Bill,

If you don't understand the path you'll never arrive at the moon. You'll end up 
somewhere else and think it's the moon.

Edgar



On Oct 24, 2012, at 9:37 PM, Bill! wrote:

> Edgar,
> 
> Then I do disagree!
> 
> It's not the UNDERSTANDING and FOLLOWING the finger that leads to the moon. 
> It's GIVING UP your fruitless efforts of trying to understand an follow the 
> finger that results in complete resignation which THEN leads to the moon.
> 
> ...Bill!
> 
> --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote:
> >
> > Bill,
> > 
> > You continually over analyze and intellectualize what I'm saying and then 
> > reject your own over analysis and intellectualization.
> > 
> > Just DIRECTLY EXPERIENCE what I'm saying for a change...
> > 
> > The world of forms is the koan, the finger pointing at the moon.
> > 
> > The finger is NOT the moon, but if you don't understand and follow the 
> > finger you'll never find the moon.
> > 
> > Edgar
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Oct 24, 2012, at 9:03 PM, Bill! wrote:
> > 
> > > Edgar,
> > > 
> > > I agree wholeheartedly with the last sentence in your previous post.
> > > 
> > > It's the preceding key statement that I've always rejected: "Intellectual 
> > > understanding is the koan you need to solve BEFORE you can directly 
> > > experience realization." There are times I put this down to 
> > > misunderstanding because of different terminology - and the way you've 
> > > phrased the statement above is another one of these times. What you've 
> > > stated MIGHT by agreeable with me, but then again it might not. It all 
> > > depends on what you mean. I've gone down this path with you before, but 
> > > when trying to explore just what you think the role of intellect has in 
> > > realizing Buddha Nature (like with my recent 'Repeating Daily Question') 
> > > you've either answered it in a way that confirms my disagreement or 
> > > refused to respond.
> > > 
> > > Rather than continuing to beat a dead horse I will, as usual, tell you 
> > > EXACTLY what my position is:
> > > 
> > > Intellect has absolutely NO ROLE in realizing Buddha Nature. In fact 
> > > intellect can act as a DETERRENT to realizing Buddha Nature. Our 
> > > intellect is the source of all illusion which OCCLUDES Buddha Nature and 
> > > and must be halted/paused/deferred BEFORE Buddha Nature can be realized.
> > > 
> > > Now, if this halting/pausing/deferring is what you mean by 'solving the 
> > > koan of the intellect' we do have a broad basis of agreement.
> > > 
> > > If this is not what you mean by that, please tell me what you do mean.
> > > 
> > > ...Bill!
> > > 
> > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > No, you just never understood what I've been saying consistently..
> > > > 
> > > > Intellectual understanding is the koan you need to solve BEFORE you can 
> > > > directly experience realization. It is necessary to prepare yourself 
> > > > for a correct realization...
> > > > 
> > > > Intellectual understanding is NOT realization in itself...
> > > > 
> > > > Edgar
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On Oct 24, 2012, at 8:10 AM, Bill! wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Edgar,
> > > > > 
> > > > > You say this all the time. The last time was saying something like 
> > > > > 'you must understand the difference between reality and illusion'. 
> > > > > That's what prompted my 'Daily Question' which you declined to answer.
> > > > > 
> > > > > ...Bill!
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bill,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Funny, accusing Merle of supporting something I never said and 
> > > > > > don't believe....
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Edgar
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > On Oct 24, 2012, at 3:16 AM, Bill! wrote:
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Merle,
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > I believed you did not know this because of your MANY posts 
> > > > > > > recently supporting Edgar's continual assertions that 
> > > > > > > UNDERSTANDING is necessary for realizing Buddha Nature.
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > ...Bill!
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> 
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Â but of course BILL.... what makes you believe i did not know 
> > > > > > > > this?...merle
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Â 
> > > > > > > > Merle,
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > Because Buddha Nature is not something you understand, it's 
> > > > > > > > something you experience...Bill!
> > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> 
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >  why not ?..merle
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > >  
> > > > > > > > > Merle,
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Yes. That's why I wrote it.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Huxley's 'Attention! Attention! Here and Now Boys! Here and 
> > > > > > > > > Now Boys!' is the same thing as Joshu's 'The Oak Tree in the 
> > > > > > > > > Garden' and 'Mu'', Unmon's 'Dried Shit-Stick' Tozan's 'Three 
> > > > > > > > > Pounds of Flax' and my 'Just THIS!'.
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > Understand? (...and you better not answer 'YES!!!!')
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > ...Bill! 
> > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Merle Lester 
> > > > > > > > > <merlewiitpom@> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > >  and is that not what the repeat as the mantra in 
> > > > > > > > > > the island novel?...merle
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > >  
> > > > > > > > > > Merle,
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > Or, if you prefer, "Attention! Attention! Here and Now Boy! 
> > > > > > > > > > Here and Now!"
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > ...Bill!
> > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Joe" 
> > > > > > > > > > <desert_woodworker@> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Merle,
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > The latter, I think. I imagine it was fashioned in the 
> > > > > > > > > > > form of a flat blade, like a palette-knife, or putty 
> > > > > > > > > > > knife, probably from a broad thin piece of architectural 
> > > > > > > > > > > bamboo.
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > It must have been a common enough accessory in use at the 
> > > > > > > > > > > Ch'an monasteries, some of which housed hundreds of monks 
> > > > > > > > > > > or nuns, and the latrines must have been extensive. And 
> > > > > > > > > > > so the Master made use of the stick as an example, in his 
> > > > > > > > > > > teaching.
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > Others might have answered, "The Oak Tree in the court 
> > > > > > > > > > > yard" (but at some of the monasteries on high mountains, 
> > > > > > > > > > > Oaks did not grow, but mostly Pines did/do). Bamboo could 
> > > > > > > > > > > be brought up from below, for building, and for 
> > > > > > > > > > > implements.
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > Still others might have answered, "Just THIS!".
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > The Master was very compassionate, bringing the student 
> > > > > > > > > > > back into the "here and now" with what he said and how he 
> > > > > > > > > > > said it.
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > --Joe
> > > > > > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > > > > > > Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > huh??????? wiping what.... the toilet or the arse?..
> > > > > > > > > > > > so it's an arse wiping stick?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > 
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > 
> > >
> >
> 
> 

Reply via email to