forever arguing...
try accepting ... ~~~~~~~~~~~~
 merle
  
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