Edgar, You write as tho you have caught your self engaged in self-deception, or partial blindness of your own reality. For those of us who have a tendency to prefer things to be slightly other than they are, or who have a lifetime of not seeing certain parts of our functioning, ir can be useful to have a teacher. It is harder to fool more people at the same time. Plus, having a teacher to bounce things off of is pleasant.
YMMV of course, and perhaps my own self unawareness is much higher than the average. Chris Thanks, --Chris 301-270-6524 On Jun 11, 2013 3:57 AM, "Edgar Owen" <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Bill, > > Yes, in the limited teacher student context. But as I've explained before > reality is the ONLY real teacher. Human teachers may or may not serve as > little pieces of reality that facilitate pointing out Buddha Nature. > > But there is NO NEED AT ALL to 'convince' your teacher to pass the koan. > You either realize Buddha Nature or you don't. If you do the teacher is no > longer relevant.... > > One demonstrates Buddha Nature to Buddha Nature by realizing Buddha > Nature. NO teacher necessary other than reality itself. > > Only dependent personalities think teachers are a necessity. Did you need > a teacher to start breathing when you were born? > > Edgar > > > > On Jun 11, 2013, at 3:43 AM, Bill! wrote: > > > > Edgar, > > Yes, demonstrating Buddha Nature is the 'answer' or 'solution' to all > koans. And yes, that could involve pointing, or an utterance, or some other > action or even silence and no action. And yes, you do have to 'convince' > your teacher to pass the koan - at least if you want to gain his/her > verification that you have passed the koan. > > After you have passed the koan there was at least in my case then some > rational conversation about the structure of the koan and on what it was > specifically designed to focus. These discussions were intended to prepare > you for becoming a teacher. > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote: > > > > Bill, > > > > There is only one answer or solution to ALL koans. And that is Buddha > Nature. So all one has to do in response to any koan is simply to point to > anything at all and convincingly bring attention to its Buddha Nature. > > > > But as I say repeatedly anything at all can be a koan to get you to that > realization. Reality itself is ultimately the ONLY koan.... even in its > seemingly most insignificant aspect... > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > On Jun 9, 2013, at 9:17 PM, Bill! wrote: > > > > > Edgar, > > > > > > I agree with Joe here. > > > > > > All the 'breakthrough' koans (the first ones that are specifically > designed to induce kensho (first experience of Buddha Nature)require a > demonstration rather than an explanation. For example my first koan was > Joshu's MU and my teacher's request was to "BRING me Mu" and "SHOW me Mu" - > certainly not "explain what Joshu's answer 'Mu' means". > > > > > > In later koans, although still requiring actions or demonstrations, > there is some room for intellectual discussions with your teacher, although > these discussions are usually focused on just what the koan is specifically > designed to accomplish rather than a discussion on the meaning of the > actual content. > > > > > > This has been my experience with koan study anyway, and this was with > two different zen masters - although admittedly the two zen masters were > from the same 'school' and they themselves had a teacher:student > relationship at one time. > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Joe" <desert_woodworker@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Edgar, > > > > > > > > If YOU take things literally, then that's what YOU do. > > > > > > > > Anyone who passes the koan "What is the sound of One Hand?", makes a > demonstration. It's easy, at that time. After that work. What are you all > hung up about? > > > > > > > > Edgar, note, too: my practice has been not too much on koans; after > a few, my teacher saw the road ahead for me, and that was not koans. > Either, "no need", or "no aptitude". > > > > > > > > From my point of view, after a point, it was: > > > > > > > > "No need for gumdrops along the way". > > > > > > > > Yet, all Hail! for folks who go on this way longer that I did. > > > > > > > > I took my Doctor's prescription and switched modalities. > > > > > > > > Hail! > > > > > > > > I'm lucky to have had such a teacher. May you be lucky in this way, > in some life. > > > > > > > > --Joe > > > > > > > > > Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Joe, > > > > > > > > > > The point of my reply to your post both of which you obsessively > snipped is this > > > > > > > > > > Your post went against even the view of koans you are supposed to > believe in as an orthodox zennist. > > > > > > > > > > You and Bill claim that koans have no solution but are to be > discarded in a satori. > > > > > > > > > > But instead your post claimed that you not only understood the > sound of one hand but could produce it yourself. > > > > > > > > > > Thus you don't even understand the naive view of koans Bill does... > > > > > > > > > > You are not supposed to take the koan to heart as if it actually > expressed something but to discard it... > > > > > > > > > > Even Bill knows that... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
