MU!
All thinking appears dual. Get over it.
KG
On 9/5/2012 7:32 AM, Edgar Owen wrote:
Bill! and Merle,
It's Bill! that thinks dualistically because he separates illusion
from reality. I understand illusion is part of reality which is a
unity. That is NOT dualistic.
I think we may agree however that the dualistic separation between
self and not self is an illusion since antecedent to both there is
simply experience, which only then becomes categorized in many ways
including into self not self.
Edgar
On Sep 5, 2012, at 1:36 AM, Bill! wrote:
Merle,
I say he is in error, but that really depends on your perspective.
He's talking about reality from a dualistic point-of-view. That's
okay for scientists and philosophers, and is the way we all usually
perceive things - dualistically. That means there's a subject/object
split. The most personal dualism we create is the concept of 'self'.
We think of ourselves as having an individual and unique 'self' that
is separate from everything else. I call that the self/other split or
dualism. Edgar's words below (which are representative of most of his
posts) are based on that dualistic view.
Zen training is a process of halting the creation of dualism, like
self, 'realizing' (making real, NOT 'understanding') that all
products of dualistic thought are illusory coming from your
dualistic, discriminating, rational mind. (The same one that creates
the illusion of logic.)
When you halt this seemingly continual process of the generation of
illusions you are then able to experience (NOT understand) reality
directly. That is called Buddha Nature.
I've read a lot of Edgar's suggestions to you and believe many of
them are very good and I'm sure very helpful - but they're not zen,
they're not useful in leading you to a point where you can experience
Buddha Nature.
Of course all this is my opinion. Edgar has a different opinion.
...Bill!
--- In [email protected]
<mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>, Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@...>
wrote:
>
>
>
> Â i understand what edgar is saying..are you suggesting he is in
error?... merle
> Â
> Merle,
>
> It's Edgar that has the 'closed mind'. It's been closed in my
structure. It might be a very big and seemingly comprehensive
structure, but it's a closed boundary nonetheless.
>
> Edgar,
>
> You stated something very wrong in your reply to KG:
>
> "...Everyone certainly models reality differently each in their own
internal simulations of it. But in a deeper sense there is no reality
except as it is experienced by some observer or other.... This is a
complex subject that requires a deep understanding and more time than
I have right now...
>
> Your errors (IMO) are two:
>
> One is ..."that there is no reality except as it is experienced by
some observer or other..." What you are talking about here is not
reality, it is a PERCEPTION of reality. Pure experience of reality
(Buddha Nature) is not dualistic. There is no subject/object pair
created.
>
> The second is "...This is a complex subject that requires a deep
understanding and more time than I have right now..." Direct
experience of reality is NOT complex. It is the most simple thing you
can do. You just have to quit THINKING about it. It's the THINKING
that's complex, not the experience. 'Understanding' is not the key.
EXPERIENCING is the key and it doesn't require a lot of time to do.
EXPERIENCE is immediate and very, very simple.
>
> ...Bill!
>
> --- In [email protected]
<mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>, Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >  some folk have closed minds edgar...you need a sledge hammer
to break through..a stick would not do...merle
> >
> >
> > ÂÂ
> > Kristopher,
> >
> > Well yes and no... Maybe... Everyone certainly models reality
differently each in their own internal simulations of it. But in a
deeper sense there is no reality except as it is experienced by some
observer or other.... This is a complex subject that requires a deep
understanding and more time than I have right now...
> >
> >
> > Kristopher is obviously someone who has endured much pain and
suffering in his life and made considerable strides in transcending
that by approaching Zen....
> >
> > However, if I may respectfully say so, I detect a hint of a
particular attitude towards Zen characterized by a sort of Nihilism,
hopelessness and a feeling of meaninglessness in everything which
really isn't Zen.
> >
> > Please don't take this as a criticism, God knows none of us is
perfect, but my feeling is that since we are all on the path we do
each other a favor by pointing out how we might each do better and
that we should all be free and open in exchanging and receiving such
insights.
> >
> > Merle especially seems open to this. She's a great example for us
all in that respect and we should all take her lead on this..
> >
> >
> > Zen is not meaningless, hopeless, or Nihilistic. On the contrary
by directly realizing and experiencing the ultimate absolute reality
of all things really really here right now in the present moment it
can be said to reveal the ultimate MEANINGFULNESS of things, and thus
of the seeker...
> >
> > Edgar
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sep 4, 2012, at 10:26 AM, Kristopher Grey wrote:
> >
> > ÂÂ
> > >
> > >
> > >OK. Then there is no Bill! standing apart from Buddha nature.
Not the Bill! who posts here, and not the Bill! who lives as a
logical construct in your head. If you think these Bill!s are the
same, you will logically think Bill! to be illogical. You will see
what you think is Bill!'s error. If you think them apart, you make
the same error for him.
> > >
> > >It's only easy to be right about the image you have of him, no
> > other can be known. There is no difference.
> > >
> > >Same goes for 'Zen'
> > >
> > >KG
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >On 9/4/2012 8:56 AM, Edgar Owen wrote:
> > >
> > >ÂÂ
> > >>Bill!,
> > >>
> > >>Bill! claims logic is NOT Zen...
> > >>
> > >>Bill! says he uses logic in his daily life...
> > >>
> > >>Therefore Bill must believe he CANNOT have Zen in his
> > daily life...
> > >>
> > >>This is a serious error...
> > >>
> > >>Zen is 24/7 whether one is using logic or sitting
> > mindlessly.
> > >>
> > >>It is a fundamental error to believe only mindless sitting
> > is Zen. That's mistaking a particular meditative state for
> > Zen.
> > >>
> > >>There is no part of reality that is not Buddha Nature.
> > Illusion is part of reality and thus is a manifestation of
> > Buddha Nature.
> > >>
> > >>Realization is seeing the illusion that is part of reality
> > as illusion rather than the fake reality it pretends to
> > be....
> > >>
> > >>When Bill! understands that logic is part of reality and
> > thus like everything else is a form manifesting Buddha
> > Nature rather than something contrary to and apart from
> > Buddha Nature, then and only then will Bill! allow himself
> > to completely realize Zen in his daily life as well as
> > when he is sitting mindlessly...
> > >>
> > >>This is the crux of Bill!'s misunderstanding.... At the
> > most fundamental level he dualistically divides reality
> > into illusion and Buddha nature without realizing that
> > even illusion is a manifestation of Buddha Nature because
> > there is nothing that is not Buddha Nature... The world of
> > forms does NOT stand apart from Buddha Nature. The world
> > of forms is a direct manifestation OF Buddha Nature.
> > >>
> > >>Zen does not try to dismiss the world of forms; Zen is
> > seeing the Buddha Nature that is manifested in the world
> > of forms... It is seeing the world of forms AS Buddha
> > Nature...
> > >>
> > >>Only when this becomes clear can realization occur....
> > >>
> > >>Edgar
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
