Bill!, Your first sentence is actually correct and is what I've been trying to tell you ad infinitum!
However it contradicts most of what you say.... Edgar On Sep 5, 2012, at 8:31 AM, Bill! wrote: > Edgar and Merle, > > To think dualistically is to think that reality has parts, like has a part > which is called illusion. Holistic (non-dualistic) experience (not thinking) > reveals only One - and that can be called Reality, or Buddha Nature or Just > THIS! > > I do agree with Edgar that self/not-self is an illusion and before that > duality is created there is simply experience - what I call reality, Buddha > Nature, Just THIS!. > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> 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], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  i understand what edgar is saying..are you suggesting he is in > > > > error?... merle > > > >  > > > > 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], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  some folk have closed minds edgar...you need a sledge hammer to > > > > > break through..a stick would not do...merle > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > 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: > > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >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: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>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 > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
