  construct.  

When   you  go  to   the   car  and  you  touch  it  you  think,  ‘Oh,  this   is   very  hard.  This  is  very  real.’   ‘This  is  very  
hard’  –  who  says  that?   We   say  that.   ‘This   is   very  real,’  –   who   says  that?  We  say  that.  We  say  the  car  is  
red,  we  say  the  car  is  old,  we  say   the  car  is  new,  it’s  expensive,  its  got  new  Ares,  and  whatever.  Who  says  
all  these  things?  We  do.  The  mind  makes  the  car.  The  mind  makes  the  car  –  the  car  is  an  experience.  

If   you  go  into   the   experience   of   thoughts  about   the   car,  si:ng   inside   these  thoughts,   they   will,   very  
generously,  very   easily,  create   for  you  the  theatre  of  self-­‐exisAng   material  car.  And  inside  that  you   will  
have  a  motorcar   that  is  something.  Something  different   from  you.  You   will  know,  ‘I  am  not  a  motorcar.’  
That  is  a  thought.  

This  is  why  it’s  very  tricky.  It’s  so  much  easier  to  believe  that  everything   is  solid  and  real.  That  is  to  say,  
we  are  trapped   in  a  semioAc  dream-­‐Ame  –   a  nightmare  –  in  which  we  take  our  thoughts  as  telling  the  
truth.  Our   thoughts   aLribute  value.  Our  thoughts  cover  intrinsic  value.  Intrinsic  value  is  revealed  when  
we   realise  that,  ‘We  look   for  the   mind  but  can’t   see   anything.  This  is   really  strange.  I   know  where   my  
nose  is,  my   ears,  my  hair,  but  where   is  my  mind?  I  can’t  catch   it.’  The  mind  is  the  basis  of  my  experience,  
but  it’s  not  a  thing.  It’s  nothing,  and   yet  it’s  showing  everything.  It’s  empAness  and  clarity,   and  yet  there  
are  motorcars!  

What  are  these  motorcars?  Very  important  to  know,  because  if  you’re  crossing  the  road  they  will  hit  you.  
So   you   have   to   take   the   motorcars  seriously   as   a  dream-­‐phenomenon   that   will  seriously   injure   your  
dream-­‐phenomenon   body,   and   will   have   you   in   a   dream-­‐phenomenon   hospital,   or   a   dream-­‐
phenomenon   cemetery.  It’s   like  that.   Because  people  do  go  to  the  hospital  and  say  describe  how  they  
were  hit  by  a  car   and  tell  the  doctor   as  much  as  they  can  about  it.  What   are  they  doing?  They’re  telling  
you  a  story  –  ‘A  car  hit  me.’  The  doctor  says,  ‘This  is   very  serious,’  and  then  he  gives  then  a  whole  load  of  
LaAn  which  tells  you  just  how  serious  is  the  condiAon  of  his  paAent.        

All   of  this  is  a  flow   of  experience.   The  paAent  will   either  die  or  recover.  If   they   die  we  tell  one  kind  of  
story,   if   they   recover  we  tell  another   kind  of   story.  It’s  stories.   That’s  not   to   say   that   if   you’re  careless  
with  a  knife,  it  won’t  cut  your  finger.   Blood  will  come  out.  This  is  one  kind   of   experience   –  the  chopping  
of   the   carrot,   followed   by   another   experience   –   the   chopping   of   the   finger,   followed   by   another  
experience  –  ‘Oww!‘  Later  there  will  be  another  experience,  and  another   experience.  What  we  have  is  a  
flow   of   experiences   –   none   of   these   experiences   is   final   because   they’re   all   occurring   in   the  
dharmadhatu,  in  the  sphere  of  experience.  

This   is   someAmes   difficult   to   understand,   and   explaining   it   again   and   again   is   someAmes   not   very  
helpful,  since  the  only  way  to  really  experience  it  is  through  the  meditaAon.  

SomeAmes  as  we   sit   here  in  this  dharma  centre  we  can  hear  the  church  bells  from  outside.  When  we  
walk  down  the  road  and  see  the  church,  we  know,  ‘Ding  dong  ding,’  this  is  coming  from  the  church.  ‘The  
sound  is  coming  from  the   bell,  through  the   air,  into  my  ear,  into  my   mind.’  My   mind  is  in   my  head?  Is  this  
true?  We   have  been   trained   to   believe  this.  ‘The   sound  is  arising  in  my  mind.’   The  thought,  ‘My   mind  
understands  the   sound   of  the   church  bell,  which  is  down   the   road,’  is  a  thought  that  arises  in   my  mind.  
The  sound  is  directly  in  the  mind.  Sound  comes  from  the  mind.  Without  the  mind  you  wouldn’t  have  any  
sound.  

This  is  a  classic   quesAon  in  Indian  philosophy   –  if   a  tree  falls  in  a  forest  far  from   any  human,   does  the  
tree  make  a  sound?  Is  there  a  sound  if  you  don’t  hear  it?

It’s  an   imputaAon  that   there   would  be  a  sound.   You   can’t   have   a  direct   percepAon   if   there’s  nobody  
there.  It  exists  as  experience  if   we  are  there.  We  have  tended  to  fuse  imputaAon,  or   deducAon,   and   to  
 P a g e  |  63

take   deducAve  logic   as  being   the  same   as  direct   percepAon.   By  fusing   deducAon   and  imputaAon   into  
percepAon,  we  can’t   actually   see  what  we  see,   because  we’re  always  interpreAng   what  we  see  before  
we  actually  see  the  vibrancy  of  it.

Garab  Dorje’s  second  point  is  to  alert  us  to  be  careful  with  the  thoughts  that  arise  in  our  mind.  The  mind  
will  conAnue  with  its  vast  contents  of   stories  and  interpretaAons  and  raAonales  and  so  on.  If   you  see  
them  in  the  moment,  this  is  the  arising  and  passing  of  the   energy  of  the  mind.  If   you   fall  into  them,  this  
liLle  story  line  will   take  you  on  a  journey,  and  then  you  get  picked  up  by  another   story,  which  takes  you  
on  another   journey,   and  another  journey,  and  another  journey,  so  that  we  experience  ourselves  moving  
from  here  to  there,  from  there  to  here.  All  of  these  experiences  are  happening  in  the  mind.  The  mind’s  
nature  is  empty.  

In  the  dzogchen   tradiAon  they   say   everything   is  complete  from   the  very   beginning.  Some   translators  
prefer  to  use  the  word  ‘perfect’.  I’m  not  so  sure  about  ‘perfect’,  because  it  has  such  a  moral  connotaAon.  
But,   if   we  say   everything   is  complete,   that   is  to  say,  it  is  what  it  is  …   a  thought   arises,   it  has  a  feeling  
tone,  the  feeling  tone  creates  the  sense  of  something,  and  then  it’s  gone.  Just  see  this  as  an  experience;  
we  don’t   have  to  block  the  experience  or  be   afraid  of   it   because  it  doesn’t  have  the  power  to  condiAon  
awareness.  

However  the  thought,   if   you  fall  into  it,  the  thought   will  condiAon  you.  Who  is  condiAoned?  The  next  
thought.  What  then  happens  is  that  the  thought  is  passed  to  the  thought,  is  passed  to  the  thought.  A  bit  
like  in  the  old  days  when  they  had  steam  engines  and  they   would  do  loose  shunAng.  There   would  be  a  
whole  series  of  goods-­‐carriages  lined  up,  not  linked  together,  and  the  train  bangs  the  first  one,   and  they  
just   poom,   poom,   poom,   poom,   all   the   way   along.   And   you   get   this   movement,   a   concatenaAon,   a  
vibrancy  that  passes  through.  That’s  what  we  have.  One  thought  leads  to  another  to  another.

Ques%on:    If  you  don’t  fall  into   your  thoughts,  where  are  they?  They   are  in  the  mind  but  nobody  is  at  
home.  Is  that  not  a  bit  frightening?

James:       Presumably   in  your   house  you  have  various  things,  tweezers,  screwdrivers,   spare  keys,  some  
rice,   all  sorts  of  things.   These  are  very   useful  to  have,  but  every  Ame  you  go  out  of  your  house  you  don’t  
pack   them   all   and   take   them   with   you.   You   trust   that   when   you’re   at   home   and   when   you   need  
something,   it   will   be  there.  So,  in  that  sense,  the   potenAal   of   your   house   is  there,   peacefully.  It’s  not  
calling  out,  ‘You  must  use  this!’  It’s  just  there.

In  the  same  way,   the  potenAal  of  the  mind  is  that  it  will  give  rise  to  whatever  is  required.   You  know   how  
when  you  meet  someone,  you  find   yourself   speaking.  You  don’t  have   to  think,  ‘What   will  I  say?’  When  
you  start  to  think,  ‘What  will  I  say,’  you  usually  don’t  speak  very  well,  because  anxiety  has  caught  you.  
The  sense  that  somehow,  if  I’m  not  holding  it  together,  ‘it’  or  ‘I’  will  fall  apart  is  the  anxiety  which  comes  
with  the  burden  of  ignorance.  The  anxiety  that  having  been  separated  from   our   ground,  we  live   inside  
this  bubble  of   myself   which  carries  this  terrible  burden:  ‘It’s  all  up   to  me.   I  have  to  do  it.  If   I  don’t  do  it,  
who  will  do  it?’  

The  whole  basis  of   the  noAon   of   relaxaAon   in   dzogchen   and  the  idea  of   non-­‐duality   is  that  if   you   fall  
over,  you’ll  be  okay.   You  don’t  have  to  hold   the  whole  world   together.   The  tension  that  we  carry,  the  
stress  that   we   carry   in  our  body,  in   our   minds,   in   our   planning,  and   our  hopes  and   fears  –   all  of   this  
rigidity,  is  not  necessary  because  it’s  a  given.  Given-­‐ness  is   something  which   may   seem  to  belong  to  a  
phantasy  realm.  

Most   cultures   have   a   myth   that   a   long   Ame   ago   there   was   a   golden   period   in   which   food   came  
effortlessly   in  the  fields,  and   everybody  was  healthy  and  had  a  long  life,   and  so  on.  Gradually  difficulAes  
came  into  the  world,  and  the  gold  period  went  to  the  silver,  and   the  silver  to  the  copper,  and  the  copper  
to  the  lead,  and  then   it’s   all  a  mess.  There  is  the  fear  that  if   we  don’t   make  effort  things  will  get  even  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  64

worse.  However,  maybe  the  golden  period  is  always   there.  Maybe   it’s  our  very  effort  which  is  covering  
the  gold  with  lead.  The  funcAon  of  meditaAon  is  to  explore  that.  

This  Tibetan   term  lhundrup,  or   effortlessly   arising,  means  that,   without   effort,   the   perceptual   field  is  
here.   We  didn’t,  ourselves,  make  the  trees.   We  didn’t,  ourselves,   make  our  own  bodies.  We  didn’t  make  
all  this  stuff   around  us  –   it’s  here.   We  will   have  histories  and  stories  about  who  planted  the  trees,  and  
what  the  history  of   such  and  such  a  building  is,  and  so  on;  that’s  one  version,  but,  in  the  immediacy  of  
direct  experience,  what  is  occurring  is  just  here.  

The  crossroads:  one  ground  and  two  paths

Once  more  we  are  at  the  crossroads;  there  is  the  one  ground  of  openness,  and  there  are  two  paths.  

One  path  says  that  resAng  in  the  open   nature  of  the  mind,  I  look  around   and  nowhere  do  I  find  any  limit  
at   all.   Each   thing   which   is   arising   is   in   the   mind,   be   it   inside   or   outside   my   head,   be   it   indoors   or  
outdoors,   the  trees,  the  clouds,  the   sun  the   moon...  Everything   is  the  experience  of  the  mind   coming  
and  going.  

The  other  path  says  that  I  am  having  thoughts  about  all  of   these  phenomena.  The  one  who  is  thinking  is  
me,  the  things   that  I’m  thinking  about  are  those  things.  The  thoughts  are  like  the  mediators   between  
the  self,  which  is  real,  and  the  other,  which  is  also  real.  This  is  the  crossroads  we  are  at.  

We’re  always  having  to  decide  which  way  to  go.  Garab  Dorje’s  second  statement  is  that  if  you  remain  in  
doubt,  if  you  remain  on  that  crossroads,  then  it  gets  very  troubling  for  you.

What  we  need  to  examine  again  and  again  is,   ‘What  is  this  experience?’  and  trust  the  immediacy  of  the  
experience.   If   we   trust   the   thought,   rather   than   the   experience,   the   thought   will   bring   in   a   whole  
raAonale  about  subject  and  object,  and  things  being   self-­‐exisAng,  and  being   truly  defined  by  their  name,  
and   so   on,   unAl   suddenly   everything   is   very   solid.   Inside   that   world   of   thoughts   everything   is  
experienced  as  very  solid.  

We   are   at   the  crossroads  between,   as  it  were,  two  different  worlds.   They’re  not  essenAally   different,  
because  both   have  the  same  basis  of  empAness,   but  they   are  funcAonally   very  different.  If   you   follow  
the  path  into  trusAng  the  thought  and   believe  that  your  thoughts  are   telling   you  the  truth  about  your  
experience  then  you  will  be  forever  in   narraAves  about  ...,   about  what  is  coming,  about  what   is  going.  
That  is  the  essenAal  difficulty.  

When   we   do   the   meditaAon,   and   find   ourselves   ge:ng   caught   up   in   thoughts,   according   to   Garab  
Dorje’s  second  statement,  we  should  look  and  ask  ‘Where  do   thought  come  from?’   What  is  the  ground  
of   a  thought?  If   the  thought  is  coming   from   the  mind   and   the  mind   is  empty,  then  the  thought,  like  a  
rainbow  in  the  sky,  has  no  substance.  Yes,  it  can  have  funcAon  or  impact,  but  it  has  no  substance.   That  is  
to  say,  it’s  an   energeAc  form   which  appears,  takes  a  parAcular  form,  and  then  vanishes.  In  it’s  vanishing,  
there’s  then  a  space  for  another,   and   another,  and  another.  And  that’s   what’s  going  on   all  the  Ame,  so  
every  Ame  you  go  into  the  thought,  see  for  yourself  what  happens.  

What  kind  of  world  is  revealed  to  you  when  you  enter  your  thoughts?  The  thought   is  like  a  messenger   –  
it’s  coming  and  showing  something,  and  then  going.  Just  coming  and  going.  If  you  don’t  merge  with  the  
thought,  you  won’t  become  stupid,  because  in  fact  thoughts  give  you  their  informaAon  very  very  quickly.  
We  don’t  need  to  hang  onto  them.  

Ques%on:  What  kind  of  informaAon  do  you  mean?

James:       Well,  for  example,  if  you  look  around  the  room  you  see  everything  very  quickly.  You  see  what  
it  is.   You   can   then   tell   stories  about   it,   but   the   immediacy   of   these  phenomena   gives  you   its   sense  
 P a g e  |  65

straight  away.  So  if   you  have   a  thought,   ‘Ouch,   my   back’s   sore,’   that’s  enough.   You  can   elaborate  that  
with   thought   upon   thought   upon   thought,   ‘Maybe   I   need   to   go   see   an   osteopath,   but   they’re   a   bit  
unreliable,   and  it   costs  money,  and  blah,  blah,  blah,’   ‘I   had  a  friend  and   they  went,  and  their   back  got  
even  worse  …‘      Blah  Blah  Blah.  Thoughts  will  very   quickly  engage  with  other  thoughts.  You  just  have  the  
first  thought.

Ques%on:   When   we   are   in   a  quieter   state  of   mind,   then   maybe   the   thoughts  are   more  interesAng  
thoughts,  more  spiritual  thoughts.  Then  I  think  that   I  need  to  follow   them  up  and   remember  them,  and  
maybe  even  record  them  in  some  way.  But  you  say  we  should  not  do  that  either?  

James:       No.  

Ques%on:      So  then  they  all  come  down  to  the  same  kind  of  level.

James:       Yes.

Ques%on:      Just  thoughts.  So  that’s  the  informaAon  it’s  telling  me.

James:       Yes.

Ques%on:   Just  thought?

James:     But  where  did  it  come  from?

Ques%on:   Oh,  the  boLomless  well!

James:       The  boLomless  well  [laughs].  Okay.  

Ques%on:   Well,  that’s  what  I   worked  out  when  I  was  about  five.  I  could  see   there  was  a  linkage,  a  well  
and  one  ajer   another  the  thoughts  seemed  to  go  down  there.  One  ajer  the  other.  And  in  a  way  I  can’t  
see  that  what  you  are  saying  is  different.

James:       Well,  good   luck  with  your  bucket  in  emptying  the  well!  But  you’ll  never   get  to  the  boLom  of  
the  well.

Ques%on:   You’re  laughing.

James:  We’re  talking   about  two   things  here.  One  is  that  yes,  indeed  our  minds   are  all  psychoAc.  We’re  
not  nearly  as  raAonal  as  we  think  we  are.  On  a  general  level  we  don’t  have  much  conAnuity  between  our  
thoughts,  which  is  what  we  understand  in  basic  meditaAon.  We  sit,  and  we  see  thoughts  going  here  and  
there  –  it’s  like  liLle  fireflies  on  a  summer’s  night.

Having  thoughts  arising  in  the  mind  is  very  different  from  thinking.  Thinking  is  linking,  and  if  you’re  good  
at  thinking,   you  can   make  sequences  of   thoughts   that  are  very,  very   long.  However   when  you  are  just  
si:ng  with  thoughts  coming   and  going  in  your  head,  they’re  usually  quite  short  sequences.  The  central  
quesAon  is  where  do  they  come  from?  If  you  look   at   the  content   of  the  thought,  you   may  noAce  that,  
‘Oh  yes,  I  remember,  this  thought  is  due   to   that  thing  that  I  was  experiencing  earlier...’  and  you  link  that  
to   something   else,   and   to   something   else,   and   to   something   else.   We   build   up   these   networks   of  
thoughts.  

What  we’re  looking   at  here  is   that   if   there  is  no   limit   to   the  mind,  then   everything   is  in  the  mind.  So  
although   we  may  say  something  is  coming   from  somewhere  else,  for  example,  ‘My  watch   came  from  a  
shop  in  an  airport  and  I  bought  it  when  I  lost  my  other  watch.’  So  I  know  where  it  came  from.  What  does  
that  tell  us?  It   tells  us  that  there  is  a  story  about  this  watch.  Where  does  the  thought,   ‘The   watch  came  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  66

from  a  shop  in  an  airport’  come  from?  Well,   you  could  say   it  comes  from  my  memory  bank.  One  of   you  
said  it  comes  from  her  well.  

But  these   thoughts  are   arising   in  my   mind.   In  the  meditaAon  we  are  examining   ‘where   is   the  mind?’  
What  shape  is  it?  What  colour  is  it?   Where  does  it  come  from,  where  does  it  go?   Where  does  it  stay?  We  
think  it’s  staying  here,  but  when  we  look  again,  that  place  is  gone!  We  think  it’s  here  inside  us,   we  look  
and  look,  and  that   also  place  is  gone!  Something   else  is  arising.   So  all  kinds  of  thoughts  and   experiences  
are  arising   in  the  mind,  but  the  mind  itself   is  not  a  thing.  So,   when  the   thought  arises,  ‘This  watch  is  
from  a  shop  in  an  airport,  Heathrow  Terminal  1’  this  doesn’t  tell  us  anything  except  that  a  thought  arises  
in  my  mind.  

What  is  the  real  status  of  the  thought?   It  is  the  luminosity  or  the  clarity  of  the  mind,  and  if   we  stay  with  
that,  then  all  the  details  of  all  the  thoughts  don’t  maLer  so  much.

Ques%on:   Is  this  the  creaAvity  of   the   mind?  I  like   to  paint  and  I  can  read   all  sort  of   things  into   what  I  
see.  

James:       How   you   interpret   the   content   of   the   mind   depends   on   your   karma.   Ajer   lunch   today   I  
walked  up  the  path   outside  here   and   there  were  many  holes  in  the   grass  because  the  wild  pigs  around  
here  are  snuffling  around,  turning  over  the  ground  with  their   snouts  sniffing  out  tasty  liLle  roots.   Having  
just  eaten,  I   was  not  minded  to   get  down   on  all  fours,   put  my  nose  on  the  ground  and  look  for  roots.    
Even  if  I  were   very  hungry,   I  probably  wouldn’t  be   using   my  nose   to  try  and  find  these  roots,  because  I  
live   in   a   different   dimension   from   the   pig.   The   pig   sees  a   different   world   from   me.   The   birds  see   a  
different  world  from  me.  So  in  that  sense,  yes  it’s  like  a  painAng;  the  world  is  interpretaAon.  

However   we  can  go  round  and  round  endlessly   talking   about   this,   making  judgements,  and  evaluaAons,  
and  so  on.  The  quesAon  is,   in   the  moment  of  the  arising  of  the  experience,  who  is  the  experiencer?  This  
is  the  mind  itself.  Like  the  mirror,  it  reveals  this  thought.  

We  have  spent  so   many  years  linking  thoughts  together  and  making   paLerns  of   illusion.  All  these  sand  
castles  we’ve  built  that  have  already   washed   into  the  sea.  Now  rather  than   looking  at  the  grains  of  sand,  
we  look  at  the  nature  of  the  mind  itself,  and   then  see:  this  is  how  the   mind  looks  today;  this  is  how  the  
mind  looks  today;  this  is  how  the  mind  looks  today.  This  is  the  look  of  the  mind.

Earlier  today  I   was  using   the   example  of   how  the  complexion  of  the  face  shows  the  health  of   the   body.  
When   you’re   si:ng   in   meditaAon,   the   mind   is   open.   That’s   the   natural   face,   nothing   to   grasp.   The  
thoughts  that   arise,  this  is  the  radiance  of   the   mind.   If  we   stay  with  that,  we  can  start  to  see  the  non-­‐
duality  of  the  thought  and  the  mind,  or  of   the  thought  and  the  thinker,  which  is  not  an  individual  thinker,  
it’s  just  the  source.  

By   going   into  the  semanAc  content  of   the  thoughts   and  and  developing   these   loops   and  connecAons  
which  take  us  here   and   there   we  are  choosing   to  stay   in  samsara.   This  is   always  the  crossroads  that  
we’re  at.  

When   Garab  Dorje  is  telling  us  not  to  remain  in  doubt,  he’s  saying,  ‘Don’t  imagine   that  the  value  which  
you  a>ribute  to  things  is  the   real  value.  Stay  with  the   intrinsic   value  –   stay  with  the  clarity  of  the  mind,  
because  the   empPness  of  the  mind,  the  clarity  of   the  mind  will  stay.  These  are  the   natural  qualiPes  of  the  
mind,  whereas  the  flow  of   thoughts   and   interpretaPons  and  what  sense  you   make  of  things,   this  is  just  
like  sand  trickling  through  your  fingers.’  

Ques%on:   My  experience  is  that  thoughts  come   with   the   sense  of   an   ‘I’  who  has  to  decide  what  to  do  
with  ‘them’.  
 P a g e  |  67

James:       This  is  a  big   quesAon  and  an  important  one,  because  what  we’re  faced   with  is  the  nature  of  
subjecAvity.  So,  ‘I’  exist  as  a  conscious  subject,  which  includes  my  consciousness  –   being  aware  of  things  
out  there,   and  being  aware  of   things  in  here  –   but   it’s  also  the  site  where  my   memories  of  the  past  and  
plans   for   the  future,   and  all  coincide.  The  conscious  self  is  like  a  crossroads  where  many  messages  can  
arrive   very  quickly.  A   thought  comes  and  if  our  address  is  this  ‘I,  me,  myself’  crossroads,  then  of   course  
we  will  have  to   respond  to  it.  However  this   ‘I,  me,  myself’  is  another  aspect  of  the  energy  of  the  mind.  
It’s   a  manifestaAon  of   the   mind.  The   mind  itself   is  not  being   asked  to  make  any   decision  at   all  about  
anything.  

The   one   who   makes   decisions   is   already   a   manifestaAon.   Just   as   the   mirror   is   not   called   on   to   do  
anything  –   having   no  bias,  no   prejudice,  being   is   only  reflecAons  reflecAng  reflecAons  –  so   is  the  mind  
not  being   called   on  to  make   any  responses.  Does  that  makes  sense?  When  the  reflecAon  ‘I,   me’,  myself,  
who  I  am   in   my  world’,   is  confronted  with  this  new  possibility  of  choice,  ‘Do  I  want  it?   Do  I   not  want  it?’  
then  you  get  this  endless  pulsaAon  of  mental  acAvity.  

The   thing  is  to  catch  the  sense  of   subjecAvity.  For   example,  yesterday  ajernoon,  when   we  were  doing  
the   pracAce   of   looking,  ‘Where   is   the   mind?   Where   does   it  rest?’   this   is   usually   the   place   where   we  
experience  a  lot  of  this  subjecAve  nexus.  We  feel  maybe  ‘My  mind  is  in  my  head,’   or  ‘My   mind  is  in   my  
heart,’  or  ‘My   mind  is   just  here,’   or  ‘This  is   my  mind.’  It  seems   to  take  on  some  kind  of   form,  but   if   we  
stay  with  it,  it  dissolves.  Nevertheless  it’s  very  tempAng  just  to  think,  ‘Oh,  this  is  it.  This  is  it.’

So  here  we  have  this,   like  a  liLle  vortex,   a  liLle  whirlpool  of   energy,  that  brings  itself   into  being   for  a  
moment,  and  in  that  moment  is  the  totality  of  my  idenAty.  So  in  that  moment  when  the  thought  comes,  
this  parAcular  paLerning  that  you’re  in  at  that  moment  has  to  respond  from  where  it  is.  Yet  you  would  
have  responded   to   the  same  thought  in  a  different  way   if   it  had   come   in   the  morning,  or  when  it  was  
raining,  or  something  different.       You  get  the  temporary   constellaAon   of  the  self  object  encountering  the  
arising  of  another  object,  and  they  get  into  some  kind  of  interplay.  Both  are  manifestaAons  of   the  mind.  
Both  are  the  energy  of  the  dharmakaya.  

However   we   are  prone   to   idenAfying   with   one   and   holding   onto   it   as   definiAonal   of   ‘who  I  am.’   Of  
course,  when  we  go  for  a  cup  of  tea,  it  is  who  we  are.  Somebody  asks,  ‘Hi,  what  are  you  doing  on  Sunday  
auernoon?’   And   we  tell  them,   ‘Oh,  I’m   going  to  do   this.   I’m   going   to   do  that.’   This   aspect   of   ‘I,   me,  
myself’  is  our  conversaAonal  or  communicaAve  point  for   engaging  in  the  world  with   others.  Its  funcAon  
is  in  the  house  of  compassion.  The  problem  is  that  when  we  take  something  which  is  primarily   relaAonal  
and   responsive,   as  being   in   the   house   of   wisdom   then   we   distort   its   actual   funcAon,   because   it’s   a  
temporary   construcAon   which   provides,   moment-­‐by-­‐moment,   more   or   less   possibility   of   relaAng   to  
others.  

When  buddhist  texts  say  there  is  no  self,  they  are  saying   there  is  no  self-­‐exisAng  self,  no  self-­‐determining  
self,   which   is   the   fundamental   basis   of   idenAty.   Moment-­‐by-­‐moment   there   are   these   gestures   of  
manifestaAon  which  become  our  launching   points  of   connecAng  with  the  world  and  with  ourselves.  So  
when   we  find  ourselves  thinking   about  our  own   lives  –  ‘Why   should  I  do  that?  Is  this  really   what  I  want  
to  do?  I  was  planning  to  do  that,  but  is  it  worthwhile?’  –  what  you’ve  got  are  paLerns  of   manifestaAon  in  
interacAon.  They  create  a  kind  of  son  et  lumière  effect  where  nothing’s  really  there.  It’s  an  illusion.

Again  and  again,  what  we  want  to  do  is  to  relax  into  very  open,  and  just  let  it  roll.  Let  it  roll.  TradiAonally  
the  texts  talk   of  a  term  rangbab,  which  means  falling   like  water  down  a  mountain.   Don’t   interrupt  the  
flow  of  the  mind  –  someAmes  it’s  clear,  someAmes  it’s  unclear.  SomeAmes  there  seems  to  be   a  dialogic  
turmoil  in  which,  as  you  say,  we’re  provoked  by  all  sorts  of  stuff.  SomeAmes  it’s  very  calm.  Let  it  run   as  it  
runs.  The  more   we  do   that,   the   more  we   see  that  this  stuff  –  which  appears  to  be  running,   horizontally  
as   it  were,  through  us   on  the   arc  of  Ame  –  is  actually  manifesAng  moment-­‐by-­‐moment;  that  the  arc  of  
Ame  is  an  illusion  created  out  of  the  paLerning  of  the  thoughts.

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  68

Common meditation problems

Perhaps  it  is  helpful  to  look  now  at  some  common  meditaAon  problems.        I  will  present  this  largely  from  
the   point   of   view   of   what’s  called  semde.  The  dzogchen   tradiAon  is  ojen   divided   into   three  groups,  
called   the   mind   series,   the   space   series,   and   the   instrucAon   series.   When   they’re   taught   in   the  
Nyingmapa  tradiAon   they  are   ojen  woven  together,   but  there   are  some  teachers   who   also   keep  them  
very  disAnct  and  separate.  

Semde   is  the  mind  series,  and   so  it’s  concerned  primarily  with  the   nature  of   the  mind,  or   with  rigpa,  or  
our  presence;  and   so  the  approach  to  the  meditaAon  problems  that  I’ll  describe  now  is   from  that   point  
of  view,  but  we  can  also  look  at  it  from  other  points  of  view.

In  my   book,   Simply   Being,  you   will   find  chapters  where  the  authors  Patrul   Rinpoche  and   Chetsangpa  
describe   very   common   problems   in   meditaAon.   They   always   give   a  single   soluAon,   which   is   to   stay  
present  on  whatever  is  happening.  I’ll  try  to  describe  precisely  what  they  mean  by  this,   and  then  we  can  
look  at  it  in  relaAon  to  the  different  sort  of  experiences  that  we  have.  

It  will   link   this  to  what   we’ve  been   studying   so   far:   that  the  mind   has  no   shape   or   form,   that   it   is  a  
presence,  a  quality  of  being.  That  is  to  say,   we  are  with  ourselves,  we  are  with  experience.  We’re  here.  
Now,  our  here-­‐ness   is  something  which  is  here  with  whatever  is  happening.  So  when  I  go  to  London,  I  do  
have  to   take  my   bag  with  me,  but   I   don’t   have  to  take   my  presence  with  me.  Presence  is  always  there,  
whatever   is   going   on.   It’s   not   like   trying   to   remember   where   I   put   my   keys,   it’s   not   like   trying   to  
remember   what   I   have   to   do   first   thing   on   Monday,   it’s   not,   as   we   have   spoken   of   before,   taking  
something   from  somewhere.  Because  the  mind   is  not  fixed,  is  not  anywhere,  it  is  everywhere.  Whatever  
occurs,   you  are  already   there.  Presence   is  always  present  –  that’s  what   it  is.  So,  we  wouldn’t   have  any  
experience  if  we  weren’t  there.  

So   when  an   experience  arises  …  say   a  very   dull   experience.  You’re  si:ng,   nothing   much   seems   to  be  
going  on.  You  feel  a  bit   heavy,  you  may  get  some   associated  thoughts  like  ‘This  is  a  waste   of   Pme’   or  ‘I  
can’t   do   this,’   and   the   general   feeling   is   small,   limited,   and   a   bit   stuck.   Someone   is   having   that  
experience.      Again  we’re  at  the  crossroads  where  we  have  to  decide  which  of  the  two  answers  to  follow.  
Who  is  having  the   experience?   ‘I   am   having  the  experience.’  If   you  take  that  route  then   you’re  pulled  
into  wanAng   to  do  something   about  the  experience.  We  make  a  judgement:  ‘This  is  not  a  good  kind  of  
experience   to  have,  therefore  I  want  to   push  this   experience  away   and  get   a  be>er   kind   of  experience.’  
We  all  know  that  path  very  well,  because  we  do  it  a  lot.  It’s  very  difficult  not  to  follow  that  path.

Following  the  other  route:  here  is  an  experiencer.   Where  is  the  experiencer?  The  experiencer  is  here.   Be  
the  experiencer.  Here  you  are  with  whatever  is  going   on.  It’s  very,  very  close.  You’re  not  falling  into  the  
experience,  so  that  there  is  only  the  experience.  Nor   are  you  stepping   back   from   the  experience,  but  
you’re  staying  with  it.  You’re  being  with  what   is  going  on.  Now,  this  ‘being  with’,  this  is  the  openness  of  
being.  This  is  not  ‘being  me’  being  with  it,  because  if   I’m  ‘being  me’  I’m  back  into  the  subjecAve  nexus  of  
me  standing  in  relaAon  to  it,  and  all  the  consequent  feeling  tones  that  will  be  generated.

The  mind  is  always  and  already  here

So   we’re   back   with   this   quesAon:   how   just   to   be?   To   be   open,   to   be   fresh,   to   be   naked,   all   these  
descripAons  that  we  hear  again  and  again.   To  be  in  the  state  of  the  mirror.  SomeAmes  we  talk   of  ‘finding  
ourselves’  in  that  state,  which  alludes  to  the  important  fact  that  you  can’t  make  yourself  be  in  that  state.  
It’s  not  achievable.  The  mind   is   always  and  already   here;   you   can’t  lose  it  and  you   can’t  find  it.  We’ve  
never  lost  it  and  we  will  never  find  it.  In  that  sense  you,  as  an  ego,  cannot  get  enlightened.

This  is  where  this  parAcular  view  is  very  different  from  most  spiritual  paths.  Most  spiritual  paths  see  the  
true  nature   as  some  kind  of   subtle  or   sacred   quality   which  is   hidden   from  us,   and  which   we   need   to  
approach   through   removing   obscuraAons,   removing   faults  and  demerits,   and   so   on,   unAl,   finally,   we  
 P a g e  |  69

become  one  with  that  which  we’re  seeking.  Sufi   literature  such  as   the   Songs  of  Kabir,  express  this  view  
and  it  is  normal  in  Indian  religious  systems.

However,   what  this  dzogchen   view   is  saying   is  that  the  natural   luminosity   of   the   mind  is  here   and  is  
showing  itself  as  the  enArety  of  samsara  and  nirvana.  When  you  have  an  experience  like  dullness  in  your  
mind  and  you  say,  ‘I  don’t  like  this,’  or  ‘This  is   bad,’  or  ‘This  shouldn’t  be  happening,’  what  you’re  doing  is  
not   recognizing   what   it   is.   This,   itself,   is   the   radiance,   or   the   experience,   or   the   complexion,   or   the  
showing   of   the  mind.  Therefore,  what  is  required   is  simply  to  be   present,  to  be  there,  to   be  with  that  
experience.

How  do  we  do   that?  We  do  that  by  not  doing  anything  else.  Being  is  revealed   when  everything  else  falls  
away.  When  we  take  our  clothes  off,  we’re  naked.  When  we  put  our  clothes  on,  we’re  sAll  naked  but  we  
can’t   see   the   nakedness,   we   only   see   the   clothes.   Clothes   don’t   remove   nakedness,   clothes   hide  
nakedness.       If  you  hold  that  as  an  analogy,  all   these  obscuraAons  in  the  mind  are  a  clothing  that  hides  
the  nakedness  of  the  mind.  It  is  not  that  they  remove  it,  because  the  mind  is  always  naked.

Just  as  the  clothing  that  we  wear  expresses  our   body,  and  in   a  sense  shows  the  body,   so   these  thoughts  
show   the   mind.  If   you’re   present   with   it,   it’s   always  already   there.  The  one  who   doesn’t  want   to   be  
present  with  the  dullness  is  the  one  who  has  entered   into  a  judgement  that  ‘This   isn’t  good.  I  don’t  want  
my   mind   to  be   dull.’  Why?  What’s  wrong   with  being  dull?   It’s  very  popular  among   cows.         Possibly  a  
couple  of  us  here  today  will  be  born  as  cows  in  our  next  life,  so  we  might  as  well  get  used  to  it  now!        

So  long   as  the  ego  discriminates,  saying,  ‘This  is  not  good.  I  don’t   want   this  to  be   happening’,   it  will  be  
impossible   to   see   the   intrinsic   value   of   everything   which   occurs.   There   is  no   meaning   in   parroAng,  
‘Everything  is  self-­‐perfected   from  the  very  beginning,’  repeaAng  it  again  and  again   and  again,  if  you  then  
follow  it   up   with,  ‘...but  I   don’t  want  this   one.‘      In  such  moments  there  is  the  chance   just   to  open   to  
what   is   there.   Of   course,  we   have  a  fear   and   reluctance.   It’s  almost   like  post-­‐traumaAc  stress.   Post-­‐
traumaAc  stress  condiAons   are  caused  because   at   one  Ame   the  person  experienced  a  trauma,   and  this  
trauma  has  become  embedded  in  their  energeAc  system,  so  that  they  conAnue  to  have  an  experience  of  
hyper-­‐vigilance  and  tensions  of   various  kinds,  and  the  system   can’t  relax.  When  ignorance  arises   in  the  
mind,  you  could  say   this  is  a  great  trauma,  because  the  natural  integraAon  of   openness  is  torn  by  the  
arising   of   duality  wherein   subject   is  kept   apart  from   object.  This   is  a  real  trauma,  and   in   that   trauma  
there  is  a  lot  of  fear,  a  lot  of  anxiety.

For  the,   if  you  like,  the  small  self,  the  quality  of  what  is  coming  from   the  environment   is  very  important.  
We’ve   already   been   hurt   very   badly   –   we’ve   lost   our   ground;   we   don’t   know   who   we   are;   we’re  
wandering   around.  As  we  know,  sadly,  refugees  are  very   vulnerable.  They  can  be  exploited   very  easily,  
made  into  sex  slaves  and   so  on.  We  are  like  these  refugees.  We  can  be  captured  by  all  kinds  of  things,  so  
we  need   to  be   a  bit   careful.   That’s  why   we  chose  to   think   that   good   experiences  are   okay,  and  bad  
experiences  are  not  okay,   because  bad   experiences  carry   with   them  an   echo  of   the  big   trauma  when  
things  really  went  wrong.  

When   dzogchen  tells  us  to  open  up  to  everything  bad,  that  doesn’t  sound  very  good,  does  it?  Open  up  
to  hopelessness?   Open  up  to  despair?   Don’t  protect   yourself   against  these  things?   On  the  level  of   an  
ego-­‐self,  that  sounds  completely  stupid  –  why  would  you  do  that?  

Once  again,  we’re  at  the  crossroads.  The  ego-­‐self  is  quite  small,  and  does  need   to  protect  itself.  Since  it  
is  an   energeAc   formaAon,   it   will   always   be   vulnerable.   The   ego   cannot   be   safe   because   it’s  just   an  
accumulaAon,   a   meeAng   together,   a   paLerning,   a   juxtaposiAon,   of   parAcular   traits   and   habits,  
formaAons  –   it  has  no   essence  or   substance  to  it.  It   can  always  be   moved  around  and   influenced.   In  
contrast,   presence  or  being,  is  open,  is  like  the  sky,  like  the  ocean.   When  storms  go  off   in  the  sky  –  when  
there’s   lightning  and  thunder,  great  clouds  rolling  around,  noise,  excitement,  electricity   –   ajer  a  while  
they   go   by,  and  the  sky   is   just  the  same.   The  sky   is   indestrucAble.  The   dzogchen  tradiAon  describes  the  
mind  as  being  like  the  sky;  the  mind  is  indestrucAble,  it  is  vajra.

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  70

We   have  to   really   try   to   take  this  idea   into   us,   that  the  real   nature  of   my   being,   who   I   really   am,  is  
indestrucAble.  The   energy   of   that  being   manifests   itself   as  the   vulnerable  forms  ‘I,   me,  myself.’   If   we  
can’t   tell   the   difference   between   the   two,   we’re   stupid.   They’re   not   the   same.   The   mind   itself   is  
indestrucAble,  whereas  the  personality   is  very   destrucAble.   The  personality   gets  very   disturbed  by   all  
sorts  of  things.   Allowing   the  personality  to  move  is  a  kind  of   freedom,  but  this  is  a   secondary   freedom  
because  the  fundamental  freedom  is  the  indestrucAbility  of  the  mind.  

When  you   really   start  to  see  for   yourself   that  the   mind  is  empty,  then,  when  depressed   states   come,  
when  agitated  states  come,  or  fearful  states,  you  stay  with  them.  You’re  not  afraid,  because  they  will  not  
harm   the  open  awareness.  Awareness  is  like  the  sky.  This  experience  is  here,  it’s  me,  and  it’s   gone.  It’s  
me,   and   it’s   gone.   This   is   the   great   freedom.   This   is   the   purpose   of   meditaAon   –   to   give   us   the  
confidence,  the  direct  experience  of  our  indestrucAble  nature.

So,  when   we’re  meditaAng,  whatever  occurs  in   the  mind,  whatever  sensaAon   or  emoAon   or   thought,  
don’t  block   what  is  occurring.   Don’t  enter  into  judgement  about  it.  Just  offer  hospitality   to   it.  The  nature  
of  the  mind  is  infinite  hospitality.  It’s  always  open,  always  welcoming.  That  is  how  we  enter  into   our   own  
state,  by  opening  again  and  again.  

On   a  relaAve   level   we   did   this   last   night   with   the   tong   len   pracAce,   where   we   take   other   people’s  
suffering   into  ourselves.   On   an  ordinary   level   this  may  seem  a  very   strange  thing   to   do.   Why   would  I  
want  their  suffering?   Then  we  realize  it’s  not   toxic,  it’s  not   poisonous.  If   a  friend  is  very   sick  and  maybe  
dying,   then   we   can  feel   very   sad.   Yes,   this   is   very   very   sad   but  sadness  is  part  of   life.   It’s   just   what’s  
happening.   ‘It   shouldn’t   be   happening,’   or   ‘It’s   terrible,’   or   ‘It’s   cruel’   –   these   are   all   judgements.  
Someone  is  dying.  Some  people  die  in  the  womb;  some  people  die  at  birth;  some  people  die  in  the  first  
few  years  of   life;   some  people  die   at  ninety.  Some   people  die  asleep  at  night;   some   people  die  in   car  
crashes.  There  are  many  ways  to  die.  We  are  all  going  to  die.  So  this  person  is  dying.  Be  with  whatever  
happens.  Very  important,  just  this  is  it.  This  is  it.  

This  doesn’t  mean  that  you  become  some  kind  of  passive  idiot  to  be  pushed  around  by  everything  in  life.  
Opening  to  circumstances  allows  you  to   work   with   the  circumstances.  So,  whatever   is  occurring   in  the  
meditaAon,  just  be  with  it.   Being  with  it  means  that  if  you  have   a  friend  who’s  telling  you  about   some  
difficulty  in   their  life,  and   they’re  upset,  you  don’t  start  crying  too  and  weeping   and  wailing.  That  would  
be  stealing  their  story.        Being   able  to  listen  to  someone   doesn’t  mean  having  all  their  tears   for   them,  
but  neither  does  it  mean  being  unfeeling.  When  we’re  with  someone  we’re  touched  and  moved,  but  we  
are  not  caught   up  in  it,  because  if  you  want  to  help   someone  you  can’t   be  too  far  in   the  story.  Let  their  
story   be  present   and  register  …  it’s  almost  as  if  we   open  our   heart  and  we  make  a  space  in  our  heart,  
and  the  other  person  can  dwell  in  there  for  a  liLle  bit.  Something  like  that.

It’s  exactly  the  same  in  the  meditaAon.  Whatever  thoughts  or  sensaAons  or  feelings  are  arising,  let  them  
arise  in  the  space  of   the  heart,  in  the  centre  of   our  being.  And  then  they’re  gone.  And  then  they’re  gone.  
Not   defending   ourselves   against  what   is   occurring   is   the  taste   of   non-­‐duality;   because   in   non-­‐duality  
there’s  nothing  to  defend  yourself  against.  

So,  according   to  semde,  this  is  the  essenAal  way  of  dealing   with   all  meditaAon  problems.  In  meditaAon  
someAmes  the  mind  is  empty  of   thoughts,  open   yet  with  nothing  much  going   on.  Other  Ames  the  mind  
is  suffused  with  happiness.  SomeAmes  the  mind  has  a  great  clarity.   When  such  experiences  arise,  don’t  
hang  onto  them,  don’t  appropriate  them,  don’t   feel  that   you’ve   arrived   anywhere.  Just  allow   them   to  
come  and  go.

Of  course  this  is  difficult  for   us  because  if  we  get  a  good  experience  we  want  to   build  on  it.  What  do  we  
need  a  building  for?   The  mind  is  naked  and   empty,  it   has   no  pockets.   We  can’t   get   anything,   so  if   we  
can’t   get   anything   why  are  we  trying   to  get  something?   We   don’t  need  it.  This  also  is  difficult.  In  the  
ChrisAan   tradiAon   they   say,   ‘sufficient   unto  the   day’   which   means  ‘give   us   this   day   our   daily   bread’,  
meaning  that  this  is  enough.  ALend  to  the  moment.  ALend   to   the  moment.  That’s  very,  very  interesAng  
 P a g e  |  71

because  this  moment  is  enough.  In  dzogchen  language,  it  is  self-­‐perfected,   completed.  Having  had  many  
many  moments  in   your  life,   did   any  of   them   have  a  hole  right   through  the  boLom  of   them?   There’s  
always  something  else.  Or,  as  we  say  in  ordinary  language,  ‘it’s  just  one  damn  thing  auer  another.!

Having   an   anxiety   that   experience   is   going   to   stop   is   a   bit   unnecessary.   It   is   guaranteed   that   this  
experience  will  go,  and  then  another  will  come.  ‘But   I  like  this  one.  I  can  use  this  one.  It  suits  me.’  This  is  
the  land  of  the  ego.  Let  it  go  –  then  you’re  in  the  land  of  awareness.  

Here   is   a   very   simple   kind   of   litmus   test   to   see   the   difference   between   the   ego   and   awareness.  
Awareness  doesn’t  need  to  hold  onto  anything  –  like  the  mirror,  it  just  is  with  whatever  is  there.  There  is  
nothing   to   take   away   because   no   experience   is   beLer   than   any   other.   In   the   world,   when   we’re  
interacAng   with  other   people,  experiences  have  value;   they   have   the  relaAve   value  of   exchange.   One  
cup  of   coffee  can  be  a   lot  beLer  than  another  cup  of   coffee.  It  would  be  ridiculous  to  say  everything  is  
the   same,   that   all   coffee   is   the   same,   that   all   apples   taste   the   same.   But   in   terms   of   meditaAon,  
phenomena  are  all  arising  and  passing,  and  the  more  we  allow  that  to  happen,  the  more  free  we  are.

Meditation  with  Hung  

We   can   try   another   pracAce   now.   This   is   a   way   of   loosening   up   our   fixaAon   on   objects,   including  
ourselves,  as  being  strongly  real.  

Imagine  in  your   heart  a   small  ball  of   blue  light,  about  as  big  as  to  the  first  joint  of   your   thumb.   Inside  
that  you  imagine  a   blue   Hung,  The  blue  light  represents  the  open   spacious  dimension  of  the  Buddha’s  
mind.  

Focus  your  aLenAon  on  this  blue  ball,   which,  although  it’s  small,  it’s  also  as  big  as   the  whole  universe.  
And  then  start  to  make   this  sound  of   Hung.  ‘Hung,  hung,  hung,  hung...’  As  you  say  that   imagine   small  
Hungs  or  small   balls  of   blue  light  are  flying   out  with  enormous  power.  As  they   pass  through  your   body  
they   dissolve   it   into   dust.   As  they   pass  out   into   the   world,   they   dissolve   everything   they   encounter.  
They’re  crunching   up  the  whole  universe  unAl  nothing   is  lej  except  this  small  ball   of   blue   light.   Then  
that  too  dissolves  into   empAness.   Just  sit  in  empAness,  but  keep  the   chanAng   of   Hung  for  quite  a  long  
Ame  to  give  you  Ame  to  revisit  any  bits  that  need  a  bit  more  grinding.        

So,  anything  that  you  feel  you’re  aLached  to  –  your  books,  your  lover,   your  wine  cellar,  whatever  needs  
a  parAcular  grinding  into  dust,  give  it  a  lot.  

Hung  is  the  sound  of  the  five  wisdoms,   of   all  the  qualiAes  of  immediate  wisdom  that  the  buddhas  have.  
This  force  is   a  very  pure  force.  The  actual  nature  of   all  phenomena,  including   our   own  body,  is  like  an  
illusory   form,  like  a  rainbow  so  any  feeling   tone  of   things  being   solidly   real  is  a  false  percepAon  which  we  
have  projected  onto  the  phenomena.  

ReciAng   the  Hung  again  and  again,  we  just  clear  all  the  space,   infinitely   expanding,  infinitely  expanding  
unAl  there  is  no  trace  lej.   And  then   we  bring  all  the  light,  all  these  forms,  back  into  this  one  Hung  in  the  
heart,  or  into  this  one  blue  spot  in  the  heart.  It  dissolves  into  that,  into  empAness,  and  then  we  just  sit  in  
that  open  state  for  some  Ame.

Any  quesAons  about  that  before  we  begin?

[PracAce]

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  72

Garab Dorje’s third point: continue with confidence

Yow   to   look   at   Garab   Dorje’s   third   statement,   which   is   to   conAnue   with   confidence,   or   to   have  
confidence  in  the  understanding  established  so  far.  This  is  to   say  that  whatever   occurs  is  the  radiance  of  
the  mind  itself.  

The  real   difficulty   for  us  is   the  nature  of  judgement.  Clearly  in  life  we  have   to  make  choices.   When   you  
go  for   breakfast  you  have  to   decide  what  you’re   going   to   eat.  Everything  is   okay,  but  you  sAll  have   to  
decide.   When   you   make  that   decision   it   doesn’t   mean   you   have   to   insult   the  things   you   don’t   eat.  
They’re  not  bad,  it’s  just  that  you  don’t  want  to  eat  them  today.  

In  a  similar   way  we  make  parAcular  choices  with  everything  in  life.  There  are  many,  many  roads  that   are  
open   to   us,   many   paths   we   could   go   down,   but   we   have   to   choose.   One   of   the   ways  we   reassure  
ourselves  that  our  choice  has  been  good,  is  to  decide  that  the  other  choices  are  bad.  This  creates  the  
heaviness  of  dualisAc  interpretaAon.  

Carried  to   its  extreme  form   this  accounts  for   the   witch   trials  throughout   Europe.  There’s   a   noAon   of  
standard   behaviour,   and   there’s   a   noAon   of   unusual   behaviour.   If   there’s   a   need   to   find   out   why  
something   inexplicable  is  happening,  you  choose  the  people  whose   behaviour  is   different   from  yours,  
you  isolate  them  and  then  persecute  them.  Something  similar  happens  in  the  modern  phenomenon  of  
terrorism.   People   who   disagree   with   government   policy   in   various   countries   are   accused   of   being  
terrorists,  and  having  being  marked  as  terrorists,  they  are  then  exposed  for  torture  and  killing.  

So   the  quesAon  is  how   to  avoid  judgement.  Judgement  is  a  quality  of  duality:  ‘I  have   this   opinion  about  
that.’  In  the  making  of  the  judgement,  the  posiAoning  of  the  self   becomes  very  small  and  Aght.   There  is  
a  difference  between  judgement  and  discernment.  Discernment  is  prajna   in  Sanskrit,  sherab  in   Tibetan.  
Sherab  means  good  knowing  or  best  knowing  –  it  means  able  to  know   precisely   what  something  is,  what  
it’s  qualiAes  are.  

For  example,  if   you   drink  some  wine,   you   can  know  whether  the  wine  is   dry  or  sweet,  you   can   know  
whether  it  has  a   good   taste  or   a  bad   taste,  whether  it’s  rich  or  full  or  empty   or   acidic.  This  can  all  be  
neutral  informaAon   or   it   can   be  fuel  for  a  judgement.   You  may  then   say,  ‘Oh,  this   is   horrible.  It  is  very  
sharp.’  Instead  of  saying  that  I  do  not  like  sharp  wines  and  keeping  the   feeling  tone  in   me,   I  project  the  
horribleness  onto  the  wine.  The  wine  is  somehow   aLacking   me  by  being  not  what  it  should  be.  There  
we  can  see  some   of  the  essenAals  of   judgement:   that  we   start  with  a  map  –   with  a  model  of   how  the  
world  should  be.  

Another  example,  we  might  have  a  sense  that  this  world   we’re   in  is  samsara,  and  that  samsara  is  full  of  
problems,  and   that   the  people  we  see  have  the  five   poisons  and  so   they  are  all   very   limited.  This  is  a  
general  buddhist  view  and  explains  why  we  say  to  people,  ‘May   you  be  happy,  may  you  get  enlightened’,  
because   it’s   obvious   that   the   people   we   meet   are   not   enlightened.   This   is   a   judgement.   This   is   a  
judgement  based  on  a  parAcular  viewpoint,  or  a  perspecAve.  

Remember  that  it  is  most  important   to  always  to  be  clear  what  is  the  view  that  you  are  pracAcing  with,  
because  not  all  views  are  the  same  and  the  view  and  the  meditaAon  and  the  acAvity   and  the  result  all  go  
together.  

In  dzogchen   the  view  is   that   everything   is  fine  as  it  is.  It’s  okay.  It’s  complete  as  it   is  –   it  doesn’t  need  
anything   done  to  it.  If   we  say,  ‘it’s   perfect’  It   doesn’t  mean  perfect   in   the  sense   of   superior   to   things  
which   are   imperfect.   Although   the   language   in   dzogchen   is   always   gesturing   towards   non-­‐duality,  
language  itself  is  structured  around  binary  opposiAons  so  you  have  to  deconstruct  your  dualisAc  reading  
of   the   word   that   is  being   applied.   Otherwise  we  just  can’t  say  anything.   So,  saying   that   everything   is  
perfect  doesn’t  mean  that  it’s  superior  to  imperfect  things.   ‘Everything  is  perfect’  means  there  are   no  
inferior  things.  
 P a g e  |  73

So  what  does  perfect   mean?   It  means   that  the  ground   is  perfect.  A   tradiAonal  example  that’s  given  is  
that  if  you   go   to  the  land  of  gold,  everything   is  made  of  gold,  and  you  won’t  find  anything   there  that  is  
not  gold.  Everything  will  have  value.  

When   we  do  the  pracAce  and  we  open  the  mind,  we  see  that  the  mind  is  empty.  It  has  no  limitaAon,  it  
has  no   shape,  it  doesn’t   rest   anywhere.   The  mind  is  the  ground   of   everything.   It   is   the   basis,   or  the  
ground,  the  kun  zhi,  the  absolute  dimension  out  of  which  everything  arises.  

This  is  not  a  view  that  is  shared  by  all  the  schools  of  buddhism.  Many  would  say  that  the  phenomena  of  
the  world  are  arising  from  the  alayavijnana,   the  kun  zhi  nampar  shepa,  which  is  to  say  that  they’re  arise  
from   subtle   habitual   traces,   and   that   we’re   constantly   regurgitaAng   the   same   stuff   again   and   again,  
reconstrucAng   this   familiar   dimension.   This   fundamental   ground   consciousness   is,   itself,  
uncompounded.   There  are   no   true   essences,  so  what   people   take  to   be  the   ground   is   always  a   false  
ground  because  the  ground  itself  is  not  a  ground  that  you  can  grasp.  The  basic  ground  is  empAness,  an  
empAness  which  is  suffused  with  awareness,  and  has  the  quality  of  clarity.  

Thoughts  are  the  movement  of  the  mind

In   the   pracAce   many   experiences   are   arising.   They’re   arising   in   empAness,   as   empAness,   from  
empAness,   to  empAness.   They   don’t   come  from   anywhere  else,   they   don’t   go   anywhere   else.   Inside  
that,  the   play  of  conceptualizaAon  says,  ‘This  is  good.  That  is  bad.  I  don’t  want  my  mind   to  be   like  this.  I  
would  like  my  mind  to  be  like   this  more  ouen.’  These  are  the  movements  of  the  mind.  The  movements  of  
the  mind   don’t  establish  the  truth,   they  simply   establish   narraAves.   There   are  many  different  kinds  of  
narraAves.  The  narraAves  of   dharma  can   be  very   judgmental;   the   narraAves  of   samsara   can   be   very  
discriminatory.  

In  the  meditaAon,  is  there  any  thought  that  we  need  to  get?  No.  No   one  thought  is  more  important  than  
another  thought.  The  answer  doesn’t   lie  in  the  thought.  Thoughts  are  transient  rays,  like  the  rays  of  the  
sun.   The  sun   itself   remains  the  same.  So,   the  quality   of  rigpa,  awareness,   or  being,  or  presence  is  self-­‐
effulgent;   it  has  it’s  own  light,  and  this  light  displays  itself  as  all  the  forms  of  existence.  These  forms  are  
not  important,   they’re  just   moments.   They   are  ungraspable  moments.   When   we  think   that   we   have  
arrived  someplace  by  tying  ourselves  to  a  fixed  moment,  we  are  going  to  be  lost.  

This  is  the  difference  between  dzogchen  and  the  lam  rim  paths.  The  lam  rim   path   is  a  gradual  process  of  
building  up  stage  by   stage  by  stage,  but  each  moment  of  each  stage  is  an  impermanent  phenomena.  The  
Buddha’s   basic   teaching   is   impermanence.   Impermanence   is   viewed   in   dzogchen   as   self-­‐liberaAon.  
Whatever  arises  is   passing,  therefore,   don’t   be  excited  by  things   you   like,  for  the   shiny  object  and  the  
limited  subject  will  arise   and  pass  together.  Also  don’t  be  disappointed  by   things  you  don’t  like,  for  the  
negaAve  object  will   be  linked  with  another  limited  and  transient  paLern  of  mental  formaAon  and  both  
will   soon   vanish   of   their   own   accord.   This   mind,   in   that   context,   is   simply   another   energeAc   form,  
whether  it’s  the  object  or  the  subject;  as  it  arises,  it’s  already  going.  

We  think  that  we  get  to  know   other  people  through  Ame  and  that  we  develop   and  build  up  friendships.  
Friendships  don’t  happen  in   five  minutes  or  in   a  day.  If  you  meet  someone  on  a  bus  journey   and  talk   to  
them  for  half  an   hour   but  are  likely   never  to  see  them   again,  it  would   probably  be  rather   strange  to  say,  
‘That’s  my  best  friend.’  You  wouldn’t  rely  on  a  stranger  because  a  stranger  is  passing  by.  Likewise  these  
thoughts  that   arise   in   our   mind   are   essenAally   strangers.   They   are   never   going   to   be   in   our   world.  
Paradoxically,  of   course,  they’re  always  in  our  world  because  they   are   the  flowers  of   the  dharmakaya,  
they  are  the  flowers  of  the  sky,  but  you  cannot  catch  them.  

So  all  the   energy  that  goes  into  judgement  –  into   liking  and  not  liking,  pu:ng  things  here,   taking  things  
away  –   all  this  is  the  energy  of   duality,   which  is  just   like  a  swirl  on   the  surface   of  the   infinite  ocean  of  
awareness.   However  these  surface  swirls,  in  their   turbulence,  can  distract  us   very   easily,  and   then  we  
forget  this  calm  openness.  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  74

We  can  look  at  our  own  lives  and  think  about  how   many  thoughts  we’ve  had,  and  ask  what  stability  have  
these  created?  The  various  enthusiasms  that  we’ve  had  at  different  periods  in  our  lives  have   gone.  It’s  
very,  very  important  to  reflect   again   and  again  how  you  have  given  yourself   to  acAviAes,  to  projects,   to  
people   –   and   then   it’s  vanished.   People   who   were  very   important   are   now   vanished   from   your   life,  
someAmes  with  sadness,  someAmes  you’re  happy  to  see  the   back   of  them.  Anyway  they’re   gone.  You  
cannot  build  idenAty  on   the  object.  Also,  the   subject  who  is  looking  to  build  its  idenAty  on  the  object  is  
also   always  changing.  Subject  and   object   interact,   and   mutually   influence  and   change.   They’re  never,  
ever  stable.  

What   we   call   our   subjecAvity   is   a   desire   to   be   involved;   this  is   why   it’s  the   basis   of   the   energy   of  
compassion.  We  arise  into  the  world,  as  part  of  the  world,  wanAng  to  be  involved  in  it.  That  involvement  
can   happen  without  judgement.  When  you’re  in  a  mood  for   dancing,   you  can   dance   to   anything   but  if  
we  sit  waiAng  for  the  perfect  song  that  we  like,  then  maybe  we  will  wait  for  a  long  Ame.

So  when  we’re  looking  at  these  three  aspects  of  idenAty,  ngowo,  rangzhin,  thugje   –  the  open  dimension,  
the   field   of   experience,   and   the   parAcular   movement   of   experience   –   that   parAcular   movement   is  
embedded  in  the  field.  That’s  the   most  central  thing,  that  we   are  always  already  dancing.   We’re  always  
in  some  kind  of  movement,  in  some  kind  of   rhythm  in  everything  we  do.  Whether  it’s  traveling   to  work,  
or  going  into   the  shops,   thinking   about  what  to  buy,   planning   for   a  holiday;   these  are  all  interacAons  
with  parAcular  kinds  of  melodies  that  pass  through  us.  The  dance  goes  on.  The  music  doesn’t  stop.

In  the  general  tantric  tradiAon  they  say   that  our  nature’s  encompassed,  that  it’s  unborn   and  unceasing.  
It   doesn’t   come   into   existence  at   all   as  anything,   so   it’s   pure   empAness,   and   yet   the   quality   of   this  
empAness  is  the  ceaseless  flow  of  experience,  which  is  both  subject  and  object.  

In  terms  of   Garab  Dorje’s  third  point,  confidence  means  that  everything  which   occurs,  including  myself,  
this  whole  field,  is  the  radiance  of   openness.   That  is   what  it  is.  On  top  of   that,   all  kinds   of   narraAves  
move.  These  narraAves  are  also  part   of  the  radiance  –  whether  the  narraAve  is  a  narrow,  pain-­‐inducing  
one,  or  an  open,  joyful,  connected  one,  they  have  the  same  nature.  

Remember  this  basic  proposiAon  that   there  is  one   ground   and  two   paths?  These  paths  are  whether  we  
stay  related  to   the  ground,  or  we  don’t.   The  path   of  samsara  is  forgevulness  of   the   ground;  the  path  of  
nirvana  is  integraAon,  or   remembrance  of   the  ground.      That’s  the  main  difference  between  them.  When  
we  forget  the  ground,  we  have  to  work  out  what’s  going  on  and  then  we  enter  into  judgement,  and  that  
keeps  us  very   busy.  If   you  remember  the  ground,  if  you  open  to   everything  in   that  way,   you  will   find  an  
easy  flow  of  responsiveness  coming.  

This  takes  us  back   to   the  quesAon  of   agency   –   what  we  take  to   be  the  ego  agency,  the  one  who   does  
things.   Tibetan’s  call  this  the   che   pa  po,   the  actor,  the  enactor.  This  is   itself   the  energy  of   awareness,  
rigpa  itself.  It  means  every  Ame  you  are  doing  something,  this  is  just  the  movement  of  the  mind.  We  run  
the  story  ‘I  am  doing  this,’  but  a  great  deal  of  what  we  do  is  just  happening.  

Now   you   could   take   a   western,   biochemical,   neurophysiological   interpretaAon   of   this.   Take   a   fairly  
automaAc  behaviour   such   as  walking.   Walking   on   a  busy   flat  city   road,  or   walking   in   the   countryside  
when   your   feet   are   adjusAng   to   the   height   and   stability   of   stones  large   and   small.   There   is  a   huge  
amount   of   responsive   interplay   between   the   contouring   of   the  environment   and   how   we   inhabit   it.  
Some  people  will  analyse  this  enArely  in  terms  of  brain  funcAon  and  neurotransmiLers  and  so  on.  

Dzogchen   is   not   making   that  kind   of   interpretaAon   at   all   –   the  view   would   be:   this  is  the  arising   of  
awareness.  We  don’t  need  to  think  of  it  in  terms  of  ‘I  am  walking.  I  am  doing  this.  This  hill  is   very  steep,  I  
am  gekng  Pred.’   It’s   not   that  you  can’t  say   these   things,  but  if   you  put  your  energy   into  it  as  a  true  
account   of   what   is  going   on,   then  you  think,  ‘I  am  climbing  the  mountain.’  What  is   this  ‘I’  that  has  so  
much  power?  Because  if  we  say,  ‘I  am  Pred,’  then  you  could  say
 P a g e  |  75

—   Well,   Mr.   I,   you’re   able   to   climb   mountains.   Why   are   you   Pred?   Don’t   go   to   bed,   climb   a  
mountain!  
—  No,  I’m  Pred.
—  But  I  thought  you  were  climbing  a  mountain.
—  I  do  different  things.  I’m  different  people.  You  can’t  catch  me  like  that.
And  this  is   exactly  true:  ‘I’  is  an  empty  signifier.  ‘I’  has  no  content  in  it  at  all,  and   this  is  why  ignorance  
catches  us  again  and   again  –   because  ‘I’  is  empty   you   can  put   any  kind  of   bullshit  into  it.  You   can   say  
anything  you  like  –  ‘I  am  this.  I  am  that.  I’m  whatever  I  fancy.’  

What  is  this  ‘I’?  Well,  if   it  can  take  on  all  these  significaAons,  it  must  be,  indeed,  an  empty  signifier.  It  has  
no  content  of  its  own.  The  ‘I’   is  empty.  What  we  call  ‘I’  is  actually  the  dharmadhatu,  it’s  ying   rig  yer  me.  
It   is  the   radiance   of   awareness.   So   the   ordinary   ego   is  actually   awareness   itself,   except,   instead   of  
looking  at  it’s  ground,  it  looks  at  it’s  content:  ‘I  am  Pred.’  

So  if   you   take  the  sentence  ‘I  am  Pred,’   and  ajer  the   first  two  words  you   put  in  a  comma:  ‘I  am,  Pred.  I  
am,  hungry.  I  am,  BriPsh.’   It  can  be  ‘I  am,  anything,’  but  the  ‘I  am’  comes  first.  What  is  the  ‘I  am?’  ‘I   am  
empty,   therefore   I   can   be   BriPsh.   Therefore   I   can   be   hungry.   Therefore   I   can   be   Pred.’   So   that’s  the  
missing  bit  of  the  sentence.  ‘I  am   empty,  therefore  …’  you  can  say   whatever  you  like  about  yourself,  but  
if  you  miss  out  this  middle  bit,  you  get  lost.  The  reason   that  ‘I,’  all  of  us,  can  be  so   many  different  things,  
is  because   we’re   empty.   We  can   be   sad,   happy,   and   so   on.   We   can   be  indifferent   to   other   people’s  
sufferings,   or   very   upset   by   other   people’s  sufferings   because   we   can   be   filled   with   many   different  
contents.  

The  individual   ego-­‐self   is   empty  and  is,   itself,  the  point   between   the   open  dimension  and   the   closed  
dimension.  The  closed  dimension  is  never  closed  –  it’s  simply  an  enclosure  in  the  openness.  

If   you   go  up  in  a   liLle  airplane  and   you   fly  across  the  land  here,   you   look  down  and  you  see  hills  and  
forests,  and  so  many  things,  and  when  you   see  this  more  open  area,  you  see  fields.   And  how  we   know  
it’s  a  field  is  because  it  has  a  fence  around  it  –  the  fence  is  a  convenAonal  signifier.  The  farmer  who  owns  
the   field   has   that   field   registered   with   the   land   registry,   so   that   if   he   gets   into   a   conflict   with   his  
neighbour,  they   know  exactly   who   owns  what   bit  of   land.  All  the  land   on  the  earth  now   is  owned   by  
somebody.   But  the  land  itself,  underneath   the   fence  …  I  mean  the  fence  post   is   only  going   down   half  a  
meter,  if  that.  Underneath  that  is  just  the  land.  So   the  imposiAon  of  these  convenAonal  cu:ng   ups,  the  
aLribuAon  of  ownership,  ‘This  is  mine,  this  is  not  yours,’  we  see  how  this  funcAons  outside.  

It   also  funcAons  in  our   mind.  We  do  the  same  thing.  This  open  field  of   experience,   the  uncondiAoned  
dharmadhatu,   is  chopped   up   into   liLle  pieces  by  the   ego   registry   office  that  says,   ‘This   is  mine,  this  is  
yours.’   Except  the  person  in  the  ego   registry,  under  the  table,  has  a  liLle  boLle  of  whisky,  so   they  get  a  
liLle  bit  drunk  and  confused,  and  one  minute  they’re  saying,  ‘No,  this  is  what  I  really  want.   No,  no,  no   –  
that’s   wrong,   no.  This  is   what   I  really  want.  No,   no,  no,  no.   This  is   what   I  really  want.’   So  all   day  long,  
we’re  changing  our  mind  about  who  we  are,  but  we  say  it  with  absolute  convicAon!  This  is  how  the  mind  
goes  on  in  the  turbulence  of  samsara.

Because  the  self  is  empty,  how  could  it  be   reliable?  It  will  not  be  stable,  because  it  doesn’t  have  a  fixed  
content.  It’s  like  asking  the  mirror  ‘What  do  you  look  like?’  The  mirror  says,  ‘I  look   like  whatever’s  in  front  
of  me.’  
—  No,  but  what  do  you  look  like?
—  I  told  you,  I  look  like  whatever’s  in  front  of  me.
—  Don’t  you  have  any  idenPty  of  yourself?
—  Well,  don’t  you  want  to  look,  look  at  your  own  nose?  
—  My  giu  to  you  is  the  reflecPon.  Don’t  ask  me  for  anything  more.
You  won’t  catch  the  mirror.  You  won’t  catch  the  mind.  The  mind  will  endlessly  give  you  these  reflecAons.  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  76

So  this  is  the  essenAal  thing.  Opening  to  the   empAness.   TrusAng   the  open  dimension  of  being,  the  un-­‐
capturable   nature   –   which   is  not   nothing   at  all,   because   we   also   call  it   vajra.   It’s   indestrucAble,   the  
radiant  field.  So  we’re  si:ng  in  the  pracAce  with  our  eyes  open.   Lot’s  of  things  are  going   on:   noises  from  
outside,  people  moving,  sensaAons  in   our  own  body,  shijs  in  the   visual  field,   memories,  thoughts,  and  
so   on.  All   of   this,   where   does  it  come   from?  This  is  why  we   have   to   look   at   these   five   quesAons  we  
looked  at  before.  Again  and  again  and  again,  unAl  you  are  sure.  The  mind  is  infinite.  My   mind  is  infinite.  I  
am   infinite.  Infinity  has  no   limit.  There  is,   therefore,  nothing  outside  it;  everything  which  arises   is  the  
display  of  the  mind,  the  play  of  the  mind.

This  is  exactly   what  Garab   Dorje  is  meaning   by   the  confidence  –   so  it  means,  whenever  something  is  
occurring,   this   is   the   radiance   of   the   mind.   Like   a   rainbow   in   the   sky:   there   yet   ungraspable;   and  
vanishing.   So,  from  that   point  of   view   you  don’t  need  to   enter  into   heavy  judgements  because  there  is  
no   territory   to   secure.   You   already   have   the   territory.   This  is  the  great   freedom   of   relaxing   into   the  
dharmakaya.  Then  from  that  state,  we  find  ourselves  moving  and  responding  in  the  world  with  others.  

Responding   arises   with   discernment.   Discernment   means   that   we   modulate   our   behaviour   through  
connecAon.  That  is  to  say,  we   don’t  have  to   fine-­‐tune   it,   but   by   staying   connected  with   the   different  
people  and  the  different  environments,  it  corrects  itself,  doesn’t  it?  

For   people   who  know  how  to  drive  cars,  when  you’re   driving,  you’re  moving  on  the  road.  It’s  not  your  
own  private  road,  so  other  people  are  driving  along  it  too.  As  somebody  is  coming  towards  you,  or  trying  
to  overtake  you  from  behind,  you  have  a  sense  of  how  they  are  driving.  If  they  look  scary,  you  are  more  
careful.  If   they  look   okay,   you  can  see  what  they’re  doing.   These  cars  are  passing   each  other.  They   are  
moving   in  the  same  field,   and  the  whole  thing  about   cars  having  mirrors  is  because  the  driver  has  to  be  
in  the  field   as  it’s  unfolding.  You  have  to  read  the  road  and  other  drivers  and  the  movement  of  the  road,  
whether  it’s  uphill  or  downhill,  or  around  a  sharp  corner.  That  makes  you  do  what  you’re  doing.  The  road  
shows  you  what  to  do.  You   don’t   have  to   sit  worrying  and  worrying,  ‘How  will  I  get   round  this   corner?’  
because  once  you  have  the  basic  competence,  you’re  simply  moving  with  circumstances.

We   are   working   with   circumstances,   this  is  central   to   Garab   Dorje’s   third   point.   We’re   not  trying   to  
impose  ourselves  on  circumstances,  but,  by  allowing  ourselves  to  be  fully  part  of  the  field,   we  have  the  
opAmal  sense  of  what  is  going  on,  and  the  movement  arises  from  that.

Questions
What  basic  competencies  are  needed?  
Ques%on:   What  are  the  basic  competences  you   need?   You  told  us  that  for   driving   a  car   you   have   to  
have  a  driving  cerAficate.  How  do  we  get  a  dharma  driving  licence?

James:     It’s  an  important  quesAon:  what  are  the  basic  competencies  that  you  need.

Firstly,  really   look   unAl  you  see  the  empty   nature  of  the  mind.   Now,  this  is  not  something  that  you  have  
to  achieve,   because  the   mind  itself   is   already   empty.  You’re   not   making   your  mind   empty.  You’re  not  
doing  something   arAficial  to  yourself  –   you’re  stopping  being   arAficial.   In  the  same  way,  the  first  thing  
that  you  would   have  to  do  in  learning  to   drive  is  to  stop  being  a  passenger.  The  passenger  sits  in   the  car  
and  looks  out  the  window,   ‘Mm-­‐mm,’  because  it  doesn’t  maLer  what  the  passenger   is  doing.   They’re  
not  influencing   the   movement   of   the  car.   It  somebody   gets   into   the  driver’s  seat,   then   they   have   to  
think,  ‘Ah!  I’m  not  the  passenger,  I’m  the  driver.’  It’s  a  whole  different  world.

So   in   our   ordinary   samsaric   existence,   we’re   like   the   passenger,  just   wandering   around,   looking   here,  
looking   there.  CreaAng   and   creaAng   and   creaAng   kinds  of   experiences  in  the  forgevulness  of   karma,  
imagining  whatever  we  do  is  fine,  not  seeing  that  there  will  be  consequences.  
 P a g e  |  77

When  we   start  to  look  in   the  meditaAon,  and  we  see,  ‘Oh,  the  thing  that  hides  my  own  nature   from  me  
is  my  involvement  in  these  thoughts.’  DistracAon   is  something   that  I   am  doing   as  an  acAve  ego,  and  it  
stops  me  from  being  a  safe  driver.  It’s  not  good  if  drivers  are  distracted.  

So,   the   basic   competence   in   dzogchen   pracAce  is  to   release  and   release   and   release  involvement   in  
whatever  is  arising.  The  thought  doesn’t  bring  you  anything  that  you  need.  

A  long   Ame  ago,  when  I  was  in   Ladakh  doing  some  chöd  pracAce,   I  was  out  in  the  middle  of  a  big  stony  
desert,  and  there  was  a  liLle  cemetery  where  I  was,  and  I’d  been  doing  some  pracAce  and  I   had   some  
ideas.  But  I  had  no  wriAng  paper,  but  I  did  have  some  incense  packets  so  I  tore  them  open  very  carefully,  
and  I  was  wriAng  in  very  liLle  leLers  on  them.   This  person  came  over  the  field   to  see  me,  and  when  he  
saw   what   I  was  doing,   he   started  shouAng   at   me.   He  picked   up   some  stones  and   was  banging   them  
together.  He  was  very  nice  –  he  was  a  lama  called  Nyoshul  Ken,  and  he  had  walked  a  long   way  out  to  see  
me,  because  he   thought  it  was   good  that  someone  was  doing  chöd.  He  was   shouAng  at  me  ‘What  are  
you   doing?   Look  at  the   stones,   look  at  the   world,   look   at  the  sky,’  and   then  he  started  to   tear  up   my  
wriAng.  This  was  very  helpful,  because  it  told  me,  ‘If  you  are  doing  the  pracPce,  why   is   your  thought  so  
special?  Everything  you  need  is  already  here.’  That  was  very  sweet  for  me.

It’s  like  that  for   each  of   us  when  we   sit  in   the  pracAce.  We  hang   onto  our  thoughts.   We  think  they’re  
very  meaningful  –   that  good   thoughts  will  give  us  something,  bad  thoughts  will  harm  us.  This  is  not  true.  
The  vajra  nature,   the   indestrucAble  nature  of  the  mind,  means  that  the  thoughts,  the  feelings,  and  the  
sensaAons  are  irrelevant.   Irrelevant  in  terms   of  their  semanAc  content  –   because  their  real  value,  their  
intrinsic   value,   is   that   they   are   the   radiance   of   the   mind.   If   we   see   that   intrinsic   value,   then   the  
secondary  value,  the  aLribuAonal  value,   is  merely   situaAonal.  It’s  conAngent  on  the  factors  around  us.   It  
is  potenAally  useful,  yet  there  is  no  need  to  give  it  a  gravitas,  to  give  it  any   parAcular  weighAng.  When  all  
we  have  is  thoughts  to  make  sense  of  the  world,  we  overload  them  with  significance.  

So  that’s  the  basic  competence  that  we  really  need  to  have,  and  so  when  Garab  Dorje  is  saying  ‘conAnue  
in  confidence’  it  means  don’t  do  anything  else,  trust  that  this  is  okay.  Directly  taste  this  for  yourself.

Question  about  taking  action  to  change  things  in  the  world
Ques%on:   For   me,   relaxing   into   openness  can   someAmes   feel   like   being   conformist,   or   accepAng   a  
world  and  a  society  which  I  don’t  parAcularly  accept.   Does  that  make  sense?  If  the  demand   of  the   Ame  
is  to  be  radical,   but  I  just  accept  the   status   quo  and  go  to  the  supermarket  like  everybody  else,  maybe  
that’s  not  the  right  thing  to  do?

James:     When   Prince  Siddhartha   was  born   the   court   astrologer   made  a  predicAon   that   either   he  
would   be  either   a   great   world   emperor   or   a   great   yogi.   The  king   hoped   he  would   be   a  great   world  
emperor,  so   he   trained   and   educated   him  for   that,   to  have  power   over   things.   As  we   know   from   his  
story,  he  went  through  all  this  educaAon  to  be  a  great  prince  and  a  king,  and  a  warrior;   but  when  he  was  
in  his  mid-­‐twenAes,   he  decided   this  was  really   the  wrong  way,   and  so  he  gave  that  up  and  became  a  
renunciate,  and  became  a  yogi.  

We  can  always  come  back  to  asking  ourselves  the  quesAon  of  whether   and  why  we  seek  to  have  power  
on  the  world  to  change  it?  You   know,  in  the  Bible  Jesus  says,  ‘the  poor  are   always   with  us.’   You  might  
describe  that   as  a  very   fatalisAc  comment,  but  he  made  it  when   Mary   Magdalene  had   brought   some  
expensive  oil  and   she  wanted  to  rub  it  on  him,  prompAng  some  of  his  disciples  to  ask,  ‘Master,  shouldn’t  
we  take   this  oil  to   the   market  and  sell  it,  and  buy  food  and   feed  all  the  poor   people?’  Jesus  responded  
with,  ‘The   poor   are   always   with   us,  but  I   am  with   you   today.’  So   let’s  have  a  good   Ame,   let’s   have  a  
party!  There   are  always   going   to  be   poor   people,  but   does   that  mean  other   people   can’t   have   a  full  
belly?  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  78

RenunciaAon  can   be  a   kind  of   compensaAon  for  the  difficulAes   of  the  world,  but  so  can   radicalism.  It’s  
not  that  we  shouldn’t  try  to  change  things,  but  one  of  the  basic  laws  of  physics  says  that  for  every  acAon  
there’s  an   equal  and  opposite  reacAon.  If   you   push  the  wall,   the  wall  is  going  to  be  exerAng   an  equal  
force  to  you.  We  find  that  in  poliAcal  systems  too.

So  the  key  point  from  the  dzogchen  point  of  view,  is  that  if  you  want  to  change   things,  do  it  within  the  
spirit  of   empAness.   It’s   not   that   in   accepAng   things,  we  are  pu:ng   up  with  them;  it’s  not  a  defeaAst  
acceptance.   Rather  its’  a  phenomenological  acceptance:  ‘This   is  how  it  is.   I  really  see   this  is   how  it  is.’  
Now,  what  can  I  do  with  this?  

The  problem  with   a  lot  of   radical  poliAcs  is  that   it  starts  from  an  ideal.   It  starts  from  a  vision,  and  then  
people  think,  ‘How   can  I  bring  this  vision  into  the  world?’  and   ‘All   these  people  are  gekng  in  the  way  of  
my  vision,  and   why  couldn’t  we  all  just  do  …’  All  that  can  seem  quite  exciAng.  A  protest  camp  was  set  up  
recently   around   St.   Paul’s   Cathedral   by   people   from   a   group   called   ‘Occupy   London’.   They   set   up  
discussion  groups  to  discuss  how  we  could  change  society  and  so   on.  On  one  level  it’s  all  very  admirable,  
but  does  it  make  any  difference?   No  doubt,  it  makes  a   difference  to  the  people  there;  it  changes  their  
minds,   it’s  consciousness-­‐raising.   But  the   world  system  is  very   powerful,  and  if   you   link   that   with  the  
understanding  of  karma…  

The  reason  that  people  do  bad  things  is  not  because  they  are  truly  bad,  since  everyone  is  basically  good,  
but  because  they’re  caught  up  in  the  karmic  confusion  of  not  understanding.  Trying  to  get  into  a  raAonal  
debate  with   people   who   are  confused   doesn’t  really   help,   because   they’re  confused.   Their   confusion  
means  that  they  can’t  actually  get  it.  

So,   what  is  radical  acAon?   I  would  suggest   to   you   that  dzogchen  and   mahamudra  are  forms  of   radical  
fundamentalism.  By   ‘fundamentalism’  I  refer   to   the  fundament,   to   the  ground,   and  the  ground   is  the  
dharmadhatu.   The   word  ‘radical’  comes  from   radix,  meaning  a  root.  We   integrate,  we  put  the  root  of  
phenomena  back   into  the  ground   of  empAness,  so  we  dzogchenpas  are  radical  fundamentalists!      That  
raises   the   quesAon,   ‘If   I’m   gekng  into   opposiPon   with  other   people,   and   I’m   trying   to  change   their  
minds,  am  I  grounded?  Am  I  rooted  in  this  openness?’  If  my  distaste   for  what  they  do,  or  my  hope  that  
they  do   something   different,   is  taking   me  into  a  small  posiAoning,   then  we’re  just   going   to   get   into  a  
dualisAc  ding-­‐dong.  

Even  if   you  win   the  baLle  you’ll   never  win  the  war,  because  you’re  part  of   the  problem  so  long  as   you  
are  within   the  dualisAc  matrix.  That   would  be  my  sense:  it’s  not   about   giving  up  a  sensiAvity   to   what  
happens  in  the  world,  but  about  using  empAness  to  find  a  way  through.  

For  example,  last  night  when  I   was  watching  the  people  here  dancing,  at  a  certain  stage,  a  circle  formed  
and   people  were  kind  of  moving  in  rhythm.  Then  people  were  moving  across  the  circle   in  various  ways.  
It  was  a  kind  of  spontaneous  movement.  I  would   say  that’s  a  kind   of  natural  synergy,  that  when  people  
are  open  to  each  other,  they  find  themselves  on  the  same  wavelength.  

That   might  give  us  a  sense  of   the  condiAons  that  could   bring  about  change.  That   was  a  circle   of   like-­‐
minded  people.   Now   the  quesAon   would  be,  does  that   circle  form  itself   by  turning  its  back  on  people  
who  are   not   like-­‐minded,   so   you  have  an  insider/outsider   thing,  or   how  can   you   extend   the  circle   to  
include  more  people  –  maybe  everyone?  

Clearly   we   need   to   pracAce  things   like  tenderness,   like  concern,   like  aLenAon  to  the  specificity   of   the  
individual  condiAon,  and  not  have  too  many   plans.  But  of  course,  when  you’re  young   and  enthusiasAc,  
it’s  very   important  to   have  big  plans  and  high  ideals.  So   it  is  about   how  you  integrate  that  with  wisdom.  
Otherwise  the  energy   can  just  bash  into   power   structures,  and  these   power  structures  are   very   very  
strong.  They  really,  really  are.  
 P a g e  |  79

So  I  think  there  is  a  lot  of  hope.  Acceptance  doesn’t  mean  that  I  accept  the  situaAon  and  I’ll  let  it  run  as  
it   is.   Acceptance   means,   ‘Let   me   really   examine   and   see   how   it   funcPons.’   You   can   do   that   from   a  
western  point  of  view  and  you   can  also  do   that  using  a  dharma  point  of  view.  ‘These  are  the   five  poisons  
in  acPon.  What  can  I  do  to  help  other  people  feel  more  safe?’  

People   suffer   fear   and  anxiety   and  these  give  rise  to  all  sorts  of   defensive  structures.   Fear  and  anxiety  
arise  from  the  basis  of  ignorance.  That  is  the  basic  proposiAon.  All  these  afflicAons,  the  nyonmong,  these  
obscuraAon,  are   actually  defensive.   They’re  ways  of   protecAng   the   empAness   of   the  ego.  Now,   like  a  
narcissisAc  personality  structure,  it’s  sort  of  shiny  on  the  outside,  but  depressed  and  lost  on  the  inside.  If  
you  challenge  somebody   who’s   very   narcissisAc,   they’re  going   to   feel   humiliated   because  their   inner  
depression   is   being   revealed.   So,   the   quesAon   would   be,   how   to   invite   people   to   change,   without  
making   them   feel  shamed,  humiliated,   embarrassed,  defended,  and   so   on?  I   think   that   would  be  the  
skillful  way.  

How  you   do  that,  I’m  not   very   sure.  I  have  my  own  challenges  at   work.  It’s  not  so   easy,   but   these   are  
exactly  the   real  points  of   applying  dharma  in  the  world,  of   integraAng   the  pracAce.  We  get  frustrated.  
We  think,  ‘Why  don’t  you  understand?’  and  the  fact  is  they  don’t  understand.  My   colleagues  are  not  me,  
they  have  a  different  background  and  a  different  set  of  values.  If   my   fantasy  hits  their  fantasy,  we  just  get  
in  a  mess.   I’m   the  one  who  has  to  drop  the  fantasy  and   try  to  be   with  their  actuality,  how  they  are,  and  
work  with  that.  But  it  is  difficult.

How  can  we  integrate  everything  into  the  state  of  meditation?
Ques%on:   What   can   we   do   to   reduce   the   gap   between   the   meditaAon   and   what   we   do   ajer  
meditaAon,  for  example  in  our  work,  so  that  there’s  no  difference?  

James:     That   depends  on   the  view.  If   your   underlying  view  is  that  you  are  in  samsara  which  is  a  bad,  
profane  and  dangerous  place,  then  we  look  to  the  meditaAon  to  give  us  some  relief  from  that.  We  try   to  
establish  some  kind   of   sacred  space,  perhaps  we  go  on  retreat   or  onto  our   meditaAon  mat.   Then   we  are  
in   another  beLer  world.  If   you   take  that  view,  then   when  you  come  back   into   the  ordinary   world   you  
may  feel  even  worse!  So,  rather  than  helping  you  with  the  ordinary  world,  you  now  feel,  that  somehow  
it’s  been  debased.  

From   the   dzogchen   point   of   view,   the   central   thing   is   that   my   basic   presence   is   inseparable   from  
empAness.  This  is  why  over  the  years  we  have  been  doing  such   pracAces  together  as  the  five  quesAons,  
the   Aa,  the   Hung  and   so   on.   The  central  experience  that   you   want  to  seLle  in   is  that  the  root   of   my  
being,  my   basic  presence,   my   mind   itself,   the   basic  sense   of   my   aliveness,  openness,   availability,  is  a  
quality  inseparable  from  empAness.  That  is  to  say,  I  am  not  a  thing.  I  am  space.  

SeLling  in   that,  every  experience   which  arises  –   including  all  the  thoughts  of  ‘I,  me,  myself,’  my  life,  my  
personality,   my   work   –   is   the   manifestaAon   of   space.  The  thoughts  inside   my   head,   and   the   objects  
outside  my  head,  all  this  is  the  radiance  of  space.  

So,  when   we  go  into  work,  everything   there  is  the  radiance   of  space.   Now,  nobody   in  our  workplace  is  
likely  to  confirm  that;  they’re  operaAng  from  another  view,  another  vision.  That’s  what’s  difficult  –   that  
we  have  to  hold  on  to  this  sense  of  spaciousness.  But,   again,  it’s  not  that  we’re  se:ng   up  an   opposiAon,  
which   would   be   unhelpful   and   counter-­‐producAve.   This   space  is  the   field  within   which   everything   is  
occurring,  and  the  occurrence  of  everything  is  experience.  

When  people  cite  ‘hard  facts’  and  give  ‘evidence’,  that  is  materialisAc  experience.  Yes,  there  are  things  
with  these  properAes,  and  that  is  undeniable.  That’s  a  hard  fact.  Our  freedom  to  move  is  constrained  by  
that.   So,  again   and  again,   we  have  to  integrate  these  so-­‐called  ‘hard  facts’  into  their  ground,  and   to  see:  
this  is   an  experience   arising   in  space  itself.  It  is  the   experience  of   space.   For  example,  there   are  pillars  
holding   up  the  roof   of   this  room.   These  pillars  have   the  quality  of  the  earth  element.  There’s  a  certain  

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low

 P a g e  |  80

hard  fact,  so  if  we  bang  our   head  on  the  pillar,  we  will  feel  pain.  The  fact  that  we  feel  pain  doesn’t  make  
the  pillar  real.  When  you  have  a  binary  opposiAon,   a  duality  between  reality   and   fantasy,   then  banging  
your  head  on  the  pillar   awakens  you  to  the  reality  of   the  pillar,  and  the  idea  that  it’s  illusion  –  well,  that  
just  seems  like  a  fantasy!  What  is  all  this  nonsense?

But  it’s  not  like  that,  because  the  experience  of  the   pain  in  your  head   is  an  experience.  The   hardness  of  
the  pillar  is  an  experience.  It’s  not  out  there.  Our   access  to  the  world  is  always  in  terms  of  what  registers  
with   us   –   that’s   what   we   have.   And   these   experiences   arise   and   pass.   They   have   no   substance   in  
themselves.  

ReificaAon,  the  creaAon   of  objects,  among  people  and  animals,  and  so  on,  living   things,  objecAficaAon,  
the  denial  of   the  lived   vitality  in  the  other,   the   turning  of   the  other  into  an  instrument  for  our  pleasure  
or  our  profit  or  something  like  that  –   these  are  all  tendencies  we  have  to  resist.   Being   alive  with  the  
other  is  more  vital  than  being  a  thing  in  a  world  of  things.  

So   when  we  go   out   of   the  meditaAon,  if   we  have   that   a:tude   that  ‘I’m  going   out   of   the   meditaPon’  
we’re  going  to  have  problems.  The  basic  proposiAon  is  that  the  meditaAon  never  ends,  because  we  have  
these  two  aspects  of  meditaAon:  the  resAng   in   a  parAcular  mode  of  being  with   space;  and  then  opening  
that  mode  of  being  with  space  to  integrate  with  everything  that  occurs.  

Let’s  imagine   si:ng   on  your  mat,  at  home,   doing  the  pracAce,  si:ng  for   a  while.   Open.   Then  you’re  
more   looking   around   the   room.   You’re  registering   the  unique  specificity   of   each   of   the   things   in   the  
room.  You’re  at  that  crossroads  again!  ‘This  is  a  lamp.  I  like  this  lamp,  I  don’t   like  this   lamp…’      Or,  ‘I   am  
experiencing  the  lamp.’  

Your  ability  to  walk  without  bumping  into  the  lamp  will  be  the  same,  whichever  path  you  take,  but  if   you  
say,  ‘This  is  a  lamp,’   you  get  into   talking  about  something  which  is  out  there.  But  if  you  hold  exactly  the  
same   phenomena   in   the   sense   of,   ‘I’m   experiencing   this   lamp.   What   I’m   experiencing   is   lampness.  
Wallness,  windowness,  soundness,  legness...,’  as  we  look  around  we  are  aware  of  these  different  things.  
This  is  experience.  This  is  experience.  In  that  way  we  can  incorporate  it.  It’s  not  going  to  make  us  blind  or  
stupid   or  unable  to  funcAon.  But   it’s   holding   the  vitality   of   the  unfolding   moment   close   to   us.   Every  
detail  will   be  there.   In   fact  you   will   have  more  phenomenological  clarity   by   opening   yourself   to   the  
situaAon  than   by  staying   in  your  ideas  about  it.  You’ll  be  much  more  precise.  That  would  be  the  way  of  
integraAng  everything  into  the  state  of  meditaAon.  

Of  course  it  can  be  difficult,  especially  when  people  give  us  a  hard   Ame.  Maybe  you’ve  got  a  boss  who  is  
quite   difficult   to   get   on   with,   who   doesn’t   seem   to   acknowledge   your   qualiAes   and   skills.   You   feel  
yourself   shrinking.  Who   is  the  one  who  shrinks?   When  you  are  feeling,  ‘Poor  me.  Don’t   they   see   how  
much  I’ve  done.  Why  don’t  they  appreciate  me?’  that  is  a  thought.  Staying  with   that  thought  –  you  don’t  
need  to  block  the  thought,  you  don’t  need  to  be  brave,  or   forgiving,  or  whatever.  You  can  just  be  feeling,  
‘Oh,  this   is  not  very   nice.’  That’s  an  experience.   IntegraAng   all  of   these  difficulAes  just  means,  ‘I  accept  
this  is  how  it  is.’  

The  next  thing  is,   ‘How  will  I  respond?’  If   I  respond   from  a  hurt,   contracted,  ‘poor  me’  posiAon,   it’s  likely  
that  I   will  respond   unskillfully,  because  in  feeling   ‘poor   me,’   hard-­‐done-­‐by,   oppressed,   I   now   have  an  
oppressor.  Somebody  who  doesn’t  care.  I   now  have  an  image  of  who  that   person  is,  and   I’m   reacAng   to  
that  image.  The  image  may  not  be  out   there,  you  may   have  formulated  an  object-­‐relaAon  in  your   own  
head.   By  that  is  meant  that   you   construct  something  and   then  you  project  it  out  onto  the  world.  You  
then   act   toward   your   own   projecAon.   The   ensuing   mismatch   between   your   projecAon   and   what   is  
actually  there,  becomes  the  cause  of  a  great  deal  of  trouble.  

So,  staying  relaxed  and  open  actually  makes  the  world  much  more  workable.  I  think  that’s  at  the  heart  of  
it.  
 P a g e  |  81

Question  about  feeling  love

Ques%on:   When   I  am   experiencing   loving   feelings  is  this  love   on  the   relaAve  level   or   is  it   the  sun  of  
rigpa  shining?  

James:     ‘Love’   is   a  tricky   word,  in  any  language.      It  has  a   wide  range  of   meanings.   In   the  buddhist  
tradiAon,  generally  it  means,  ‘May   all  beings   be   happy,’   and  the  rays  of   the  sun   go  out  imparAally   to  
every   place.   It   falls   like   the   gentle   rain   from   the   heaven   above,   equally   on   everything.   Our   love   is  
normally  a  bit  more  parAal,  liking  and  not  liking,   so  in  the  sense  of  imparAality,  awareness  is  like  love,  in  
that  it  gives   equal  aLenAon  to  everything  that  arises.   It  illuminates  everything   equally.  That  is  why  we  
can  see  things  before  we  engage  with  them.  The  phenomenological  field,  or  the  field  of   experience,  or  
rigpai  rangzhin,  this  is  what   is  here,  but  we  can  only  see  it  if  we  are   open-­‐hearted   and  we  see  clearly.  
Then,  within  that,  we  make  our  parAcular  moves  of  responding.  

So,  rigpa,  awareness,  is  certainly  full  of  love,   but  it’s  a  parAcular  kind   of  love.  It’s  not  an  eroAc   love,  it’s  
not  an  acquisiAve  love,  it’s  not  a  dependency  love  –  it’s  the  love  of  availability.  

Ques%on:   I  feel  connected  to  other  people.

James:     Being  connected  to  people  doesn’t  always  feel  very   warm.         We  all  want  cosy.  We  all  want  to  
be  under  the  duvet,  and  the  Buddha’s  teaching  love,  and  it’s  kind  and  it’s  nice.  

But  one   of   the   qualiAes   of   awareness  is  clarity,   and  clarity   is  not  cosy.   It’s  clear.   Clear   means  seeing  
precisely   how  things  are,  and  so  we  have  to   relate  to   people  as   they  are,  and  someAmes  people  are  a  
pain   in   the  ass.  It   doesn’t   mean   that  we  stop  relaAng   to   them,   but   we  relate  with  our  eyes  open  and  
with   care.  A   caring  concern,  but   it’s  not  cosy,  and  it’s  not  necessarily  warm.  One  of   the  funcAons  of  the  
rays  of   the   sun   is  they   provide  heat  and   light,  but  that   warmth   can  also   burn.   SomeAmes   burning   is  
useful.  For  those  of  you  who  have  experienced  teachers  you   will  know  that  most  of  the  teachers  have  a  
range  of   emoAons  that   they  show.  SomeAmes  sweet,  and  someAmes  not  so   sweet.  Hopefully   that   has  a  
useful  funcAon  for  the  other  person.  But  to  imagine  that  it’s  warm  and  nice,  a  kind  of  tradiAonal  bedside  
manner  –  perhaps  not.  

[Ending  of  Teachings  ]

Dedication of Merit
GE  WA  DI  YI  NYUR  DU  DAG

OR  GYAN  LA  MA  DRUB  GYU  NAE

DRO  WA  CHIG  KYANG  MA  LU  PA

DE  YI  SA  LA  GO  PAR  SHO

By   this  virtue  may  I  quickly  a>ain  the  glorious  Guru's  stage,  then  may   I  put   all  beings   without  even  one  
excepPon,  on  that  same  stage!

Song
[The group now sang to James a poem he had written and which they had put to music for this
occasion.]

www.simplybeing.co.uk © James Low


 |
 82
How to be Naked
All you have and
all you see
and all you take
yourself to be –
is only clothing.
Clothing can cover or
be the display
of the radiant source
forever in play.
Open and naked
you cannot be caught,
not by self nor by other
whether seeker or sought.
Fresh, raw and simple
our state is complete
though dressing’s an option
for those whom we meet.
Sweet gift of nothing
this infinite field
the buddhas’ own paradox
before which we yield.
Moment by moment
we arise in new forms
clothes in strange patterns
forever unborn.
P a g e
It’s fine as it is
for what it is not
thinking won’t get it –
It’s a joke, it’s a shock.
Naked is easy
so don’t do a thing.
The clothes they come freely,
just see what life brings.
So how to be naked
is not something to know;
you’re always uncovered
wherever you go.
Effort is wasteful
it muddies the water.
Don’t try to relax,
that’s really improper!
It is what it is
as it always has been;
let the clothes slip away,
they were only a dream.