Edgar, I did get this post but no 'Kwatz' moment. More like a 'Plop'. Again.
Illusions are not Buddha Nature. Illusions obscure Buddha Nature. To become aware of Buddha Nature you must first halt (albeit temporarily) illusions (thought). Zen literature refers to this as a parting of the clouds revealing the sun. After you are aware of Buddha Nature you can accommodate illusions just as after you see the sun you can suffer the return of clouds. Clouds are not the sun. Illusions are not Buddha Nature. Buddha Nature is direct experience of reality, and this is ONLY available through what we call the senses. ...and there is no koan in your post, nor mine. There are enough koans to address this. Here's my all time favorite tailored especially for you: [Edgar] Are illusions Buddha Nature? [Bill!] KWATZ! Now SHOW ME or BRING ME 'KWATZ!'. (And MOST IMPORTANTLY please notice I did NOT ask: 'Write me a 30-page exegesis on the similarities and differences of Illusions and Buddha Nature' or explaining the meaning of 'KWATZ'. ...Bill! --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote: > > Bill! > > And that my friend is precisely the problem. Logic, like everything else that > exists IS Buddha Nature. Because there is nothing that is NOT Buddha nature... > > I think we've honed into the absolute kernel and crux of the disagreement > right here ... > > See what I'm saying? > > You adopt a dualistic view by denying part of what exists is part of Buddha > Nature. > I point out there is no such dualism because everything that exists is part > of reality (Buddha Nature) by definition, including things such as logic and > your daily life using logic making a living, that you deny is part of Buddha > Nature. > > > This is the MOST IMPORTANT post of mine to Bill! ever! I only hope this will > be a super Kwatz moment and that Bill! won't try to avoid and ignore the koan > as usual.... > > Edgar > > > > > On Sep 2, 2012, at 7:32 AM, Bill! wrote: > > > Edgar, > > > > Sometimes I think you don't read my posts. > > > > I NEVER said I don't use logic. I use it all the time. I make my living > > using it. I don't however mistake logic for Buddha Nature. > > > > ...Bill! > > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote: > > > > > > Bill!, > > > > > > Proving Bill! still uses his considerable intelligence to negotiate the > > > rational world of forms contrary to what he claims and would have us > > > believe .... > > > :-) > > > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 2, 2012, at 4:46 AM, Bill! wrote: > > > > > > > Bill, > > > > > > > > I've had a lot of practice trying to follow Edgar's posts. I'm sure > > > > you'll get the hang of it sooner or later. > > > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], William Rintala <brintala@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for that Edgar. I can follow your emails better if you > > > > > give them to > > > > > me a teaspoon at a time, unlike Bill! who seems to follow what you > > > > > say with > > > > > ease. > > > > > > > > > >  Bill not Bill! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Find what makes your heart singâ¦and do it! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > From: Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > Sent: Sat, September 1, 2012 6:36:59 AM > > > > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: " dancing with the daffodils" > > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Aug 30, 2012, at 11:51 PM, Joe wrote: > > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > >Hiya, Merle, > > > > > > > > > > > >Nonetheless, practice formally if you are able. > > > > > > > > > > > >If you are not able, then find some way to do it. ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > >It's as important as that. Life is a little bit short, nowadays. > > > > > > > > > > > >If you report-back that it is all B.S., then we'll understand that > > > > > >it is so, for > > > > > >you... once you have given it your ALL, with a good teacher, and > > > > > >sangha. > > > > > > > > > > > >But I think you'll have a more positive experience, and report. > > > > > > > > > > > >In fact, I worry that you may develop attachments, especially in the > > > > > >realm, or > > > > > >area, of the Optical-sense. But when I see the paintings that > > > > > >afterwards result, > > > > > >coming from your studio, THAT will assuage my concerns, probably, > > > > > >and bath me in > > > > > >balm, I am sure. And this is what I look forward to. > > > > > > > > > > > >Yet, it's not selfishness, on my part. > > > > > > > > > > > >And, I am not attached to the possibility. But I have hopes that > > > > > >EVERYONE who > > > > > >wishes to practice under the best conditions may have their wish, > > > > > >and will > > > > > >awaken. Not just because I have done it, and have had the wonder and > > > > > >miracle of > > > > > >this chance a number of times, as many of us have, in company with > > > > > >so many > > > > > >others throughout History, and among our intimate acquaintances: > > > > > >but, because so > > > > > >many others have *not*. > > > > > > > > > > > >I know what I'm wishing you, and others, I mean. > > > > > > > > > > > >Otherwise... may the veiled-life suffice! One can't disparage where > > > > > >we are. One > > > > > >can only either realize, or not realize. Realize means realizing > > > > > >where we are > > > > > >already, but being the most clear about it. That's not a movement to > > > > > >somewhere > > > > > >else, but it is a very, very big step, as momentous as the late Neil > > > > > >Armstrong's. Will you trust me, about this, in this? > > > > > > > > > > > >I was 17 when he and Buzz landed, and walked, and Mike Collins > > > > > >orbited, > > > > > >station-keeping for them. Life was different after that. I could > > > > > >write volumes > > > > > >about how. > > > > > > > > > > > >Maybe I'm a relic. Maybe, someday, to be appreciated. ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > >--Joe > > > > > > > > > > > >> Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> ..am i on track.????? > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ 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: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
