It’s Just How I See It

Is it not odd how ideas that seem incomprehensible are obvious once you understand them? I’ve just had a double whammy with this one. So idea one: according to the Buddhist tradition of Dzogchen buddha-nature expresses itself as the whole phenomenal universe BUT it resides in the heart and may be seen with the eyes where it will - with practice - appear as little mandalas with a buddha sitting at the centre of them. So a bit of a seeming contradiction there. How can something that is everything be located in one specific place? Idea two: If buddha-nature - remember this is a synonym for non-dual awareness - is all there is how come there are special places of spiritual power dotted about? If non-dual awareness is like a mirror that reflects everything equally, irregardless of whether it’s good, bad and ugly, then why single out any particular spot - for instance a stone circle - as somehow more ‘holy’? Surely everywhere is equally holy (or not).

There are two back story to these quandaries. The first arose when listening to a Buddhist teaching on Dzogchen given by Khandro Rinpoche a year or so ago. And I have to admit, despite it being rather esoteric, it sent me into a lot of confusion - thinking I had understood something after over forty years of study and then wondering whether I had understood it at all. And the second happened only the other day when talking with a very dear friend who has spent a great many years studying the shamanic practices of the indigenous Native Americans. Practices that identify places, objects and rituals as specific ‘locations’ of spiritual power. When I shared with her the idea that everything is the display of awakened awareness and therefore, picking out one place or one thing as spiritually potent - from this perspective - doesn’t really make sense, she appeared rather surprised. (This is assuming I read her expression correctly). Within her experience it was unquestionable that some things were definitely more sacred - special sites, water, tobacco - then others such as industrial wastelands or city streets. So how do we square these apparent contradictions?

I guess we could simply say the obvious. Things never really add up. All explanations of how things are are never perfect and are only partial truths. Why else would it be that human beings have created a myriad of belief systems to make sense of our existence? No single one has so far been acceptable to everybody. And I kind of like this - it’s a celebration of our creativity. However, there is a Buddhist one that I also like a lot because it covers most corners - the simultaneous existence of relative and ultimate truth. Mind boggling? A bit, but imagine being in a room with a mega powerful microscope - one that can look into the the ultimately most tiny thing. Looking around the room you will see all the things in it including yourself. Everything is a separate entity and they all remain themselves - not suddenly changing into something else. This is relative or conventional reality - it’s what we experience (unless we are on hallucinatory drugs). Now, look in the microscope. Tweedle the knob so the magnification increases and increases. First we see cells, then the DNA within the cells, then the atoms that make up the molecules, then subatomic particles, the protons, neutrons and clouds of electrons, and within these even tinier particles called quarks. By this time everything that we experience as relative or conventional reality has apparently disappeared. Instead we find ourselves as part of an infinite web of energy fields in which no separate, solid or unchanging things exists. This includes ourselves and this is the ultimate truth - how things really are when deeply investigated. Now this doesn’t mean that our relative perception disappears - look away from the microscope and it’s still there. The two exist together - the difference is merely how we see it.

OK, so let’s apply this insight to my quandaries. On the relative level there is no doubt that some actions, objects and places hold a particular spiritual potency that is perhaps built up over time. If we have the sensitivity to feel it, it’s there. Similarly, when we start practicing the ‘doing nothing’ style of Dzogchen meditation, it does feel as if the state of non-dual awareness is located or accessed more easily through the eyes. It’s just what it feels like when we are not already resting in non-dual awareness. So we could say that all these experiences are being perceived at the relative level. Or put another way, they are known dualistically - me and something else outside of me. However, on the ultimate level it’s quite different. Look down the microscope and it all dissolves into a reality it’s virtually impossible to find words for. A reality in which all things are of the same nature and therefore equally sacred, a reality where all experiences - according to Dzogchen - are directly known to be awareness itself. Look through one eye and there is a sacred mountain that is distinct from other less holy places, look through the other eye and the whole universe is a shimmering matrix of divinity with no distinctions. Or in the Dzogchen context, ’look’ into the mind for the one who is looking and (just maybe) in that moment ‘see’ there is no-one there looking for anything. And with this the local/universal puzzle reveals its resolution.

NW. 17 June 2026 With thanks to R.B. for her inspiration - it was all in her look!