Non-Attachment Does Not Mean: Get Rid Of

 I was sitting with one of my Non-Duality friends and teachers for a rice bowl the other night and he was quoting the famous Hsing hsing ming "The Great Way is not difficult for those who have no preferences." and he said that another translation of it is "The Great Way is not difficult for those who are not attached to preferences." And a huge Light/Bell went off and it struck me how we sometimes incorrectly try and push thoughts away in our meditation, as well as try and be islands unto ourselves by never developing close interpersonal relations, all in the attempt to follow the Great Way and thus "attain liberation." 

However, it really isn't about getting rid of. It's about being with, and realizing that possession and attachment are figments of the imagination, of the mind. These are the causes of suffering, not the preferences themselves. You don't see Ken Wilber hanging out with crack addicts and wife abusers all the time. He obviously has preferences arise. But is he attached to those preferences? Do they define him? Does he define himself with them? And the answer seems pretty obvious. Can I get a resounding "NO!" 

We're in the midst of the greatest redefining of culture and society, of men and women, of life and love, that has ever occurred in history! This is to be celebrated, despite the many pains of this rebirthing process. In our interests in Non-Duality, sometimes we find people who completely drop the pronouns and say, "There is anger arising. There is this tendency to cry for no reason," and we notice that they have pushed the "I" pronoun away thinking that this will make them appear less "enlightened" in the presence of the teacher and the students. But this is really even more egoic than talking about yourself constantly. Ego watch is the most egocentric thing you can do. And it's all quite a comical thing, really. 

'Transcend and include' is the motto; the best motto I've seen. This point should be digested.