Edgar, I never heard that about nor have seen that happen with dogs - and I have nine of them.
You almost said something that is correct here. You said, "Apparently a dog understands Zen better than some humans!" If you'd have said 'Apparently a dog EXPERIENCES Buddha Nature better than some humans' you'd have been completely correct... ...Bill! --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote: > > Bill, > > Actually you are COMPLETELY WRONG HERE. Dogs in fact do understand that when > a human points he is pointing AT SOMETHING and not just raising his finger. > This has been shown in repeated scientific studies and is understood by most > dog owners. In fact dogs are superior to chimps in this type of intelligence. > > Apparently a dog understands Zen better than some humans! > :-) > > Edgar > > > > > On Oct 25, 2012, at 1:44 AM, Bill! wrote: > > > Edgar, > > > > There is no path to understand. You are either looking at the moon or > > you're not. The 'finger pointing to the moon' is a popular zen analogy, but > > like all analogies has it's strong points and weak points. > > > > This analogy is strong in that it warns you not to mistake the finger for > > the moon. That part's good, but it doesn't go on to say 'follow the > > direction the finger is pointing to find the moon'. This analogy is more > > like pointing out something to a dog. A dog does not understand you're > > pointing at something. They just get fixated on your finger. > > > > One of the weak points of this analogy is the finger which you get fixated > > on might not even be pointing to the moon. It might be pointing at a Roman > > toilet brush. > > > > In order to find the moon you must first give completely up on the finger. > > Only then when you're just sitting there with no thoughts, no desires, no > > goals will you suddenly realize you are bathed in moonlight. > > > > ...Bill! > > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote: > > > > > > 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: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  but of course BILL.... what makes you believe i did not > > > > > > > > > > > know this?...merle > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > Merle, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Because Buddha Nature is not something you understand, > > > > > > > > > > > it's something you experience...Bill! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Merle Lester > > > > > > > > > > > <merlewiitpom@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > àwhy not ?..merle > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > à> > > > > > > > > > > > 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: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ãâàand is that not what the repeat as the > > > > > > > > > > > > > mantra in the island novel?...merle > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ãâà> > > > > > > > > > > > > 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? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ 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/
