Chris, I've been dealing with the quantum koan all my life.
Reality is the ultimate koan... Solve that one and you've got it! Edgar On Jun 8, 2013, at 9:43 AM, Chris Austin-Lane wrote: > > I didn't think you had done Koan training, Edgar? > > Thanks, > --Chris > 301-270-6524 > On Jun 8, 2013 4:40 AM, "Edgar Owen" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Bill, > > O boy, here we go again.... > > Maybe YOUR intellect shuts down but my intellect IS Buddha Nature.... > > Edgar > > > > > > On Jun 7, 2013, at 11:17 PM, Bill! wrote: > >> >> Suresh, et al... >> >> I agree with Joe here. In fact zen koans are used to exhaust logic and >> dialectic. When you try to use logic or dialectic to 'solve' a koan you will >> continually fail and eventually will just give up out of frustration or >> boredom - much the way you can relax your mind by gazing into a fire >> (chaotic image) or hearing a repetitious sound (ticking of a clock). Your >> mind may first try to 'make sense' (create a perception) out of the changing >> images of the flames or the constant ticking of the clock, but eventually >> will just 'tune them out'. >> >> The same happens with to your intellect during a koan. It eventually just >> shuts down - and what then is left? Buddha Nature! >> >> ...Bill! >> >> --- In [email protected], "Joe" <desert_woodworker@...> wrote: >> > >> > Suresh, >> > >> > Well, "obsessed" is too strong -- and wrong -- a word. >> > >> > On a Zen forum, I don't mind speaking about Zen, however. Your habit seems >> > to speak about all else but Zen. >> > >> > Other things enter here from time to time, of course, which relate to our >> > topic. >> > >> > But in general, I enjoy keeping on-topic, and making the forum a more >> > concentrated place upon the central topic that it is dedicated to. Here, >> > such concentration is not "obsession": but it is "keeping on topic", and >> > following the Terms of Service of the board. >> > >> > You say you know Naimy: but he passed away 25 years ago. Did you know him >> > personally, earlier? >> > >> > I do not agree that argument can lead to what you call pure consciousness. >> > Neither does it have to do with the "No Mind" of Zen awakening. Argument >> > and dialectic can only show the futility of using logic and thought to >> > realize Buddha Mind. Once a person is satisfied -- and exhausted -- that >> > cogitation is futile, he/she can then get down to actual practice, >> > instead, preferably with a Zen teacher and a group, and see them >> > regularly, and practice Zazen regularly. That is, if your interest is in >> > fact really in Zen. >> > >> > --Joe >> > >> > > "Suresh" <varamtha@> wrote: >> > > >> > > Dear Joe, >> > > >> > > Of course the discussion was with other forum member. I know the author >> > > of The Book of Mirdad. >> > > >> > > I have posted it since it is also related to Buddha. Since that member >> > > thought Buddha also copied from vedas, I have to argue with him. >> > > >> > > Like you are so much obsessed with zen and zen only, the other member is >> > > obsessed with Hindu scriptures such as vedas. He thinks only vedas are >> > > supreme and oldest and all other have copied and told in their own way. >> > > >> > > I don't like obsession. I am free from all theories and all ism. >> > > >> > > I also wanted to indicate my way of argument, which when followed >> > > carefully arrive at pure consciousness or No self in zen terms. >> > > >> > > I only post what is related to zen, meditation, no self, the pure >> > > consciouness. >> > >> > > > > >
