Chris,
I really think getting down to this level of discussion of such things
on a zen forum is uncalled for and probably leads to more confusion than
clarification, but I will answer your question - only because you're one
of my favorites... [:x]
First of all your phrase 'states of the brain' is problematic. It's
taken our discourse out of the realm of functions (software) into
physicality (hardware). I'll try to explain my understanding of all
this using the terms you've used which will require me to use
subject/object language, so don't hold be too tightly to what I say
here. I don't claim to be an expert in this area (physiology) so I'm
just explaining this the way I think of it.
The brain has many functions. The brain's functions don't have to be
either all on or all off. Thought is one function; registering sensual
experience is one function and awareness is one function. Some
functions are autonomous and continue whether you are aware of them or
not.
Using this skeleton outline I would say:
* Buddha Nature = sensual experience
* Intellection = Human Nature
* Realizing Buddha Nature = sensual experience + awareness - thought
* Human Nature = thought + awareness - sensual experience
* Enlightenment = sensual awareness + thought + awareness
Is that mathematical enough for you?
...Bill!
--- In [email protected], Chris Austin-Lane wrote:
>
> So you are claiming that states of the brain and non thought are
mutually
> exclusive?
>
> Thanks,
> --Chris
> 301-270-6524
> On Jul 5, 2013 6:44 PM, "Bill!" BillSmart@... wrote:
>
> > Chris,
> >
> > "Non-thought" is no intellectual activity - no creating pluralism
which is
> > the foundation of delusion and attachment. Later you can
reincorporate
> > thought without attachment by realizing it as delusive.
> >
> > It doesn't mean all your bodily functions shut down.
> >
> > ...Bill!
> >
> > --- In [email protected], Chris Austin-Lane chris@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Non-thought is not no mental activity, sitting errect fully
present in a
> > > moment takes more lively brains/more energetic bodies than sleep.
> > >
> > > Or are you suggesting that skimming thru life without really
inhabiting
> > > each moment is the key?
> > >
> > > Or just falling prey to that Zen temptation of word play, since I
wrote
> > of
> > > people "moved" by beauty?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > --Chris
> > > 301-270-6524
> > > On Jul 5, 2013 10:53 AM, pandabananasock@ wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Chris,
> > > >
> > > > Mind moves mind.
> > > >
> > > > Yours truely,
> > > > Peebles
> > > >
> > > > You: "Over and over, I have
> > > > heard some music without really paying attention, and tuen one
time
> > have
> > > > really listened to it, and been deeply moved."
> > > > ------------------------------
> > > > On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 12:31 PM EDT Chris Austin-Lane wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >Are you kidding? Your intellect is where your sense of beauty
come
> > from?
> > > > >That could not be further away from my experience. Over and
over, I
> > have
> > > > >heard some music without really paying attention, and tuen one
time
> > have
> > > > >really listened to it, and been deeply moved. Really also I
find
> > > > >listening/seeing/tasting/touching/smelling/introspecting in
general
> > > > rewards
> > > > >attentive attending ;) with a suuden pleasurable deepening
> > appreciation
> > > > for
> > > > >how things are, for the specific thing at hand a routine
occurance.
> > > > >
> > > > >For beauty, there is a saying, when nothing is special, then
> > everything
> > > > >can be special. But our brain will be responding to beauty in
any
> > case.
> > > > >Spontaneously. Not because of intellectual something, but our
full
> > > > >response to life clearly seen.
> > > > >
> > > > >Thanks,
> > > > >--Chris
> > > > >301-270-6524
> > > > > On Jul 5, 2013 2:35 AM, "Bill!" BillSmart@ wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Merle,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> My intellect judged them to be beautiful. That judgement was
> > probably
> > > > >> something I learned to mimic from hearing other people
describe
> > things
> > > > as
> > > > >> beautiful.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> ...Bill!
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --- In [email protected], Merle Lester
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Ãâ
> > > > >> > Ãâ bill..how do you know they were beautiful?
clarification
> > > > please..merle
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > I have indeed perceived many beautiful sunsets.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > But have also experienced Just THIS!
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > ...Bill!
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > --- In [email protected], Merle Lester
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâ
> > > > >> > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâ bill..is that so?...is that
what you have realised or
> > have been
> > > > >> told to believe think and feel?.. have you never seen a
beautiful
> > > > sunset
> > > > >> ?...merle
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâ
> > > > >> > > Merle,
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Math is judged to be beautiful because it is logical.
Yes.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Logic is judged to be beautiful because it deceives us
into
> > > > thinking
> > > > >> we understand the truth.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > Truth is not beautiful or not-beautiful. Truth just is.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > All judgments come from your delusive intellect and
self. If
> > you
> > > > are
> > > > >> looking for 'realization' [Buddha Nature?] then you'll have
to let
> > go
> > > > your
> > > > >> attachments to such things as self, intellect, truth and
beauty.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > ...Bill!
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > --- In [email protected], Merle Lester
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > mathematics is beautiful because it is logical
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > >
ÃÆ'Ã'âââ¬Ã
¡ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâ logic is
beautiful because it is so
> > pointing to the
> > > > truth
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > truth is so beautiful because it points and parts the
way for
> > > > >> realisation to take place ..
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > merle
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > >
ÃÆ'Ã'âââ¬Ã
¡ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâ
> > > > >> > > > Edgar,
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > Reality is not bound by logic. I'd buy your statement
if you
> > said
> > > > >> 'math words because it accurately models our logically-based
> > > > perception of
> > > > >> reality', but I suppose that wouldn't work for you.
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > ...Bill!
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen
> > wrote:
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > Bill,
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > No, no, no. Human math works because it DOES
accurately
> > model
> > > > the
> > > > >> actual logic of reality.
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > Edgar
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > On Jul 3, 2013, at 8:55 PM, Bill! wrote:
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > Chris,
> > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > Mathematics doesn't reveal reality. Mathematics
only
> > mirrors
> > > > the
> > > > >> human intellect.
> > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > ...Bill!
> > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > --- In [email protected], Chris
Austin-Lane
> >
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > The thing I like about math as a source of
analogies
> > for
> > > > zen
> > > > >> is that it
> > > > >> > > > > > > shows how two different things csn br exactly
the same.
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > Linear equations over reals are lines. Lines are
linear
> > > > >> equations.
> > > > >> > > > > > > Numbers, points, the constituents drop away as
the
> > eternal
> > > > >> unity is seen.
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > >> > > > > > > --Chris
> > > > >> > > > > > > 301-270-6524
> > > > >> > > > > > > On Jul 3, 2013 8:12 AM, wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > Bill!:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > You're gonna ignore the math? I thought you
said you
> > were
> > > > >> looking for an
> > > > >> > > > > > > > impersonal language a couple posts ago... :D
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > The thing about using math that way is that
> > eventually it
> > > > >> leads you back
> > > > >> > > > > > > > to the beginning. We use mathematics as an
> > expression of
> > > > the
> > > > >> model, then
> > > > >> > > > > > > > we use the model as an expression of the math.
Then
> > we
> > > > >> realize that both
> > > > >> > > > > > > > are models of each other and the same, and
experience
> > > > >> encompasses all -- no
> > > > >> > > > > > > > need for anything else. Rivers and mountains
become
> > > > rivers
> > > > >> and mountains
> > > > >> > > > > > > > again!
> > > > >> > > > > > > > ~PeeBeeEss
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------
> > > > >> > > > > > > > On Wed, 7/3/13, Bill! wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Say Bye-Bye to the Delusion
of
> > > > >> Cause-and-Effect and
> > > > >> > > > > > > > Karma
> > > > >> > > > > > > > To: [email protected]
> > > > >> > > > > > > > Date: Wednesday, July 3, 2013, 8:56 AM
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > PBS (That's going to be my TLA (Three
> > > > >> > > > > > > > Letter Acronym) for Pandabananasock from now
on)...
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > I'll ignore all the math but do agree that
JUST IF
> > there
> > > > is
> > > > >> > > > > > > > such a think that could be called 'karma' it's
not so
> > > > much a
> > > > >> > > > > > > > moralistic cause-and-effect as it is an
intrinsic
> > > > quality of
> > > > >> > > > > > > > the act itself.
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > But, I'll continue to poo-poo all claims of
karma.
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > ...Bill!
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > --- In [email protected],
> > > > >> > > > > > > > pandabananasock@ wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Most people think of "1+1=2" as procedural,
that
> > is,
> > > > >> > > > > > > > that there is 1, THEN we add 1 to it, THEN it
becomes
> > > > >> > > > > > > > 2. They would regard "2=1+1" and "2=2" to be
> > different
> > > > >> > > > > > > > equations, but they are not in the least bit
> > > > >> > > > > > > > different. The equal-sign is the present.
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > "1+1" is already 2! And the effect IS the
> > > > >> > > > > > > > cause. Your karmic punishment for doing
something
> > > > >> > > > > > > > "bad" is you doing that "bad" thing. Your
karmic
> > > > >> > > > > > > > reward for doing something "good" is you doing
that
> > > > "good"
> > > > >> > > > > > > > thing. Forget the come-back-to-bite-you BS!
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 4:58 AM EDT Bill! wrote:
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > > >...Bill!
> > > > >> > > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > ------------------------------------
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you
> > recently
> > > > have
> > > > >> > > > > > > > read or are reading! Talk about it
today!Yahoo!
> > Groups
> > > > >> > > > > > > > Links
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > [email protected]
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > ------------------------------------
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > > Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you
> > recently
> > > > have
> > > > >> read or are
> > > > >> > > > > > > > reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups
Links
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > > >
> > > > >> > > > >
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> ------------------------------------
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have
read
> > or
> > > > are
> > > > >> reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have
read or
> > are
> > > > reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or
are
> > reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
