Bill,

Well, that's telling!
:-)

Edgar



On Oct 23, 2012, at 9:36 AM, Bill! wrote:

> Edgar,
> 
> What 'intellectual koan'. I went through over 60 koans in my koan study and 
> never encountered and 'intellectual koan'.
> 
> ...Bill!
> 
> --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote:
> >
> > Mike, Merle and Bill,
> > 
> > Sure that's my take too, but my POINT is that you have to get through the 
> > intellectual koan to get there.
> > 
> > Jeeze, I wish Bill and Mike would some day take the trouble to understand 
> > the points I'm making instead of arguing against the wind...
> > 
> > Edgar
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Oct 22, 2012, at 5:09 AM, mike brown wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > Merle, Bill!'s take is my take also. Buddha Nature is seen directly 
> > > without the intervention of the intellect. If you mean an intuitive 
> > > understanding, then yes. 
> > > 
> > > From: Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@...>
> > > To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> 
> > > Sent: Monday, 22 October 2012, 6:25
> > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: genius
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > bill.... rubbish..that's your take!..merle
> > > 
> > > Merle,
> > > 
> > > I'm saying understanding has nothing at all to do with experiencing 
> > > Buddha Nature...Bill!
> > > 
> > > --- In [email protected], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Â 
> > > > bill!..are you saying your zen practise is superior to edgar's zen 
> > > > practise, eh?..
> > > > tut tut.. Â one man up manship games...
> > > > shame on you Bill!..you the enlightened one!
> > > > Â merle
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > Â 
> > > > Merle,
> > > > 
> > > > Edgar could be a genius, but that won't help his zen practice...Bill!
> > > > 
> > > > --- In [email protected], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >  bill!..i can see where you are coming from and also where edgar 
> > > > > is coming from..so where am i coming from?
> > > > > i can understand and relate to what you both are saying
> > > > > 
> > > > >  god father BILL!.. aldous huxley is a genius...
> > > > >  next you'll be telling me your bored with leonardo da vinci
> > > > >  the genius  are then not your cup of tea?
> > > > > 
> > > > >  maybe edgar is a genius?
> > > > >  merle
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > >  
> > > > > Merle,
> > > > > 
> > > > > Edgar and I disagree on fundamental issues. In his post below I agree 
> > > > > only with the first paragraph. The rest of it, which basically says 
> > > > > some attachments are benign (actually, even necessary) and some 
> > > > > aren't, I disagree with. And his last sentence "Zen is not as simple 
> > > > > as many imagine!" is outright egregious. Zen is the most simple thing 
> > > > > you can imagine. IMO Edgar makes is complicated by trying to 
> > > > > UNDERSTAND and EXPLAIN it all the time. There is no need for, in fact 
> > > > > IMO there is a need NOT TO, try to understand zen.
> > > > > 
> > > > > You don't understand zen, you practice zen.
> > > > > 
> > > > > My reading of the ISLAND has bogged down midway in Chapter 4. It 
> > > > > seems very tedious and somewhat juvenile to me, but I'll keep going 
> > > > > for at least another couple chapters to see what might come next.
> > > > > 
> > > > > ...Bill!
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In [email protected], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Bill!..what is it that you and edgar disagree on?... is this just 
> > > > > > childish one up manship?
> > > > > >  as we are all ONE
> > > > > >  then stands to reason..edgar and you are still on the same 
> > > > > > coin so to speak
> > > > > >  how is your island reading going ?
> > > > > >  merle
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > >  
> > > > > > Merle,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I am 'listening' (reading actually), but there's nothing in this 
> > > > > > post for me to learn, nothing new anyway. I already am aware of how 
> > > > > > much Edgar and I disagree on zen - and I knew that already.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > ...Bill!
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > --- In [email protected], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> 
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > ÃÆ'‚ yes bill!..edgar is back..
> > > > > > > edgar is on the cutting edge..are you listening?... and need i 
> > > > > > > say learning?..merle
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > > Suresh,
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Attachment is a very valuable evolutionary survival mechanism. 
> > > > > > > It's a fundamental part of human nature similar to what we share 
> > > > > > > with other species. With no attachments individual humans would 
> > > > > > > have no motivation or direction and would not survive.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > The problem is not attachments per se. We all use attachments 
> > > > > > > every day to go about our lives successfully. That's what enables 
> > > > > > > people to sustain material success in life. The problem is 
> > > > > > > excessive attachment, or attachment to your attachments. The 
> > > > > > > problem is excessive attachments THAT DO NOT MESH WITH WHAT IS 
> > > > > > > REAL or attainable.ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > For example a man's attachment to THE IDEA OF an unattainable 
> > > > > > > woman, or an unattainable position in society. Attachment to the 
> > > > > > > unattainable causes suffering.ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > However attachment to the ATTAINABLE maintains physical and 
> > > > > > > social life.ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > However things can change. When one loses something one was 
> > > > > > > attached to realization demands changing one's attachment to it 
> > > > > > > to mirror the new state of reality.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Zen is not as simple as many imagine!
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Edgar
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > On Oct 20, 2012, at 1:38 AM, SURESH JAGADEESAN wrote:
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >Bill
> > > > > > > >Why do human liked to get attached?
> > > > > > > >What is the root cause for attachment?
> > > > > > > >Suresh
> > > > > > > >On Oct 20, 2012 8:38 AM, "Merle Lester" <merlewiitpom@> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > This message is eligible for Automatic Cleanup! (merlewiitpom@) 
> > > > > > > > Add cleanup rule | More info 
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> 
> > > > > > > >>ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > > >>ÃÆ'‚ so how does one NOT be attached to these 
> > > > > > > >>emotions eh?..merle
> > > > > > > >>ÃÆ'‚ 
> > > > > > > >>Merle,
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>No, these in-and-of themselves are not attachments. They are 
> > > > > > > >>concepts (mental models), and in some case emotions - and it is 
> > > > > > > >>not these that cause suffering. It is ATTACHMENTS to these that 
> > > > > > > >>cause suffering.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>...Bill!
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>--- In [email protected], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> 
> > > > > > > >>wrote:
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>> 
> > > > > > > >>> 
> > > > > > > >>> ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ thanks..are they 
> > > > > > > >>> attachments?... merle
> > > > > > > >>> Merle,
> > > > > > > >>> 
> > > > > > > >>> 
> > > > > > > >>> Love is not exactly the OPPOSITE of hate, but love/hate is a 
> > > > > > > >>> dualistic pair - like good/bad, tall/short, hot/cold, 
> > > > > > > >>> yin/yang, etc...
> > > > > > > >>> 
> > > > > > > >>> ...Bill!
> > > > > > > >>> 
> > > > > > > >>> --- In [email protected], Merle Lester 
> > > > > > > >>> <merlewiitpom@> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > > >>> > 
> > > > > > > >>> > 
> > > > > > > >>> > ÃÆ'Æ'Æ
> > > > > > > >>> > 'ÃÆ'¢â‚¬Å¡ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ÂÂÂ
> > > > > > > >>> >  tell me more BILLLL....... Love is it the opposite of 
> > > > > > > >>> > hate????? merle
> > > > > > > >>> > ÃÆ'Æ'Æ
> > > > > > > >>> > 'ÃÆ'¢â‚¬Å¡ÃÆ'Æ'‚ÃÆ'‚ÂÂÂ
> > > > > > > >>> >  
> > > > > > > >>> > I agree with James.
> > > > > > > >>> > 
> > > > > > > >>> > As with all emotions like fear, anger, love, hate it is not 
> > > > > > > >>> > the emotion that is the real problem, it is the ATTACHMENT 
> > > > > > > >>> > to the emotion.
> > > > > > > >>> > 
> > > > > > > >>> > ...Bill!
> > > > > > > >>> > 
> > > > > > > >>> > --- In [email protected], "James W. Meritt" 
> > > > > > > >>> > <JWMeritt@> wrote:
> > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > >>> > > 
> > > > > > > >>> > > Not so sure getting rid of fear is a good thing. I see 
> > > > > > > >>> > > having fear, but modifying how you use and react to it as 
> > > > > > > >>> > > a good thing.
> > > > > > > >>> > > 
> > > > > > > >>> > > 
> > > > > > > >>> > > 
> > > > > > > >>> > > James W. Meritt 
> > > > > > > >>> > > CISSP, CISA, NSA IAM, PMP
> > > > > > > >>> > >
> > > > > > > >>> >
> > > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > >
> >
> 
> 

Reply via email to