Petre Laskov

View Meditation Action

12 min read

View, Meditation, Action

The three crucial aspects of the Dzogchen path:

  • View — tawa (lTa ba)
  • Meditation — gompa (sGom pa)
  • Action — chodpa (spyod pa)

Roaring Silence’s Introduction establishes the triad as the Dzogchen path’s structural frame. Spectrum of Ecstasy Ch.3 develops it into a full chapter and maps it explicitly to the three spheres of being.

Key Points

  • View provokes or incites our natural intelligence. It is what allows us to see how we are in unenlightenment, and to glimpse the enlightened state insofar as language, symbol, and transmission can point.
  • Meditation opens our realization to the view. View is not adopted as a belief; it is tested in the laboratory of experience, and meditation is the laboratory. “Meditation enables us to find out for ourselves.”
  • Action is the pure appropriateness of our spontaneity in the state of realization. It is not a code of conduct applied externally — it is what behaves through us when the natural state is what is operating.
  • Simultaneous, not sequential. “In reality view, meditation and action are simultaneous.” (NCR, Ch.3 SoE)
  • Mapped to the three spheres of being. Ch.3 SoE: tawa = chö-ku (dharmakāya), gompa = long-ku (sambhogakāya), chodpa = trül-ku (nirmāṇakāya).

SoE Ch.3 — The Three-Spheres Mapping

Ch.3 of Spectrum of Ecstasy supplies the footnote that binds the three-aspect path frame to the three-spheres ontology:

“In Tibetan, view is tawa, meditation is gompa, and action is chodpa. These also equate to cho-ku (dharmakaya, the sphere of unconditioned potentiality), long-ku (sambhogakaya, the sphere of intangible appearance), and trul-ku or tulku (nirmanakaya, the sphere of realised manifestation).”

AspectTibetanSphereSanskritDimension
Viewtawa (lTa ba)chö-kudharmakāyaUnconditioned potentiality
Meditationgompa (sGom pa)long-kusambhogakāyaIntangible appearance
Actionchodpa (spyod pa)trül-kunirmāṇakāyaRealised manifestation

Structural consequence: view is not a belief or philosophy — it is the dharmakāya-level recognition. Meditation is not a technique to produce calm — it is the sambhogakāya-level discovery. Action is not ethical conduct — it is the nirmāṇakāya-level manifestation. The three aspects are the three spheres seen from the practice side. See Three Spheres of Being for the ontological side.

This is the third mapping the Aro gTér handbook pair supplies to the three spheres (alongside RS Ch.8’s mind/voice/body exercise mapping and RS Ch.10’s paramita mapping), establishing that the three spheres are not incidental iconographic category but load-bearing structural axis the book’s whole curriculum is organized around.

View in Depth

View is “the collected experience of almost three thousand years of meditation practice in which a great number of yogis and yoginis have made the same discovery” (RS Introduction). It consists of two simultaneous seeings:

  1. How we are in unenlightenment — the mechanical functioning of disquiet, dissatisfaction, confusion, frustration, irritation, pain.
  2. The nature of the enlightened state — insofar as it can be pointed at by oral, symbolic, and direct transmission.

View is intellect used to transcend intellect. The Introduction’s formulation: “As soon as we integrate the view, the view disappears and becomes knowledge. Knowledge is like breathing — we do not have to remember how to breathe.” View must always be tested against experience; otherwise it is merely philosophy, which obscures rather than reveals. This is the development of view.

View Defined by Exclusion (SoE Ch.3)

Ch.3 SoE defines view by what it is not, in direct parallel to Ch.1 RS’s negative definition of shi-nè:

“View in this sense has nothing to do with philosophy. View is the uncharacterised way in which we see ourselves and our surroundings. That is to say: it is not a constructed conceptualised way of seeing the world. It is simply seeing the world. It is intrinsically effortless and uncontrived. View involves our ceasing to employ preconceptions as part of the methodology with which we investigate our situation. View is the recognition that logical analysis is limited. It is the recognition that intellectual comprehension is no substitute for direct experience.”

View is not:

  • philosophy
  • constructed or conceptualised
  • built from preconceptions
  • logical analysis (which is “limited”)
  • intellectual comprehension (which is “no substitute for direct experience”)

View is: “the uncharacterised way in which we see ourselves and our surroundings” — intrinsically effortless, uncontrived, simply seeing shorn of preconceptions.

View Develops by Recognising Patterns of Referentiality (SoE Ch.3)

Ch.3’s scope-setting for the rest of the book:

“In this exploration of emotions we are dealing largely with view. In the development of view we come to recognise the different patterns that evolve from referentiality. We recognise the different styles of distraction that are available when we distance ourselves from experience and drift into indirect experience — duality.”

View-development is pattern-recognition at the referential-operation level. The practitioner comes to see the styles of distraction the dualistic apparatus produces — which, in SoE’s terms, are the emotional patterns that Ch.6–10 develop as the five element-chapters. View is what enables the practitioner to see emotions as distorted reflections of liberated energies (hall-of-mirrors), which is the methodological precondition for the book’s Tantric embracing-emotions work.

View Is Emptiness

Ch.3’s closing exchange — the book’s compressed formulation:

Q: So then how does view relate to emptiness?

NCR: View is emptiness.

KD: Emptiness equates to wisdom, and view is the manifestation of wisdom — so view is emptiness and active-compassion is form.”

View = emptiness = manifestation of wisdom. Active-compassion = form.

This is SoE’s compressed version of the Ch.11 RS mirror argument: wisdom-of-emptiness and active-compassion are not divisible; the dualistic mind divides them into view and form. In the realised state the two are one indivisible energy under two descriptive aspects. See Changchub-sem — the Sutra reading of bodhicitta as “active compassion” is the form-aspect; the Dzogchen reading of changchub-sem as sem-nyid is the emptiness-aspect; view/form is the same dyad from the path-aspect side.

Meditation in Depth

SoE Ch.3 — “The Discovery of Space”

“The development of view is encouraged by meditation. In the context of starting out on the path, meditation is the practice of shi-ne: the discovery of space. From the ultimate perspective, meditation is not a fabricated state that needs to be artificially maintained; it is our natural state and as such only needs to be discovered. It is actually quite hilarious, that the method of discovery is the discovery. This hilarity itself is only possible because our innate realisation sparkles through. The real quality of meditation is sheer effortlessness, and shi-ne is a way of approaching this state. It is a way of encouraging ourselves to dispense with the illusion that we are unenlightened.”

Compressed definition of shi-nè: “the discovery of space” — the phrase that becomes Ch.4’s chapter title. This is a distinctively SoE framing — RS names shi-nè as “remaining uninvolved” and “peaceful remaining.” SoE positions the fruit (spatial experience) as the name of the practice.

The hilarious-circularity: “the method of discovery is the discovery.” Practice does not produce the natural state — the natural state is already the case; practice is the recognition. The same principle as the nongradual approach in RS Ch.10.

Meditation as dispensation: “a way of encouraging ourselves to dispense with the illusion that we are unenlightened.” Not generation of enlightenment; dispelling of the counter-illusion. Cross-reference: Beginningless Enlightenment.

Meditation as Relaxation (RS Introduction)

“The teaching of Dzogchen declares that meditation is the state of relaxation — a means by which we can be what we are, without tension, tyranny, or anxiety.” (RS Introduction)

This is not relaxation as absence of alertness; it is the absence of manipulation. The Four Naljors, starting with Shi-nè, give the practical form this relaxation takes. The “sheer effortlessness” of SoE Ch.3 is the same state under a different name.

Action in Depth

SoE Ch.3 — The Endless Spontaneous Dance

“View encourages us to gain direct experience through meditation, and meditation gives us confidence of view. View and meditation are the basis of action, which is the dynamic of our relationship with the world. That is to say: how we respond when view and meditation are present in the moment. Action is the endless and spontaneous dance ignited by precise sensitivity to whatever happens. We flow harmoniously with what is, wherever we happen to find ourselves. Action is not a ‘way of acting’ — it is being: unrestricted, uncontrived, unconditioned, and unlimited.”

Action is not a repertoire. The practitioner does not have an action (an ethical style, a behavioral repertoire); the practitioner is action, in the mode “unrestricted, uncontrived, unconditioned, and unlimited.”

Action = Lhun-drüp (Ch.3 Q&A)

Q: Would this be the same as lhun-driip?

KD: Yes. Lhun-driip means spontaneity.

NCR: This is the final practice, if one can employ such a term, of the four methods of remaining in the natural state — the Four Naljors. It is the actual practice of Dzogchen, the practice in which everything is integrated with the non-dual state.”

KD: It’s also called gommed or non-meditation, according to the four levels of formless Mahamudra in the Kagyiid School.”

Action = lhun-drüp — the fourth of the Four Naljors. Cross-confirmation of the RS Ch.10 lhun-drüp = gom-méd mapping from the action-aspect side. Action is the register in which lhun-drüp is present-and-integrated.

Why This Triad (Rather Than, Say, Practice Alone)

Without view, meditation has no orientation and tends to collapse into technique-for-relaxation or subtle self-improvement. Without meditation, view remains philosophy. Without action, both remain private events with no integration into the life being lived. Each of the three removes a failure mode of the other two.

Mutual Constitution

“View encourages us to gain direct experience through meditation, and meditation gives us confidence of view.” (SoE Ch.3)

Not a linear order. View encourages meditation; meditation confirms view. Both ground action.

Simultaneous in Reality

Q: It sounds like view is the result of shi-ne — being able to see and be in silence. But I don’t understand how view encourages us to gain direct experience through meditation. Isn’t view itself direct experience?

NCR: Actually, yes. In reality view, meditation and action are simultaneous.

The linear exposition is expositional, not experiential — the same nongradual-approach principle RS Ch.10 names for the Four Naljors. The practitioner’s inability to clearly distinguish view from successful shi-nè is, in Ch.3’s Q&A, “just fine and dandy.”

Non-Method and the Method of Non-Method

Ch.3 SoE’s methodological hinge:

“Being is methodless. However, the methodlessness of being is something that the limitations of our foggy faculties cannot encompass… So we need to feel our way with delicacy, daring and determination. We have to acclimatise ourselves to the method of non-method. We discover the effortless spontaneity of being, through the practice of shi-ne — the introduction to space.”

The method of non-method — Ch.3’s reformulation of the adage [[Meditation Isn’t Getting Used To Is|meditation isn’t; getting used to is]]. Being is methodless, but the practitioner apparently does not know how to be; therefore method is required — the paradoxical method whose content is the cessation of methodical reaching.

Non-method is the post-sit condition, per KD Q&A:

KD: ‘Non-method’ is the condition in which you might find yourself at the end of a meditation session. You stand up, and somehow — that’s not the end of the meditation… but we still need to avoid pretending to live as though we’re enlightened.”

See Jé-thob for the RS Ch.11 companion framing. The jé-thob 15–30 minute post-meditation period is the non-method register Ch.3 describes.

Life Without Method Is the Goal — Not the Path

A load-bearing Ch.3 distinction:

KD: life without method is the goal — it’s not the path, even though methodlessness may be reflected in the path.”

Methodlessness may be reflected in the path (non-method moments), but the path itself has method. This is a critical clarification against the common misreading that Dzogchen = no practice. The practitioner on the path has method; the practitioner who achieves the goal is methodless. Claiming methodlessness without having completed the path is imitating enlightenment — “Tantric fantasy world in which you are some great non-dual heroine.”

The Imitation-of-Enlightenment Failure Mode

Ch.3’s Q&A is the book’s principal treatment of this failure. Attempting to act as if view, meditation, and action are already unified — without the lived experience of space — produces bland-smile, Buddhist robot, vajra android, wisdom-cookie Buddha, or ultimately vajra hell. The remedy: kindness-for-its-own-reward is the one valid imitation; all other imitations re-engage hope/fear and falsify. See Imitating Enlightenment and Kindness for the full treatment.

Graph View

Backlinks