Bill, I agree with what you say with one very important addition.
After dissolving the illusion of self there is an additional step. That is understanding that the illusion of self IS part of reality but only when it is recognized as illusion. This is meaning of "mountains are mountains again".... It is this further step that allows Zen to be brought back into daily life rather than being confined to just zazen. In zazen the illusion of self can dissolve, but in daily life the illusion of self is necessary to operate in the world of forms. This final step is living in the world of forms while recognizing the forms as illusions manifesting Buddha Nature. In this step self is self again but realized as illusion manifesting Buddha Nature. One sees the Buddha Nature in all forms.... This is how one operates in daily life 24/7 in the world of forms while keeping one's Zen..... EDgar On Nov 23, 2012, at 8:53 AM, Bill! wrote: > 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 > > > > > > > > > >
