Bill,

A very funny and dangerous view of reality.

Go step in front of a bus. It won't be a mistake. It will only be an 
experience, and therefore good Zen in your strange world...

Edgar



On May 19, 2013, at 4:01 AM, Bill! wrote:

> Edgar,
> 
> Au contraire mon ami...
> 
> When Won Hyo experienced drinking water that night there was no mistake.
> 
> The next morning when Won Hyo learned he drank from a skull it was then he 
> perceived a mistake. His intellect created the judgement of mistake at that 
> time.
> 
> There are no mistakes in experience or Buddha Nature. There are only mistakes 
> in perception and the intellect. This is because 'mistake' is a rational 
> concept.
> 
> Capisce?
> 
> ...Bill!
> 
> --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote:
> >
> > Bill,
> > 
> > No, it points to the fact that if one doesn't use his rational mind his 
> > direct experience makes mistakes (mistaking the skull for a cup).
> > 
> > Making mistakes one doesn't realize the true nature of reality.
> > 
> > Therefore the rational mind is necessary to recognize the true nature of 
> > reality.
> > 
> > Therefore using the rational mind is an essential part of Zen..
> > 
> > Edgar
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On May 18, 2013, at 6:50 AM, Bill! wrote:
> > 
> > > Edgar,
> > > 
> > > That might be true if the man from whose skull he drank had died of some 
> > > communicable disease, but as you well know that's not the point of the 
> > > story.
> > > 
> > > The point of the story is that when Won Hyo was not able to completely 
> > > engage his rational mind (because of the lack of information caused by 
> > > the darkness) the experience of the water was refreshing. In the morning 
> > > when he was able to fully engage his rational mind the perception of his 
> > > having drank from the skull was nauseating.
> > > 
> > > The story points out the difference between experience and perception, 
> > > the difference between Buddha Nature (experience) and rationalization 
> > > (thought). Won Hyo's conclusion was: "Ah, he said to himself, thinking 
> > > makes good and bad, life and death. And without thinking these is no 
> > > universe, no Buddha, no Dharma. All is one, and this one is empty."
> > > 
> > > ...Bill!
> > > 
> > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Bill,
> > > > 
> > > > LOL! And then Won Hyo died of whatever had killed the guy who's skull 
> > > > he drank out of.
> > > > 
> > > > Why? Because he was a comic book Zennist who didn't have enough sense 
> > > > to use his RATIONAL MIND!
> > > > 
> > > > Edgar
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On May 18, 2013, at 12:39 AM, Bill! wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Mike,
> > > > > 
> > > > > And what I am saying (and IMO) is perception should NOT be used to 
> > > > > illustrate Buddha Nature.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Perceptions are creations of the intellect (Human Nature).
> > > > > 
> > > > > [The awareness of sensual]experience is Buddha Nature. (The 
> > > > > qualifiers in [brackets] should be unnecessary but I know many do not 
> > > > > share my definition of 'experience'.)
> > > > > 
> > > > > Here is another zen story that I think I posted just recently that 
> > > > > perhaps better illustrates my point:
> > > > > 
> > > > > "This is a story about Won Hyo, who is a famous Korean monk. He 
> > > > > wanted to travel to China to meet a master that would teach him 
> > > > > Buddhism. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > One evening as Won Hyo was crossing the desert, he stopped at a small 
> > > > > patch of green, where there were a few trees and some water, and went 
> > > > > to sleep. Towards midnight he awoke, thirsty--it was pitch-dark. He 
> > > > > groped along on all fours, searching for water. At last his hand 
> > > > > touched a cup on the ground. He picked it up and drank. Ah, how 
> > > > > delicious! Then he bowed deeply, in gratitude, to the Buddha for the 
> > > > > gift of water. The next morning, Won Hyo woke up and saw besides him 
> > > > > what he had taken for a cup (during the night). It was a shattered 
> > > > > skull, blood-caked and with shreds of flesh still stuck to the 
> > > > > cheek-bones. Strange insects crawled or floated on the surface of the 
> > > > > filthy rainwater inside it. Won Hyo looked at the skull and felt a 
> > > > > great wave of nausea. He opened his mouth. As soon as the vomit 
> > > > > poured out, his mind opened and he understood. Last night, since he 
> > > > > hadn't seen and hadn't thought, the water was delicious. This 
> > > > > morning, seeing and thinking had made him vomit. Ah, he said to 
> > > > > himself, thinking makes good and bad, life and death. And without 
> > > > > thinking these is no universe, no Buddha, no Dharma. All is one, and 
> > > > > this one is empty. There was no need now to find a master. Won Hyo 
> > > > > already understood life and death. What more was there to learn? So 
> > > > > he turned and started back across the desert to Korea." 
> > > > > 
> > > > > -From the book entitled, "Thousand Peaks" by Mu Soeng Sunim
> > > > > 
> > > > > Now, IMO Buddha Nature is pure experience, like Won Hyo's experience 
> > > > > of drinking the water. It would be like the 'Ah!' I recommended in 
> > > > > the strawberry story. Both his initial perception of 'delicious' and 
> > > > > his later perception which caused him to be nauseous is like the 
> > > > > 'sweet' exclamation in the strawberry story.
> > > > > 
> > > > > So unless you want to interpret 'sweet' to just be a spontaneous, 
> > > > > non-judgmental exclamation IMO it is not an appropriate 
> > > > > representation of Buddha Nature. I'd also think that is shown by all 
> > > > > the confusion and dialog it has caused on just this thread.
> > > > > 
> > > > > But, as usual, all this is CAVEAT EMPTOR and IMO only...Bill!
> > > > > 
> > > > > --- In [email protected], uerusuboyo@ wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Bill!,<br/><br/>You could well be correct about the story not being 
> > > > > > used as a recognised koan. But I'm sure I've come across it being 
> > > > > > used as such a couple of times. <br/><br/>I can see how "Ah!" could 
> > > > > > be used as you say, but it isn't. The point I'm arguing here is 
> > > > > > that in the story - a Zen teaching 'device'- a perception was used 
> > > > > > by the man to illustrate Buddha Nature. The man didn't just say 
> > > > > > "Sweet!" as a passive description - he exclaimed his perception 
> > > > > > positively.<br/><br/>Mike<br/><br/><br/>Sent from Yahoo! Mail for 
> > > > > > iPad
> > > > > >
> > > > > 
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > 
> > >
> >
> 
> 

Reply via email to