Edgar, My mind perceives it as trash, so for me it's trash.
And who told you I only 'realize zen' (which I'll take to mean 'experience Buddha Nature')3 hours a week? ...Bill! --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote: > > Bill, > > It's rubbish only because you trash it in your mind. > > It's a tremendous shame you aren't able to receive this teaching. If you > could you'd realize Zen mind 24/7 instead of the only 3 hours a week you say > you do now... > > Edgar > > > > On Mar 31, 2013, at 10:43 AM, Bill! wrote: > > > Edgar, > > > > Rubbish, all rubbish no matter how many times you post it...Bill! > > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote: > > > > > > Bill, > > > > > > The world of forms is the manifestation of the reality of Buddha Nature. > > > > > > The mind creates an additional set of forms which is an internal MODEL of > > > the external world of forms. > > > > > > One needs to clearly understand which forms are in the mind (our > > > cognitive model of the world) and which in the external world (eg. are > > > intrinsic laws of nature) > > > > > > The Zen picture is realizing these are both part of a single reality that > > > models itself. > > > > > > Zen mind is realizing these forms are all manifestations of their > > > underlying Buddha Nature and existing within them as an expression of > > > that Buddha Nature... > > > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mar 31, 2013, at 4:49 AM, Bill! wrote: > > > > > > > Joe, > > > > > > > > IMO all concepts (like cause-and-effect) are illusory. The 'exist' in > > > > the same way all illusions 'exist'. The are created by us (humans, and > > > > maybe other rational beings too)and superimposed on experience. I > > > > assume we do this because it gives us a sense of order and therefore > > > > control over what is undoubtedly pure chaos. > > > > > > > > When I use the phrase in single parenthesis 'out there', I mean the > > > > dualistic illusion that there is an 'out there'. I know many/most of > > > > you really believe there are what you call 'principals' or 'laws of > > > > nature' (and now I have to add) 'out there'. You believe these > > > > principals or laws exist independent of you and that you, the smart > > > > fellow that you are, have the ability to observe, recognize, separate > > > > out, classify and document these principals. I don't believe that. I > > > > believe we create them, or at least some of us who are really, really > > > > smart create them and then teach them to the rest of us, which of > > > > course we all believe on faith. That faith is bolstered by our ability > > > > to observe the same principals or laws at work in our own dualisitic > > > > and rationalized perception of our experience. > > > > > > > > Kapeesh? > > > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Joe" <desert_woodworker@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Bill!, > > > > > > > > > > I've seen you put it like this several times before, and I think you > > > > > are being a little amiss in how you're saying one small part of this. > > > > > > > > > > I don't think you mean the "concept" doesn't exist "out there". > > > > > > > > > > I think you mean a kind of functioning that results in what looks to > > > > > us like cause and effect does not exist out there. > > > > > > > > > > By contrast, of course the concept exists: it exists in us, as a > > > > > concept. Otherwise it would not be a concept for us. Concepts exist > > > > > nowhere else but in us, so of course we won't find it "out there". > > > > > > > > > > But, what about the "functioning" I refer to above? ...the > > > > > functioning that results in our ascribing cause and effect. I would > > > > > not say it exists out there as a concept (as I think you would not). > > > > > I would not say it exists out there as a Principle. I would not say > > > > > it exists out there as a Law. I think all we can say is that there is > > > > > a functioning, and that functioning is a VERB, not a noun. It > > > > > functions. But we do not see "something" functioning, or the > > > > > mechanics and gears of the functioning. We see instead manifestations > > > > > or consequences. Consequences of WHAT? When we ask that, "WHAT?", and > > > > > ANSWER it, this is where we start drawing up phantoms. And we attach > > > > > to them, if we are not awake. They become our models. It's OK to use > > > > > the phantoms for our purposes, and emploit them in our skilful means. > > > > > But attachment to them as something "out there" is the root of > > > > > suffering. The concept or idea of a self is one of these "things", I > > > > > know everyone here agrees. > > > > > > > > > > --Joe > > > > > > > > > > > "Bill!" <BillSmart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike, > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm not denying that cause-and-effect seems to provide independent > > > > > > conditioning in the world of forms (illusions), I'm saying like the > > > > > > world of forms the concept of cause-and-effect is just a projection > > > > > > of our rational mind. It's not something that exists 'out there' > > > > > > independent of intellect. > > > > > > > > > > > > This is a good example of the question: "If a tree falls in the > > > > > > forest and no one (human) is there, is there a sound?" No, there > > > > > > isn't. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ 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/
