Thank you Sent from my iPhone
On Apr 16, 2013, at 8:23 PM, "Bill!" <[email protected]> wrote: > William, > > I am not exactly saying "...even as lost as they are to the rest of humanity > they still have a Buddha Nature." I am not saying they are 'lost', you are. I > assume by that you mean they are not functioning intellectually as most > humans function - within some prescribed 'normalcy' boundary. I am not > commenting on their 'humanness'. I am only commenting on their ability to > experience Buddha Nature - and that I do believe they have. > > I do not believe Buddha Nature is limited to humans. Buddha is purported to > have said words to the effect that 'all sentient beings have Buddha Nature'. > I believe that because that corresponds with my experience that has shown me > that Buddha Nature is not a quality of the intellect. > > I did not say people with dementia (non-ordinary or impaired intellect) or > people with vastly diminished intellectual capacity (low IQ) cannot realize > Buddha Nature. IMO (and this is ONLY opinion and not backed up by any > experience) I think people with dementia are no less likely to be able to > experience Buddha Nature than people without dementia. I think people with > diminished intellectual capacity MAY be more likely to experience Buddha > Nature than those with a high intellectual capacity BECAUSE it think people > with a high intellectual capacity are very prone to being ATTACHED to their > intellect and less willing to let that attachment drop so they can experience > Buddha Nature. > > Again, this is all just IMO and I only offer it as a hypothetical discussion > on this forum. My real answer to this would have to be "I don't know", but > again I personally would not just write them all off but assume they do have > the ability to experience Buddha Nature. > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], William Rintala <brintala@...> wrote: > > > > I take all of what is said here in the context of "IMO". Many of the > > people > > that I work with are very happily demented they smile and laugh and are > > very > > childlike in much of what they do. You are saying that even as lost as they > > are > > to the rest of humanity they still have a Buddha Nature. The vehicle is > > damaged > > and they will never become Realized Beings. With "no reincarnation" this is > > sadder than I had hoped. One little lady sits and smiles and when I sit > > with > > her she looks at me and her face becomes very stern and severe, then she'll > > laugh with this great hysterically demented laugh, like something from a > > horror > > movie. It goes on and on and she's obviously really enjoying the moment. I > > really makes me smile and laugh myself. It's as if she's saying "why be so > > serious? Laugh. We're only here for a short while". > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@...> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Tue, April 16, 2013 7:46:23 PM > > Subject: [Zen] Re: senses > > > > > > William, > > > > You have quoted and appear to have understood me correctly. > > > > I did just recently post a reply about the affects Alzheimer's (or > > dementia) > > might present vis-a-vis realizing Buddha Nature. If that was not clear > > please > > let me know and I'll try to explain it further. > > > > Oh yes, and this might be a good time to state everything I post is > > IMO...take > > it or leave it as you see fit. > > > > ...Bill! > > > > --- In [email protected], William Rintala <brintala@> wrote: > > > > > > Pardon my insistence here. Bill's posts below he states that "An > > > autistic > > > person can certainly realize Buddha Nature since that only requires > > > sentient-ness, not any intellectual quality" and I infer that the > > > Rational mind > > > > > > is similarly a hinderence since he states that "'perceptions' IMO are the > > > concepts (illusions) created by our discriminating, rational mind > > > (intellect) > > > which post-processes experience with such rational actions as filtering, > > > augmenting, categorizing, evaluating, etc..." . In my work I see many > > > people > > > > > with advanced dementia/Alzheimer's. These people are sentientand their > > > egos, > > > > > memories and intellect have all been stripped away. Have they realized > > > buddahood? If not then what else remains to hinder that from happening? > > > Or > > > conversely what has been lost that prevents it? > > > > > > > > > > > > William, > > > > > > I don't know. But I'd say that they express it just the way they are, and > > > that > > > > > the Absolute expresses itself through that person. I don't mean to put it > > > this > > > > > way just as if these were mere "Truisms", though (although they can be > > > taken to > > > > > > be). > > > > > > If we think about ourselves, it's just like that also. Except, > > > differently like > > > > > > that. > > > > > > --Joe > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: William Rintala <brintala@> > > > To: [email protected] > > > Sent: Tue, April 16, 2013 3:08:01 PM > > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: senses > > > > > >  > > > I've often wondered what people with Alzheimer's experience and how > > > their > > > situation expresses Buddha Nature? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > > To: [email protected] > > > Sent: Tue, April 16, 2013 5:01:32 AM > > > Subject: [Zen] Re: senses > > > > > >  > > > Merle, > > > > > > That's a VERY GOOD QUESTION! > > > > > > An autistic person can certainly realize Buddha Nature since that only > > > requires > > > > > > sentient-ness, not any intellectual quality. > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >  question:bob: so would an autistic person who is not perhaps > > > > engaging in > > >all > > > > > > >the senses.. > > > > but in many ways acts like a machine how does the mind figure in this > > >equation > > > > > > >you have set out here regarding senses and zen? > > > > merle > > > > > > > > > > > >  > > > > > > > > > > > >  bob..you forgot the 6th sense..merle > > > > > > > > > > > >  > > > > Bob, > > > > > > > > Thanks for your reply but it did not answer my question which was: > > > > > > > > "The senses are always engaged. How could you disengage them while > > > > remaining > > > > > >conscious?" > > > > > > > > Perhaps we're using the same words differently. Here is how I am using > > > > the > > >word > > > > > > >'senses'. > > > > > > > > 'Senses' to me is an awkward, dualistically-based word used in part to > > >describe > > > > > > >just plain experience. (I sometimes use the phrase 'direct, sensory > > >experience' > > > > > > >just to be clear, but the qualifiers 'direct' and 'sensory' are > > > >redundant and > > > > > >might lead you to believe there is such a thing as 'indirect' or > > > >'non-sensory' > > > > > > >experiences. There are not.) The word 'sense' itself implies an 'avenue' > > > >or > > > >'interface' which 'connects' us with the 'outside world'. We divide > > > >'senses' > > >up > > > > > > >into five categories: sight, hearing, touch, smell and taste. But there > > > >is no > > > > > >'outside world', no 'interface' and only one experience ('sense') - and > > > >I > > > >usually call that Buddha Nature or Just THIS!. > > > > > > > > If you're wondering why I'm trying to be very precise about this it's > > > > because > > > > > > >sentient-ness (having senses) is very key to Buddha Nature - not > > > >rationality > > >or > > > > > > >logic or emotions or memory or projections or physicality or anything > > > >else. > > >Just > > > > > > >sentient-ness. > > > > > > > > > > > > The term 'perceptions' IMO are the concepts (illusions) created by our > > > >discriminating, rational mind (intellect) which post-processes > > > >experience with > > > > > > >such rational actions as filtering, augmenting, categorizing, > > > >evaluating, > > >etc... > > > > > > > > So maybe when you say "different levels of awareness of our senses" you > > > > are > > > >saying (in my terms) there is experience, and then there is a whole host > > > >of > > > >levels of perceptions. And maybe not... > > > > > > > > I have no idea what you think the story about the drawing has to do > > > > with your > > > > > > >'senses'. You recognizing a line drawing as "an orchid in all its glory" > > > >is a > > > > > >perception - not an (direct, sensory) experience. > > > > > > > > So, I repeat my question again in a little different way... > > > > > > > > When you say "The senses do need to be engaged but should work > > >'properly'...", > > > > > > >what exactly to you mean by that? > > > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "bobthomas564" <bobthomas564@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > HI Bill thanks for the welcome. > > > > > > > > > > To answer your question I think there are different levels of > > > > > awareness of > > > > > >our senses. To remind the new meditators of their senses brings, what is > > > >normally an autonomous process back into 'immediate reality' (indicating > > > >a > > > >clearer idea of the senses rather than the reality of reality - if you > > > >know > > >what > > > > > > >I mean). > > > > > > > > > > Many years ago a group of us did an experiment in focus and coming in > > > > > touch > > > > > > >with the senses. We were given a large sheet of drwg paper and some > > > >charcoal. > > >We > > > > > > >all had to draw a huge orchid in a brass pot. I am useless at art and > > > >drawing > > > > > >match stick people is a stretch. Having meditated, done a few straight > > > >lines > > >and > > > > > > >a few circles we started by concentrating on a single point, drawing > > > >that and > > > > > >then moving on. After a short time I stood back and was astounded that I > > > >had > > > >drawn an orchid in all its glory. > > > > > > > > > > I hope this answers your question. > > > > > > > > > > Bob > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Bill!" <BillSmart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Bob, > > > > > > > > > > > > Welcome to the group.. > > > > > > > > > > > > I was also taught to relax my eyes so they are only 'half' open, > > > > > > lower my > > > > > > >gaze to about 3 feet in front of me and allow my eyes to de-focus. > > > >Closed eyes > > > > > > >were discouraged to help keep your mind from wandering, minimize > > >visualizations > > > > > > >and because as you note of the tendency to sleep. > > > > > > > > > > > > The senses are always engaged. How could you disengage them while > > >remaining > > > > > > >conscious? > > > > > > > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "bobthomas564" <bobthomas564@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > HI Joe - I agree. I was taught to squint through slightly open > > > > > > > eyes but > > > > > > >not at first. The senses do need to be engaged but should work > > > >'properly' ie > > >not > > > > > > >allowing the ego to take control of them and run with them. Easier said > > > >than > > > >done. The ego, as it throws up things, always strike me like files with > > > >a > > >'look > > > > > > >at this' on the front of them. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I take the guys through getting in contact with their senses > > > > > > > prior to > > > >starting meditation encompassing the idea of 'nowhere to go and nothing > > > >to > > >do'. > > > > > > >I find that they can deal with the issues of meditation easier with > > > >their eyes > > > > > > >closed in the early stages. Eventually a few things happen as they get > > >stronger, > > > > > > >sleep disappears as an issue and they naturally sit m
