Another powerful illustration involves a monk in the Buddha’s time, affectionately known as the dullard, who struggled to remember even a four-line verse of teaching. The Buddha instructed him to stand in the sun and briskly rub a white cloth in his hands. As the cloth grew soiled, the monk contemplated impermanence and the unattractive aspect of the body. This insight led to his full enlightenment through non-clinging.

In another discourse, the Timsamatta Sutta, the Buddha reminded thirty forest-dwelling bhikkhus of the beginningless cycle of rebirth, prompting their minds to be liberated by non-clinging:

Bhikkhus, this samsara is without discoverable beginning. A first point is not discerned of beings roaming and wandering on hindered by ignorance and fettered by craving. . . . Enough to be disenchanted toward all formations, enough to become dispassionate toward them, enough to be liberated from them. . . . And while this exposition was being spoken, the minds of the thirty bhikkhus were liberated from the taints by non-clinging.

In this context, the phrase empty phenomena rolling on, which emphasizes nonself, might become endless phenomena rolling on, reminding us of the liberating power that comes from deeply understanding the nature of samsara—the beginningless rounds of rebirth.

Years of dedicated forest practice had prepared the minds of these monks so well that simply listening allowed the words to carry a transformative power. The lesson here is that both teaching and listening to the dharma are themselves acts of meditation, and that awakening can arise from either. Liberation can occur through myriad insights, with practices tailored to each individual’s unique conditioning and capacity.

Integrating the Teachings from Different Practice Traditions

The question then becomes how different approaches can support each other rather than be in conflict. This integration occurs quite naturally when we realize that different systems of practice can each serve as skillful means for cultivating non-clinging—the essence of a free mind. One helpful way to understand the differences in various approaches is to reflect on the union of knowing and object. While some practices emphasize non-clinging to the object, others focus on non-clinging to the knowing itself.

A clear example of this distinction appears in the Mahamudra and Dzogchen traditions of Tibetan Buddhism. In these traditions, the nature of mind is described as the unity of emptiness and clarity (or cognizance). Although the two traditions use different terminologies and methods, their underlying essence and endpoints are the same. Mahamudra emphasizes a gradual development, initially working with the appearances in the mind, such as thoughts and sense objects, in order to recognize their empty nature. Once this recognition is stabilized, the training is to then rest in the unity of clarity and emptiness. Dzogchen, on the other hand, emphasizes a direct introduction to resting in awareness itself. Thus, even in these liberating nondual traditions, we find different emphases at various stages of practice.

We can observe similar differences in emphasis across many Buddhist traditions and lineages. Yet regardless of the particular emphasis, genuine freedom requires non-clinging to both the object (appearance) and the knowing (clarity). Each of us may be drawn to a particular path that resonates deeply, but as we learn from other traditions, we may find that different teachings become interwoven strands of practice, with each strengthening the other. Much as a rope gains its strength from multiple strands woven together, our practice can become stronger through this integration. While each tradition offers its own skillful means, a shift in perspective from another system of practice can sometimes reveal new insights that serve the ultimate goal: the end of suffering.