#5!

Edgar



On Jun 13, 2013, at 10:18 AM, [email protected] wrote:

> Yeh, but who's counting?...
> 
> 
> Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPad
> 
> From: Edgar Owen <[email protected]>; 
> To: <[email protected]>; 
> Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: The Book of Mirdad 
> Sent: Thu, Jun 13, 2013 2:03:24 PM 
> 
>  
> Mike,
> 
> 
> And your ego just commented on it for the 3rd or 4th time this morning...
> 
> 
> Edgar
> 
> 
> 
> On Jun 13, 2013, at 9:12 AM, [email protected] wrote:
> 
>>  
>> Edgar,
>> 
>> And yet your ego's moved enough to comment on it.
>> 
>> Mike
>> 
>> 
>> Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPad
>> 
>> From: Edgar Owen <[email protected]>; 
>> To: <[email protected]>; 
>> Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: The Book of Mirdad 
>> Sent: Thu, Jun 13, 2013 12:24:26 PM 
>> 
>>  
>> Mike,
>> 
>> 
>> Again a clever response that allows your ego to pat itself on the back 
>> rather than get out of the way...
>> 
>> Edgar
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jun 13, 2013, at 2:40 AM, [email protected] wrote:
>> 
>>>  
>>> Bill!,
>>> 
>>> And yet here is Edgar trying to 'teach' us his theory and where we're all 
>>> going wrong.. Oh, the sweet irony!
>>> 
>>> Mike
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPad
>>> 
>>> From: Bill! <[email protected]>; 
>>> To: <[email protected]>; 
>>> Subject: [Zen] Re: The Book of Mirdad 
>>> Sent: Thu, Jun 13, 2013 6:27:35 AM 
>>> 
>>>  
>>> Edgar,
>>> 
>>> There is nothing for which a human being NEEDS as teacher. You could 
>>> conceivably invent calculus on your own if you came to a situation where 
>>> you needed it. However most humans do learn from teachers starting with 
>>> your parents. It saves a lot of time and effort because you don't have to 
>>> 'invent the wheel' every generation. The body of knowledge is passed 
>>> through teaching.
>>> 
>>> It's no different with zen. A good teacher can help you get started and 
>>> shepherd you though difficult patches. He/she cannot learn things for you 
>>> but can certainly help you learn. And yes, there does come a time when 
>>> you've exhausted your teachers' ability to assist and then must go our on 
>>> your own, but you do so from that very substantial base of your learning.
>>> 
>>> ...Bill!
>>> 
>>> --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> 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...
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > 
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > 
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 

Reply via email to