← 10% Happier with Dan Harris
10% Happier with Dan Harris
How To Get Out Of Your Head: Joseph Goldstein and Sam Harris on Nirvana, Non-Clinging, Non-Duality, and the Best Way to Meditate
01:31:13
Loading summary
Transcript134 lines
- [00:00]
Dan Harris
Few things feel better than knowing someone's looking out for you. That is the spirit behind the ATT guarantee. Staying connected matters. That's why AT and T has connectivity you can depend on, or they will proactively make it right. That's the AT&T guarantee, because connection should be dependable, especially in the moments that matter most. Terms and conditions apply. Visit att.comguarantee for details. @ and T connecting changes everything. This is the 10% Happier podcast. I'm Dan Harris. Hello everybody. How we doing? So this is going to be an interesting one. I'm both excited and a little worried to hear how you respond to this. Let's get right into it. For the past 15 years, I've been listening to an ongoing argument between two of the most influential meditation teachers in my life. Sam Harris, the author, podcaster and proprietor of the excellent Waking Up Meditation app, and Joseph Goldstein, also an author and the co founder of the legendary Insight Meditation Society in Massachusetts. Sam and Joseph are not only old friends of mine, but they're also very old and very close friends of one another. For decades, they have been debating the relative merits of two ancient styles of meditation. One is vipassana, or insight meditation, the foundation of most modern mindfulness practice. The other is zogchen, a Tibetan approach that points you directly to the open, boundless, separate, selfless nature of awareness. If this sounds confusing, bear with me. I will unpack this as we go. Here's how the debate between Sam and Joseph breaks down. Sam believes that Zogchen is the more direct route that you can recognize right now that the sense of I that we all harbor self consciously is actually an illusion. This recognition that you can get through Zogchen is often called non dual awareness, meaning there's no separate meaning me or I observing my anger or my sadness. There's just experience unfolding sensations, thoughts, emotions, all passing like weather in the open sky. This may sound a little esoteric, but it's actually incredibly practical. When you stop taking your emotions so personally and so seriously, they lose their power to hijack you. Most of us, however, practice in a more dualistic way. Watching the breath, noticing thoughts, feeling like there's an eye observing them. That's how you start practicing when you do vipassana, or insight meditation, although over time you do eventually come to see that the self is an illusion. So Sam's argument is that Zogchen is better because it emphasizes the direct recognition that there's no separate self behind your experience, that what we call I is just thoughts, sensations, and emotions. Unfolding in awareness. Joseph does not disagree that this realization is incredibly important, but he argues that for most of us, we actually need to gradually and steadily cultivate mindfulness in order to really have this non dual insight in all of the freedom it brings. This is why Joseph teaches in a way that mixes both Vipassana and Dzogchen. Am I making sense here? Are you with me? Just to restate it, Sam emphasizes the direct recognition that there's no separate self or you or I behind all of your experience, that what we call I is just thoughts and sensations unfolding in awareness. And Joseph agrees that this insight into selflessness is central in Buddhism. But he points out that for most of us, it's only through steady dualistic mindfulness and repeated investigation that this insight becomes stable and freeing. Like I said, I've been listening to these guys debate this subject for years. You can find hours of their discussions over on Sam's Waking up app. Quick plug. By the way, if you want to sign up, use this link wakingup.com Dan Harris I'll put a link in the show notes. I get a small cut, so do me a solid. Also, as I said earlier, it's an excellent app. Anyway, after all of these years of listening to Sam and Joseph go at it, I thought, why not invite them both onto my podcast and try to moderate this discussion myself? That may have been hubris. As you'll soon hear, these two are not easy to wrangle. But what I hope we've achieved is a funny and respectful and illuminating conversation between two of the brightest minds in the meditation world about how we can all upgrade our minds and suffer less and do life a little bit better. One very quick thing to say before we dive in here and this is relevant to our discussion of non clinging or non duality. There's a new meditation that drops today with November's Teacher of the Month, Christiana Wolf, and it's all about how to be less attached. Specifically how to be less attached to your moment to moment impulses in the meditation. Christiana teaches something called urge surfing. You can access all of our companion meditations if you sign up over@danharris.com Subscribers also get access to our weekly live meditation and Q and A sessions every Tuesday at 4 Eastern. And if you want to meditate with me in person, I'll be doing a live meditation and Q and A at Troutbeck, which is a hotel in the Hudson Valley. An intimate little gathering coming up on November 23rd. There's a link in the show notes we'll get started with Sam and Joseph Rob right after this few things feel better than knowing someone's looking out for you. That is the spirit behind the AT and T guarantee. Staying connected matters. That's why AT and T has connectivity you can depend on, or they will proactively make it right. That's the AT and T guarantee, because connection should be dependable, especially in the moments that matter most. Terms and conditions apply. Visit att.comguarantee for details. @ and T Connecting Changes Everything we're making Thanksgiving plans right now, and we've got a bunch of things we're going to do over the holiday. But one of the things we're going to do is go out to the beach in eastern Long island, the town of Montauk, which we love. It's obviously not going to be beach weather, but it's a great time to hang out in one of our favorite places when it's a little less touristy. We're going to stay in a house with family members, and it's a great way, especially when it's family you haven't seen in a while or family that you don't get to see all the time. To really hang out. You're in a house together, especially if it's a big enough house. You've got your own space, but then shared spaces where you can hang out and really get to know each other in unscripted, casual moments. It's a great way to have more space to be able to cook for yourself and most importantly for me, to be able to bond with people that I don't get to see all the time. And here's the cool thing. I love staying in welcoming homes, homes that I book on Airbnb. But it's got me thinking that my home could do the same for somebody else. My wife and I have put so much love into all the details of our home. Why not help somebody feel comfortable and taken care of while they're traveling? Think about it. If you host your home on Airbnb while you're traveling, it's a great way to offset some of the costs of your trip. The extra income that you make can be put towards an upcoming trip, a splurge. You've been eyeing home improvements, and if you've got a lot of trips ahead of you, hosting is a pretty cool and unique way to make some money back. Whenever I travel, my place is just empty. So while I'm away, it really does make sense to host it on Airbnb. Your home might be worth more than you think. Find out how much@airbnb.com host. Joseph Goldstein. Sam Harris, welcome back to the show.
- [08:15]
Joseph Goldstein
Thanks, Dan.
- [08:16]
Sam Harris
Great to see you both.
- [08:18]
Dan Harris
Okay, let's get started. As I've joked to both of you, preparing both of you for this conversation has been like negotiating the Dayton Accord. So let's, let's start with the subject of non duality. And let me tee this up for a second. Sam and I have talked about non duality on this show. I think it's such an important issue, it's great to revisit it. Joseph, I don't think you and I have really gotten into it in such a big way. So let me just start with a really overarching question of what, what do you mean when you use the term non duality? And as an add on, what does it matter to the rank and file meditator?
- [08:55]
Joseph Goldstein
One of the things that came out of our, our endless back and forth about this, both this conversation and this topic, I took a little deeper dive into really researching how this term non duality has been used. And I was kind of surprised in a way, although a little bit familiar with it, that it really can refer to several different things. And so it does feel important first to understand the different ways that the term non duality can be used and then to define how we're using it in any particular context. Just one other kind of footnote. When I was looking at the different meanings of it, I was struck by the fact that some meanings really cross traditions, that in all the Theravada, in Mahayana, Vajrayana, some of the meanings of non duality, the same one can be found in all of them. And other meanings of non duality are really specific to particular traditions. So I thought that was pretty interesting. And perhaps one of the reasons for some confusion, because if we're not really precise about how we're using the term, then it's going to be hard to have conversations about it with anyone. There were, I think, around four or five different meanings how the term non duality was used, one that is kind of uncontroversial and it's really quite limited. I think in the Theravada tradition, one of the ways it's used, there are other meanings of non duality in the tradition also, but one of them is just the non duality of the unified mind in absorption. In Jhana practice, you know, where there's that unification in the absorption, it could be like the infinite space or infinite consciousness and a total unification in that.
- [11:06]
Dan Harris
Can you. I hate interrupting any Guest. But particularly you. But because this is a conversation that can get a little abstruse, I want to make sure to police the use of terms.
- [11:17]
Joseph Goldstein
Yeah.
- [11:18]
Dan Harris
When you say absorption and Jhna, what does that mean?
- [11:21]
Joseph Goldstein
Okay, so in the Theravada tradition and in the early Buddhist suttas, the Buddha makes a lot of reference to the development of deep states of concentration. You know, and there's a. A series of ascending levels of absorption where the mind is unified on a single object. So it's the fact that it's unified on a single object that it could be expressed as being non dual in that state. And Jhna is just the polyword for these different states of deep absorption or unification of mind. So that's the basic meaning of it. This meaning of non duality I think is very straightforward. And other traditions don't give that much importance to Jhna as part of the practice, this level of samadhi. So I just wanted to mention this. This is not really the one that's most interesting to me. So a few of the other meanings or ways the term is being used across traditions is the non duality between existence and non existence. So that duality is collapsed in the understanding that one can say or claim things to be either existent or non existent. And that's reflective in the law of dependent origination, that everything arises out of conditions and passes away. So to say things are existent doesn't acknowledge the continual passing away of things. And to say things are non existent doesn't acknowledge the arising. So dependent origination just collapses that dichotomy. And so that's one way the term non dual is being used with reference to the duality of existence and non existence. It's a little bit technical, but I've come across that a lot in teachings in various traditions. Another meaning of non duality, and this is really specific to particular traditions, does not cross over the non duality of Samsara and Nirvana, which is a very common expression in Mahayana and Vajrayana teachings. And it's based on a certain metaphysics of what Nirvana means in those traditions. In Theravada, the distinction between Nirvana and Samsara is very definitive because the meaning of Nirvana is different in that tradition than the later ones. So non duality here is the non duality of Samsara and Nirvana, but it's very tradition specific, that particular meaning.
- [14:35]
Dan Harris
I'm going to jump in again.
- [14:36]
Joseph Goldstein
Yeah.
- [14:37]
Dan Harris
Can you define Mahayana, Vajrayana, Samsara and Nirvana and Theravada?
- [14:44]
Joseph Goldstein
Okay. Do you have a couple of hours?
- [14:47]
Sam Harris
Your question is Samsara.
- [14:50]
Joseph Goldstein
Good point, Sam.
- [14:52]
Dan Harris
Wait, wait, wait, Sam. I thought our implicit deal was any abuse verbally was going to be directed at Joseph.
- [14:59]
Joseph Goldstein
Yeah, you can abuse Dan. That's okay.
- [15:03]
Sam Harris
I already have. Minus one point. I'm keeping score.
- [15:07]
Joseph Goldstein
So the teachings all began with the historical Buddha, who lived somewhere around between 500 and 400 BCE and after his death, and over many centuries, the teachings transformed and evolved and changed in different ways. So Theravada is the name of one of the early traditions of the teachings. It means path of the elders. But then as Buddhism spread, Mahayana was a later development in the teachings, and it began to emphasize the Bodhisattva ideal, that is practicing for the attainment of Buddhahood in the sense of really practicing to attain the Buddha mind. You know, all of this, there's footnotes to everything I'm saying now, so. But I'm trying to just give an overarching thing. So Theravada was an earlier expression of the teachings. Mahayana came later. And after that, when Buddhism was brought to Tibet, another whole tradition developed of Vajrayana, which we know mostly now through Tibetan Buddhism, that includes many different kinds of practices, but one that we've talked a lot about are the Zochen practice and Mahamudra practice, which are quite explicitly expressed as non dual traditions. Does that cover what you were hoping for, Dan?
- [16:54]
Dan Harris
Yes, absolutely. It did leave out Samsara and Nirvana. And I know that's a particularly tricky. A deceptively simple or complex question, actually, because the definitions of Samsara and Nirvana are different, as you referred to, depending on the tradition. But can you just give us a brief overview?
- [17:12]
Joseph Goldstein
Yeah. So in the Theravada tradition, Samsara refers to all conditioned phenomena, everything that arises because of causes, and therefore impermanent, kind of unreliable, because everything's impermanent, you know, and selfless. So Samsara is just every aspect of our experience, including awareness. Because in Theravada, awareness itself, consciousness itself is seen as dependently arising as a conditioned phenomena. In Theravada, Nirvana is that reality. It's been referred to with a lot of different. I don't know if epithets is the right word. Unborn, unformed, uncreated, unfabricated, a lot of UN's in it. But the key point in understanding different traditions is that in this notion of Nirvana, it transcends awareness, it transcends consciousness in the later traditions. Okay, I'm going to allude to something which is going to lead to another definition of the non dual. But for example, in Zo Chen, which is part of the Vajrayana tradition, non duality refers to the inseparable unity of clarity or the knowing aspect of mind awareness, the inseparable unity of awareness and emptiness. And nirvana is seen as being the recognition of that unity. And Samsara is described as that delusion of not seeing that unity. So in that way of understanding, the quality of awareness is seen as unconditioned. An unconditioned awareness which has this clarity aspect of knowing, but also it's empty aspect, insubstantial, selfless, can't be found. And yet the knowing is there. And so that's the basic difference in the understanding of Samsara and nirvana. In the earlier tradition, nirvana transcends awareness. In the later traditions, awareness itself can be experienced as the ultimate reality.
- [20:00]
Dan Harris
I'm going to ask a question that eventually I want to direct at Sam too. But I can imagine at this point in the conversation some of the folks that I'm describing as kind of rank and file meditators might be thinking, what does this matter to me? I'm just trying to be less stressed, less owned by my emotions.
- [20:17]
Sam Harris
Yes, I'm prepared to weigh in on that. But Joseph, you didn't get to your final definition of non duality. You need to land the plane.
- [20:25]
Joseph Goldstein
I'm glad you're keeping track. Yeah, you're paying attention.
- [20:30]
Sam Harris
Good.
- [20:31]
Joseph Goldstein
So the last one, the last definition of non duality, which in some way may be the most relevant as we begin to look at how it impacts, you know, just us as practitioners. And that is the non non duality as being the non separation of observer and observed. So the dualistic perception would be there's an observer and then that which is observed and seeing that duality. So one meaning of non duality is the collapse of that subject object distinction. And this meaning of non duality can be found across traditions. And this is the one that I think we might unpack as having impact in how we're living in the world and how we're experiencing things. To respond to that question, which I think is fundamental to this whole discussion, is what does it matter? Sam and I, and you have rather philosophic minds so we can get into this just for the joy of the discussion of it. But in terms of for just a practitioner who just wants to have a little more ease in their lives, I think the bottom line in all the traditions is coming to the end of suffering and what alleviates suffering in our minds in our lives and to see whether any of the things I mentioned or how they would contribute to the end of suffering or not. For me, anyway, that's the bottom line. That's the point of it all. It's not about some philosophic view, apart from does it alleviate suffering or not. So again, for me, that is really the fundamental question as we discuss duality, non duality, and anything else we might get into.
- [22:37]
Sam Harris
Yeah, well, I agree with that last part, certainly, that that is the fundamental question. Actually, Joseph, I have a question for you about the traditions, though. Is it your understanding that the radical disjunction between nibbana and samsara in the Theravada tradition is throughout the tradition? Or does it change as you go, let's say, from the Burmese Mahasi Sayadaw construal of it to something like the Thai forest tradition where they're dealing with precisely the same Abhidhamma claims and the same view?
- [23:09]
Joseph Goldstein
That's a really good point, Fem. Within Theravada, there are many lineages within the tradition. Theravada is the kind of Buddhism practiced in Sri Lanka, in Burma, in Thailand, Cambodia, and then Vietnam is some mix of Mahayana and Theravada. The Thai view, I think, is closer to, in some respect, to the Zochen view, because some of the Thai forest teachers do talk about an unconditioned awareness. I don't know how because I'm not intimately familiar with that tradition. I don't know the range of understandings that are contained within it. So I'm just familiar really with a few teachers in that. But I would say that within that view of the Thai forest tradition, I don't think it would be in accord with.
- [24:15]
Dan Harris
With.
- [24:18]
Joseph Goldstein
Classical Theravada teachings. Now, somebody in the Thai fars tradition who's really, you know, experienced in it might take issue with that statement. So when I say the classical teachings, I'm basing it on kind of the view, the Sri Lankan view, the Burmese view. But even as you know, there's this really quite brilliant German monk immersed in what he calls Early Buddhism. Right. So really just going back to the Pali suttas and not any of the later commentaries. So he distinguishes himself from Theravada.
- [24:59]
Sam Harris
You're talking about Analyo or Analio.
- [25:02]
Joseph Goldstein
Yeah, and that's why he refers to it as Early Buddhism, even before the development of Theravada. And he also would say that that Thai view is not classical based on the Suttas. However, I've read from really wonderful teachers in the Thai forest tradition of how they try to base that understanding of an unconditioned awareness with Sutta references. We might say there's some controversy here, but for the most part I would say that distinction is characteristic of Theravada.
- [25:43]
Sam Harris
A couple things to say. One is I'm not especially interested in the metaphysics. I think I share Joseph's bias here that it really is all about suffering and the end of suffering and what works and what helps and how people can recognize what is available in the present moment so as to experience that difference between suffering and the end of suffering. My interest in the metaphysics extends, however, to the. I think the empirical fact that each of these views is in some important respect self confirming. Which is to say, if you hold one, you really can practice in such a way as to seem to discover that it is in fact true and that has certain consequences with respect to this question of what is sufficient to relieve suffering. So in my view you can suffer quite unnecessarily with the dualistic view and yet all the while seem to validate it and ramify it based on your moment to moment experience of mindfulness. Right. And I believe I have some experience doing that about which I've complained for years. And Joseph has been quite hard hearted and judgmental of my complaints, which he should look into.
- [26:57]
Joseph Goldstein
Talk to you around number two. Number two, Sam.
- [27:03]
Sam Harris
Okay, back to the high wire. So the energy that you sometimes hear from me in debating Joseph on this topic is coming from this sense of urgency around the difference between suffering and the end of suffering that is to be realized by resolving this debate in favor of non duality.
- [27:21]
Joseph Goldstein
So what definition of non duality are you using here? This is where it gets confusing.
- [27:26]
Sam Harris
I'll definitely get there. But one more point about the metaphysics or about just the difference in this view, or I guess this is one species of non duality that you just mentioned. Joseph, the reason why a non dual construal of Samsara and Nirvana makes sense, I think it should make sense to you, just logically, is that clearly in every tradition, even within the Burmese construal of the Theravada, is that it's possible to be an Arhant or to be a Buddha in Samsara with your eyes open, teaching the Dharma and talking to people and eating lunch and making decisions and obviously experiencing the full range of phenomenal existence. You see and hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, thinking moment by moment. There has to be a way to do that that's compatible with the freedom of An Arhant or a Buddha. So what is that? What is that state? And is it possible to recognize that directly? Right. The non dualistic schools like Dzogchen and Mahamudra, but even outside of the Buddhist tradition, I mean the Advaita tradition in India generally, that goes nominally in the bin of Hinduism, and you can add Zen to this and a bunch of other lineages, they all seem to agree that it's possible to recognize the mind of the Buddha, the open eyed mind of the Buddha, directly, that it's available now. And in some sense it's coincident with what people are mistaking for their ordinary dualistic consciousness, which is to say, if you're just sitting there reading your email in a dualistic samsaric entangled frame of mind, it's possible to have that same experience of reading your email as a Buddha would have that experience, or as an Arhant, as an enlightened being would have that experience. There's just. You have to find that specific orbit in your conscious mind or you have to find that kind of. You have to cease to do something that is obscuring that way of seeing in this next moment. And you can do that without turning the lights out, without going elsewhere, without schlepping up the mountain from the base, without doing lots of work. It's actually, it is in fact coincident with your experience in this moment. And there's a, an act of misperception, a kind of false cognition, an illusion that is present that has to be cut through. And so I would just say pre, theoretically or just on the basis of no experience, just a priori, there's a reason to think that that would be the case because all these traditions claim that it's totally possible to be a Buddha who drives a car or walks across the street without getting run over. And obviously that Buddha is seeing and hearing and smelling and tasting and touching, Right? So your three definitions of non duality, leaving aside Jhna, all sort of collapse into the last one in my experience and what I believe is in fact the view of Dzogchen, which is to say that when you overcome this false distinction, this illusory distinction between subject and object in the moment of experience, right? So you're seeing the full contents of your visual field. There's this sense of there being a seer and things seen. If you look into that matter closely enough in the way that would be recommended by a Dzogchen teacher or any of these other non dual teachers, it's possible to recognize that that dichotomy is false and that what in fact exists is this open and inexpressible condition which in Dzogchen is called rigpo, which is their non dual awareness. You can call it consciousness, you can call it awareness, or you can call it emptiness. And those two designations, consciousness, awareness, rigpa on the one side or emptiness on the other, strike a slightly different emphasis. I mean, the consciousness and awareness is the first person character of it, like what it's like to be you. Emptiness is more the kind of third person descriptive character of what's left when you cease to divide reality into parts and into this basic subject object framing. That's where it seems to me those three other definitions of non duality kind of merge. Because when you no longer have a sense that you're the subject and everything is still appearing from this Ogtian point of view, it's not true to say that it's now one thing. It's not this monistic fusing of everything. It's not a unity experience, although it's easy to see how people could kind of misdescribe it that way. It's not just one thing because everything in all its diversity continues to appear. You haven't been reduced to just kind of some blob lack of intelligence where you can no longer discriminate. If someone says, can you hear the bird? Yes, you can hear the bird. And yet hearing from the perspective of there being no one who hears leaves a continuous open and inexpressible totality which has a kind of paradoxical quality to it. Right? So in some sense a bird is not really a bird, Right? So this is where those other notions of emptiness come in. In a slightly different sense, like the first one you gave Joseph was with respect to dependent origination, which is to assert the existence of something is to deny impermanence. And yet to deny its existence is to deny that it arose in the first place. So there's this kind of inscrutable non duality there. I would change the emphasis a little bit and move it from impermanence to just the fact that this is kind of more of like a Majamica view of the situation. Things don't have an independent existence even when they're present in some basic sense, Right? So like the borders of things are specified conceptually. And when you erode your hold on those concepts, you begin to see that the mountain isn't really quite a mountain, even though something seems to be happening. Right? So first there is a mountain, then there is no mountain, then there is, but then there is state that final state, the non dual version of it is. You recognize that in some sense it's the mountain, as though seen in a mirror. The reality of anything is provisional and is somehow emergent out of this totality that is in fact inexpressible and is coincident with awareness.
- [33:39]
Dan Harris
Just. I'm going to stay with the pointy edge of the stick here in terms of what does this matter? How does this matter for a regular person? And I think what you said there was something to the effect of if you can tap into what we're calling non dual awareness, then you don't take your anger, your panic, whatever afflictive emotion so seriously. And therefore it is way less afflictive. Maybe zero percent afflictive.
- [34:10]
Sam Harris
Yes. I'd like to bring in one other term here that Joseph is very fond of because I think it will help us dissect the difference here, if a difference exists. So Joseph often wants to say that all of this, everything we've just said, is just academic and of kind of secondary importance. Because the real promise of the Dharma, the real practice and the purpose toward which any one of these methods, whatever their metaphysical views, is applied is non clinging. Right? Non clinging is the practice, and that is what liberates the mind. And so the Dzogchen tradition and the Theravada tradition have a different view about what it takes to practice non clinging. Well, okay, but there's still where the rubber meets the road is are you clinging or are you not? That's the difference.
- [35:00]
Dan Harris
It might be helpful to just say what clinging is right there.
- [35:03]
Sam Harris
I think we might find some difference of opinion. That's part of the rub there. But. So Joseph, just feel free to respond to that. But I do have a. I would love to complete the thought about how this relates to the difference between the two views.
- [35:16]
Joseph Goldstein
This notion of clinging I would ascribe to that, but it would take some further explanation of why. And one of the difficulties which I'm beginning to notice in the conversation is that you have a young brain and can remember everything.
- [35:37]
Sam Harris
Not so young.
- [35:38]
Joseph Goldstein
And I have an old brain. And there were a lot of points you made. And each one I wanted to respond to.
- [35:47]
Sam Harris
This is, look at this polite way of saying that I'm long winded. Sam, you clearly like the sound of your own voice.
- [35:59]
Dan Harris
Coming up. Sam and Joseph talk about whether you can really stop clinging if you still see the world in a dualistic way. How shifting from I'm aware to awareness knowing can open up a whole new level of freedom. And the difference between being calm and being truly. You know those moments when someone just takes care of something for you. That's what ATT is doing with the AT T guarantee. Staying connected matters. That's why AT and T has connectivity you can depend on or they will proactively make it right. That's the AT T guarantee. Because staying connected isn't optional, it's essential. And AT and T wants you to feel that somebody's got your back. Terms and conditions apply. Visit att.comguarantee for details. @ T connecting Changes everything Today's episode is brought to you by Fabletics. I was working out this morning in my Fabletics. I had actually been thinking a lot lately about the fact that I work out all the time, but my workout gear is just busted. And then Fablet swooped in as an advertiser on this show, sent me a bunch of stuff and now I look and feel great while I'm hitting the gym. But this is not just about stuff to wear in the gym. If you're like me and you live in activewear, you really can never have enough of this stuff. But the good stuff usually costs a fortune. Which is why I'm really into Fabletics now. I get pieces that feel premium and perform like the expensive brands without the crazy price tag. Becoming a Fabletics VIP is simple. When you sign up as a new VIP, you get 80% off everything and after that the membership is about 60 bucks a month unless you skip that monthly fee gives you exclusive membership benefits including a credit you can use toward a full outfit or bundle up to a hundred dollars. On the 1st of every month they send you an email and you decide if you want to purchase a member credit or just skip the money month. The cool part is that member credit isn't just for you. You can use it to grab something for your partner or your friend or whoever. The fit and feel are totally dialed in. No waistbands, rolling down, joggers that actually keep their shape, jackets that are warm without the bulk. It solves many of the issues I've had historically with activewear while still being soft, breathable and durable enough for workouts, travel or everyday wear. They're not just about good deals, they're about also doing the eco friendly stuff. Half of their fabrics are made from recycled materials and the company has been carbon neutral since 2021, which I think is awesome. Treat yourself to gear that looks good, feels good and doesn't break the bank with Fabletics. Go to Fabletics.com happier and sign up as a VIP and get 80% off everything that's Fabletics.com happier.
- [38:55]
Sam Harris
All right, let me just give you something very punctate to respond to. I do think this will sharpen things up. So let's agree that clinging is really, if it's not the only important thing, it's among the most important things. It's really kind of at the center of the bullseye of what we're talking about here, however we define it. And I would say that it is possible to have a view of clinging that is dualistic, that allows you to practice in a way where it seems like you are not clinging and in fact you're no longer clinging on the basis of this view, and yet you're still perceiving reality dualistically. Maybe an analogy would help here. So there's this classic analogy, and I'm not even sure it's Buddhist, it may just be Indian. But this classic analogy in the Dharma of mistaking a coiled rope for a snake. You see a coiled object in the corner of a room, you glance at it and you think it's a snake. And then on further inspection you realize it's a rope. Let's just, for the purposes of this analogy, let's have that realization that cutting through illusion, that's the duality, non duality, illusion. So it's duality to think it's a snake. And you recognize non duality when you recognize that it's a rope.
- [40:03]
Joseph Goldstein
Wait, wait, wait, wait. How does that follow?
- [40:06]
Sam Harris
It's not a perfect analogy. Just go with me for a second here. It's possible to practice in such a way that you still think there's a snake over there, but you have achieved real equanimity about there being a snake over there. Right? You're no longer experiencing aversion, you're no longer experiencing desire to get away. You really have a balanced mind, and yet you are still taken in by this underlying illusion that you're in the presence of a snake. And I would say that the same can be done with, with dualistic mindfulness where you feel like there's this subtle division between subject and object. Consciousness is arising spontaneously and totally unencumbered by aversion or desire. You're noticing impermanence and yet there's this snake. Again, not a perfect analogy. But the snake that is present here is this sense of subject object separation. The reason why this matters is that it can seem to be self confirming, right? And you can maintain this orbit for quite some time, at least in my experience. And yet the clinging is gone. What we're Calling, clinging in this case is the desire for experience to be any other way than it is, right? You're not pushing the unpleasantness away. You're not grasping at the pleasantness, the emotional tone of what I'm calling clinging, the contraction in the face of unpleasantness, and the graspiness in the place of pleasantness that has been relaxed. And yet duality remains. That, in my view, is a problem, a serious problem. The first claim is just that that is possible.
- [41:42]
Joseph Goldstein
Okay, I should have been taking notes because then I could go point by point, but I wasn't. So first to say that a lot of what you said I agree with. I don't see actually that much difference with some of the things you said and some of the others not. So there are a few points that just I'm remembering from the beginning in terms of your example of, yeah, of course, the Buddha's living in the world, right? And seeing, hearing, smelling. So contrasting that to the Theravada view is missing one point of the different ways Nirvana is described in Theravada. So one meaning of it is the cessation of the defilement. So the polyword for defilement or unwholesome states is kalesa. So it's called Kalesa Nirvana because it's the eradication of the defilement. The other expression or manifestation of Nibbana is within the tradition. The Theravada tradition is that experience where the very aggregates of existence are no longer there, which is in that understanding is what happens at the death of an arhant. And so there is the complete acknowledgment that the enlightened mind living in the world can live in the world. In Nirvana, so to speak, because it's referring to Kalesa Nirvana, there are no longer any causes in the mind to cause suffering. And so I'm in total agreement with you that of course the enlightened mind can live freely, completely freely in the world of conditioned phenomena. And Nirvana just has those two different meanings. So in terms of Nirvana and Samsara being the same or different, with Khaleesa Nirvana, it's the same in terms of being free, because all the Khaleesis are absent. But they're not the same in terms of the Skandha Nirvana, which is the cessation of all the aggregates. And that's where the big distinction is.
- [44:11]
Sam Harris
But the distinction is with respect to methodology. So in your view, or in the Theravada view, it is necessary to keep experiencing Skandha Nirvana in order to ultimately get to Kalesa Nirvana.
- [44:26]
Joseph Goldstein
No, no, just the opposite. Exactly the opposite.
- [44:30]
Sam Harris
Well, no, it actually goes both ways. But in your view, you need to have the lights out experience repeatedly in order to uproot the Kalesas so that you can experience Kalesa Nirvana. And the way to get to that, to the lights out experience is to rest in such equanimity the mind can enter into it in the first place.
- [44:49]
Joseph Goldstein
Yeah, to rest in equanimity. But this goes to another point of the collapse of the subject object dichotomy. There are many examples of that aspect of non duality, that collapse of subject object distinction within Theravada, both classically and in modern times. So classically, the Bahaya Sutta really expresses it in the scene, just the seen, in the herd, just the heard and the smells known. Just the known. And it's pointing to the absence of, of any subject there, of any self as subject. And so it's a very non dualistic expression of understanding and of the path of a path of practice in more modern teachings a la Joseph. There's one practice which I came to in my own practice which really was transforming and you've probably heard me give this little rap on the passive voice construction because the way we language things definitely conditions how we experience things. So if we're languaging things to ourself in the active voice, I'm knowing a sound. The I is built right into there, right? And so it's going to be reflective very often in how things are experienced, unless there's some counter practice for that. What I found was relanguaging to myself in how I'm experiencing things in the passive voice, which would be sounds being known in the passive voice. There's no selfish subject. And in fact I asked ChatGPT, what is the subject in the passive voice? If the I is not the subject, then what is the subject? And it was really interesting and it confirmed, confirmed my understanding. It said that basically the object becomes the subject. So sounds being known, sounds becomes the subject, not the object. And so when we're experiencing things with that frame, that duality of separate subject and object disappears. And it's just things being known. And the knowing and what's being known are inseparable and there's no I apart from it. And so the very thing you're talking about, I think is also found within the Theravada teaching.
- [47:49]
Dan Harris
Okay, I'm just going to jump in again because first of all, the passive voice practice has been massive for me personally But I want you to articulate exactly why that non dual experience that one can have by using the passive voice in practice matters.
- [48:08]
Joseph Goldstein
Well, yeah, it matters for a lot of the reasons, kind of Sam mentioned. First, it's effortless. Once I framed things in that way, it was totally effortless. I started doing it in walking, but then it could be with anything. And as soon as I got my mind into that linguistic frame and at first I had to remind myself of it, but at this point it's just automatic. Things are being known effortlessly, spontaneously, sounds, thought and whatever is arising and being known. Which metaphysics aside, seems to me very resonant with Dzogen practice. It doesn't feel that different to me. That's one point. Another point. Going to your question or exploring a little bit more your question of why does this matter? Ordinary practitioner, what's the importance of this? I think it's important to ask what is the cause of suffering that non duality teachings in the way you're describing Sam addresses? Because okay, I'm going to throw this in as something. Somebody just told me this and I've come across it in different writings by Kensei Rinpoche also, who's a great Tibetan master, but Silkny Rinpoche, who's a contemporary Xogen teacher, he was giving a retreat. I wasn't at the retreat. So this is somebody who was there told me about this exchange.
- [49:50]
Sam Harris
This is either better or worse than ChatGPT in terms of its authenticity.
- [49:55]
Joseph Goldstein
If it was just that, I might have that degree of skepticism. But it reinforced what I've read very often. In fact, I think I've sent this to you, sir, although I have one email in my draft folder that I never sent to you. So what I'm about to say might be in that email I never sent where Kenzie Rinpoche says in awareness there's no clinging. And if there's clinging, it's not awareness.
- [50:22]
Sam Harris
Yeah.
- [50:22]
Joseph Goldstein
And so what Sokhni Rinpoche said, as I heard it, you know, secondhand, he was asking the student on the retreat, well, why is Rigpa important? Reasonable question. And they gave various answers and he ended up saying, no, it's none of what you're saying. It's because in Rigpa there's non clinging. And so I think it has a more essential part of the Zogian teachings then you give credit for.
- [50:56]
Dan Harris
Sam, before you get into whatever ancient tit for tat you're attempted to get into. I will get back to it, but I just, I want to stay with the why does this matter for a second? Because, Joseph, I don't think you really answered the question from a very basic level. The ability to. To be aware of whatever's arising in our mind, especially if it's provoking unhappiness or suffering, without claiming it as ours, or even claiming the awareness of the thing as ours is inherently and deeply freeing. Am I going in the right direction? And if so, can you just say a little bit more about that before I let Sam come in and do whatever violence he's going to do?
- [51:40]
Joseph Goldstein
Okay, so one of the problems may be, I mean, one thing I have to thank you for, Sam, is all your comments do inspire a lot of reflection. Makes me think about these things more than I probably would otherwise. So in some way we're talking, or I've been talking about clinging as the cause of suffering and therefore it's experiences of non clinging, which is the end of suffering. However, in a technical sense, clinging has one very kind of specific connotation. There are other qualities in the mind that also are creative of suffering that express a slightly different aspect. So for a few examples, the quality in the mind of. In Pali, the term used is mana. It's translated as conceit. But conceit in this sense, the fundamental meaning of it is the feeling or sense of I am. In a wide variety. We could think of it as I am over time. You know, I was this in the past, I'll be doing this in the future. If there's some sense of an I am in there, that's conceit and that's a contraction that's a source of suffering. So technically conceit and clinging are two different things. But when I refer to non clinging, I'm really talking about it not so much in the technical Abhidhamma definition, which is a very specific way of relating to things. I'm including in it things like clinging, desire, grasping conceit to anything. But conceit is the I am wrong view is the belief in a self craving is the sense of this belongs to me.
- [53:42]
Sam Harris
I think we can add one more piece which seems to be related here. I mean, you can talk about it separately, but it does seem to be attached to the same erroneous cognition which is identification with thought, the sense that this thought is me. So, Joseph, but you've just stumbled upon, I think the core truth of Dzogchen, which in my view the only real difference between clinging and non clinging that you need to consider is the difference between duality and non duality. Right? I mean, it's cutting through dualistic clinging. It's cutting through dualistic fixation, to use the common Dzogchen phrase that unties all these knots. This is what Kensing Rinpoche was saying. If he did in fact say that if it's awareness, there's no clinging. If there's clinging, there's not awareness, meaning rigpa, meaning non dual awareness. If you cutting through the knot of dualism untangles all these things. And I'm glad you brought in mana conceit, because that's just another shading of the same illusion, which is the sense of I am the same subject that was here a moment ago or last year. This is why it's a little question begging to say it's all a matter of clinging without really defining what you mean by clinging from the Dzogchen side. The root clinging really is in this subject, object dichotomy that is cut through and recognized in rigpa. And then all of this is resolved. And it is from that view and in that experience, an experience of what you're calling Kalesa Nibbana. This is where some of the paradoxes of the Vajrayana view also come in. That's true even in the presence of Kalesa. So let's say you feel a moment of anger or aversion which testifies to your own enlightenment, know certainly from the Theravada view. But that moment of anger recognized becomes the same non dual openness and emptiness and great perfection. And the crucial bit is that that's true even before the physiology of anger has dissipated. You know these weird Tantric phrases you meet in Vajrayana teaching, like you know, you know, anger dawns as wisdom. How is that anything other than just weird PR for this hierarchical view? It's empirically true when you can experience it, when your mindfulness is such that you're recognizing anger as a mere expression of the totality of emptiness from a non dual point of view. What I would argue, and this is why it matters, Dan, is that it's possible to practice in a dualistic way such that you're noticing anger mindfully. And your mindfulness then appears to be this sort of remedial, provisional, gradually cultivating practice which is not revealing to you in that moment the utter freedom that is compatible with emptiness and non dual recognition. What it's revealing to you is this sort of this yet another moment of kind of balanced mediocrity. It's a vigil. The vigil continues. You're still waiting to get somewhere, even as you're balancing the factors of equanimity. And I mean, this is the crucial bit for me, Joseph, is that either a moment of mindfulness is good enough or it isn't. And you can't fake it. You can hope it's good enough, you can wish it was good enough, but the question is, is it really good enough? Is it really a moment of freedom? Or are you still waiting on some subtle level for your experience to change, to become enlightened, to get somewhere? And so my question to you is, why isn't Kalesa Nirvana good enough? Like if Kalesa Nirvana is really available in the next moment, I mean, you might doubt whether it is, but if you agree that it is, if your passive voice gets you to a recognizable experience of Kalesa Nibbana, wherein you don't find the evidence of your unenlightenment even in the presence of anger that just arose the moment before and now it's just this inscrutably empty display of energy, why isn't it good enough to experience Kalesa Nibbana in that next moment?
- [58:10]
Joseph Goldstein
Can you summarize that question, Dan?
- [58:13]
Dan Harris
I think what he's saying is that most of us practice mindfulness, or many of us practice mindfulness in a way where anger might arise and we feel like the subject, the point of awareness, witnessing this anger separate from us in our consciousness in some way. And we might be able to reduce our suffering by breaking or by putting the anger through a cheese grater. You know, like seeing that it manifests as rumbling in the chest, redness in the ears, starburst of self righteous thoughts.
- [58:47]
Sam Harris
And no, no longer being identified with the thoughts that were making you angry.
- [58:51]
Dan Harris
Correct. But that is missing a crucial non. Dual piece, which is to see that by separating yourself out and viewing it dualistically, you are missing an aspect of freedom that is not available in the way he's saying you teach, Joseph, as opposed to the way he teaches. How'd I do, Sam?
- [59:14]
Sam Harris
I wouldn't have put that final invidious flourish on it, but you could take that as implied. Yeah. The only other thing I would add is that you are condemned for that to be so. I mean, everyone has to start where they start, right? And everyone, basically everyone starts from a dualistic place where they feel like they're a subject having to learn to meditate and they want to get somewhere and they're suffering. And so the dualism and the seeking and the distance of the goal is all implied by the very structure of the practice in the beginning. The unique capacity of a non dual insight is that it obviates all of that. Then you can then practice the goal so that there's no distance between you and the goal. And if there is a distance, if there's a seeming distance between you and the goal, that's just the way things seem. And then you are condemned to feel that way about each moment of awareness.
- [60:08]
Dan Harris
Coming up, Joseph and Sam talk about the Bahia Sutta and what it means to really see and hear without a me behind the experience. Whether freedom is something you can touch right now or only after years of practice and why different Buddhist traditions disagree on what the ultimate goal even is. This time of year. It's sensory overload everywhere but one feeling that we're all chasing Cozy and Bombas has the socks, slippers, tees, and basically everything you need to get there. There are lots of ways to get 10 happier. I would say comfortable socks have to fall into that category. I got some Bombas socks recently and I love them. In fact, my wife and I have been competing to see who can win wear them. So maybe that is reducing my happiness just a little bit because it's leading to marital stress. Anyway, the socks are great. Super comfortable, super cozy. And the sock scientists at BOMBAS have found a way to channel that energy into everything from slippers with the sink in cushioning to satisfyingly weighty teas. And that feeling? It does not stop after one wear, it keeps going. I can attest to that. Also worth noting, BOMBAS makes makes gifting easy. They've got answers for all of your gifting questions like what do I get my son's new marathon training girlfriend? Bomba's running socks have sweat, wicking and impact cushioning. What about your neighbor's fussy newborn baby? Bombas fit like a hug and they're designed to feel soft and stay snug on even the wiggliest toes. One of the best things about BOMBAS is that they're mission oriented. For every pair of Bombas you purchase, Bombas donates one to somebody facing homelessness on your behalf. So anytime you get something cozy, somebody else does too. Head over to bombas.com happier and use the code happier for 20% off your first purchase. That's B O M B A S.com happier code, happier at checkout, Cold mornings holiday plans. This is when I just want my wardrobe to be simple. Stuff that looks sharp, feels good, and stuff I'll actually wear. For me, that is Quint's. Quint's pieces make great gifts too this season's lineup is simple but smart and easy with Quint's 50 Mongolian cashmere sweaters that feel like an everyday luxury. I've got I think four of those sweaters by the way. Also wool coats that are equal parts stylish and durable. Denim nails the fit and everyday comfort all at a fraction of what you'd expect to pay. By partnering directly with ethical factories and top artisans, Quint cuts out the middleman to deliver premium quality at half the cost of other high end brands. So you can give luxury quality pieces as gifts without the luxury price tag. Just to say, Quint has offerings that extend well beyond clothing. They also have home goods, stuff for your bathroom and kitchen, stuff for travel. It's an expanding and exciting brand. Give and get timeless holiday staples that last this season with quints go to quints.com happier for free shipping on your order and 365 day returns. Now available in Canada too, that is Q U I N C E.com/happier free shipping and 365 day returns quints.com happier. Just to put a fine point on the goal in this context is back to this Bahia sutta that Joseph referenced earlier, which is a classic just for the listener who might not remember it. This is something the Buddha is said to have said in a so called sutta, which is a teaching of the Buddha in the classical texts where some guy named Bahia asked him about the nature of freedom and he said something like in the seeing is just the scene, in the hearing is just the herd. So with the anger it's just there's no me witnessing my anger, it's just anger angering. And there's an enormous amount of freedom in that because you don't need to take it so personally.
- [64:25]
Sam Harris
Well, even anger. Anger isn't even anger at that point really. I mean again, it's just a display of awareness or emptiness, depending on how you want to describe it. Let's not open the door to the crazy wisdom teachings and all the dysfunction that follows thereupon in Vajrayana Buddhism. I'm not recommending that people not view anger as something to be avoided or mitigated, et cetera. All of that's fine as a matter of practice. I'm just saying that either a moment of mindfulness really delivers the goods of freedom no matter what's happening or it doesn't, or it's a method that you're applying to an otherwise problematic circumstance. That is Samsara. In my view, only non dual mindfulness cashes the check of Samsara and Nirvana are one. Right. Otherwise you might believe that, but you're not experiencing that. And there's no reason to say that.
- [65:20]
Joseph Goldstein
Okay. It's so much and so much heresy.
- [65:24]
Sam Harris
I hit you with buckets of heresy so that you with your thimble can just try to clean them up first.
- [65:32]
Joseph Goldstein
I think it's really important to recognize that the goals are different. And so to use the frame of Zo Chen and non duality as you're expressing it posits a certain understanding of what Nirvana is.
- [65:55]
Sam Harris
Well, it need not, Joseph. It actually need not. We could leave all of the metaphysics and the views aside. I'm just talking about certain experiences are available in the present moment, and you're either having them or not in the present moment.
- [66:10]
Joseph Goldstein
Yes. So. Okay. I think it may have more important implications. I'll leave it aside for the moment. Just as in Zochen, where people are given the pointing out instructions and so they're beginning to practice non dual awareness, that does not mean that people are actually experiencing it again. I think it was sokni or maybe somebody else. You fake it till you make it. You keep practicing in this way and that way until you finally land at what it really means. But it's not like that understanding is immediately available. There will be some people for whom it is, but I would suggest that it's much rarer than you may believe, because it's possible to be approximating what's called rigor, but not really.
- [67:16]
Sam Harris
Okay, so let me just translate that back into my language, just so that doesn't really. That's not a counterpoint to anything I would want to say, because in my language, that's just to say that some significant percentage of people try to practice Zogchen and they fail. Or they might say they're practicing it, but they're not. There's an important difference there, and I would totally acknowledge that that's the case. But that's not Dzogchen practice. That's the failure mode of the Dzogchen teachings.
- [67:45]
Joseph Goldstein
Yeah. So I would say the same thing is true of the deeper understanding of mindfulness and that what you're describing, that people can be practicing mindfulness in a dualistic way in the way you're talking about. But when you really get down to what mindfulness in its fullness or in its depth means, many people are. They're not practicing that they're practicing mindfulness in the same way that people are practicing Zogen, but haven't really quite landed yet at the essential element of it. And it's the same thing with mindfulness. So just a few examples of this. People often conflate recognition and mindfulness. So you're practicing and anger, to use your example, moment of anger arises and we recognize it. We could name it anger and we're experiencing it in some way. But that recognition is not sufficient. It's necessary, but it's not sufficient. Mindfulness has a deeper dimension to it than just that. And one of the dimensions of it is the mind in that moment, free of greed and hatred and delusion. So it's just to say that in both practices there's kind of an entry, a long Runway to get to the place where we're actually practicing with the full experience of realization. Either of what non dual awareness is using that phrase, or what mindfulness is. Because in my experience, mindfulness, properly practiced in its fullness, is a non dual practice. Because the non duality is the freedom from the subject object dichotomy. That's one of the meanings of non duality. And that comes at a certain point of understanding and development. As expressed in the Bahyasutta, as expressed in the passive voice construction.
- [70:22]
Sam Harris
But Joseph, you're ignoring all of the dualistic constructions that are even more canonical. I mean, just the fact that consciousness is considered to be this separately arising, impermanent conditioned phenomenon that is known.
- [70:37]
Joseph Goldstein
Not separately arising, dependently arising.
- [70:40]
Sam Harris
No, dependently arising. But it's separate from the thing that is known. Right. So there's the sight and the consciousness that is arising.
- [70:46]
Joseph Goldstein
No, no.
- [70:47]
Sam Harris
Well, there's the object. Consciousness knows its object.
- [70:50]
Joseph Goldstein
Okay. Do you see this?
- [70:53]
Sam Harris
I do.
- [70:54]
Dan Harris
The pad of paper, what is it?
- [70:56]
Sam Harris
This is like the flower for Mahakassapa.
- [71:00]
Joseph Goldstein
So what shape is this?
- [71:02]
Sam Harris
All right. It's a rectangle.
- [71:05]
Joseph Goldstein
Yeah.
- [71:05]
Sam Harris
And it looks gray on your camera. Yeah, yeah.
- [71:09]
Joseph Goldstein
Okay.
- [71:10]
Sam Harris
So its grayness and its rectangleness are combined in the same instance.
- [71:14]
Joseph Goldstein
Exactly. They're inseparable. The color has a shape and the shape has a color and. Right, but they're inseparable. Is that understanding. If you are highlighting the color or the shape, it will seem dualistic. If you're highlighting the inseparability, it's non dual. And same thing with consciousness. The knowing and an object are inseparable.
- [71:39]
Sam Harris
The crucial difference from my point of view is just a matter of practice and a matter of kind of psychological well being is. Is the experience of mindfulness drawn right out of the Bahiya sutta. So in the seen, Just the seen and the heard. Just the heard and the cognized Just the cognized. Right. So that's just this kind of radical evaporation of a sense that there's one who's doing anything or being mindful. Is that synonymous with every moment of mindfulness, even offer a treat in one's ordinary life? Or is that some sort of peak experience that one achieves only by virtue of real continuity and stability and equanimity along the progress of insight far out there, sort of on the map?
- [72:25]
Dan Harris
Can I answer that one, Joseph, as your student?
- [72:27]
Joseph Goldstein
Yes.
- [72:27]
Dan Harris
This I can say with a kind of definitive tone. The passive voice practice can be done anytime, anywhere, whether you're meditating or not, no matter how strong your concentration is. Just by for context, Sam referenced this earlier, but one of his historical beefs with the way Joseph teaches is that there's an aspect of you have to do this hard work, as Sam said before, like schlep up from the base of the mountain to the peak, at which point maybe you have a nirvana experience where the lights go out. But the passive voice practice is something you can do right here, right now. And if it's frustrating because some people, it doesn't click. But just for me, for example, it was just immediately obvious I'm walking down the hallway and things are being seen. Well, seen by what? And if you look for it, you won't find anything. And it's right there. It's immediate, it's not dependent upon spending seven days on retreat.
- [73:30]
Sam Harris
Okay, obviously I'm not going to doubt any of that because consciousness simply is this way and can be recognized this way. And if the passive voice technique works for you, well then great. But again, the sticking point for me is that the metaphysical view dictates a certain logic of the practice. Right? And it is possible to practice by a certain logic and with a certain view. It might all be happening in the background all the time. It may never be explicit. You don't wake up in the morning on your 17th day of a three month retreat thinking again about the metaphysical view and thinking again about the just being mindful. But the question is what is available for you to notice in each moment of mindfulness? And if it's just non dual suchness, then that's a certain experience. But if it's just more impermanence from this subtle point of view of kind of trying to build concentration and trying to get somewhere, it's a different experience and it is a self confirming experience. Again you can have the experience where that's all there is to notice. And what I'm Saying is that that can extend to a very high level of concentration and continuity and real feelings of subjective freedom and equanimity. In my experience, what's unique about the non dual approach is that again, not everyone can practice it. Not everyone has enough mindfulness to be successfully introduced to it. But if it works for you, what is revealed is that even in just the most ordinary moment of consciousness, the radical freedom of subject object delusion is available. Nothing has to change. It doesn't matter what happened a moment ago. And I would grant you, yes, that once you've recognized that the passive voices is as good an indication as any to recognize that again. But until you've recognized that, it's very easy to feel that Samsara and Nirvana are radically different. Right. And you wouldn't even know what to make of the claim that they're the same thing.
- [75:39]
Joseph Goldstein
Okay, so what is the basis of the subject object distinction? The basis of it is an identification with consciousness as being self. It's identifying with consciousness. And that's what creates the duality, that's what creates the separation. The practice of Vipassana, it obviously is taught in many different ways, but I just want to reiterate, kind of Dan's and my point, that there are ways of practicing mindfulness that brings you immediately to the non identification with consciousness because of how we are conceiving it. And that's where the paths of voice.
- [76:34]
Sam Harris
But again, in your view, or in the Theravada view, consciousness isn't good enough.
- [76:39]
Dan Harris
Really?
- [76:40]
Joseph Goldstein
No. Okay, so this is the second point I was going to make. And here's where the difference in the view of Nirvana is important. It's not just a philosophic distinction, because in the Zogen practice, as I understand it, we practice until this non dual awareness is stabilized. And that it's the recognition of the nature of that mind, which is the union of clarity and emptiness. So that just becomes the understanding or the fields in which life is taking place. And that is seen as the end point.
- [77:27]
Sam Harris
But again, there is a slight. You have to hold that pretty lightly because it really is from the point of view of Dzogchen, it's not as heavy handed as the Advaita tradition with people like, you know, Punjaji or Nisargada Maharaj, where they just castigate any efforts at meditation as being part of the illusion. Right. And also there's some Zen teachers who have done similar. But it goes halfway there, which is to say that you're not meditating on anything. I mean, that's why they call it non meditation. And you're. I mean, they're very alert to the problem of trying to make it a practice, which is a natural way of misunderstanding what there is to notice. Right? So you're not cultivating this thing, you're not trying to improve it, you're not using it as a tool. It's not a method. The path thereafter is not to overlook the way things already are. Leave it as it is.
- [78:24]
Joseph Goldstein
I understand all that, and that's not the point I'm making.
- [78:27]
Sam Harris
Okay, but 99.9% of ordinary mindfulness practitioners, I would say, don't understand all that.
- [78:34]
Joseph Goldstein
Okay, well, I'm in the exalted 1%.
- [78:36]
Sam Harris
That's my bizarre. Yes, I know you. I know you to be so.
- [78:39]
Joseph Goldstein
But that's not the point I'm making. The point I'm making is that the end goal is different. And because it's different, what do you.
- [78:50]
Sam Harris
Mean the end goal? Arhun chip vs Buddhahood, or what are you talking about?
- [78:54]
Joseph Goldstein
What I'm talking about is rigpa, the union, the inseparability of clarity, which is awareness and emptiness. That is the endpoint.
- [79:08]
Sam Harris
What's the other endpoint? And why have another endpoint, is my question to you?
- [79:12]
Joseph Goldstein
Because the endpoint, from the Theravada perspective, they would see that as still conditioned phenomena. And I'm not arguing for one or the other. I'm just saying they are different understandings of the endpoint. And for Zogen, that's the end point. And for Theravada understanding of the endpoint, it's the cessation of all of awareness itself.
- [79:43]
Sam Harris
This brings us back to where we started. Because what is the pragmatic difference if you're resting in the non dual condition of mindfulness without clinging to anything, including the sense of self, why isn't that a sufficient even from the Theravada point of view, if it's just conditioned phenomenon, why isn't that a sufficient holding pattern awaiting the Skandha Nibbana that you still subtly hope is going to happen at some point in the future?
- [80:13]
Joseph Goldstein
Because that.
- [80:14]
Sam Harris
I mean, it's equanimity, right? It's non distraction and it's equanimity. What is lacking from your point of view as a matter of practice? Let's say Mahasi said I was right about everything and you got to rub two sticks together fervently to make fire. Why isn't just resting in non dual awareness of everything as it arises, without clinging this mindfulness sufficient unto the path of the progress of Insight.
- [80:40]
Joseph Goldstein
It could be, but it depends on the understanding one has. And I think here kind of the. The metaphysical basis has some relevance. If one has the view that this is the ultimate reality, then there's no either interest or elements in the mind which will be open to the cessation of it all. And this is borne out in the different practitioners in the different traditions.
- [81:23]
Sam Harris
What do you mean? Say more about that. What do you mean it's borne out?
- [81:27]
Joseph Goldstein
Well, I think for Tibetan practitioners, cessation of it all, it's not even on the table. I mean, they think it's delusion and they think it's a dead end and a black hole and I mean, they don't talk about it at all. It's not even.
- [81:43]
Sam Harris
Well, that's why I feel like this matters. The metaphysics matters because it is self confirming.
- [81:48]
Joseph Goldstein
But on both sides it's self confirming.
- [81:50]
Sam Harris
Yeah, but from the other side, I think it's possible to practice in the kind of Mahasi way and have your repeated cessation experiences and still not know how to practice Dzogchen. That's the problem. I see, right. Non dual mindfulness is still not available even after stream entry or it's intermittently available, right?
- [82:13]
Joseph Goldstein
No, I think it's as available to one of those practitioners as to a Dzogchen practitioner.
- [82:19]
Sam Harris
Well, no, it's not, because Dzogchen is synonymous with non dual mindfulness. If you're not practicing non dual mindfulness, you're not practicing Dzogchen. I'm saying that from the Theravada side, obviously you can practice mindfulness not really emphasizing the non duality of it, because all the language, all the concepts, just what you did to Dzogchen. You said it's obvious that cessation's not important to these guys because they don't talk about it. And when you ask them about it, they roll their eyes and say, get off. That there's more important things to talk about. I'll grant you that that's the view. But conversely, within the Theravada tradition, certainly within the Burmese tradition of Theravada, there's a resolutely dualistic view. If you want to find one and all of your. And what you've added to it with passive voice, et cetera, and other kind of Zen and Zogchen vibe shifts is great for your students, but does not discount the fact that it's possible to be a pure Theravada practitioner for whom all this non duality talk doesn't make a lot of sense.
- [83:23]
Joseph Goldstein
If one acknowledges that the endpoints are different with respect to the Theravada view, there are many ways to the endpoint non dual awareness, which I think comes automatically in the course of practice. And you may disagree with that, but is my sense of that understanding because that non duality is really just an expression of non self. There's no self as subject. And that insight reveals itself very clearly at a certain point in Vipassana practice. And is there. But within the Theravada tradition, there are other means for reaching the final goal than emphasizing specifically non duality. And that's why I think that there is a commonality up to a certain point and then there's a divergence because the endpoints are different. In Zogen, there's a very direct pointing to an experience of the endpoint. In Theravada, it's not that. So there's a real difference there. The difference is because the endpoint is different. And so it's just again, not to claim one is better or worse or superior or not. It's to see, okay, what's the end point and what is one's own aspiration? And people will have different aspirations and so then they connect with the practice that supports whatever final goal they're aspiring to.
- [85:15]
Sam Harris
Well, first of all, I don't think most people, or really virtually anyone, is motivated by a abstract conception of an endpoint that may or may not be attractive to them. It's not that people are shopping for descriptions of the goal and then are finding a ton of motivation based on their favorite flavor of the goal as articulated by one tradition or another. It's much more the case that virtually everyone starts with this very compelling sense that they have a self and that that's a problem, right? And then the question is, what do you do from that starting point and the immense power of Vipassana, Theravada, Vipassana is that you can offer that person, that confused and suffering person, a practice that is totally straightforward and non paradoxical. And it's just, here, do this, right? I understand where you're stuck. I understand how things seem to you. There's a few things you should notice right now. Like for instance, you're just spending all your time lost in thought, and you're so lost in thought you can't even notice that. So here, pay attention to the breath and see if you can do that and notice how hard it is to do that. And now as you begin to train in that and begin to notice things, notice a few other things, notice impermanence and notice how everything's impermanent. Notice how you're getting a little more concentrated. And again, you can walk up from the bottom of the mountain here, or seem to in a way that is not confusing. It's not easy. It can take years and years and years. And it can be very frustrating, et cetera, et cetera. But it's not paradoxical. It's not Zen, it's not Dzogchen, it's not Advaita. It's not, you're already free. It's not Samsara Nirvana or one. It's not, you can't polish a brick into a mirror. It's not, show me your mind and I'll pacify it. It's none of that highfalutin bullshit. It's like going to the gym to get muscles, right? You got a picture of Arnold Schwarzenegger on the wall. He did it. He's going to tell you how to do it. Just start lifting heavier objects, eat more protein, lift heavy things. Non paradoxical, that is its immense strength, but that is also its weakness. The weakness is it can keep someone feeling like they've got a problem to solve now they know how to solve it. That can endure for a very, very long time. And what I'm saying is that in my experience there is a shift that is available in how one experiences mindfulness, where mindfulness no longer becomes a practice, no longer becomes a style of meditation, it no longer becomes a remedy for this apparent problem of clinging or selfhood or suffering, or it becomes a recognition of a prior condition which is always already the case, which is just non dual awareness or emptiness or whatever you want to call it. And it's available now always already. And it need not be snuck up on by virtue of any other sustained practice. It can just be recognized as just the ordinary state of consciousness in any present moment. So advice to the listener is that this can be a very frustrating thing to hear. And trying to make your experience of mindfulness non dual can be frustrating. And all the teachings around that, many of which can be found over the Waking up app or in Dzogchen teaching or Vaita teaching. And there's different flavors of methodology in talking around this liminal moment of how dualistic mindfulness becomes non dualistic mindfulness, there is a difference there to be discovered. And on some level, I would say you shouldn't be satisfied until you're satisfied. Use that frustration as a key to further inquiry. And I would say that that frustration bears witness to this predicament, which is it is possible to practice dualistically for a very long time. And the frustration of that occasion is built in to the circumstance because on some level, though, you might want to encourage a very different vibe. The vibe is a kind of a superficial change in attitude. It doesn't really give you the freedom you're looking for. Until it does, it's perhaps a bitter pill to swallow. But I would counsel honesty around the frustration, honesty around the insufficiency of mindfulness if it feels insufficient. Everyone has to start somewhere. I'm not saying you don't start with dualistic mindfulness, as virtually everyone does. Of course you do. It is the only preliminary practice to dualistic mindfulness. But I just think that it's appropriate to be frustrated if you still feel like you're working on a problem when you're meditating, when you're paying attention to the present moment.
- [90:13]
Dan Harris
Joseph, just in closing here, let's go back to your passive voice. I have heard from so many people who show up at my events and their subscribers. You know, I often will teach and give you full credit. This practice of, you know, you. I'll do some sort of stabilization, concentration practice like loving kindness or focus on the breath, and then I'll open up to open awareness with the passive voice in there. And I hear from a lot of people like, I don't get it. And so I'm just curious, what's your advice to them? My advice generally is just keep knocking at the door generally, and you might see something interesting over time, but don't get too sweaty about it. Just keep trying it gingerly and persistently. Would you agree with that? And what else would you add?
- [91:00]
Joseph Goldstein
I think that's good advice. And there are also a lot of other approaches. Everything we're discussing is really a skillful means and just kind of in my closing argument. So the teachings, the Theravada teachings, but I think this is true across all Buddhist traditions, or at least most of them, but certainly Zochen included. There's one sutta in which it says nothing whatsoever is to be clung to as I or mine. Whoever understands this, realizes this, practices this, has realized all the teachings. So if we understand the I, an attachment to the I in one form or another as being the basis of dualism, that separation of subject and object, right, Embedded in the Theravada teachings. It's just this very clear statement, in whatever way one is identified with awareness or knowing, that's a problem. And so nothing whatsoever is to be clung to or adhered to as I O is just the essence of it all, what I'm suggesting is that there are many ways to come and realize that and at different levels of realization. And just as Sam said in Dzogchen and in Vipassana, there's a lot of practice one has to do to really fully embody that understanding. One thing that I think sometimes you don't acknowledge, Sam, is that even within classical Zogen teachings, there are a lot of different practices which are supportive for that non dual awareness, which is the essence of the pointing out to not acknowledge that they are actually a necessary part of reaping the benefits of the non dual awareness. Because unless there's the capacity in the mind and that its qualities like mindfulness and light concentration, how often somebody without any of that background, without any of those qualities of mind, I think it would be extremely rare for people to actually remain or even remember non dual awareness in the busyness of their lives. One example, and this is something I love from Dujaminpoche, great Zouchen master, when he talked about the undercurrent of thoughts, not the big dramatic thoughts, but just kind of a pretty steady stream of very light thoughts going through the mind throughout the day that we are mostly unaware of. And he called these the thieves of meditation, the thieves of non dual meditation. So for somebody who has not developed the capacity through mindfulness and some steadiness of mind, there is no way they're going to be aware of this undercurrent of thought. And it's very prevalent. And in all of those moments of undercurrent which are not being recognized because they're very subtle, very light people are not in non dual awareness. They are lost in those thoughts. And so what I'm suggesting is that I have a tremendous appreciation for the Zogian teachings and I benefit a lot from them. And they don't exist independent of all these supportive practices which make that aspect possible for people to really integrate in their lives. And so in just the same way, a lot of the Vipassana practice, what we call Vipassana practice in the beginning, in the beginning can be a while. It is the development of a lot of these supportive practices. And there's a Zogen, I think Tulka Workin talked about this, and it's probably in the Zogen texts where they talk about fabricated and unfabricated mindfulness. And fabricated is kind of what you're suggesting, I think, characterizes Vipassana, where there has to be kind of some effort made and unfabricated mindfulness, where it's just There there's no effort required. Well, in Vipassana there's also that move from fabricated to unfabricated mindfulness. Okay, so that's being said then. I agree with you that there can be subtle dualistic perceptions, just like the undercurrent of thought that mostly go unrecognized. Whether one's practical Dzogen or Vipassana, there are some really subtle. They're called cognitive distortions and they're really explained quite definitively, although can be a little difficult to unpack in the very first discourse of the middle Unsaints, where the Buddha's acknowledging and pointing out these very subtle cognitive distortions that may be unrecognized. So I agree with you that that can be there, but they are also addressed within the Theravada tradition and one does have to penetrate through them. So I would suggest something to the listeners acknowledging that we've been having these discussions for years and sometimes with different flavors and this and that. What I would suggest is in whatever has been heard, any thread of any of it that seems of interest, just to pursue that thread, we don't have to kind of hold it all and try to figure out right and wrong. And if there's something in what was said that was helpful for the practice to relieve suffering in some way, go for it, you know, and just explore and see where it leads.
- [98:09]
Sam Harris
I like that.
- [98:11]
Dan Harris
Joseph and Sam, thank you both. Appreciate you.
- [98:14]
Sam Harris
Thank you, Dan. Until next time, Joseph. Okay, my seconds will call in your seconds.
- [98:26]
Dan Harris
Thanks again to Joseph and Sam. I hope you all found it useful. I certainly did. Although that was the first time I've ever in the recording of a podcast, put my head down on my desk. Don't forget you can get a companion meditation that comes with this podcast if you sign up. Over@danharris.com our Teacher of the month, Christiana Wolf has crafted a meditation all about urge surfing or not being owned by your urges, both on the cushion and off. If you sign up, you can also come to our weekly live meditation and Q and A sessions. We do them every Tuesday at 4. And as mentioned in the intro, I've got an IRL event coming up on November 23rd in the Hudson Valley. There's of a lot link in the show notes. Finally, thank you to everybody who worked so hard to make this show. Our producers are Tara Anderson and Eleanor Vasily. Our recording and engineering is handled by the great folks over at Pod People. Lauren Smith is our managing producer. Marissa Schneiderman is our senior producer. DJ Kashmir is our executive producer and Nick Thorburn of the band Islands wrote our theme. Foreign.
- [99:42]
Sam Harris
Introducing Family Freedom from T Mobile. We'll pay off four phones up to 3, 200 and give you four free phones, all on America's largest 5G network.
- [99:50]
Dan Harris
Visit t mobile.com familyfreedom.
- [99:55]
Sam Harris
Up to 800 per line via virtual prepaid card typically takes 15 days. Free phone via 24 monthly bill credits with finance agreement. Example Apple iPhone 16128 gigs $829.99 Eligible trade in example iPhone 11 Pro for well qualified credits end and balance due if you pay off early or cancel. Contact us.