Edgar, I responded to this earlier but that was before your response below in which you ask "Now in terms of Zen and Joe's question applied to us as individuals where does this leave us?"
My interpretation of this important philosophical axiom from the perspective of my zen practice is a little different than yours (Surprise! Surprise!). You focus on the consequence (as in cause & effect) of thinking and existence (am). I focus on the consequence of thinking and the creation of self (I am). For me "I think, therefore I am." means (in my words) 'self is a concept created by the discriminating mind'. I could embellish that by saying self is but one example of many dualistic sets created by the discriminating mind (intellect), all of which are illusory. In any case in my zen practice I focus on dissolving the illusion of self (I am). And how do I do that? By ceasing the cause - thinking (intellectualization/creation of duality). When done while sitting this is called shikantaza - but this can be done at any time and then it is called (I call it) realizing Buddha Nature. ...Bill! --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote: > > Joe, > > Interesting question. > > The fundamental axiom of reality is 'Existence exists'. It is impossible for > non existence to exist, therefore existence MUST exist and must have always > existed. Therefore there was never a nothingness out of which something > arose. Therefore there is no need for a creator. > > Existence exists or to paraphrase Bill. Existence! the single word that > establishes its own existence. > > Existence! > > This is the fundamental self necessitating axiom of reality upon which all > others depend. It's the very bottom turtle. > > This is what is beyond doubt. > > > Now in terms of Zen and Joe's question applied to us as individuals where > does this leave us? > > First there can be NO doubt at all that we exist period. It is impossible > that we even consider the question of our existence and not to exist. That's > a no brainer and it's clear Decartes was either an idiot or he meant > something different by '...I am" than simple existence. And his 'cogito ergo > sum' is tremendously stupid when one thinks about it since thinking does NOT > establish existence. It's the other way around. > > Back to Joe's question as pertains to a realized Zen person. As I've often > repeated here realization is simply a matter of realizing realization. > Realization is realizing the true nature of things. The true nature of things > continually surrounds us 24/7 in the present moment so there is no escaping > the true nature of things. It's just a matter of looking and seeing and > experiencing them as they are. That means understanding how human biology and > cognition transform reality into an internal simulation of the 'real' reality > in one's own brain, which when further understood is both the 'real' world > and the simulated internal world at the same time in a single reality which > is the only true reality accessible to humans. It's a matter of understanding > the true nature of illusion so that the reality appears within it. Illusion > recognized AS illusion IS reality. > > Well I had intended to give a simple answer but reality is not simple. Let me > try to cut through to the essence by discarding the unessential relative to > Descartes. > > First of all at the most fundamental level there is no 'I am' and there is no > 'I think' so those can be discarded. > > The essence in a nutshell is more like > > Consciousness! Reality! Enlightenment! > > Or even better just " " to indicate that what is which is > nameless IS.... > > > Thanks for asking the question Joe, > Edgar > > > > > > > > > > > > On Nov 22, 2012, at 11:56 PM, Joe wrote: > > > Group, > > > > I'm interested in your "pensees". > > > > Rene Descartes was the French philosopher who published his "Pensees" to > > great acclaim; it has been an influential study in Western Philosophy, and > > elsewhere, for centuries. > > > > The book, "Thoughts", or "Meditations" is the record of his attempts to > > find what he calls "clear and distinct" ideas. He tried to begin with the > > most basic thought, or idea: he looked for what he could absolutely not > > DOUBT. He looked, and he looked. Some would say he meditated on it (but not > > in the Zen way, probably). This is why the title is almost always > > translated as "Meditations" in English. But we know what the translators > > mean (if we can remember to the time before we began meditation practice). > > I think of the book as "Thoughts", or "Pensees". > > > > Descartes writes that when he engages in his meditations, he finds that > > what he cannot doubt is that he "thinks" (probably many of us do, too, when > > we meditate). > > > > He took it a step further, and deduced that, because he thinks, he exists. > > > > The "cogito" is the famous proposition he coined: > > > > "Cogito, ergo sum." > > > > "I think, therefore I am." > > > > Now, a question for the group is, how does an awakened person view the > > cogito? > > > > Or, what would an awakened person say, instead?, if asked to find something > > that he/she could not DOUBT. > > > > Don't all say "Mu", at once, though. I'll worry it's a stampede. > > > > And, is there something like the cogito that an awakened person would > > compose? > > > > --Joe > > > > > ------------------------------------ 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/
