Re: [Zen] illusion

[Merle Lester]

 yes edgar...and where are you?..merle


  
Which one is Joe and which Bill?
:-)

Edgar




On Apr 25, 2013, at 8:32 PM, Merle Lester wrote:


>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>IMG_0653
> 
>
>
>
>
>

 

Re: [Zen] illusion

[Edgar Owen]

Which one is Joe and which Bill?
:-)

Edgar



On Apr 25, 2013, at 8:32 PM, Merle Lester wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> IMG_0653
>  
> 
> 
> 

Re: [Zen] Illusion - Change of Term

[Bill!]

ED,

Thanks!

As you can see there are many different definitions of 'illusion'.  I shy away 
from those that stress 'false' and lean towards those that stress 'distorted'.

...Bill!

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "ED"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> Bill!  -
> 
> 'illusion' appears to be an acceptable label in zen.
> 
> As,  google[zen and illusion] gives 6.6 million results.
> 
> Next, define what one means by 'illusion'.
> 
> -- ED
> 
> PS1: Is 'conception' a suitable replacement for 'illusion'?
> 
> PS2: Below are a variety of meanings for 'illusion'
> 
> 
>  
>  d=imvns&tbas=0&ei=ScxMUKWxMYHhiALLyIHYDg&ved=0CCoQuAs> Dictionary 
> Search Results
> il·lu·sion
> noun /iˈlo͞oZHən/ 
> illusions, plural
> 
> 1. A false idea or belief
> * - he had no illusions about the trouble she was in
> 
> 
> * A deceptive appearance or impression
> * - the illusion of family togetherness
> * - the tension between illusion and reality
> 
> 
> * A thing that is or is likely to be wrongly perceived or interpreted
> by the senses
> * - Zollner's illusion makes parallel lines seem to diverge by
> placing them on a zigzag-striped background
> 
> 
> 
> Web definitions
> * an erroneous mental representation
> 
> * something many people believe that is false; "they have the
> illusion that I am very wealthy"
> 
> * delusion: the act of deluding; deception by creating illusory ideas
> 
> * magic trick: an illusory feat; considered magical by naive
> observers
> wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
>  n%3Fs%3Dillusion&rct=j&sa=X&ei=ScxMUKWxMYHhiALLyIHYDg&ved=0CDMQngkwAQ&q=\
> illusion&usg=AFQjCNEsQHK59ChYovHpQHSOzHq0eyJihg>
> 
> * (illusional) marked by or producing illusion; "illusionary stage
> effects"
> wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
>  n%3Fs%3Dillusional&rct=j&sa=X&ei=ScxMUKWxMYHhiALLyIHYDg&ved=0CDUQngkwAQ&\
> q=illusion&usg=AFQjCNHZ3gkERC5YBfEdy2_NAnCbXzXygg>
> 
> * (illusory) illusive: based on or having the nature of an illusion;
> "illusive hopes of finding a better job"; "Secret activities offer
> presidents the alluring but often illusory promise that they can achieve
> foreign policy goals without the bothersome debate and open decision
> that are staples of ...
> wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
>  n%3Fs%3Dillusory&rct=j&sa=X&ei=ScxMUKWxMYHhiALLyIHYDg&ved=0CDcQngkwAQ&q=\
> illusion&usg=AFQjCNFND4IibFwyUBj-HCASl6GAVke-Tw>
> 
> * An illusion is a distortion of the senses, revealing how the brain
> normally organizes and interprets sensory stimulation. While illusions
> distort reality, they are generally shared by most people. ...
> en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusion
>  =j&sa=X&ei=ScxMUKWxMYHhiALLyIHYDg&ved=0CDkQngkwAQ&q=illusion&usg=AFQjCNH\
> OEKJEuFILdEw2osDjHDHmmHIBPA>
> 
> 
> * Anything that seems to be something that it is not; A
> misapprehension; a belief in something that is in fact not true; A
> magician's trick; The fact of being an illusion (in any of the above
> senses)
> en.wiktionary.org/wiki/illusion
>  t=j&sa=X&ei=ScxMUKWxMYHhiALLyIHYDg&ved=0CEUQngkwAQ&q=illusion&usg=AFQjCN\
> EYCLXk8PuHfqRXGf0WkygVLeoyUg>
> 
> * (illusory) Resulting from an illusion; deceptive, imaginary, unreal
> en.wiktionary.org/wiki/illusory
>  t=j&sa=X&ei=ScxMUKWxMYHhiALLyIHYDg&ved=0CEcQngkwAQ&q=illusion&usg=AFQjCN\
> F_-DgMuywVb0hlonAOSHZqz1s_1g>
> 
> * (Illusions) Perceptions created in the visual system and brain that
> differ from the "objective" environment as measured by physical
> instruments.
> www.google-docs.com/post/143.html
>  rct=j&sa=X&ei=ScxMUKWxMYHhiALLyIHYDg&ved=0CEkQngkwAQ&q=illusion&usg=AFQj\
> CNHa7e_fmAr-k6gDDgFt2pEgDox7Tw>
> 
> * (illusions) a false perception; the mistaking of something for what
> is not.
> www.uihealthcare.com/depts/uibehavioralhealth/patiented/glossa…
>  ioralhealth/patiented/glossary.html&rct=j&sa=X&ei=ScxMUKWxMYHhiALLyIHYDg\
> &ved=0CEsQngkwAQ&q=illusion&usg=AFQjCNGsv5cy8SpdFS-Jgo90prjTB41tJw>
> 
> * Illusions occur when a person sees something that is real but
> misinterprets what it is. For examples, heat waves on the desert floor
> can look like waves of water.
> www.mdvu.org/glossary/
>  ei=ScxMUKWxMYHhiALLyIHYDg&ved=0CE0QngkwAQ&q=illusion&usg=AFQjCNH6n2mYSwF\
> fxFfdHz

Re: [Zen] Illusion - Change of Term

[billsmart]

Edgar,

I don't like the phrase 'cognitive simulation of reality' although it does 
describe what I'm talking about. It's just too wordy, too complicated. I want a 
plain word or very short phrase. I want a word that better fits into zen which 
is very simple and not complicated. 'Illusion' is of course still the best for 
me but it as I've said seems to be uncomfortable for many others. I guess they 
think if they have 'illusions' they're dumb, but if they think they have 
'cognitive simulations' they're smart (or at least not so dumb). It all seems 
like 'po-TAY-toe, po-TAH-toe' to me.

I've also investigated the term 'perception' which also means what I want to 
convey, but in some dictionaries 'perception' is defined as 'awareness'.  
Although it certainly does include awareness it's a self-awareness, a 
dualistically-based awareness and not the same as the non-dualistically-based 
awareness I call Buddha Nature.  So...that  would probably just introduce 
another instance of confusion or resistance.  It's like Whack-A-Mole.

I like the 'model' term, but have now rejected 'logical' and 'rational' model 
because the thing-a-ma-bob we're talking about is not entirely logical or 
rational. I'm hovering around 'mental model' but the alliteration and the 
sing-song effect of both words having 2 syllables is a little uncomfortable. I 
think I will use it for a while and see how it feels.

...Bill!

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Edgar Owen  wrote:
>
> Bill,
> 
> I use the term cognitive simulation of reality for how people model reality 
> in their heads. Every organism operates in reality in terms of and on the 
> basis of its own internal model of reality.
> 
> Functionally it's like a robot which operates on the basis of its own 
> computational model of its environment.
> 
> 
> When you understand how that works it becomes clear that "The reality, the 
> world, that you think you live in is actually entirely in your head."
> 
> Only problem is your head is not entirely in YOUR head.
> 
> Experience is primary, and antecedent to all discrimination...
> 
> However experience manifests consistency, and from that all else follows
> 
> This is fairly easy to understand when speaking of OTHER organisms. It's just 
> basic biology. However then when one tries to understand it from the inside 
> of your own head the understanding becomes much more subtle...
> 
> Edgar
> 
> 
> 
> On Sep 9, 2012, at 4:59 AM, Bill! wrote:
> 
> > To Anyone Who Cares,
> > 
> > After much reflection and a good round of my thrice-weekly, 
> > regularly-scheduled 18-hole kinhin I've decided to quit using the term 
> > 'illusion'. It is the term I was personally taught and have seen written in 
> > countless books on zen and that I myself have used for over 40 years, but 
> > it seems to conjure up some kind of bad mojo for most of you. I get the 
> > feeling that you think if your are creating 'illusions' that you're doing 
> > something wrong or bad, and that's is definitely not what I want to project.
> > 
> > So...I'm now going to use the term 'model' or 'logical model' or maybe 
> > 'rational model' (I haven't decided which yet). I'm looking for something 
> > that will more palatable to the majority here that seem to have a bad 
> > reaction to the term 'illusion'.
> > 
> > But the meaning I intend to communicate will still be the same...Bill! 
> > 
> >
>





Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Illusion - Change of Term

[Bill!]

Edgar,

I don't like the phrase 'cognitive simulation of reality' although it does 
describe what I'm talking about.  It's just too wordy, too complicated.  I want 
a plain word.  I want a word that better fits into zen which is very simple and 
not complicated.  'Illusion' is of course still the best for me but it as I've 
said seems to be uncomfortable for many others.  I guess they think if they 
have 'illusions' they're dumb, but if they think they have 'cognitive 
simulations' they're smart (or at least not so dumb).  It all seems like 
'po-TAY-toe, po-TAH-toe' to me.

I like the 'model' term, but have now rejected 'logical' and 'rational' model 
because the thing-a-ma-bob we're talking about is not entirely logical or 
rational.  I'm hovering around 'mental model' but the alliteration and the 
sing-song effect of both words having 2 syllables is a little uncomfortable.  I 
think I will use it for a while and see how it feels.

...Bill!

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Edgar Owen  wrote:
>
> Bill,
> 
> I use the term cognitive simulation of reality for how people model reality 
> in their heads. Every organism operates in reality in terms of and on the 
> basis of its own internal model of reality.
> 
> Functionally it's like a robot which operates on the basis of its own 
> computational model of its environment.
> 
> 
> When you understand how that works it becomes clear that "The reality, the 
> world, that you think you live in is actually entirely in your head."
> 
> Only problem is your head is not entirely in YOUR head.
> 
> Experience is primary, and antecedent to all discrimination...
> 
> However experience manifests consistency, and from that all else follows
> 
> This is fairly easy to understand when speaking of OTHER organisms. It's just 
> basic biology. However then when one tries to understand it from the inside 
> of your own head the understanding becomes much more subtle...
> 
> Edgar
> 
> 
> 
> On Sep 9, 2012, at 4:59 AM, Bill! wrote:
> 
> > To Anyone Who Cares,
> > 
> > After much reflection and a good round of my thrice-weekly, 
> > regularly-scheduled 18-hole kinhin I've decided to quit using the term 
> > 'illusion'. It is the term I was personally taught and have seen written in 
> > countless books on zen and that I myself have used for over 40 years, but 
> > it seems to conjure up some kind of bad mojo for most of you. I get the 
> > feeling that you think if your are creating 'illusions' that you're doing 
> > something wrong or bad, and that's is definitely not what I want to project.
> > 
> > So...I'm now going to use the term 'model' or 'logical model' or maybe 
> > 'rational model' (I haven't decided which yet). I'm looking for something 
> > that will more palatable to the majority here that seem to have a bad 
> > reaction to the term 'illusion'.
> > 
> > But the meaning I intend to communicate will still be the same...Bill! 
> > 
> >
>






Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Illusion - Change of Term

[ED]

Bill!  -

'illusion' appears to be an acceptable label in zen.

As,  google[zen and illusion] gives 6.6 million results.

Next, define what one means by 'illusion'.

-- ED

PS1: Is 'conception' a suitable replacement for 'illusion'?

PS2: Below are a variety of meanings for 'illusion'


 
 Dictionary 
Search Results
il·lu·sion
noun /iˈlo͞oZHən/ 
illusions, plural

1. A false idea or belief
* - he had no illusions about the trouble she was in


* A deceptive appearance or impression
* - the illusion of family togetherness
* - the tension between illusion and reality


* A thing that is or is likely to be wrongly perceived or interpreted
by the senses
* - Zollner's illusion makes parallel lines seem to diverge by
placing them on a zigzag-striped background



Web definitions
* an erroneous mental representation

* something many people believe that is false; "they have the
illusion that I am very wealthy"

* delusion: the act of deluding; deception by creating illusory ideas

* magic trick: an illusory feat; considered magical by naive
observers
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn


* (illusional) marked by or producing illusion; "illusionary stage
effects"
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn


* (illusory) illusive: based on or having the nature of an illusion;
"illusive hopes of finding a better job"; "Secret activities offer
presidents the alluring but often illusory promise that they can achieve
foreign policy goals without the bothersome debate and open decision
that are staples of ...
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn


* An illusion is a distortion of the senses, revealing how the brain
normally organizes and interprets sensory stimulation. While illusions
distort reality, they are generally shared by most people. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusion



* Anything that seems to be something that it is not; A
misapprehension; a belief in something that is in fact not true; A
magician's trick; The fact of being an illusion (in any of the above
senses)
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/illusion


* (illusory) Resulting from an illusion; deceptive, imaginary, unreal
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/illusory


* (Illusions) Perceptions created in the visual system and brain that
differ from the "objective" environment as measured by physical
instruments.
www.google-docs.com/post/143.html


* (illusions) a false perception; the mistaking of something for what
is not.
www.uihealthcare.com/depts/uibehavioralhealth/patiented/glossa…


* Illusions occur when a person sees something that is real but
misinterprets what it is. For examples, heat waves on the desert floor
can look like waves of water.
www.mdvu.org/glossary/


* A delusional perception between what is perceived and what is
reality.
www.mysticalblaze.com/GlossaryParanormal.htm


* 1. The distortion of mental matter by a mind that perceives reality
incompletely. 2. An incomplete or distorted perception of the archet

Re: [Zen] Illusion - Change of Term

[Kristopher Grey]

A pointer by any other name  ;)

KG

On 9/9/2012 4:59 AM, Bill! wrote:


To Anyone Who Cares,

After much reflection and a good round of my thrice-weekly, 
regularly-scheduled 18-hole kinhin I've decided to quit using the term 
'illusion'. It is the term I was personally taught and have seen 
written in countless books on zen and that I myself have used for over 
40 years, but it seems to conjure up some kind of bad mojo for most of 
you. I get the feeling that you think if your are creating 'illusions' 
that you're doing something wrong or bad, and that's is definitely not 
what I want to project.


So...I'm now going to use the term 'model' or 'logical model' or maybe 
'rational model' (I haven't decided which yet). I'm looking for 
something that will more palatable to the majority here that seem to 
have a bad reaction to the term 'illusion'.


But the meaning I intend to communicate will still be the same...Bill!

Re: [Zen] Illusion - Change of Term

[覺妙精明 （JMJM）]

Hi Bill,

Congratulations.

The reasons that Diamond Sutra continues to emphasize "dharma is not 
dharma, just called dharma, etc." enables each of us to reflect in our 
own way inwardly.  If it stated too clearly what it is or it is not, 
then the reader could easily be forced to either agree or disagree.  
That is not as effective, because it directs the reader to form 
(thoughts) instead of heart(Buddha nature).


Stay flexible, stay illusive, stay in the middle way, then perhaps 
someone may awake from these words, instead of continue to agree or 
disagree.  After all, agree or disagree, according to your old term, is 
illusory. :-)


For your reference,
jm
with palms together


On 9/9/2012 1:59 AM, Bill! wrote:


To Anyone Who Cares,

After much reflection and a good round of my thrice-weekly, 
regularly-scheduled 18-hole kinhin I've decided to quit using the term 
'illusion'. It is the term I was personally taught and have seen 
written in countless books on zen and that I myself have used for over 
40 years, but it seems to conjure up some kind of bad mojo for most of 
you. I get the feeling that you think if your are creating 'illusions' 
that you're doing something wrong or bad, and that's is definitely not 
what I want to project.


So...I'm now going to use the term 'model' or 'logical model' or maybe 
'rational model' (I haven't decided which yet). I'm looking for 
something that will more palatable to the majority here that seem to 
have a bad reaction to the term 'illusion'.


But the meaning I intend to communicate will still be the same...Bill!

Re: [Zen] Illusion - Change of Term

[Edgar Owen]

Bill,

I use the term cognitive simulation of reality for how people model reality in 
their heads. Every organism operates in reality in terms of and on the basis of 
its own internal model of reality.

Functionally it's like a robot which operates on the basis of its own 
computational model of its environment.


When you understand how that works it becomes clear that "The reality, the 
world, that you think you live in is actually entirely in your head."

Only problem is your head is not entirely in YOUR head.

Experience is primary, and antecedent to all discrimination...

However experience manifests consistency, and from that all else follows

This is fairly easy to understand when speaking of OTHER organisms. It's just 
basic biology. However then when one tries to understand it from the inside of 
your own head the understanding becomes much more subtle...

Edgar



On Sep 9, 2012, at 4:59 AM, Bill! wrote:

> To Anyone Who Cares,
> 
> After much reflection and a good round of my thrice-weekly, 
> regularly-scheduled 18-hole kinhin I've decided to quit using the term 
> 'illusion'. It is the term I was personally taught and have seen written in 
> countless books on zen and that I myself have used for over 40 years, but it 
> seems to conjure up some kind of bad mojo for most of you. I get the feeling 
> that you think if your are creating 'illusions' that you're doing something 
> wrong or bad, and that's is definitely not what I want to project.
> 
> So...I'm now going to use the term 'model' or 'logical model' or maybe 
> 'rational model' (I haven't decided which yet). I'm looking for something 
> that will more palatable to the majority here that seem to have a bad 
> reaction to the term 'illusion'.
> 
> But the meaning I intend to communicate will still be the same...Bill! 
> 
> 

[Zen] Illusion - Change of Term

[Bill!]

To Anyone Who Cares,

After much reflection and a good round of my thrice-weekly, regularly-scheduled 
18-hole kinhin I've decided to quit using the term 'illusion'.  It is the term 
I was personally taught and have seen written in countless books on zen and 
that I myself have used for over 40 years, but it seems to conjure up some kind 
of bad mojo for most of you.  I get the feeling that you think if your are 
creating 'illusions' that you're doing something wrong or bad, and that's is 
definitely not what I want to project.

So...I'm now going to use the term 'model' or 'logical model' or maybe 
'rational model' (I haven't decided which yet).  I'm looking for something that 
will more palatable to the majority here that seem to have a bad reaction to 
the term 'illusion'.

But the meaning I intend to communicate will still be the same...Bill! 





Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] illusion

[Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明]

 Edgar,

Thank you for your support.  Let me elaborate further.

Words, thoughts, concepts and this discussion are all like waves in the 
ocean.  They appear and disappear.  One reflects on the other 
interdependently.  The value of all comments posted exists only relative 
to each other.  Like waves in the ocean, it is an endless chase of each 
other. Searching, quoting online, through wikipedia or dictionary are 
all for the thinking brain.


Some call this thinking brain our egoic mind.  When we are wakened from 
the impermanent and relative nature of words and concepts, then we may 
begin to accept the fact, that truth of Chan can only be experienced and 
not understood.


Perhaps then, we may accept the fact that perhaps we should sit down, 
shut off our mind and start cultivating our chi, or your Tao, then enter 
the gateless gate of Chan.


There is really really no other way. :-)

Be Enlightened In This Life - We ALL Can
http://chanjmjm.blogspot.com
http://www.heartchan.org


On 10/5/2010 2:02 PM, Edgar Owen wrote:


JMJM,


An excellent description of the impermanent nature of forms and thus 
their illusory nature with which I am in agreement. Forms come and go 
as manifestations of the underlying substance, but the underlying 
substance is itself unchangeable.


Thanks,
Edgar


On Oct 5, 2010, at 4:41 PM, Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 wrote:


If I may jump in here about these important subject matter...

DP asked an excellent question about the nature of illusion.  Edgar 
answered as "chi/tao manifested itself through varius forms of 
illusion. "


If I may elaborate further...

In Chan, we don't use the term "illusion".  You may notice so in all 
my posts for the last 7/8 years.   Chan is defined as the universal 
life force and wisdom.  Edgar called it Tao.  Others called it God. 
Scientists call it Big Ban.


This universal life force, or universal chi for short, manifested 
everything - planets, air, water, earth, human, trees, flowers - we 
label them as forms.  This universal chi, or mother nature, supports 
every form in a harmonious way, though every form eventually 
disappears from our senses.  We describe these disappearances as 
illusive or impermanent.


Therefore, our body, our mind, our thoughts, our words, are all 
forms, all impermanent, all relative, and all illusive.


Meaning the concept of illusion itself is illusive...

Then, what is reality?  how to experience it?

Chan teaches, "detach from all forms and be in sync with the 
universal chi."


If I may add, "all forms" includes our thoughts, judgments, analysis, 
understanding, etc. as well as this post of mine.


JMJM
Head Teacher
Order of Buddha Heart

Be Enlightened In This Life - We ALL Can
http://chanjmjm.blogspot.com
http://www.heartchan.org

On 10/5/2010 4:22 AM, Edgar Owen wrote:


Chris and Bill,


Sure but you both miss my point. My point is that you must use the 
intelligent mind to reach the point where things happen naturally 
via the whole being.


A great martial artist doesn't intellectualize each move but his 
Zen-like responses are the results of years of study and training 
involving a great deal of intelligent study and physical training. 
Same with recognizing illusions for what they are. That is immediate 
not intellectual experience, but only done properly after intense 
intelligent analysis of the nature of illusion.


Remember Zen is simply experiencing reality. The ONLY thing that 
stands in the way is the illusions which seem real but aren't. So 
the essence of Zen is simply recognizing illusion for what it is. 
Not so much getting rid of illusions (some can be got rid of some 
can't) but recognizing illusion as illusion. That is experiencing 
reality since reality consists entirely of ontological energy (chi, 
Tao) manifesting through the various forms of illusion.


Edgar




On Oct 4, 2010, at 10:19 PM, Chris Austin-Lane wrote:



When you swim well, your intelligence is not separate from your 
action, but indivisible. At that point the things you could think 
about swimming, things you read in books, are not necessary to 
think. The intelligence is there in the action.


All these words about thoughts vs perceptions seem to have a 
viewpoint of analysis. To analyse without the view point of 
analysing, you swim, answer questions about swimming, give 
explanations of swimming, all without leaving the spot.



On Oct 4, 2010 6:02 PM, > wrote:




Edgar,

As usual I agree with some of what you say but not all.

The part I agree with is that zen is not anti anything.  I’d say 
if anything it’s anti-attachments.  I myself winced when I sent 
the post affirming that zen is anti-intellectual.  It’s not.


The part I disagree with you is about the role of intelligence in 
zen.  Intelligence is not necessary to realize Buddha Mind, only 
sensory experience.


Intelligence (rationality) like all illusions can be benign.  The 
important thing is to discard your attachment to in

Re: [Zen] illusion

[ED]

Edgar,

>From a zen perspective is not all this conceptualization unnecessary,
(like 'adding legs to a snake'?)

--Ed



--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Edgar Owen  wrote:
>
> JMJM,
>
> An excellent description of the impermanent nature of forms and thus
their illusory nature with which I am in agreement. Forms come and go as
manifestations of the underlying substance, but the underlying substance
is itself unchangeable.
>
> Thanks,
> Edgar



> On Oct 5, 2010, at 4:41 PM, Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明
wrote:
>
> > If I may jump in here about these important subject matter...
> >
> > DP asked an excellent question about the nature of illusion. Edgar
answered as "chi/tao manifested itself through varius forms of illusion.
"
> >
> > If I may elaborate further...
> >
> > In Chan, we don't use the term "illusion". You may notice so in all
my posts for the last 7/8 years. Chan is defined as the universal life
force and wisdom. Edgar called it Tao. Others called it God. Scientists
call it Big Ban.
> >
> > This universal life force, or universal chi for short, manifested
everything - planets, air, water, earth, human, trees, flowers - we
label them as forms. This universal chi, or mother nature, supports
every form in a harmonious way, though every form eventually disappears
from our senses. We describe these disappearances as illusive or
impermanent.
> >
> > Therefore, our body, our mind, our thoughts, our words, are all
forms, all impermanent, all relative, and all illusive.
> >
> > Meaning the concept of illusion itself is illusive...
> >
> > Then, what is reality? how to experience it?
> >
> > Chan teaches, "detach from all forms and be in sync with the
universal chi."
> >
> > If I may add, "all forms" includes our thoughts, judgments,
analysis, understanding, etc. as well as this post of mine.
> >
> > JMJM
> > Head Teacher
> > Order of Buddha Heart
> > Be Enlightened In This Life - We ALL Can
> > http://chanjmjm.blogspot.com
> > http://www.heartchan.org 



> > On 10/5/2010 4:22 AM, Edgar Owen wrote:

> >> Chris and Bill,
> >>
> >>
> >> Sure but you both miss my point. My point is that you must use the
intelligent mind to reach the point where things happen naturally via
the whole being.
> >>
> >> A great martial artist doesn't intellectualize each move but his
Zen-like responses are the results of years of study and training
involving a great deal of intelligent study and physical training. Same
with recognizing illusions for what they are. That is immediate not
intellectual experience, but only done properly after intense
intelligent analysis of the nature of illusion.
> >>
> >> Remember Zen is simply experiencing reality. The ONLY thing that
stands in the way is the illusions which seem real but aren't. So the
essence of Zen is simply recognizing illusion for what it is. Not so
much getting rid of illusions (some can be got rid of some can't) but
recognizing illusion as illusion. That is experiencing reality since
reality consists entirely of ontological energy (chi, Tao) manifesting
through the various forms of illusion.
> >>
> >> Edgar



> >> On Oct 4, 2010, at 10:19 PM, Chris Austin-Lane wrote:
> >>
> >>> When you swim well, your intelligence is not separate from your
action, but indivisible. At that point the things you could think about
swimming, things you read in books, are not necessary to think. The
intelligence is there in the action.
> >>>
> >>> All these words about thoughts vs perceptions seem to have a
viewpoint of analysis. To analyse without the view point of analysing,
you swim, answer questions about swimming, give explanations of
swimming, all without leaving the spot.


>  Edgar,
> 
>  As usual I agree with some of what you say but not all.
> 
>  The part I agree with is that zen is not anti anything.
I’d say if anything it’s anti-attachments. I myself winced
when I sent the post affirming that zen is anti-intellectual.
It’s not.
> 
>  The part I disagree with you is about the role of intelligence in
zen. Intelligence is not necessary to realize Buddha Mind, only sensory
experience.
> 
>  Intelligence (rationality) like all illusions can be benign. The
important thing is to discard your attachment to intelligence or any
other illusion. Intelligence can be used, as you have said, to help
orient you in the beginning - but it is not necessary. You can gain
information about most anything with your intelligence â€" like
reading books or even listening to others talk.
> 
>  Intelligence can be used to learn to swim or ride a bike. You can
get a general idea of what it is you are supposed to do, but to actually
swim you have to get into the water or onto the bike and throw the book
away. What you have learned using your intelligence might help you then,
or it might hinder you. These are functions your body has to learn, not
your rational mind.
> 
>  It’s the same with zen.
> 
>  …Bill!

[Zen] illusion

[Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明]

 If I may jump in here about these important subject matter...

DP asked an excellent question about the nature of illusion.  Edgar 
answered as "chi/tao manifested itself through varius forms of illusion. "


If I may elaborate further...

In Chan, we don't use the term "illusion".  You may notice so in all my 
posts for the last 7/8 years.   Chan is defined as the universal life 
force and wisdom.  Edgar called it Tao.  Others called it God. 
Scientists call it Big Ban.


This universal life force, or universal chi for short, manifested 
everything - planets, air, water, earth, human, trees, flowers - we 
label them as forms.  This universal chi, or mother nature, supports 
every form in a harmonious way, though every form eventually disappears 
from our senses.  We describe these disappearances as illusive or 
impermanent.


Therefore, our body, our mind, our thoughts, our words, are all forms, 
all impermanent, all relative, and all illusive.


Meaning the concept of illusion itself is illusive...

Then, what is reality?  how to experience it?

Chan teaches, "detach from all forms and be in sync with the universal chi."

If I may add, "all forms" includes our thoughts, judgments, analysis, 
understanding, etc. as well as this post of mine.


JMJM
Head Teacher
Order of Buddha Heart

Be Enlightened In This Life - We ALL Can
http://chanjmjm.blogspot.com
http://www.heartchan.org


On 10/5/2010 4:22 AM, Edgar Owen wrote:


Chris and Bill,


Sure but you both miss my point. My point is that you must use the 
intelligent mind to reach the point where things happen naturally via 
the whole being.


A great martial artist doesn't intellectualize each move but his 
Zen-like responses are the results of years of study and training 
involving a great deal of intelligent study and physical training. 
Same with recognizing illusions for what they are. That is immediate 
not intellectual experience, but only done properly after intense 
intelligent analysis of the nature of illusion.


Remember Zen is simply experiencing reality. The ONLY thing that 
stands in the way is the illusions which seem real but aren't. So the 
essence of Zen is simply recognizing illusion for what it is. Not so 
much getting rid of illusions (some can be got rid of some can't) but 
recognizing illusion as illusion. That is experiencing reality since 
reality consists entirely of ontological energy (chi, Tao) manifesting 
through the various forms of illusion.


Edgar




On Oct 4, 2010, at 10:19 PM, Chris Austin-Lane wrote:



When you swim well, your intelligence is not separate from your 
action, but indivisible. At that point the things you could think 
about swimming, things you read in books, are not necessary to think. 
The intelligence is there in the action.


All these words about thoughts vs perceptions seem to have a 
viewpoint of analysis. To analyse without the view point of 
analysing, you swim, answer questions about swimming, give 
explanations of swimming, all without leaving the spot.



On Oct 4, 2010 6:02 PM, > wrote:




Edgar,

As usual I agree with some of what you say but not all.

The part I agree with is that zen is not anti anything.  I’d say if 
anything it’s anti-attachments.  I myself winced when I sent the 
post affirming that zen is anti-intellectual.  It’s not.


The part I disagree with you is about the role of intelligence in 
zen.  Intelligence is not necessary to realize Buddha Mind, only 
sensory experience.


Intelligence (rationality) like all illusions can be benign.  The 
important thing is to discard your attachment to intelligence or any 
other illusion.  Intelligence can be used, as you have said, to help 
orient you in the beginning - but it is not necessary.  You can gain 
information about most anything with your intelligence – like 
reading books or even listening to others talk.


Intelligence can be used to learn to swim or ride a bike.  You can 
get a general idea of what it is you are supposed to do, but to 
actually swim you have to get into the water or onto the bike and 
throw the book away.  What you have learned using your intelligence 
might help you then, or it might hinder you.  These are functions 
your body has to learn, not your rational mind.


It’s the same with zen.

…Bill!


*From:* Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com  
[mailto:Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
] *On Behalf Of *Edgar Owen

*Sent:* Monday, October 04, 2010 4:53 PM


To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 

*Subject:* Re: [Zen] Bible, God, etc.





Nonsense. Zen is not anti anything except perhaps illusion.



Intelligence is absolutely necess...



__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
signature database 5503 (20101004) __




The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com 




__ Information from ESET NOD32 Anti