Kris,

>I might point out that apparent obscuration is no less reality than apparent 
>clarity

Reality is certainly there regardless, but reality seen with obscuration leads 
to suffering, whereas reality seen with clarity will lead to the cessation of 
suffering. That's all I need to know and that is my witness.  

Mike



________________________________
 From: Kristopher Grey <[email protected]>
To: [email protected] 
Sent: Sunday, 2 September 2012, 16:11
Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: " dancing with the daffodils"
 

  
I might point out that apparent obscuration is no less reality than apparent 
clarity. In doing so, this point only dances around itself - offers nothing you 
can't realize directly.

What can anyone say in response that you will not directly
      experience (realize) as some aspect of this reality/realization-
      whether you realize it or not - just as when experiencing
      meditation/not meditation?

This more or less business is you triangulating your position.
      Nothing more, nothing less.

KG



On 9/2/2012 5:57 AM, mike brown wrote:

  
>Edgar,
>
>
>Wouldn't you say tho, that reality is less obscured during, or just after, a 
>long retreat of meditation?
>
>
>Mike
>
>
>
>________________________________
> From: Edgar Owen <[email protected]>
>To: [email protected] 
>Sent: Sunday, 2 September 2012, 1:13
>Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: " dancing with the daffodils"
> 
>
>  
>Mike,
>
>
>Well, it's reality either way, but that reality is always changing as 
>happening continually flows through the present moment. But however it changes 
>it is still reality....
>
>
>Edgar
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On Sep 1, 2012, at 6:09 PM, mike brown wrote:
>
>  
>>
>>
>>Edgar,
>>
>>
>>Would you say that the world (inner/outer) you look at now is the same as 
>>when you're at the end of a sesshin? 
>>
>>
>>
>>Mike
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>________________________________
>> From: Edgar Owen <[email protected]>
>>To: [email protected] 
>>Sent: Saturday, 1 September 2012, 18:44
>>Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: " dancing with the daffodils"
>> 
>>
>>  
>>ED,
>>
>>
>>Stop practicing and just BE your Buddha Nature!
>>
>>
>>Edgar
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>On Sep 1, 2012, at 12:22 PM, ED wrote:
>>
>>  
>>>
>>>
>>>Edgar,
>>>
>>>Therefore,
                                                          although each
                                                          of us is
                                                          complete, we
                                                          need to
                                                          practice
>>>diligently at
                                                          all times with
                                                          no objective
                                                          in mind?
>>>
>>>--ED
>>>
>>>--- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Joe and
                                                          Merle,
>>>>
>>>> There is
                                                          no 'goal' of
                                                          enlightenment
                                                          to be achieved
                                                          without which
                                                          you
>>>imagine you
                                                          are
                                                          incomplete....
>>>>
>>>> There is
                                                          no
                                                          incompleteness.
                                                          This
                                                          understanding
                                                          is an
                                                          essential
                                                          aspect
>>>of
                                                          realization...
>>>>
>>>> Wham!
>>>>
>>>> Edgar
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>

 

Reply via email to