Darryl Bailey - Dismantling the Fantasy - Discussion
Darryl Bailey - Dismantling the Fantasy
Richard Zen, modified 9 Years ago at 4/25/15 12:19 PM
Created 9 Years ago at 4/25/15 12:19 PM
Darryl Bailey - Dismantling the Fantasy
Posts: 1665 Join Date: 5/18/10 Recent Posts
http://non-dualitypress.org/products/dismantling-the-fantasy
This was an interesting book. He uses the metaphor of a cloud where we project shapes onto it but because we like certain shapes the stress comes when the clouds change to something else (maybe something we don't like). It challenges our inherent existence because the cause and effect is so intertwining (causes are just more effects from other causes endlessly). The book is like a pointing instruction but of course one must look at experience to learn for ourselves. The rest of the book is a question and answer format where people question further to develop the ideas more. I particularly like his point that a lot of our interests were influenced by others and that's what animates us to where we are now. This would be similar to psychologists that remind us how we are conditioned by our environment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaGP_kB716Y
This was an interesting book. He uses the metaphor of a cloud where we project shapes onto it but because we like certain shapes the stress comes when the clouds change to something else (maybe something we don't like). It challenges our inherent existence because the cause and effect is so intertwining (causes are just more effects from other causes endlessly). The book is like a pointing instruction but of course one must look at experience to learn for ourselves. The rest of the book is a question and answer format where people question further to develop the ideas more. I particularly like his point that a lot of our interests were influenced by others and that's what animates us to where we are now. This would be similar to psychologists that remind us how we are conditioned by our environment.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CaGP_kB716Y
CJMacie, modified 9 Years ago at 4/25/15 2:17 PM
Created 9 Years ago at 4/25/15 2:09 PM
RE: Darryl Bailey - Dismantling the Fantasy
Posts: 856 Join Date: 8/17/14 Recent PostsRichard Zen:
http://non-dualitypress.org/products/dismantling-the-fantasy
... a lot of our interests were influenced by others and that's what animates us to where we are now. This would be similar to psychologists that remind us how we are conditioned by our environment.
Others, going back 2400 years or so and in a meta-psychological framework, encouraged reminding, recollecting: Buddha, Dhamma, SANGHA (community)
... a lot of our interests were influenced by others and that's what animates us to where we are now. This would be similar to psychologists that remind us how we are conditioned by our environment.
Others, going back 2400 years or so and in a meta-psychological framework, encouraged reminding, recollecting: Buddha, Dhamma, SANGHA (community)
Ian And, modified 9 Years ago at 4/25/15 5:34 PM
Created 9 Years ago at 4/25/15 5:11 PM
RE: Darryl Bailey - Dismantling the Fantasy
Posts: 785 Join Date: 8/22/09 Recent Posts
http://non-dualitypress.org/products/dismantling-the-fantasy
The simple fact that this man's writing and book is being published by a publisher calling itself Non Duality Press tells me everything I need to know about it, notwithstanding the fact that the man may have studied under the guidance of a respected Ajahn in the Thai forest tradition (one who, from the few writings of his that I have read, seems to have a good basic understanding of what Gotama taught). After that, if I harbored any further doubts about the influence on this man's thought, it was surely dashed away by the facts pointed out on the page from which the above passages were taken, attesting to the fact that "along the way, there was recurring contact with the independent philosopher J. Krishnamurti, as well as a significant connection with the Advaita sage Robert Adams." This in itself told me there was an abandonment (if indeed there had been any genuine adherence or influence) from the depth of the teachings of Siddhattha Gotama.
In the past, I, too, was briefly fascinated with the non dual approach to "enlightenment" as the word was understood within the teachings of the Buddhadhamma. I even went so far as to purchase eight volumes by the famed non dualist author Wei Wu Wei (otherwise known as the Englishman Terrence Gray) who wrote a series of books based upon this philosophy or way of viewing life. One of his more popular books was titled Fingers Pointing Towards The Moon and another was titled Open Secret.
If one begins to read these books, one can quickly become entranced by the surface enchantment of the ideas being presented. They seem to make common sense at first viewing, especially to one who has studied or looked into Eastern Philosophies such as Hinduism, Taoism, or the practice of Buddhism or the Buddhadhamma. One can even find reference made in his books to terms primarily used in Mahayana schools of teaching (such as the Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara or the Heart Sutra from Zen). That was my first clue that something smelled rotten in Denmark in reference to this way of viewing.
Previously, I had looked at Mahayana influenced teaching and had to eventually dismiss it in comparison to what I was learning from a direct reading and intense study of the Pali discourses. Though there may be aspects of the two ways of viewing things that intersect, there are insights in the Buddhadhamma which to my perception are either absence or not emphasized to the degree they should be in many of the schools of the Mahayana view.
Aside from that, Advaita, from what exposure I've had to it, is very much a separate way of viewing life and reality which is admittedly a sub-school of Vedanta. Vedanta has little or nothing to do with anything that Gotama taught.
I suppose that if one wanted to follow the teachings of Advaita or those who have been influenced by Advaita that that is a personal decision. However, it is in its essence in no way comparable to anything taught by Siddhattha Gotama, even though there are claims to its having developed in interaction with other Indian traditions such as Jainism and Buddhism as well as other schools of Vedanta which I don't doubt at all. But that doesn't mean that it can add any insight in terms of what is taught in the Buddhdhamma. My thought is that if Gotama were alive today to comment upon this phenomenon, that he would see it as just another manifestation of the Brahminism to which he spoke in opposition.
By the way, I dropped reading and seriously considering those eight books by Wei Wu Wei immediately when I had this realization, and returned all my focus onto the discourses in the Pali canon. It was a good thing that I did because there was more there than I had initially imagined, and which subsequently I have noticed that other people seem to have overlooked or not gone into very deeply.
Darryl Bailey was drawn to meditation at age fourteen, he spent the next seventeen years [age 31] exploring awareness and concentration practices from Christian, Hindu, Sufi, Taoist, Buddhist, and Western psychology sources.
He then spent a further nine years [age 40] apprenticed to mindfulness teacher Ruth Denison and another six years [age 46] as a Buddhist meditation monk in the Thai forest tradition, under the guidance of Ajahn Sumedho. In both situations he was asked to begin teaching. Along the way, there was recurring contact with the independent philosopher, Jiddu Krishnamurti, as well as a significant connection with the Advaita sage, Robert Adams.
He then spent a further nine years [age 40] apprenticed to mindfulness teacher Ruth Denison and another six years [age 46] as a Buddhist meditation monk in the Thai forest tradition, under the guidance of Ajahn Sumedho. In both situations he was asked to begin teaching. Along the way, there was recurring contact with the independent philosopher, Jiddu Krishnamurti, as well as a significant connection with the Advaita sage, Robert Adams.
The simple fact that this man's writing and book is being published by a publisher calling itself Non Duality Press tells me everything I need to know about it, notwithstanding the fact that the man may have studied under the guidance of a respected Ajahn in the Thai forest tradition (one who, from the few writings of his that I have read, seems to have a good basic understanding of what Gotama taught). After that, if I harbored any further doubts about the influence on this man's thought, it was surely dashed away by the facts pointed out on the page from which the above passages were taken, attesting to the fact that "along the way, there was recurring contact with the independent philosopher J. Krishnamurti, as well as a significant connection with the Advaita sage Robert Adams." This in itself told me there was an abandonment (if indeed there had been any genuine adherence or influence) from the depth of the teachings of Siddhattha Gotama.
In the past, I, too, was briefly fascinated with the non dual approach to "enlightenment" as the word was understood within the teachings of the Buddhadhamma. I even went so far as to purchase eight volumes by the famed non dualist author Wei Wu Wei (otherwise known as the Englishman Terrence Gray) who wrote a series of books based upon this philosophy or way of viewing life. One of his more popular books was titled Fingers Pointing Towards The Moon and another was titled Open Secret.
If one begins to read these books, one can quickly become entranced by the surface enchantment of the ideas being presented. They seem to make common sense at first viewing, especially to one who has studied or looked into Eastern Philosophies such as Hinduism, Taoism, or the practice of Buddhism or the Buddhadhamma. One can even find reference made in his books to terms primarily used in Mahayana schools of teaching (such as the Bodhisattva Avalokiteshvara or the Heart Sutra from Zen). That was my first clue that something smelled rotten in Denmark in reference to this way of viewing.
Previously, I had looked at Mahayana influenced teaching and had to eventually dismiss it in comparison to what I was learning from a direct reading and intense study of the Pali discourses. Though there may be aspects of the two ways of viewing things that intersect, there are insights in the Buddhadhamma which to my perception are either absence or not emphasized to the degree they should be in many of the schools of the Mahayana view.
Aside from that, Advaita, from what exposure I've had to it, is very much a separate way of viewing life and reality which is admittedly a sub-school of Vedanta. Vedanta has little or nothing to do with anything that Gotama taught.
Advaita (not-two in Sanskrit) refers to the recognition that the true Self, Atman, which is pure consciousness, is the same as the highest Reality, Brahman, which is also pure consciousness. Followers seek liberation/release by acquiring vidyā (knowledge) of the identity of Atman and Brahman. Attaining this liberation takes a long preparation and training under the guidance of a guru. Advaita thought can also be found in non-orthodox Indian religious traditions, such as the tantric Nath tradition.
The principal, though not the first, exponent of the Advaita Vedanta-interpretation was Shankara Bhagavadpada in the 8th century, who systematised the works of preceding philosophers. Its teachings have influenced various sects of Hinduism.
The principal, though not the first, exponent of the Advaita Vedanta-interpretation was Shankara Bhagavadpada in the 8th century, who systematised the works of preceding philosophers. Its teachings have influenced various sects of Hinduism.
I suppose that if one wanted to follow the teachings of Advaita or those who have been influenced by Advaita that that is a personal decision. However, it is in its essence in no way comparable to anything taught by Siddhattha Gotama, even though there are claims to its having developed in interaction with other Indian traditions such as Jainism and Buddhism as well as other schools of Vedanta which I don't doubt at all. But that doesn't mean that it can add any insight in terms of what is taught in the Buddhdhamma. My thought is that if Gotama were alive today to comment upon this phenomenon, that he would see it as just another manifestation of the Brahminism to which he spoke in opposition.
By the way, I dropped reading and seriously considering those eight books by Wei Wu Wei immediately when I had this realization, and returned all my focus onto the discourses in the Pali canon. It was a good thing that I did because there was more there than I had initially imagined, and which subsequently I have noticed that other people seem to have overlooked or not gone into very deeply.
Richard Zen, modified 9 Years ago at 4/25/15 7:02 PM
Created 9 Years ago at 4/25/15 7:02 PM
RE: Darryl Bailey - Dismantling the Fantasy
Posts: 1665 Join Date: 5/18/10 Recent Posts
Thanks for the comment. It'll be interesting to see you weigh in when I get my hands on a copy of Buddhessence by Bailey which purports:
Bailey shows up in Leigh Brasington's reading list:
http://www.leighb.com/readlist.htm
I like non-dual practices and got lots of help from them. I think the Dismantling the Fantasy book is more of a book to connect spiritual traditions from all over the world in a non-sectarian way to an agnostic audience. This means the contradictions that do exist are smoothed over to find agreements. In my amazon review I did criticize some elements of the book in that it's a little too simplistic because the view is so all encompassing that it still leaves existential angst in place so that a person's life may not change all that much. It might reduce their stress a little but reification might still be under the radar as people pursue goals after the insight. There's also a lack of emphasis in personal control that doesn't get undermind by any spiritual practice.
I am interested on your views of Theravada vs. Mahayana and any detrimental differences. Folks like Rob Burbea look at Theravadins as those who are too attached to cessation, but then he glibly says he makes no distinction between Mahayana and Theravada. The divide seems to happen based on Nagarjuna finding samsara and nirvana equally empty.
Buddhism is currently very popular, but most people have not read the recorded teachings of the Buddha. As a result, the general understanding of this teaching is incorrect.
http://www.leighb.com/readlist.htm
I like non-dual practices and got lots of help from them. I think the Dismantling the Fantasy book is more of a book to connect spiritual traditions from all over the world in a non-sectarian way to an agnostic audience. This means the contradictions that do exist are smoothed over to find agreements. In my amazon review I did criticize some elements of the book in that it's a little too simplistic because the view is so all encompassing that it still leaves existential angst in place so that a person's life may not change all that much. It might reduce their stress a little but reification might still be under the radar as people pursue goals after the insight. There's also a lack of emphasis in personal control that doesn't get undermind by any spiritual practice.
I am interested on your views of Theravada vs. Mahayana and any detrimental differences. Folks like Rob Burbea look at Theravadins as those who are too attached to cessation, but then he glibly says he makes no distinction between Mahayana and Theravada. The divide seems to happen based on Nagarjuna finding samsara and nirvana equally empty.
Ian And, modified 9 Years ago at 4/27/15 12:27 PM
Created 9 Years ago at 4/27/15 12:15 PM
RE: Darryl Bailey - Dismantling the Fantasy
Posts: 785 Join Date: 8/22/09 Recent Posts
Hi Richard,
I'd just like to say that I did clicked on and watched the video link that you provided in the initial post. I wanted to see what this man was like and where he was coming from. What he had to say in the video did little to dissuade my opinion as expressed in my initial post in this thread. However, I have to retract some of what I wrote. After searching on the Internet for more material on Bailey's thought and writing, I found a PDF with quotes of his purportedly from his book Buddhessence indicating that he does have a familiarity with the more in-depth teachings such as dependent co-arising and the five aggregates as well as the role that realization of these processes have in the "enlightenment" process.
What I haven't seen yet is an effort to explain these processes in a way that attempts to eliminate the possibility of reification of the self, something that is very easily missed in many of the descriptions I have read postulated by proponents of the Advaita approach. That's why I shy away from recommending to people, especially newcomers or intermediate practitioners, the literature available on the Advaita approach. At least not until they can become more grounded (adept) in a deeper understanding of these mental processes based upon actual practice and observation of their own consciousness using mindfulness and contemplation. It can become too easy for them to become caught up in a conceptual playground, thinking that they have achieved "enlightenment" because they have seen the light as espoused by Advaita, and yet because the realization is more or less superficial, based on a perception/satori moment involving namarupa (name and form) which without proper discernment (yoniso manasikara) can maintain the reification of those phenomena, they continue to have problems relieving themselves of dukkha.
Ten years ago I had to catch myself before I became caught up in just such a faux "enlightenment" moment. I was searching for shortcuts, which is how I came to purchase the Wei Wu Wei books, thinking that they would help me to more quickly conceptualize my way to "enlightenment." Well, they had the desired effect for a while, that is until I began coming across Dhamma essays on non-duality which forced me to look deeper into what I had initially accepted of the Advaita teaching. The more I looked, the more I saw how I had tricked myself into believing that I had achieved something that I had not actually achieved! It was an eye-opening experience (thankfully one that I quickly got over), and one that has left me with a big red flag about self-deception and how easily it can take place. Hence, my caution about reading and buying into such material before one may actually be ready to comprehend it under the appropriate condition.
I also went back and looked through a couple of the Wei Wu Wei books to further recall what they were like. They were very well written and quite provocative for their time. They were also a bit obscure in places, which didn't lend them for being very easily comprehended, especially by someone with little or no experience with the deeper teachings on personality creation in the mind. The obscurity in his writing didn't particularly bother me (other than I thought he could have been less intellectually vague in the way he used certain terms) as I was used to having to figure out what writers like D.T. Suzuki and others had to say about Zen and how it related to the popular conception of Buddhism.
Although, to Suzuki's credit as I respect his approach and renditions, his book The Zen Doctrine of No Mind, among others, went far beyond popular conceptions of the practice of Zen Buddhism while being able (at least to my satisfaction) to present the material in a more transparent manner. His approach to the reader was more from an intuitive angle than from the unnecessarily cryptic intellectual one used by Gray. If one wants to really understand Suzuki's book, he has to be a serious practitioner of contemplation in order to corroborate the insights it contains. Otherwise, those insights may go over one's head.
Yet Terrence Gray, while being provocative, can seem to be just messing with people's minds with all of his pithy little pronouncements and Zen-like riddles, attempting to shake the reader out of his normal ruts of thinking. But then, that is what a lot of the popular expositions of Zen (and likewise of Advaita) are like. They don't necessarily teach about or provide insight into the process itself and how it can be directly apprehended, but rather point toward the end product of the satori moment. Somewhat similar to Alan Watts (with whom I also had quite a fascination), although Watts succeeded here and there in bring up salient points of insight to save his playful and exceedingly readable explications on Zen. In order to understand what Gray has to say, one has to be more than just a casual reader and practitioner, otherwise they could venture into misapprehension. It is the possibility of misapprehension by an unprepared mind that I am attempting to warn about in his (Bailey's) works and the works of others of his ilk (such as Terrence Gray and other authors like Ramesh Balsekar and Adyashanti).
I like non-dual practices and got lots of help from them.
I don't doubt that reading such literature may, at one time or another, help accelerate one's apprehension about one aspect of the teaching. But that apprehension is not the same as having practiced or realized the micro-steps involved in the practice of satipatthana and having realized the origin, step by step, of one's ability at reification, seeing it as it is in becoming formed and thereby nullifying its arising in the future. Having that as a foundation should then preclude any future delusional misapprehension.
In my amazon review I did criticize some elements of the book in that it's a little too simplistic because the view is so all encompassing that it still leaves existential angst in place so that a person's life may not change all that much. It might reduce their stress a little but reification might still be under the radar as people pursue goals after the insight.
Yes, I would agree. That is the very warning that I just wrote about above. Such writings are written in a way that is way too easy for one to miss crucial nuances of the practice and the teaching (Dhamma). Such a happenstance can potentially upset a person's practice for years (wrong view) before they might come upon the insight that they need in order to overcome it. That is why I think reading these kinds of writings (at least in the early stages of one's practice) can be dangerous. Maybe not for everyone, but for many.
In peace,
Ian
I'd just like to say that I did clicked on and watched the video link that you provided in the initial post. I wanted to see what this man was like and where he was coming from. What he had to say in the video did little to dissuade my opinion as expressed in my initial post in this thread. However, I have to retract some of what I wrote. After searching on the Internet for more material on Bailey's thought and writing, I found a PDF with quotes of his purportedly from his book Buddhessence indicating that he does have a familiarity with the more in-depth teachings such as dependent co-arising and the five aggregates as well as the role that realization of these processes have in the "enlightenment" process.
What I haven't seen yet is an effort to explain these processes in a way that attempts to eliminate the possibility of reification of the self, something that is very easily missed in many of the descriptions I have read postulated by proponents of the Advaita approach. That's why I shy away from recommending to people, especially newcomers or intermediate practitioners, the literature available on the Advaita approach. At least not until they can become more grounded (adept) in a deeper understanding of these mental processes based upon actual practice and observation of their own consciousness using mindfulness and contemplation. It can become too easy for them to become caught up in a conceptual playground, thinking that they have achieved "enlightenment" because they have seen the light as espoused by Advaita, and yet because the realization is more or less superficial, based on a perception/satori moment involving namarupa (name and form) which without proper discernment (yoniso manasikara) can maintain the reification of those phenomena, they continue to have problems relieving themselves of dukkha.
Ten years ago I had to catch myself before I became caught up in just such a faux "enlightenment" moment. I was searching for shortcuts, which is how I came to purchase the Wei Wu Wei books, thinking that they would help me to more quickly conceptualize my way to "enlightenment." Well, they had the desired effect for a while, that is until I began coming across Dhamma essays on non-duality which forced me to look deeper into what I had initially accepted of the Advaita teaching. The more I looked, the more I saw how I had tricked myself into believing that I had achieved something that I had not actually achieved! It was an eye-opening experience (thankfully one that I quickly got over), and one that has left me with a big red flag about self-deception and how easily it can take place. Hence, my caution about reading and buying into such material before one may actually be ready to comprehend it under the appropriate condition.
I also went back and looked through a couple of the Wei Wu Wei books to further recall what they were like. They were very well written and quite provocative for their time. They were also a bit obscure in places, which didn't lend them for being very easily comprehended, especially by someone with little or no experience with the deeper teachings on personality creation in the mind. The obscurity in his writing didn't particularly bother me (other than I thought he could have been less intellectually vague in the way he used certain terms) as I was used to having to figure out what writers like D.T. Suzuki and others had to say about Zen and how it related to the popular conception of Buddhism.
Although, to Suzuki's credit as I respect his approach and renditions, his book The Zen Doctrine of No Mind, among others, went far beyond popular conceptions of the practice of Zen Buddhism while being able (at least to my satisfaction) to present the material in a more transparent manner. His approach to the reader was more from an intuitive angle than from the unnecessarily cryptic intellectual one used by Gray. If one wants to really understand Suzuki's book, he has to be a serious practitioner of contemplation in order to corroborate the insights it contains. Otherwise, those insights may go over one's head.
Yet Terrence Gray, while being provocative, can seem to be just messing with people's minds with all of his pithy little pronouncements and Zen-like riddles, attempting to shake the reader out of his normal ruts of thinking. But then, that is what a lot of the popular expositions of Zen (and likewise of Advaita) are like. They don't necessarily teach about or provide insight into the process itself and how it can be directly apprehended, but rather point toward the end product of the satori moment. Somewhat similar to Alan Watts (with whom I also had quite a fascination), although Watts succeeded here and there in bring up salient points of insight to save his playful and exceedingly readable explications on Zen. In order to understand what Gray has to say, one has to be more than just a casual reader and practitioner, otherwise they could venture into misapprehension. It is the possibility of misapprehension by an unprepared mind that I am attempting to warn about in his (Bailey's) works and the works of others of his ilk (such as Terrence Gray and other authors like Ramesh Balsekar and Adyashanti).
Richard Zen:
I like non-dual practices and got lots of help from them.
I don't doubt that reading such literature may, at one time or another, help accelerate one's apprehension about one aspect of the teaching. But that apprehension is not the same as having practiced or realized the micro-steps involved in the practice of satipatthana and having realized the origin, step by step, of one's ability at reification, seeing it as it is in becoming formed and thereby nullifying its arising in the future. Having that as a foundation should then preclude any future delusional misapprehension.
Richard Zen:
In my amazon review I did criticize some elements of the book in that it's a little too simplistic because the view is so all encompassing that it still leaves existential angst in place so that a person's life may not change all that much. It might reduce their stress a little but reification might still be under the radar as people pursue goals after the insight.
Yes, I would agree. That is the very warning that I just wrote about above. Such writings are written in a way that is way too easy for one to miss crucial nuances of the practice and the teaching (Dhamma). Such a happenstance can potentially upset a person's practice for years (wrong view) before they might come upon the insight that they need in order to overcome it. That is why I think reading these kinds of writings (at least in the early stages of one's practice) can be dangerous. Maybe not for everyone, but for many.
In peace,
Ian
Richard Zen, modified 9 Years ago at 4/27/15 1:16 PM
Created 9 Years ago at 4/27/15 1:16 PM
RE: Darryl Bailey - Dismantling the Fantasy
Posts: 1665 Join Date: 5/18/10 Recent Posts
That makes sense and I certainly would say that what is emphasized in the above book is more the impermance side of it than a "container of awareness" but many practictioners might assume presence in the moment should be reified. This is especially with pointing instructions that might be misinterpreted. Also people often come to that conclusion no matter what practice they do until all experiences are challenged.