Edgar, I only read your posts NOW. I only type my posts NOW. I have a memory of reading your posts, but every time I open one up I am reading it NOW.
Labeling things as 'NOT zen' does not prove your point. ...Bill! --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote: > > Bill, > > Don't be ridiculous. Clock time, or more accurately 'happening' does > continuously flow through the Now. > > Otherwise we wouldn't be having this clock time sequential discussion in case > you hadn't noticed! > > Denying reality is NOT Zen... > > Edgar > > > > On Oct 9, 2012, at 9:30 AM, Bill! wrote: > > > Edgar, > > > > I agree that our mental interpretations are illusory, but that doesn't mean > > that a 'flowing clock time' is real. > > > > If there is only Now, there is no flow of time. > > > > Now itself doesn't have a time, at least not of any duration. I guess you > > could say it has a time of zero duration - but that's just another way to > > define Now. It's just Now. Like in geometry a point doesn't have any > > dimensions, only a position. > > > > ...Bill! > > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote: > > > > > > Bill, > > > > > > First sentence is correct. But both kinds of time are NOT illusion. The > > > time of the present moment, and the clock time that continually flows > > > through the present moment are part of the reality of the world of forms > > > which is a direct manifestation of Buddha Nature. > > > > > > These are real, what is illusion is your incorrect mental interpretation > > > of them. > > > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > > > > > On Oct 9, 2012, at 3:23 AM, billsmart wrote: > > > > > > > Jim, > > > > > > > > There is only Now. Past is just a memory. Future is a projection. There > > > > is only Now. > > > > > > > > Time is an illusion. > > > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "jfnewell7" <jfnewell7@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Yes, of course. We don't know what Bankei meant, and wouldn't even if > > > > > the words were translated exactly, because words are inadequate to > > > > > fully describe consciousness. > > > > > > > > > > In some of the world's traditions, there is a theory that all times > > > > > exist simultaneously, and we just think me are moving through time. > > > > > If that is true, then when enlightened, we would have a NOW which > > > > > included all the past and all the future, seen all at once forever. > > > > > > > > > > I can't say whether or not that theory is true. I don't know whether > > > > > the real NOW moves through time, so the past really is gone and the > > > > > future really hasn't happened, or the real NOW forever includes all > > > > > moments of time. > > > > > > > > > > If we could find out, it would affect our judgment of when we are > > > > > seeing accurately. For example, if NOW spreads eternally, and we see > > > > > a NOW which is only a short moment, we would know that we aren't > > > > > actually seeing the real NOW yet. On the other hand, if the real NOW > > > > > is only a short moment, then we would know that we either are seeing > > > > > the real NOW, or we are close. > > > > > > > > > > But since I am unable to tell you which theory is true, I couldn't > > > > > decide whether or not your experience is true, even if I could > > > > > directly detect what is in your consciousness. > > > > > > > > > > Jim > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "billsmart" <BillSmart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Jim, > > > > > > > > > > > > Bankei did mean something profound. He was doing his best to > > > > > > describe the raw, unfiltered, holistic (non-dualistic) experience > > > > > > Zen Buddhists call Buddha Nature. He did this in the context of > > > > > > hearing a bell. He did not try to explain it. He tried to describe > > > > > > it. > > > > > > > > > > > > He used some terms that are very important. Now these terms have > > > > > > been translated into English so we don't really know EXACTLY what > > > > > > he said, but if the translation was close then he's using terms in > > > > > > a way that we don't use them in everyday English. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ 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/
