Hi Bill,
 
I think it is an extremely difficult task to communicate Buddha Nature. On the 
other hand, it is also impossible for this un-enlightened mind to fully 
understand anything described as Buddha Nature because of its limitation. The 
experience/state is beyond convention, while almost everything we experience 
with with this mind (such as language, gestures, etc) are of convention, or at 
least perceived through such frame.
 
If koan is being used as a teaching tool, I imagine it takes a really 
accomplished teacher to do this properly. And perhaps, a good student too.
 
siska

--- On Fri, 19/11/10, billsm...@hhs1963.org <billsm...@hhs1963.org> wrote:


From: billsm...@hhs1963.org <billsm...@hhs1963.org>
Subject: RE: [Zen] Re: FW: Quote from St. Thomas Aquinas
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, 19 November, 2010, 9:02


  



Siska,

There are no prescribed ‘techniques’ for communicating Buddha Nature, which is 
the attempt of all koans. The communication has to be spontaneous and come 
directly from Buddha Nature. Sometimes it is a sentence or two. Sometimes it is 
just one or two words. Sometimes it is just a sound. Sometimes it’s a gesture 
or even just silence. There is no ‘right’ way, although not just any response 
is acceptable.

In the last two koans below the same zen master, Nansen, responded to the same 
question: ‘What is the Way?’ in two different and seemingly contradictory way. 
(‘What is the Way?’ is asking something like ‘How can I become enlightened?’, 
or ‘How can I experience Buddha Nature?’. ) In the first he says: ‘Ordinary 
mind is the Way’. In the second he says, “Mind is not Buddha, knowing is not 
the Way”.

…Bill! 

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 
siska_...@yahoo.com
Sent: Thursday, November 18, 2010 7:46 PM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: FW: Quote from St. Thomas Aquinas

Hi Bill,

Thanks for the koans.

What is the communication technique in the last two koans?

I think I've read some sufi stories before, but can't remember anything similar 
to koans at the moment. I'll share the story when I remember.

siska
________________________________________
From: <billsm...@hhs1963.org> 
Sender: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 10:29:31 +0700
To: <Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com>
ReplyTo: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
Subject: RE: [Zen] Re: FW: Quote from St. Thomas Aquinas

Siska,

A koan that immediately comes to mind:

Buddha Holds up a Flower, Case 6 - GATELESS GATE:

“Once in ancient times, when the World-Honored One was at Mount Grdhrakuta 
(Vulture Peak), he held up a flower, twirled it, and showed it to the 
assemblage.

At this, they all remained silent. Only the venerable Kashyapa broke into a 
smile.

The World-Honored One said: “I have the eye treasury of the true Dharma, the 
marvelous mind of nirvana, the true form of no-form, the subtle gate of the 
Dharma. It does not depend on letters, being especially transmitted outside of 
all teachings. Now I entrust Mahakashyapa with this.””

This koan shows the fundamentals of zen communication, and actually sets out in 
clear language that this communication “…does not depend on letters…” and that 
it is “…outside of all teachings.”. 

Two other examples of how this communication is used of particular interest are 
two koans, both attributed to Nansen:

Ordinary Mind is the Way, Case 19 – GATELESS GATE

“Joshu earnestly asked Nansen, “What is the Way?” Nansen answered, “The 
ordinary mind is the Way.” …”

Knowing is Not the Way, Case 34 – GATELESS GATE

“Nansen said, “Mind is not Buddha; knowing is not the Way.”

Do you have some Sufi stories that you’d like to share?

Thanks…Bill!

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 
siska_...@yahoo.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 6:43 PM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: FW: Quote from St. Thomas Aquinas

Hi Bill,

Actually one of the things that raised my interest in Zen is koans.

> Don’t try to ‘understand’ the koans.

That explains why I never really understand what the koans are trying to tell. 
Yet I don't care, I just like them. Some say koans are not to be interpreted 
and analysed. I quite agree as the interpretations can sometimes be rather 
absurd.

> Just observe (through reading) the communication techniques

I don't really get this. You mean something like the pond and frog example?

Siska
________________________________________
From: <billsm...@hhs1963.org> 
Sender: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 17:05:11 +0700
To: <Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com>
ReplyTo: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
Subject: RE: [Zen] Re: FW: Quote from St. Thomas Aquinas

Siska,

I believe face-to-face contact is the best medium. This can include language, 
utterances, gestures and of course also silence. I suggest you read some koans 
and especially pay attention at how the principals in the koans communicated 
with each other. Don’t try to ‘understand’ the koans. Just observe (through 
reading) the communication techniques.

…Bill!

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 
siska_...@yahoo.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2010 8:02 AM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: FW: Quote from St. Thomas Aquinas

Hi Bill,

The problem with language is not only that it is dualistic, but also that it 
relies heavily in words that are full with perceptions.

Makes me wonder then, what is the good medium to communicate direct experience?

Siska
________________________________________
From: <billsm...@hhs1963.org> 
Sender: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2010 23:27:07 +0700
To: <Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com>
ReplyTo: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
Subject: RE: [Zen] Re: FW: Quote from St. Thomas Aquinas

Lluis,

Just THIS! is before language. I assume what Chomsky is referring to as
'metalanguage' is just pattern recognition which is a function of our
discriminating mind. When this function is applied to language I guess it
could be called 'metalanguage' since it is an attribute that must be present
to learn language. It would also make sense that this 'metalanguage' could
be the foundation for grammar, although I still assert that grammar is an
attempt to cram language into a nice, neat logical framework - and as we all
know it doesn't actually fit very well. In any language there are a lot of
exceptions to grammatical rules, and that is because the rules (logical
structure) do not spring from the language itself, but are imposed upon it.

So I think, from the way you described Chomsky's theory of language and
'metalanguage', that I disagree.

I also disagree with your statement below that '...direct experience...is
something that could not be communicated.' It certainly can be
communicated, although language is not a very good medium for that precisely
because most languages are dualistically-based.

I haven't read any Sufi tales, but from the way you described them they
sound a lot like zen koans. And if that's the case they aren't meant to be
'understood' - they are meant to communicate direct experience. As you say
later in the paragraph, 'No way to explain...When the moment arrives, it is
there.'

...Bill! 

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Lluís Mendieta
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 10:03 PM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: FW: Quote from St. Thomas Aquinas

Hi, Bill

Well, I am just a chemist, not a linguist.
But I have been teached the metalanguage theory of Chomsky: all languages
have a subjacent grammar that brain understand, process and implement,
making this way that children could produce perfect phrases that they have
never heard before.
So, the metalanguage exists before it is placed in the form of grammar.
Grammar would be the verbalization of the metalanguage. Not after language.
Just the language (or just this)

The direct experience I feel that is something that could not be
communicated.
Would be maybe like the sufi tales: if you do not understand them, they are
not for you.
You feel (even beeing dualistic, I know, but I could not place in other
way), or you feel not.
No way to explain. No way to shre. Whe moment arrives, is there.

Or maybe I am just a plain brick, very far from awareness

With best wishes

Lluís

P.D.: the non dualistic form of the haiku, at least in spanish 
Rana
Charco
Chop!

would be the lazy westerner form of : there is a frog, and a pond, and the
frog makes plop (or my mind works this way, at least)

----- Original Message ----- 
From: billsm...@hhs1963.org 
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Monday, November 15, 2010 4:42 AM
Subject: !QRE: [Zen] Re: FW: Quote from St. Thomas Aquinas

Lluis,

I’m not saying that Westerners, in fact all humans that manifest a
dualistic, discriminating mind, are tied to subject/object and verbs that
describe action. That’s a given.

What I’m saying is that there are forms of English (and I suppose other
languages) that are utterances free from subject/object/verb, that are not
restricted by grammar.

In the example phrases I used below: ‘Hungry!’ and ‘Fire!’, YOU are the one
who is interjecting the dualism. If I yell ‘Fire!’ or ‘Duck!’ you will
first just equate the sound to DANGER and react BEFORE you mentally
reconstruct and augment the sound to ‘I have observed a fire and want to be
sure you are aware of it.’

Other non-exclamatory examples are in poetry, especially zen-inspired haikus
such as Basho's famous haiku in which he attempted to communicate a DIRECT
EXPERIENCE (Buddha Mind) he had. There are many attempts at translating
this haiku, and the results show me whether or not the translator was
translating with his/her discriminating mind or Buddha Mind:

ORIGINAL JAPANESE

Furu ike ya
kawazu tobikomu
mizu no oto (Basho)

DUALISTIC/DISCRIMINATING MIND TRANSLATION

There once was a curious frog
Who sat by a pond on a log
And, to see what resulted,
In the pond catapulted
With a water-noise heard round the bog. (Alfred H. Marks)

MIX OF DUALISTIC/DISCRIMINATING MIND AND BUDDHA MIND TRANSLATION

Into the ancient pond
A frog jumps
Water’s sound! (D.T. Suzuki)

BUDDHA MIND TRANSLATION

pond
frog
plop! (James Kirkup)

Remember when I posted about what I describe as 'zen talk' and 'talking
about zen'? The first translation above is 'talking about an experience'.
The second is a mix, and the third is 'experience talk' - or 'zen talk'.

The point is that language does have the ability to be used and to
communicate non-dualistic (no subject/object/verb) experiences. Language
evolved, not engineered. It is not appropriate to try to superimpose a
logical structure on an evolved system. The grammatical rules that we
associate with languages have been developed AFTER-THE-FACT, not CONCURRENT
with the language. For example humans could speak and communicate very well
before anyone ever decided to categorize words into nouns, verbs, subjects
and objects. All this grammar is imposed upon language in an attempt to
'understand' language. 'Understand' always means 'impose a logical
structure'.

...Bill!

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Lluís Mendieta
Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2010 4:42 PM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: FW: Quote from St. Thomas Aquinas

Hi, Bill

Hungry! has also an implied subject: I am hungry!

Fire! has also one, "it" : It is in fire! (although could be also "there is
a fire!" and that would be impersonal, I suppose)
Ugghhhhh!
Y only know true impersonals (no subject ) in spanish, catalan and french

On vende .....
Se vende botellas ("se venden botellas" is a pasiva refleja, not a true
impersonal.... That drived me crazy in Bacchaloreat....)

Seems that westerners are tied to sujects and verbs.

With best wishes

Lluís
----- Original Message ----- 
From: billsm...@hhs1963.org 
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2010 3:39 AM
Subject: RE: [Zen] Re: FW: Quote from St. Thomas Aquinas

Lluis,

In the example I used ‘Hungry?’ you are correct that the subject (you) is
implied probably because it is a question. How about ‘Hungry!’; or better
yet ‘Fire!’?. In the case of ‘Fire!’ there is no subject/object implied –
just ‘Fire!’, Just THIS!

It’s interesting to learn that Finnish has a lot of words to define
relationships.

…Bill!

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Lluís Mendieta
Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2010 4:06 PM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: FW: Quote from St. Thomas Aquinas

Hi, Bill

I beg to differ in two non zen questions
-Hungry? has the subject implicit. You do not place it, but it is implied.
The werb in spanish or catalan would be also implicit, so, I suppose same
in english.

-finnish is a westerner language. And they have a lot of words to design the
relationship within family.

With best wishes

Lluís

----- Original Message ----- 
From: billsm...@hhs1963.org 
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
Sent: Saturday, November 13, 2010 8:09 AM
Subject: RE: [Zen] Re: FW: Quote from St. Thomas Aquinas

Anthony,

I know Thai’s drop subject and sometimes even object all the time, but I
thought it was just because they, like Westerners, are lazy.

For example, I could ask you: ‘Are you hungry?’, or I could just ask by
saying: ‘Hungry?’ (with a rising tone). That's just laziness, or being
casual in your speech.

I do think language does reveal the different values of culture. For
example in Thai there are only 3 tenses: past, present and future; whereas
there are many, many adjectives and pronouns that are used to specifically
identify the speaker's relationship with the one addressed. In English
there are many (27?) verb tenses and very few special pronouns. This I
think shows that Westerner's value time more than Asians; whereas Asians put
more importance on personal relationships than time.

...Bill!

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 5618 (20101114)__________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 5618 (20101114)__________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 5619 (20101114)__________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 5619 (20101114)__________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 5621 (20101115)__________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 5621 (20101115)__________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 5622 (20101115)__________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 5622 (20101115)__________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 5625 (20101116)__________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 5625 (20101116)__________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 5631 (20101118) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com


__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 5631 (20101118) __________

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com










      

Reply via email to