Conversation between Joseph Goldstein and Sam Harris

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
Post Reply
User avatar
Posts: 1037
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2014 8:59 pm
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

Conversation between Joseph Goldstein and Sam Harris

Post by Nicolas »

Sam Harris wrote:Joseph has been a close friend for more than 20 years. He was one of my first meditation teachers and remains one of the wisest people I have ever met. In this two-hour conversation, we discuss how he came to devote his life to the study of meditation. We also debate some of the finer points of the practice.
They talk about Joseph Goldstein's practice and then about Dzogchen. It lasts two hours; I thought it was interesting and might interest some here.

Posts: 171
Joined: Thu Feb 14, 2013 11:47 pm

Re: Conversation between Joseph Goldstein and Sam Harris

Post by Samma »

see the thread here also:

Sam: "if mindfulness of anatta is just as good an object of mindfulness as an other could
recognize there is no self very early mindfulness of that nature of coinsousness and have
that be your continity of mindfulness...and that is all you need to have these subsequent experiences"

It seems Sam is talking about not-self perception. I really don't know enough about dzogchen...and Sam does not really explain it much. Cant blame him much since it is all quite esoteric, good luck figuring it out! My main question would be how is this dzogchen resting in the natural state (or whatever) any different than not-self perception? Presumebly there is more to dzogchen than just seeing that consciousness is not self, which is what Sam seems to be hung up on. For instance when Goldstein talks about the framework being non-clinigng and uprooting defilements, Sam says nothing, rather going on about nondual awareness. The point being that something such as consciousness without surface is end of dukkha, not simply consciousness without self and maintaining a not-self perception. Perhaps they can be close and easy to blur...

Post Reply