All you can do is hope.
When someone steps out the door, there is hope they will step back when the time presents itself. But what if not?
If not, one could only hope that the mystery surrounding absence is kind to the one gone. Kindness, it would seem, is the only remaining option of those awakening beings this side of absence.
It is worth commenting for a moment on the phrase dual practice which, itself, causes difficulties similar to our fundamental questions. When it was used at the first meeting of the ongoing working group of practitioners in both traditions at the Boston meeting of the Society of Buddhist-Christian Studies, several people objected strongly to it because they felt that their practice was one thing and not two. But is this not another way of indicating an answer to our question?
In a similar way, to use the phrase dual practice could easily be an indication of an inclination to answer the question in the opposite way. Even the similar phrase "practice across traditions" is not without its problems, for it can indicate a practice that somehow transcends the tradition it is rooted in. "Dual practice" in the sense that Roger Corless uses it, in which he practices his Christianity on alternate days with his Tibetan Buddhism, and is a rather dramatic symbol of his openness to our fundamental questions and could be taken as an answer to our question, i.e., the practice is dual because Zen meditation and the life of prayer are two different things. 77 All this illustrates once again how beneath the surface of the current Buddhist-Christian dialogue powerful currents exist generated by our basic issues.
(--Arraj, James (2012-01-14). Christianity in the Crucible of East-West Dialogue / God, Zen and the Intuition of Being (2 Volumes in 1) (Kindle Locations 558-564). Inner Growth Books and Videos, LLC. Kindle Edition.)When meetingbrook first worded its interest in looking to embody the dwelling place of the Alone, to step aside making room for Another, it used the words “practicing between traditions.”
“in the space separating, in the middle of, with one on either side; amid, amidst; archaic betwixt.”
The emphasis is not on what is separated, but on the space separating. The space between.
(Kenotic space; Mu space.)
As the zen saying goes, “not two, not one.”
I’ll meet you there.
True as I am here.