[Lucy Fleetwood]

This is such a fascinating read and opens my mind in different directions. How the senses attend seems to be the focus. And yet the conversation about duality and non-duality also interesting. I reflect through my own experiences. Before finding a teacher and following the Buddhist pathway (Tibetan), I had spacious and alternate experiences, and some I would have expressed as non-dual or with a wider use of the senses.

The Buddhist wisdom teachings on emptiness, that need to be not just reflected upon, but accompanied with practices that can lead to a realisation of the teaching, beyond elaboration, have the potential to take you beyond all the concepts. The view is that samsara and nirvana are one, but our vision is obscured, our Buddha nature (a term describing the unelaborated nature of reality) is here right now, we just don’t experience it.

The two pathways, hinyana and mahayana take people to different places. The hinyana for those who wish to practice for themselves, can take people so far, but not all the way, because they retain a subtle sense of duality. The mahayana can take people all the way, because within the wisdom teaching and practices, this perception of something solid that exists (even if it is just an atom that flows into different states/things) is not there.

The process of practicing can lead to a wider use of the senses, but ultimately, the senses are also part of the dreamlike illusion. The true nature of things is viewed as something that cannot be elaborated.

I’m not sure if any of this is of any value to the thread! But I felt drawn to join in.