Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
Amanda Brody
OF MOTORCYCLE MAINTENANCE, which I clearly remember but for the life of
me cannot locate again in the book. This passage contrasts the Western
philosophy of the future, which proposes that we face the future with
our backs to the past, with an Eastern philosophy that says we have our
backs to the future and thus cannot see it until it happens and becomes
the past.
If anyone happens to know where in the book this passage occurs, or
knows anything more about the philosophy to which it refers, please
respond. I have skimmed through the entire thing twice, to no avail.
Thanks,
Amanda
aman...@home.com
creepycleveland
"This book has a lot to say about Ancient Greek perspectives and their
meaning but there is one perspective it misses. That is their view of time.
They saw the future as something that came upon them from behind their backs
with the past receding away before their eyes.
When you think about it, that's a more accurate metaphor than our present
one. Who really can face the future? All you can do is project from the
past, even when the past shows that such projections are often wrong. And
who really can forget the past? What else is there to know?"
I downloaded the book from a web page (which I can't find at the moment - I
have no idea how legal that was, which is perhaps why I can't find it now)
I also have bought two editions - a 1985 copy which is beat nearly to death
and a decent 1974 edition that I saw at a used book store and couldn't
resist.
Anyway, The passage from above is located in the introduction of the 1985
edition (pink cover - I don't know if this helps or not) and is not located
anywhere that I can find in the older 1974 edition (no introduction in that
edition) and is located in the Afterward in the online version.
Email me if you need more info - I knew I has seen that quote somewhere -
but I found it in a few different places...
"Amanda Brody" <aman...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3AFD91E6...@home.com...
Raan
It completely concurs with my own as an existential fact of human being.
Kiergkegaard says "Life can only be viewed backward but it must be lived
forward."
Thinking on this I determined this truth of our orientation in time.
Almost as though we are falling backward down a crevice so we may try to
predict changes in the cliff faces by what has passed. The possibility of
turning around also occurred to me via an enlightenment perhaps? The future
the real Self (including the past) and the past our limited self?
Fascinating conjectures ensued :)
--
*·.¸_¸.·'¨¨)
(_¸.·' Raan
"creepycleveland" <creepyc...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:shokd9...@news.erielink.com...
Omnivore
"Raan" <raan...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:4jCL6.81076$_f3.1...@news20.bellglobal.com...
> I wonder where he got this information about the Greek view of time?
> It completely concurs with my own as an existential fact of human being.
> Kiergkegaard says "Life can only be viewed backward but it must be lived
> forward."
> Thinking on this I determined this truth of our orientation in time.
> Almost as though we are falling backward down a crevice so we may try to
> predict changes in the cliff faces by what has passed. The possibility of
> turning around also occurred to me via an enlightenment perhaps? The
future
> the real Self (including the past) and the past our limited self?
> Fascinating conjectures ensued :)
> --
> *·.¸_¸.·'¨¨)
> (_¸.·' Raan
>
Turn around? - Maybe watch the receding from a different way?
Zhoubu
"Raan" raan...@sympatico.ca wrote:
>I wonder where he got this information about the Greek view of time?
>It completely concurs with my own as an existential fact of human being.
>Kiergkegaard says "Life can only be viewed backward but it must be lived
>forward." Thinking on this I determined this truth of our orientation in time.
Yes, I think so. Incorporating time into Life presents us with (time as a)
sequence of events to orient into and grasp what we had formed, or patterned
into.
R
>Almost as though we are falling backward down a crevice so we may try to
>predict changes in the cliff faces by what has passed.
Yes. Looking into the light of these past causal patterns will predicate future
effects.
R
>The possibility of turning around also occurred to me via an enlightenment
perhaps?
If you mean by turning around to 'see' these past patterns, helps us to allow
enlightenment to make its descent, because one is not afraid to see these
self-made past patterns, and correct them now (if they are errors). This
"steels" one's self to continue evolving towards this high estate.
R
<The future, the real Self (including the past) and the past our limited self?
Indeed. Realizing when enlightenment comes, comes by expansion. You've mastered
your world.
R
>Fascinating conjectures ensued :)
Nicely put R :)
Regards,
--Zhou
Cashew
you give to it.
This is a good book. Also I may have been off topic. That all depends on the
meaning you give to what I wrote.
phew!
"Amanda Brody" <aman...@home.com> wrote in message
news:3AFD91E6...@home.com...
Cashew
is no IS. At the most it is all relative. Or at the most- Life is empty and
meaningless. The only meaning life has is the meaning you make it have.
I would say that is the truth, but, there is no truth. Sorry! The truth is
just something somebody made up.
Ichin Shen
>
> Yet in Zen I find that there
> is no IS.
Yes, there is.
> At the most it is all relative. Or at the most- Life is empty and
> meaningless. The only meaning life has is the meaning you make it have.
>
> I would say that is the truth, but, there is no truth. Sorry! The truth is
> just something somebody made up.
>
From a previous post,
'Wondering for wondering gets trap in the wondering. There is more
energy lost than you think. Talking about Zen student story, here's one
for you:
Once, a halfway Zen monk went to see the Zen master Yun-Men, for which
the monk must travel for a couple of days. The sincerity must be known,
so he made a smart remark upon arrival, "as I began to come, there was a
new moon, as I'm here, the new moon curves like a hook." (implying that
he came from a long way) The master heard the remark, invited him over
for a chat. "Did you say that [remark]?" the master asked. "Yes,"
replied the monk. "Very good. let me ask you this, what's the new moon
looks like?" The monk did not answer but made a gesture which he used a
hand covering the eyes like a broad-brim visor and pretended he was
looking [for the moon]. The master commented, "if you continue to do
this [way], you may lose your sight."
Some ten days later, the monk returned. The master asked him again, "did
you figure it out?" "No," replied the monk. So the master said, "well,
you ask me then." So did the monk, "what's the new moon looks like?" The
master replied, "the new moon curves like a hook." The monk frowned, as
if he didn't know the meaning of it. Later [in life], the monk did lose
the sight.
The point? When one is pursuing Tao/Zen, it is about reality of life, it
is a very serious business, for which one must be responsible for each
of his/her own actions and words. The monk made a smart remark without
knowing what he was talking about. When been asked, the smart gesture
didn't really apply there neither (one doesn't need to cover the eyes
for looking for the new moon, the sky won't be that bright anyway). He
did not know what he was talking about but did not even know that. Thus,
when been asked the second time, he still did not know the answer. The
master was kind, gave him the third chance by telling him the answer, he
did not catch on. The spirit of the wit was gone, the monk cannot see
things any more, later, lost the sight [from mental to physical]. Get
trapped by one's own little smart, sad.'
:)
IS
Raan
"Omnivore" <sun...@SPAMOFFpacbell.net> wrote in message
news:9dnssb$ev9$1...@taliesin.netcom.net.uk...
|
| "Raan" <raan...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
| news:4jCL6.81076$_f3.1...@news20.bellglobal.com...
| > I wonder where he got this information about the Greek view of time?
| > It completely concurs with my own as an existential fact of human being.
| > Kiergkegaard says "Life can only be viewed backward but it must be lived
| > forward."
| > Thinking on this I determined this truth of our orientation in time.
| > Almost as though we are falling backward down a crevice so we may try to
| > predict changes in the cliff faces by what has passed. The possibility of
| > turning around also occurred to me via an enlightenment perhaps? The
| future
| > the real Self (including the past) and the past our limited self?
| > Fascinating conjectures ensued :)
| > --
|
Well strictly speaking all I sense is the past since it takes time even for
light to reach my eyes and then for this to translate into signals I can
process. It occurred to me that to turn tot he future would make it the past
and the past the future. Just as I cannot see behind me then I would have no
recollection of what was the past before I turned. In fact it would be
indistinguishable. As I turn in space so do I turn in time. The only hope
since I can see behind me with a mirror would be to try to find some kind of
4D mirror. My idea was that perhaps the mind itself is such a mirror.
Raan
--
*·.¸_¸.·'¨¨)
(_¸.·' Raan
"Cashew" <Cas...@xxxworldnut.att.nut> wrote in message
news:7eZL6.22891$4f7.1...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Omnivore
So, what have we got?
We gots our senses and memories and imagination.
And memories don't always seem so accurate.
Senses just show us stuff much as watching some projection on a screen.
I dunno. It all seems a bit insubstantial.
Could a whole illusion not collapse in a moment?
musician
time is fluid
past and furture
nothing is immutable
musician
Dave Ballard
I've been following this with some interest. I'd recently read an artical
on a British mathmatician, who seems to think that time does not exist.
That there is no past, present or future as we have been taught .
It was mentioned by him that if you eliminate time in you calculations then
the Quantum and Einstien's physics, merge into a Unified theroy.
In a way it seems strange that Western science keeps proving what Buddha
has said all along.
--
Dave Ballard
Where ever you go, there you are.
Raan
"Omnivore" <sun...@SPAMOFFpacbell.net> wrote in message
What is real?
Jaybuzin0000
>What is real?
peter used to also ask,
"is love real?" and then respond,
"it's real enough."
a Moody Blues composer
may have said something akin to,
"Cold hearted orb
that rules the night
removes the colours
from our sight
red is grey
and yellow white
but we decide
which right
and which
is an illusion"
the Space KAOBOY
So in other words, lets stop this typing and muffing and get down to some
dancing!
the SPACE kaoboy!
"Howdy, Howdy, Howdy" the Space KAOBOY!
musician
<kao...@funk.soul.brother.com> wrote:
>
>mus...@planet.nl (musician) wrote:
>>
>>time is fluid
>>past and furture
>>nothing is immutable
>
>So in other words, lets stop this typing and muffing and get down to some
>dancing!
>
I thought this WAS dancing!? ;-)
>
>the SPACE kaoboy!
>
>
>http://www.zfree.co.nz
>
>"Howdy, Howdy, Howdy" the Space KAOBOY!
musician
meditate constantly
not Zen. If one really wants to know where most of the ideas come from it is Greek philosophy
rather than anything Eastern.
Having said that though, no matter who you are, life varies little: you are born; you live; you die.
What more do we need to know.
MC
In article <3AFD91E6...@home.com>, aman...@home.com says...
Mike Biggins
either.
Love and Light
Mike.
"meditate constantly" <c8861...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15778ec11...@news.ozemail.com.au...
genein
"meditate constantly" <c8861...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.15778ec11...@news.ozemail.com.au...
is given about it being
> not Zen. If one really wants to know where most of the ideas come from it is
Greek philosophy
> rather than anything Eastern.
nor is it a treatise on motorcycle maintenence but never the less the quality
of zen is there....
>
> Having said that though, no matter who you are, life varies little: you are
born; you live; you die.
> What more do we need to know.
to be born requires no effort on our part nor to die, they are both beyond our
control..........but to live and live well should be the concern and goal of
all..
Ichin Shen
>
> "meditate constantly" <c8861...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.15778ec11...@news.ozemail.com.au...
> > Most people have never looked but before the start of the book, a disclaimer
> is given about it being
> > not Zen. If one really wants to know where most of the ideas come from it is
> Greek philosophy
> > rather than anything Eastern.
>
> nor is it a treatise on motorcycle maintenence but never the less the quality
> of zen is there....
Huh?? What's Zen, again?
> >
> > Having said that though, no matter who you are, life varies little: you are
> born; you live; you die.
> > What more do we need to know.
>
> to be born requires no effort on our part nor to die, they are both beyond our
> control..........but to live and live well should be the concern and goal of
> all..
"... when one can put oneself outside of the phenomenon of life, one
sees clearly like under the morning sun. As it will, sees the Oneness.
In Oneness, there's no distinction of past or current. With such "no
past or current," one may enter the realm of no death and no life. One
who kills [the notion of] life does not die; one who harbors [the notion
of] life does not live. ..."-Zhuang Zi (CT) 6-
:)
IS
The Bellman
B
Mike Biggins <big...@mbiggins.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9ejlk7$vk2$1...@news6.svr.pol.co.uk...
genein
"Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message
news:3B0DA9FA...@taomartialarts.com...
> genein wrote:
> >
> > "meditate constantly" <c8861...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:MPG.15778ec11...@news.ozemail.com.au...
> > > Most people have never looked but before the start of the book, a
disclaimer
> > is given about it being
> > > not Zen. If one really wants to know where most of the ideas come from it
is
> > Greek philosophy
> > > rather than anything Eastern.
> >
> > nor is it a treatise on motorcycle maintenence but never the less the
quality
> > of zen is there....
>
> Huh?? What's Zen, again?
nez spelled backwards.....next question...
>
> > >
> > > Having said that though, no matter who you are, life varies little: you
are
> > born; you live; you die.
> > > What more do we need to know.
> >
> > to be born requires no effort on our part nor to die, they are both beyond
our
> > control..........but to live and live well should be the concern and goal
of
> > all..
>
> "... when one can put oneself outside of the phenomenon of life, one
> sees clearly like under the morning sun. As it will, sees the Oneness.
> In Oneness, there's no distinction of past or current. With such "no
> past or current," one may enter the realm of no death and no life. One
> who kills [the notion of] life does not die; one who harbors [the notion
> of] life does not live. ..."-Zhuang Zi (CT) 6-
has "one" done this?
g.
>
> :)
> IS
Ichin Shen
>
> "Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message
> news:3B0DA9FA...@taomartialarts.com...
> > genein wrote:
> > >
> > > "meditate constantly" <c8861...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:MPG.15778ec11...@news.ozemail.com.au...
> > > > Most people have never looked but before the start of the book, a
> disclaimer
> > > is given about it being
> > > > not Zen. If one really wants to know where most of the ideas come from it
> is
> > > Greek philosophy
> > > > rather than anything Eastern.
> > >
> > > nor is it a treatise on motorcycle maintenence but never the less the
> quality
> > > of zen is there....
> >
> > Huh?? What's Zen, again?
>
> nez spelled backwards.....next question...
What's "nez"?
> >
> > > >
> > > > Having said that though, no matter who you are, life varies little: you
> are
> > > born; you live; you die.
> > > > What more do we need to know.
> > >
> > > to be born requires no effort on our part nor to die, they are both beyond
> our
> > > control..........but to live and live well should be the concern and goal
> of
> > > all..
> >
> > "... when one can put oneself outside of the phenomenon of life, one
> > sees clearly like under the morning sun. As it will, sees the Oneness.
> > In Oneness, there's no distinction of past or current. With such "no
> > past or current," one may enter the realm of no death and no life. One
> > who kills [the notion of] life does not die; one who harbors [the notion
> > of] life does not live. ..."-Zhuang Zi (CT) 6-
>
> has "one" done this?
Yes.....next question...
:)
IS
>
> g.
>
> >
> > :)
> > IS
Kenneth R. Dietiker
>
> genein wrote:
> >
> > "Ichin Shen" wrote:
> > >
> > > Huh?? What's Zen, again?
> >
> > nez spelled backwards.....next question...
>
> What's "nez"?
French for "nose".
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Mike Biggins
A classic of our times.
Love and Light
Mike.
"The Bellman" <Bel...@colchester-tours.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:9emh6g$2s3$8...@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
Ichin Shen
>
> Ichin Shen wrote:
> >
> > genein wrote:
> > >
> > > "Ichin Shen" wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Huh?? What's Zen, again?
> > >
> > > nez spelled backwards.....next question...
> >
> > What's "nez"?
>
> French for "nose".
Thanx, is it related to English "knows"?
:)
IS
Kenneth R. Dietiker
More in the lines of "plane as..."
:-)
Ken
Ichin Shen
>
> Ichin Shen wrote:
> >
> > "Kenneth R. Dietiker" wrote:
> > >
> > > Ichin Shen wrote:
> > > >
> > > > genein wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > "Ichin Shen" wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Huh?? What's Zen, again?
> > > > >
> > > > > nez spelled backwards.....next question...
> > > >
> > > > What's "nez"?
> > >
> > > French for "nose".
> >
> > Thanx, is it related to English "knows"?
> >
> > :)
> > IS
>
> More in the lines of "plane as..."
As in "Zen vanishes as 'plane' grows"?
:)
IS
>
> :-)
> Ken
>
genein
> > > > > not Zen. If one really wants to know where most of the ideas come
from it
> > is
> > > > Greek philosophy
> > > > > rather than anything Eastern.
> > > >
> > > > nor is it a treatise on motorcycle maintenence but never the less the
> > quality
> > > > of zen is there....
> > >
> > > Huh?? What's Zen, again?
> >
> > nez spelled backwards.....next question...
>
> What's "nez"?
zen spelled backwards........another?
> > >
> > > "... when one can put oneself outside of the phenomenon of life, one
> > > sees clearly like under the morning sun. As it will, sees the Oneness.
> > > In Oneness, there's no distinction of past or current. With such "no
> > > past or current," one may enter the realm of no death and no life. One
> > > who kills [the notion of] life does not die; one who harbors [the notion
> > > of] life does not live. ..."-Zhuang Zi (CT) 6-
> >
> > has "one" done this?
>
> Yes.....next question...
so tell me of this realm of no death and no life.......did you meet elvis?
g.
>
> :)
Ichin Shen
>
> "Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message
> news:3B0EFA51...@taomartialarts.com...
> > > > > > not Zen. If one really wants to know where most of the ideas come
> from it
> > > is
> > > > > Greek philosophy
> > > > > > rather than anything Eastern.
> > > > >
> > > > > nor is it a treatise on motorcycle maintenence but never the less the
> > > quality
> > > > > of zen is there....
> > > >
> > > > Huh?? What's Zen, again?
> > >
> > > nez spelled backwards.....next question...
> >
> > What's "nez"?
>
> zen spelled backwards........another?
"What's Zen, again?"
>
> > > >
> > > > "... when one can put oneself outside of the phenomenon of life, one
> > > > sees clearly like under the morning sun. As it will, sees the Oneness.
> > > > In Oneness, there's no distinction of past or current. With such "no
> > > > past or current," one may enter the realm of no death and no life. One
> > > > who kills [the notion of] life does not die; one who harbors [the notion
> > > > of] life does not live. ..."-Zhuang Zi (CT) 6-
> > >
> > > has "one" done this?
> >
> > Yes.....next question...
>
> so tell me of this realm of no death and no life.......
No death and no life.
> did you meet elvis?
Elvis is dead.
:)
IS
>
> g.
>
> >
> > :)
Mike Biggins
Wasn't he just some drugged up (mainly painkillers, he was never cool enough
to hit mainstream) hamburger/icecream eating guy, wot did a few good turns
for them good ol'fellas, sang a few little ditties, and created loads of
conceptions, and now turns up in ghostly form signing money off coupons in
super-hypermarkets
Not me.
Love and Light
Mike.
"genein" <gen...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:ceOP6.889$kh4....@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
genein
> > > > > Huh?? What's Zen, again?
> > > >
> > > > nez spelled backwards.....next question...
> > >
> > > What's "nez"?
> >
> > zen spelled backwards........another?
>
> "What's Zen, again?"
nez spelled backwards........another?
> > > > has "one" done this?
> > >
> > > Yes.....next question...
> >
> > so tell me of this realm of no death and no life.......
>
> No death and no life.
>
> > did you meet elvis?
>
> Elvis is dead.
sorry to hear that......but does he remain "dead" eternally? if not and he
cannot be said to be alive, then could he be in this realm you speak of.......?
g.
>
> :)
> IS
>
> >
> > g.
> >
> > >
> > > :)
genein
> Who in God's name wants to meet 'elvis'
>
> Wasn't he just some drugged up (mainly painkillers, he was never cool enough
> to hit mainstream) hamburger/icecream eating guy, wot did a few good turns
> for them good ol'fellas, sang a few little ditties, and created loads of
> conceptions, and now turns up in ghostly form signing money off coupons in
> super-hypermarkets
may i invite you to graceland where perhaps the "other" elvis can be seen, (and
heard) and considered.......mike how can you say he was never mainstream when
its not possible to find a person in the americas or europe who has not heard
of him and remember he was responsible for making "hips" popular......i do
believe he posts here as well.......
e.
Ichin Shen
>
> "Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message
> news:3B0FCCCD...@taomartialarts.com...
> > > > > > Huh?? What's Zen, again?
> > > > >
> > > > > nez spelled backwards.....next question...
> > > >
> > > > What's "nez"?
> > >
> > > zen spelled backwards........another?
> >
> > "What's Zen, again?"
>
> nez spelled backwards........another?
which tell/tail are you chasing next?
>
> > > > > has "one" done this?
> > > >
> > > > Yes.....next question...
> > >
> > > so tell me of this realm of no death and no life.......
> >
> > No death and no life.
> >
> > > did you meet elvis?
> >
> > Elvis is dead.
>
> sorry to hear that......but does he remain "dead" eternally? if not and he
> cannot be said to be alive,
Death is an illusion, as well as elvis.
> then could he be in this realm you speak of.......?
No, not in realm of Oneness/Zen/Tao/Unism.
:)
IS
>
> g.
genein
> > >
> > > "What's Zen, again?"
> >
> > nez spelled backwards........another?
>
> which tell/tail are you chasing next?
i chase only tales.......
>
> >
> > > > > > has "one" done this?
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes.....next question...
> > > >
> > > > so tell me of this realm of no death and no life.......
> > >
> > > No death and no life.
> > >
> > > > did you meet elvis?
> > >
> > > Elvis is dead.
> >
> > sorry to hear that......but does he remain "dead" eternally? if not and he
> > cannot be said to be alive,
>
> Death is an illusion, as well as elvis.
and of course the expected response......"are you an illusion"? and if
something is an illusion, then a real must exist, and if a real exists, how can
it be told from the illusion? and how does one come to the consideration that
anything is illusory?
>
> > then could he be in this realm you speak of.......?
>
> No, not in realm of Oneness/Zen/Tao/Unism.
the tao is all things including elvis. how can it be otherwise? we are all
one.....explain "unism"....
g.
>
> :)
> IS
>
> >
> > g.
Ichin Shen
>
> "Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message > > > >
> > > > > zen spelled backwards........another?
> > > >
> > > > "What's Zen, again?"
> > >
> > > nez spelled backwards........another?
> >
> > which tell/tail are you chasing next?
>
> i chase only tales.......
backwards?
> >
> > >
> > > > > > > has "one" done this?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes.....next question...
> > > > >
> > > > > so tell me of this realm of no death and no life.......
> > > >
> > > > No death and no life.
> > > >
> > > > > did you meet elvis?
> > > >
> > > > Elvis is dead.
> > >
> > > sorry to hear that......but does he remain "dead" eternally? if not and he
> > > cannot be said to be alive,
> >
> > Death is an illusion, as well as elvis.
>
> and of course the expected response......"are you an illusion"? and if
> something is an illusion, then a real must exist, and if a real exists, how can
> it be told from the illusion?
By do it without deliberation.
> and how does one come to the consideration that
> anything is illusory?
By illusory mind.
> >
> > > then could he be in this realm you speak of.......?
> >
> > No, not in realm of Oneness/Zen/Tao/Unism.
>
> the tao is all things including elvis.
Your tao, maybe, not the Oneness Tao. Elvis is no longer a thing.
> how can it be otherwise?
By do it without deliberation.
> we are all one.....
In what sense?
> explain "unism"....
By do it without deliberation, i.e. a unified mind and body where mind
perceives and body acts spontaneously, i.e. a state of mind where mind
is no longer there.
:)
IS
>
> g.
Mike Biggins
you are of course right.
Would love to see Graceland anytime.
Love and Light
Mike.
"genein" <gen...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:L_UP6.48486$4f7.3...@bgtnsc06-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Degrimlin
>>By do it without deliberation,
rules... :-) do you deliberate to "do" not deliberate or is doing it without
deliberation a thing in itself without an opposite? and just for the record
what the hell is DO IT?
>> i.e. a unified mind and body where mind
perceives and body acts spontaneously,
And this of course if preferred to the dualistic mind or the infamous quadistic
mind (purple people with many screen names) The "mind perceives" is of course
doing it without deliberation and the body as in a spastic motion moves
spontaneously. this is of course acchieved by tying two cows together in the
light of a full moon.
>>i.e. a state of mind where mind
is no longer there...issie<<
Hey you just said it was perceiving... now is it there or not there... and if
its not there where the hell did it go??
Ichin Shen
>
> > explain "unism"....
>
> >>By do it without deliberation,
>
> rules... :-) do you deliberate to "do" not deliberate or is doing it without
> deliberation a thing in itself without an opposite?
Do it without deliberation, as there's no mind to partition the doing,
there's no opposite.
> and just for the record
> what the hell is DO IT?
Doing/being.
>
> >> i.e. a unified mind and body where mind
> perceives and body acts spontaneously,
>
> And this of course if preferred to the dualistic mind or the infamous quadistic
> mind (purple people with many screen names) The "mind perceives" is of course
> doing it without deliberation and the body as in a spastic motion moves
> spontaneously. this is of course acchieved by tying two cows together in the
> light of a full moon.
Fancy mouth works.
>
> >>i.e. a state of mind where mind
> is no longer there...issie<<
>
> Hey you just said it was perceiving... now is it there or not there... and if
> its not there where the hell did it go??
It was never left, only disappeared in your fancy mouth works.
IS
genein
> genein wrote:
> >
> > "Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message > > > >
> > > > > > zen spelled backwards........another?
> > > > >
> > > > > "What's Zen, again?"
> > > >
> > > > nez spelled backwards........another?
> > >
> > > which tell/tail are you chasing next?
> >
> > i chase only tales.......
>
> backwards?
by going backwards one goes forward as well..
> > > Death is an illusion, as well as elvis.
> >
> > and of course the expected response......"are you an illusion"? and if
> > something is an illusion, then a real must exist, and if a real exists, how
can
> > it be told from the illusion?
>
> By do it without deliberation.
....lao tzu deliberately set out to write the tao teh ching.....
> > and how does one come to the consideration that
> > anything is illusory?
>
> By illusory mind.
isn't an illusory mind a symptom of insanity?
> > > > then could he be in this realm you speak of.......?
> > >
> > > No, not in realm of Oneness/Zen/Tao/Unism.
> >
> > the tao is all things including elvis.
>
> Your tao, maybe, not the Oneness Tao. Elvis is no longer a thing.
i have not heard of the oneness tao you speak of but i have heard of the tao
that speaks of oneness, the all encompassing tao....there is no
substitute......
> > how can it be otherwise?
>
> By do it without deliberation.
are you deliberately repeating yourself?
>
> > we are all one.....
>
> In what sense?
we are all made up of the same building blocks as the sun, moon or any part of
the universe you wish to consider....
> > explain "unism"....
>
> By do it without deliberation, i.e. a unified mind and body where mind
> perceives and body acts spontaneously, i.e. a state of mind where mind
> is no longer there.
a unified mind and body suggests "one" but a mind percieving and a body acting
*spontaneously* suggests duelism, not oneness and a mind that is no longer
there suggests some sort of parlor trick........this is not taoism or zen...why
not simply say "eat when hungry"......it tells it all................
so what else is new?
g.
>
> :)
> IS
Ichin Shen
>
> "Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message
> news:3B1171FE...@taomartialarts.com...
> > genein wrote:
> > >
> > > "Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message > > > >
> > > > > > > zen spelled backwards........another?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > "What's Zen, again?"
> > > > >
> > > > > nez spelled backwards........another?
> > > >
> > > > which tell/tail are you chasing next?
> > >
> > > i chase only tales.......
> >
> > backwards?
>
> by going backwards one goes forward as well..
Yes, they go anywhere, but arrive nowhere, "What's Zen, again?"
>
> > > > Death is an illusion, as well as elvis.
> > >
> > > and of course the expected response......"are you an illusion"? and if
> > > something is an illusion, then a real must exist, and if a real exists, how
> can
> > > it be told from the illusion?
> >
> > By do it without deliberation.
>
> ....lao tzu deliberately set out to write the tao teh ching.....
So you may get a glimpse of what Tao is? Lao Tzu's writing [in the
context of "do it without deliberation"] is an illusion already.
>
> > > and how does one come to the consideration that
> > > anything is illusory?
> >
> > By illusory mind.
>
> isn't an illusory mind a symptom of insanity?
Insanity is created by some illusory mind.
>
> > > > > then could he be in this realm you speak of.......?
> > > >
> > > > No, not in realm of Oneness/Zen/Tao/Unism.
> > >
> > > the tao is all things including elvis.
> >
> > Your tao, maybe, not the Oneness Tao. Elvis is no longer a thing.
>
> i have not heard of the oneness tao you speak of but i have heard of the tao
> that speaks of oneness, the all encompassing tao....there is no
> substitute......
Hence the Oneness Tao.
>
> > > how can it be otherwise?
> >
> > By do it without deliberation.
>
> are you deliberately repeating yourself?
Just an answer to a question.
> >
> > > we are all one.....
> >
> > In what sense?
>
> we are all made up of the same building blocks as the sun, moon or any part of
> the universe you wish to consider....
Those are made up by an illusory mind.
>
> > > explain "unism"....
> >
> > By do it without deliberation, i.e. a unified mind and body where mind
> > perceives and body acts spontaneously, i.e. a state of mind where mind
> > is no longer there.
>
> a unified mind and body suggests "one" but a mind percieving and a body acting
> *spontaneously* suggests duelism, not oneness and a mind that is no longer
> there suggests some sort of parlor trick........this is not taoism or zen...
Trick it is, only for people get tangled up with words.
> why
> not simply say "eat when hungry"......it tells it all................
"A disciple asked: 'when you sir practices [Chan/Zen], do you study hard
(Yong-Gong)?'
Master Da-Zhu answered: 'Yes, I do.'
[The disciple was puzzled, as study (Yong-Gong) appears as a Wei
(action), how can an enlightened master still Wei? So,]
He asked: 'how and doing what?'
The master answered: 'eat when hungry, sleep when sleepy.'
'Is not that how everybody does it?' asked the disciple.
'No,' answered the master.
'How so?'
'Common folks don't really eat when they are eating but find all sorts
of other things [such as reading newspaper and etc.] to eat with; they
don't really sleep when they are sleepy but think about all sorts of
other things which keeps them awake till much later. No, there're a lot
of difference.'
The disciple fell silent and asked no more."-Da-Zhu Hui-Hai, a Chan
master-
>
> so what else is new?
What you have not heard?
:)
IS
>
> g.
genein
> > > > > which tell/tail are you chasing next?
> > > >
> > > > i chase only tales.......
> > >
> > > backwards?
> >
> > by going backwards one goes forward as well..
>
> Yes, they go anywhere, but arrive nowhere,
one may well go anywhere but cannot arrive nowhere since that would infer that
nowhere is somewhere and as we know that could be anywhere....
"What's Zen, again?"
nez spelled backwards....next question (put a dime in the nez meter please)
>>>how can
> > > > it be told from the illusion?
> > >
> > > By do it without deliberation.
> >
> > ....lao tzu deliberately set out to write the tao teh ching.....
>
> So you may get a glimpse of what Tao is? Lao Tzu's writing [in the
> context of "do it without deliberation"] is an illusion already.
may i assume that you too are an illusion......?
> > > > and how does one come to the consideration that
> > > > anything is illusory?
> > >
> > > By illusory mind.
> >
> > isn't an illusory mind a symptom of insanity?
>
> Insanity is created by some illusory mind.
or the illusory mind is a symptom of insanity....(check the psycho wards for
like symptoms)
> > > Your tao, maybe, not the Oneness Tao. Elvis is no longer a thing.
> >
> > i have not heard of the oneness tao you speak of but i have heard of the
tao
> > that speaks of oneness, the all encompassing tao....there is no
> > substitute......
>
> Hence the Oneness Tao.
correct..and if you are in agreement with lao tzu, you will allow elvis to be a
part of this tao or risk not understanding the tao...
> > > > how can it be otherwise?
> > >
> > > By do it without deliberation.
> >
> > are you deliberately repeating yourself?
>
> Just an answer to a question.
>
> > >
> > > > we are all one.....
> > >
> > > In what sense?
> >
> > we are all made up of the same building blocks as the sun, moon or any part
of
> > the universe you wish to consider....
>
> Those are made up by an illusory mind.
you seem to take great stock in this illusory mind.....what is the mind that
discovered this "illusory" mind which the illusionary lao tzu seems not to have
mentioned in his illusionary book...
>
> >
> > > > explain "unism"....
> > >
> > > By do it without deliberation, i.e. a unified mind and body where mind
> > > perceives and body acts spontaneously, i.e. a state of mind where mind
> > > is no longer there.
> >
> > a unified mind and body suggests "one" but a mind percieving and a body
acting
> > *spontaneously* suggests duelism, not oneness and a mind that is no longer
> > there suggests some sort of parlor trick........this is not taoism or
zen...
>
> Trick it is, only for people get tangled up with words.
i believe you are demonstrating this rather effectively......(you may respond
with a "dig" of your own)
>
> > why
> > not simply say "eat when hungry"......it tells it all................
>
> "A disciple asked: 'when you sir practices [Chan/Zen], do you study hard
> (Yong-Gong)?'
> Master Da-Zhu answered: 'Yes, I do.'
> [The disciple was puzzled, as study (Yong-Gong) appears as a Wei
> (action), how can an enlightened master still Wei? So,]
> He asked: 'how and doing what?'
> The master answered: 'eat when hungry, sleep when sleepy.'
> 'Is not that how everybody does it?' asked the disciple.
> 'No,' answered the master.
> 'How so?'
> 'Common folks don't really eat when they are eating but find all sorts
> of other things [such as reading newspaper and etc.] to eat with; they
> don't really sleep when they are sleepy but think about all sorts of
> other things which keeps them awake till much later. No, there're a lot
> of difference.'
> The disciple fell silent and asked no more."-Da-Zhu Hui-Hai, a Chan
> master-
>
exactly as i have said....."eat when hungry" no need to go into stories, it
tells it all.....
> >
> > so what else is new?
>
> What you have not heard?
wait...there is a little bird on my windowsill, perhaps he has something to
tell.
g.
>
> :)
> IS
>
> >
> > g.
Mike Biggins
He said ' You're an be sure now to give ma regards to Genein.'
I said, 'Sure, an you have a good day now.'
Love and Light
Mike.
"genein" <gen...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:14NQ6.50325$t12.3...@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
Ichin Shen
>
> "Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message
> news:3B12F94E...@taomartialarts.com...
> > > > > > which tell/tail are you chasing next?
> > > > >
> > > > > i chase only tales.......
> > > >
> > > > backwards?
> > >
> > > by going backwards one goes forward as well..
> >
> > Yes, they go anywhere, but arrive nowhere,
>
> one may well go anywhere but cannot arrive nowhere since that would infer that
> nowhere is somewhere and as we know that could be anywhere....
As anywhere cannot be referenced, it is nowhere,
>
> "What's Zen, again?"
>
> nez spelled backwards....
like a hamster running around in its cage.
> next question (put a dime in the nez meter please)
It ain't worth a dime.
>
> >>>how can
> > > > > it be told from the illusion?
> > > >
> > > > By do it without deliberation.
> > >
> > > ....lao tzu deliberately set out to write the tao teh ching.....
> >
> > So you may get a glimpse of what Tao is? Lao Tzu's writing [in the
> > context of "do it without deliberation"] is an illusion already.
>
> may i assume that you too are an illusion......?
You may assume anyway you want. When the assumption doesn't meet its
reality, it creates an illusion.
>
> > > > > and how does one come to the consideration that
> > > > > anything is illusory?
> > > >
> > > > By illusory mind.
> > >
> > > isn't an illusory mind a symptom of insanity?
> >
> > Insanity is created by some illusory mind.
>
> or the illusory mind is a symptom of insanity....(check the psycho wards for
> like symptoms)
Psycho wards is created by some illusory mind as well.
>
> > > > Your tao, maybe, not the Oneness Tao. Elvis is no longer a thing.
> > >
> > > i have not heard of the oneness tao you speak of but i have heard of the
> tao
> > > that speaks of oneness, the all encompassing tao....there is no
> > > substitute......
> >
> > Hence the Oneness Tao.
>
> correct..and if you are in agreement with lao tzu, you will allow elvis to be a
> part of this tao or risk not understanding the tao...
Don't see anything in Lao Tzu's writing would indicate that elvis is a
real thing. The conclusion you drew is illusorily yours.
>
> > > > > how can it be otherwise?
> > > >
> > > > By do it without deliberation.
> > >
> > > are you deliberately repeating yourself?
> >
> > Just an answer to a question.
> >
> > > >
> > > > > we are all one.....
> > > >
> > > > In what sense?
> > >
> > > we are all made up of the same building blocks as the sun, moon or any part
> of
> > > the universe you wish to consider....
> >
> > Those are made up by an illusory mind.
>
> you seem to take great stock in this illusory mind.....what is the mind that
> discovered this "illusory" mind
Mind of no-mind, "a state of mind where mind is no longer there," which
is achievable only through "do it without deliberation," i.e. "a unified
mind and body where mind perceives and body acts spontaneously,"
> which the illusionary lao tzu seems not to have
> mentioned in his illusionary book...
and the "illusionary lao tzu" and "his illusionary book" is only
illusionarily yours, it vanishes in "do it without deliberation."
> >
> > >
> > > > > explain "unism"....
> > > >
> > > > By do it without deliberation, i.e. a unified mind and body where mind
> > > > perceives and body acts spontaneously, i.e. a state of mind where mind
> > > > is no longer there.
> > >
> > > a unified mind and body suggests "one" but a mind percieving and a body
> acting
> > > *spontaneously* suggests duelism, not oneness and a mind that is no longer
> > > there suggests some sort of parlor trick........this is not taoism or
> zen...
> >
> > Trick it is, only for people get tangled up with words.
>
> i believe you are demonstrating this rather effectively......(you may respond
> with a "dig" of your own)
You may believe anyway you want, Zen is not a belief.
> >
> > > why
> > > not simply say "eat when hungry"......it tells it all................
> >
> > "A disciple asked: 'when you sir practices [Chan/Zen], do you study hard
> > (Yong-Gong)?'
> > Master Da-Zhu answered: 'Yes, I do.'
> > [The disciple was puzzled, as study (Yong-Gong) appears as a Wei
> > (action), how can an enlightened master still Wei? So,]
> > He asked: 'how and doing what?'
> > The master answered: 'eat when hungry, sleep when sleepy.'
> > 'Is not that how everybody does it?' asked the disciple.
> > 'No,' answered the master.
> > 'How so?'
> > 'Common folks don't really eat when they are eating but find all sorts
> > of other things [such as reading newspaper and etc.] to eat with; they
> > don't really sleep when they are sleepy but think about all sorts of
> > other things which keeps them awake till much later. No, there're a lot
> > of difference.'
> > The disciple fell silent and asked no more."-Da-Zhu Hui-Hai, a Chan
> > master-
> >
> exactly as i have said....."eat when hungry" no need to go into stories, it
> tells it all.....
Yup, "... three year-old can say, eighty year-old cannot do."-Niao-Ke
Dao-Lin, a Chan master-
> > >
> > > so what else is new?
> >
> > What you have not heard?
>
> wait...there is a little bird on my windowsill, perhaps he has something to
> tell.
Maybe just another parrot.
:)
IS
>
> g.
Degrimlin
is achievable only through "do it without deliberation," i.e. "a unified
mind and body where mind perceives and body acts spontaneously,"<<
and sitting on da toilet
he flushed it down the hole
never to be seen again.
but then he went and ate
Degrimlin
a
> part of this tao or risk not understanding the tao...
>>Don't see anything in Lao Tzu's writing would indicate that elvis is a
real thing. The conclusion you drew is illusorily yours.<<
not see "is".
its what ya don't know thats "you" but you have to not know that also as in not
striving not to understand... so care could be taken in seeing illusions where
not illusions are clearly not known. after the picture is painted it is a major
hassle to repaint.. the going craze is to get the variable everchanging glow in
da dark not known version.
genein
> > >
> > > Yes, they go anywhere, but arrive nowhere,
> >
> > one may well go anywhere but cannot arrive nowhere since that would infer
that
> > nowhere is somewhere and as we know that could be anywhere....
>
> As anywhere cannot be referenced, it is nowhere,
it seems the snake has swallowed its tail.........
>
> >
> > "What's Zen, again?"
> >
> > nez spelled backwards....
>
> like a hamster running around in its cage.
no, a retsmah...
> > next question (put a dime in the nez meter please)
>
> It ain't worth a dime.
how about a quarter?
> >
> > >>>how can
> > > > > > it be told from the illusion?
> > > > >
> > > > > By do it without deliberation.
> > > >
> > > > ....lao tzu deliberately set out to write the tao teh ching.....
> > >
> > > So you may get a glimpse of what Tao is? Lao Tzu's writing [in the
> > > context of "do it without deliberation"] is an illusion already.
> >
> > may i assume that you too are an illusion......?
>
> You may assume anyway you want. When the assumption doesn't meet its
> reality, it creates an illusion.
an assumption cannot meet a reality by the very act of assuming....and what is
this "reality" you speak of..?
> > > > > By illusory mind.
> > > >
> > > > isn't an illusory mind a symptom of insanity?
> > >
> > > Insanity is created by some illusory mind.
> >
> > or the illusory mind is a symptom of insanity....(check the psycho wards
for
> > like symptoms)
>
> Psycho wards is created by some illusory mind as well.
who is interned and who is not can be debated....
> > > Hence the Oneness Tao.
> >
> > correct..and if you are in agreement with lao tzu, you will allow elvis to
be a
> > part of this tao or risk not understanding the tao...
>
> Don't see anything in Lao Tzu's writing would indicate that elvis is a
> real thing. The conclusion you drew is illusorily yours.
don't see anything in lao tzu's writing that claims he is not.....*all* is one
tells it *all*
> > > Those are made up by an illusory mind.
> >
> > you seem to take great stock in this illusory mind.....what is the mind
that
> > discovered this "illusory" mind
>
> Mind of no-mind, "a state of mind where mind is no longer there," which
> is achievable only through "do it without deliberation," i.e. "a unified
> mind and body where mind perceives and body acts spontaneously,"
are you certain you are not talking zen here......are you really certain? i
could speak of a mind that is always there....or not there...if i had a mind to
that is.....
> > which the illusionary lao tzu seems not to have
> > mentioned in his illusionary book...
>
> and the "illusionary lao tzu" and "his illusionary book" is only
> illusionarily yours, it vanishes in "do it without deliberation."
which could be your illusion.......can you see the difficulties when you
discuss illusions.....like a mirror of a mirror of a mirror.....there is no end
to it.....
.
> > > >
> > > > a unified mind and body suggests "one" but a mind percieving and a body
> > acting
> > > > *spontaneously* suggests duelism, not oneness and a mind that is no
longer
> > > > there suggests some sort of parlor trick........this is not taoism or
> > zen...
> > >
> > > Trick it is, only for people get tangled up with words.
> >
> > i believe you are demonstrating this rather effectively......(you may
respond
> > with a "dig" of your own)
>
> You may believe anyway you want, Zen is not a belief.
and so if i believe in zen it is not a belief? we are not talking religion
here......
> > > > why
> > > > not simply say "eat when hungry"......it tells it all................
well?
> > > The master answered: 'eat when hungry, sleep when sleepy.'
> > > 'Is not that how everybody does it?' asked the disciple.
> > > 'No,' answered the master.
> > > 'How so?'
> > > 'Common folks don't really eat when they are eating but find all sorts
> > > of other things [such as reading newspaper and etc.] to eat with; they
> > > don't really sleep when they are sleepy but think about all sorts of
> > > other things which keeps them awake till much later. No, there're a lot
> > > of difference.'
> > > The disciple fell silent and asked no more."-Da-Zhu Hui-Hai, a Chan
> > > master-
> > >
> > exactly as i have said....."eat when hungry" no need to go into stories, it
> > tells it all.....
>
> Yup, "... three year-old can say, eighty year-old cannot do."-Niao-Ke
> Dao-Lin, a Chan master-
>
>
> > > >
> > > > so what else is new?
> > >
> > > What you have not heard?
> >
> > wait...there is a little bird on my windowsill, perhaps he has something to
> > tell.
>
> Maybe just another parrot.
now *THAT* was a good one.....as you can see there is always room for
improvement......*but* the parrot would be an illusion parroting an
illusion....which makes it what?.....another dualistic, problematic statement
for you to unravel...since everything is an illusion
however.....................................
g.
>
> :)
> IS
>
> >
> > g.
Ichin Shen
>
> "Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message
> > > > > by going backwards one goes forward as well..
> > > >
> > > > Yes, they go anywhere, but arrive nowhere,
> > >
> > > one may well go anywhere but cannot arrive nowhere since that would infer
> that
> > > nowhere is somewhere and as we know that could be anywhere....
> >
> > As anywhere cannot be referenced, it is nowhere,
>
> it seems the snake has swallowed its tail.........
Could be, as it's going no where.
> >
> > >
> > > "What's Zen, again?"
> > >
> > > nez spelled backwards....
> >
> > like a hamster running around in its cage.
>
> no, a retsmah...
Now, it's a dead sqerrel fell out a tree.
>
> > > next question (put a dime in the nez meter please)
> >
> > It ain't worth a dime.
>
> how about a quarter?
Well, you may use your imagination.
>
> > >
> > > >>>how can
> > > > > > > it be told from the illusion?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > By do it without deliberation.
> > > > >
> > > > > ....lao tzu deliberately set out to write the tao teh ching.....
> > > >
> > > > So you may get a glimpse of what Tao is? Lao Tzu's writing [in the
> > > > context of "do it without deliberation"] is an illusion already.
> > >
> > > may i assume that you too are an illusion......?
> >
> > You may assume anyway you want. When the assumption doesn't meet its
> > reality, it creates an illusion.
>
> an assumption cannot meet a reality by the very act of assuming....and what is
> this "reality" you speak of..?
Direct comprehension, that is, what is seen AND what is felt, without
deliberation.
>
> > > > > > By illusory mind.
> > > > >
> > > > > isn't an illusory mind a symptom of insanity?
> > > >
> > > > Insanity is created by some illusory mind.
> > >
> > > or the illusory mind is a symptom of insanity....(check the psycho wards
> for
> > > like symptoms)
> >
> > Psycho wards is created by some illusory mind as well.
>
> who is interned and who is not can be debated....
So [debate] to create another illusory mind to see which is illusory?
>
> > > > Hence the Oneness Tao.
> > >
> > > correct..and if you are in agreement with lao tzu, you will allow elvis to
> be a
> > > part of this tao or risk not understanding the tao...
> >
> > Don't see anything in Lao Tzu's writing would indicate that elvis is a
> > real thing. The conclusion you drew is illusorily yours.
>
> don't see anything in lao tzu's writing that claims he is not.....
because there's no need to create an illusion then to claim that doesn't
exist.
> *all* is one
> tells it *all*
Like the snake that has swallowed its tail.
>
> > > > Those are made up by an illusory mind.
> > >
> > > you seem to take great stock in this illusory mind.....what is the mind
> that
> > > discovered this "illusory" mind
> >
> > Mind of no-mind, "a state of mind where mind is no longer there," which
> > is achievable only through "do it without deliberation," i.e. "a unified
> > mind and body where mind perceives and body acts spontaneously,"
>
> are you certain you are not talking zen here......are you really certain? i
> could speak of a mind that is always there....or not there...if i had a mind to
> that is.....
The language that you use has reflected what is your mind.
>
> > > which the illusionary lao tzu seems not to have
> > > mentioned in his illusionary book...
> >
> > and the "illusionary lao tzu" and "his illusionary book" is only
> > illusionarily yours, it vanishes in "do it without deliberation."
>
> which could be your illusion.......can you see the difficulties when you
> discuss illusions.....like a mirror of a mirror of a mirror.....there is no end
> to it.....
Not if you see there's "no mirror bright" at the first place.
> .
> > > > >
> > > > > a unified mind and body suggests "one" but a mind percieving and a body
> > > acting
> > > > > *spontaneously* suggests duelism, not oneness and a mind that is no
> longer
> > > > > there suggests some sort of parlor trick........this is not taoism or
> > > zen...
> > > >
> > > > Trick it is, only for people get tangled up with words.
> > >
> > > i believe you are demonstrating this rather effectively......(you may
> respond
> > > with a "dig" of your own)
> >
> > You may believe anyway you want, Zen is not a belief.
>
> and so if i believe in zen it is not a belief? we are not talking religion
> here......
When you are talking about "believe" you are talking about religion.
>
> > > > > why
> > > > > not simply say "eat when hungry"......it tells it all................
>
> well?
Because it isn't the way going to happen.
Not if you've experienced there's "no mirror bright," which is
terminated at the "physical" level.
:)
IS
>
> g.
Ichin Shen
>
> > correct..and if you are in agreement with lao tzu, you will allow elvis to be
> a
> > part of this tao or risk not understanding the tao...
>
> >>Don't see anything in Lao Tzu's writing would indicate that elvis is a
> real thing. The conclusion you drew is illusorily yours.<<
>
> not see "is".
> its what ya don't know thats "you" but you have to not know that also as in not
> striving not to understand...
Try not to be smartass about it,
> so care could be taken in seeing illusions where
> not illusions are clearly not known.
use a simpler language, so you can understand it;
> after the picture is painted it is a major
> hassle to repaint..
a simpler brush stroke, one stroke at a time;
> the going craze is to get the variable everchanging glow in
> da dark not known version.
Hopefully, it may heal your chattering.
You are what's in your mind.
IS
Ichin Shen
"A wall make of shit cannot be made dirtier."-Kong Zi-
IS
genein
> > > You may assume anyway you want. When the assumption doesn't meet its
> > > reality, it creates an illusion.
> >
> > an assumption cannot meet a reality by the very act of assuming....and what
is
> > this "reality" you speak of..?
>
> Direct comprehension, that is, what is seen AND what is felt, without
> deliberation.
my cat can do that easily, as can most folks......some do not.....
wards is created by some illusory mind as well.
> >
> > who is interned and who is not can be debated....
>
> So [debate] to create another illusory mind to see which is illusory?
who "creates" (please continue your circular theory)
> > > Don't see anything in Lao Tzu's writing would indicate that elvis is a
> > > real thing. The conclusion you drew is illusorily yours.
> >
> > don't see anything in lao tzu's writing that claims he is not.....
>
> because there's no need to create an illusion then to claim that doesn't
> exist.
so we create an illusion to say it does exist?
> > are you certain you are not talking zen here......are you really certain? i
> > could speak of a mind that is always there....or not there...if i had a
mind to
> > that is.....
>
> The language that you use has reflected what is your mind.
and as in the hall of mirrors.....back to you and why be concerned with
reflected illusions?
> > which could be your illusion.......can you see the difficulties when you
> > discuss illusions.....like a mirror of a mirror of a mirror.....there is no
end
> > to it.....
>
> Not if you see there's "no mirror bright" at the first place.
as i said there is no end to it and it prevents one from *living* which was
never the intent of our good friend lao
> > > You may believe anyway you want, Zen is not a belief.
> >
> > and so if i believe in zen it is not a belief? we are not talking religion
> > here......
>
> When you are talking about "believe" you are talking about religion.
stop, you are making me chuckle out loud which worries my cat......
> > > > > > why
> > > > > > not simply say "eat when hungry"......it tells it
all................
> >
> > well?
>
> Because it isn't the way going to happen.
no response....
> > > Maybe just another parrot.
> >
> > now *THAT* was a good one.....as you can see there is always room for
> > improvement......*but* the parrot would be an illusion parroting an
> > illusion....which makes it what?.....another dualistic, problematic
statement
> > for you to unravel...since everything is an illusion
> > however.....................................
>
> Not if you've experienced there's "no mirror bright," which is
> terminated at the "physical" level.
or so it seems.......have an illusionary day :-))
g.
>
> :)
> IS
Ichin Shen
>
> "Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message
> news:3B1526E4...@taomartialarts.com...
>
> > > > You may assume anyway you want. When the assumption doesn't meet its
> > > > reality, it creates an illusion.
> > >
> > > an assumption cannot meet a reality by the very act of assuming....and what
> is
> > > this "reality" you speak of..?
> >
> > Direct comprehension, that is, what is seen AND what is felt, without
> > deliberation.
>
> my cat can do that easily,
Yup, a cat does that easily, as it has no illusion about mirrored
images.
> as can most folks......some do not.....
I think you got that backward-some can, but most folks can't.
>
> wards is created by some illusory mind as well.
>
> > >
> > > who is interned and who is not can be debated....
> >
> > So [debate] to create another illusory mind to see which is illusory?
>
> who "creates" (please continue your circular theory)
The one who uses "Psycho wards"? Oh yeah, that's you, if you've
forgotten.
>
> > > > Don't see anything in Lao Tzu's writing would indicate that elvis is a
> > > > real thing. The conclusion you drew is illusorily yours.
> > >
> > > don't see anything in lao tzu's writing that claims he is not.....
> >
> > because there's no need to create an illusion then to claim that doesn't
> > exist.
>
> so we create an illusion to say it does exist?
Don't forget that illusion is a part of reality; an illusion is not the
problem, only when one thinks that illusion is the real thing the
problem arises, as after that, there's no telling what is real, what is
an illusion anymore.
>
> > > are you certain you are not talking zen here......are you really certain? i
> > > could speak of a mind that is always there....or not there...if i had a
> mind to
> > > that is.....
> >
> > The language that you use has reflected what is your mind.
>
> and as in the hall of mirrors.....back to you and why be concerned with
> reflected illusions?
An illusion is an illusion, just like movies, no problem to talk about
it; the problem arises only if you get wrap around in this "hall of
mirrors" thingy and believe it is real.
>
> > > which could be your illusion.......can you see the difficulties when you
> > > discuss illusions.....like a mirror of a mirror of a mirror.....there is no
> end
> > > to it.....
> >
> > Not if you see there's "no mirror bright" at the first place.
>
> as i said there is no end to it
As I said it ends when "you see there's 'no mirror bright' at the first
place."
> and it prevents one from *living* which was
> never the intent of our good friend lao
That's because you believe in "there is no end to it."
>
> > > > You may believe anyway you want, Zen is not a belief.
> > >
> > > and so if i believe in zen it is not a belief? we are not talking religion
> > > here......
> >
> > When you are talking about "believe" you are talking about religion.
>
> stop, you are making me chuckle out loud which worries my cat......
"Believing" is yours, it can be stopped only by you and you alone.
>
> > > > > > > why
> > > > > > > not simply say "eat when hungry"......it tells it
> all................
> > >
> > > well?
> >
> > Because it isn't the way going to happen.
>
> no response....
>
> > > > Maybe just another parrot.
> > >
> > > now *THAT* was a good one.....as you can see there is always room for
> > > improvement......*but* the parrot would be an illusion parroting an
> > > illusion....which makes it what?.....another dualistic, problematic
> statement
> > > for you to unravel...since everything is an illusion
> > > however.....................................
> >
> > Not if you've experienced there's "no mirror bright," which is
> > terminated at the "physical" level.
>
> or so it seems.......
Sunny, light breeze, blue yonder, lake in the sky,
> have an illusionary day :-))
Surreal indeed, :)
IS
>
> g.
> >
> > :)
> > IS
Jaybuzin0000
[...]
>so we create an illusion to say it does exist?
why soitenly!
{:-])))
genein
"Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message
> > > Direct comprehension, that is, what is seen AND what is felt, without
> > > deliberation.
> >
> > my cat can do that easily,
>
> Yup, a cat does that easily, as it has no illusion about mirrored
> images.
doesn't know a mirrored image nor what an illusion may be......
>
> > as can most folks......some do not.....
>
> I think you got that backward-some can, but most folks can't.
depends on the folks that one knows i would imagine.....
> > > > who is interned and who is not can be debated....
> > >
> > > So [debate] to create another illusory mind to see which is illusory?
> >
> > who "creates" (please continue your circular theory)
>
> The one who uses "Psycho wards"? Oh yeah, that's you, if you've
> forgotten.
i haven't forgotten but don't recall what it has to do with circular theory....
>
> >
> > > > > Don't see anything in Lao Tzu's writing would indicate that elvis is
a
> > > > > real thing. The conclusion you drew is illusorily yours.
> > > >
> > > > don't see anything in lao tzu's writing that claims he is not.....
> > >
> > > because there's no need to create an illusion then to claim that doesn't
> > > exist.
> >
> > so we create an illusion to say it does exist?
>
> Don't forget that illusion is a part of reality; an illusion is not the
> problem, only when one thinks that illusion is the real thing the
> problem arises, as after that, there's no telling what is real, what is
> an illusion anymore.
illusion is a part of reality?.........which part? actually i know what it is
you are attempting to describe......but imo you seem to be hung up on illusion
perhaps without considering how it plays out in real life....yes there is a
real life and we live it day to day.....
> > > > are you certain you are not talking zen here......are you really
certain? i
> > > > could speak of a mind that is always there....or not there...if i had a
> > mind to
> > > > that is.....
> > >
> > > The language that you use has reflected what is your mind.
> >
> > and as in the hall of mirrors.....back to you and why be concerned with
> > reflected illusions?
>
> An illusion is an illusion, just like movies, no problem to talk about
> it; the problem arises only if you get wrap around in this "hall of
> mirrors" thingy and believe it is real.
what *exactly* to consider unreal?......
> > > > which could be your illusion.......can you see the difficulties when
you
> > > > discuss illusions.....like a mirror of a mirror of a mirror.....there
is no
> > end
> > > > to it.....
> > >
> > > Not if you see there's "no mirror bright" at the first place.
> >
> > as i said there is no end to it
>
> As I said it ends when "you see there's 'no mirror bright' at the first
> place."
for you it "ends" since this is what you believe...
>
> > and it prevents one from *living* which was
> > never the intent of our good friend lao
>
> That's because you believe in "there is no end to it."
no end to what?
> > > > > You may believe anyway you want, Zen is not a belief.
> > > >
> > > > and so if i believe in zen it is not a belief? we are not talking
religion
> > > > here......
> > >
> > > When you are talking about "believe" you are talking about religion.
> >
> > stop, you are making me chuckle out loud which worries my cat......
>
> "Believing" is yours, it can be stopped only by you and you alone.
as in most things but i have no idea what i should stop believing in......
> > > > > > > > why
> > > > > > > > not simply say "eat when hungry"......it tells it
> > all................
> > > >
> > > Not if you've experienced there's "no mirror bright," which is
> > > terminated at the "physical" level.
> >
> > or so it seems.......
>
> Sunny, light breeze, blue yonder, lake in the sky,
cow manure in the meadow has a way of bringing us back to reality......there it
sits with the sun baking on it against a background of blue sky that is
attempting to compete with the lake which has no earthly business being there.
that traitorous breeze waff's the essence du cow to the nostrils of the
poet.....who quickly gathers his things and heads home......
g.
Ichin Shen
>
> "Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message
>
> > > > Direct comprehension, that is, what is seen AND what is felt, without
> > > > deliberation.
> > >
> > > my cat can do that easily,
> >
> > Yup, a cat does that easily, as it has no illusion about mirrored
> > images.
>
> doesn't know a mirrored image nor what an illusion may be......
> >
> > > as can most folks......some do not.....
> >
> > I think you got that backward-some can, but most folks can't.
>
> depends on the folks that one knows i would imagine.....
Really? One thing we know, you don't know the "direct comprehension," as
you have to ask; as you don't know the term, and probably don't among
the people you know, as you would learn the term from them already. How
many people do you say you know? You know how to imagine alright.
>
> > > > > who is interned and who is not can be debated....
> > > >
> > > > So [debate] to create another illusory mind to see which is illusory?
> > >
> > > who "creates" (please continue your circular theory)
> >
> > The one who uses "Psycho wards"? Oh yeah, that's you, if you've
> > forgotten.
>
> i haven't forgotten but don't recall what it has to do with circular theory....
It began on your "nez spelled backwards. ..."
> >
> > >
> > > > > > Don't see anything in Lao Tzu's writing would indicate that elvis is
> a
> > > > > > real thing. The conclusion you drew is illusorily yours.
> > > > >
> > > > > don't see anything in lao tzu's writing that claims he is not.....
> > > >
> > > > because there's no need to create an illusion then to claim that doesn't
> > > > exist.
> > >
> > > so we create an illusion to say it does exist?
> >
> > Don't forget that illusion is a part of reality; an illusion is not the
> > problem, only when one thinks that illusion is the real thing the
> > problem arises, as after that, there's no telling what is real, what is
> > an illusion anymore.
>
> illusion is a part of reality?.........which part?
The part which you pretended to know.
> actually i know what it is
> you are attempting to describe......but imo you seem to be hung up on illusion
> perhaps without considering how it plays out in real life....yes there is a
> real life and we live it day to day.....
Not like a snake chasing its tail, I hope.
>
> > > > > are you certain you are not talking zen here......are you really
> certain? i
> > > > > could speak of a mind that is always there....or not there...if i had a
> > > mind to
> > > > > that is.....
> > > >
> > > > The language that you use has reflected what is your mind.
> > >
> > > and as in the hall of mirrors.....back to you and why be concerned with
> > > reflected illusions?
> >
> > An illusion is an illusion, just like movies, no problem to talk about
> > it; the problem arises only if you get wrap around in this "hall of
> > mirrors" thingy and believe it is real.
>
> what *exactly* to consider unreal?......
What eye cannot see and body cannot feel and mind cannot infer within a
finite steps.
>
> > > > > which could be your illusion.......can you see the difficulties when
> you
> > > > > discuss illusions.....like a mirror of a mirror of a mirror.....there
> is no
> > > end
> > > > > to it.....
> > > >
> > > > Not if you see there's "no mirror bright" at the first place.
> > >
> > > as i said there is no end to it
> >
> > As I said it ends when "you see there's 'no mirror bright' at the first
> > place."
>
> for you it "ends" since this is what you believe...
If you'd like to believe that.
> >
> > > and it prevents one from *living* which was
> > > never the intent of our good friend lao
> >
> > That's because you believe in "there is no end to it."
>
> no end to what?
Good question, no longer remember your own statements [which lead to
"there is no end to it"]? or you don't know what you were talking about?
>
> > > > > > You may believe anyway you want, Zen is not a belief.
> > > > >
> > > > > and so if i believe in zen it is not a belief? we are not talking
> religion
> > > > > here......
> > > >
> > > > When you are talking about "believe" you are talking about religion.
> > >
> > > stop, you are making me chuckle out loud which worries my cat......
> >
> > "Believing" is yours, it can be stopped only by you and you alone.
>
> as in most things but i have no idea what i should stop believing in......
Figured.
>
> > > > > > > > > why
> > > > > > > > > not simply say "eat when hungry"......it tells it
> > > all................
> > > > >
> > > > Not if you've experienced there's "no mirror bright," which is
> > > > terminated at the "physical" level.
> > >
> > > or so it seems.......
> >
> > Sunny, light breeze, blue yonder, lake in the sky,
>
> cow manure in the meadow has a way of bringing us back to reality......there it
> sits with the sun baking on it against a background of blue sky that is
> attempting to compete with the lake which has no earthly business being there.
> that traitorous breeze waff's the essence du cow to the nostrils of the
> poet.....who quickly gathers his things and heads home......
Yup, sounds just like those high spirit seeking turists who are
wondering why they come up here to get jammed in the traffic for.
:)
IS
Chris Ellis
Ichin Shen wrote:
True that is isn't a good idea to be caught up in illusions but one must remember
that a mirrored image, although it is a mirrored image is still a reflection of
something that is real. If one steps into a hall of mirrors one can see many sides
of a true image.
-Chris-
genein
> genein wrote:
> > > > as can most folks......some do not.....
> > >
> > > I think you got that backward-some can, but most folks can't.
> >
> > depends on the folks that one knows i would imagine.....
>
> Really? One thing we know, you don't know the "direct comprehension," as
> you have to ask; as you don't know the term, and probably don't among
> the people you know, as you would learn the term from them already. How
> many people do you say you know? You know how to imagine alright.
asking questions is how i can determine more precisely what is being discussed
and the depth and quality of knowledge of he who i am speaking to.....and are
you asking for a "head count"? and yes i have an excellent imagination.....and
an excellent sense of reality......
> > > So [debate] to create another illusory mind to see which is illusory?
> > > >
> > > > who "creates" (please continue your circular theory)
> > >
> > > The one who uses "Psycho wards"? Oh yeah, that's you, if you've
> > > forgotten.
> >
> > i haven't forgotten but don't recall what it has to do with circular
theory....
>
> It began on your "nez spelled backwards. ..."
that would not be circular, that would be in the neighborhood of a spoof.....
> > > > so we create an illusion to say it does exist?
> > >
> > > Don't forget that illusion is a part of reality; an illusion is not the
> > > problem, only when one thinks that illusion is the real thing the
> > > problem arises, as after that, there's no telling what is real, what is
> > > an illusion anymore.
> >
> > illusion is a part of reality?.........which part?
>
> The part which you pretended to know.
how do you know i am pretending? a bit presumptious of you is it not? so what
is the answer?
..but imo you seem to be hung up on illusion
> > perhaps without considering how it plays out in real life....yes there is a
> > real life and we live it day to day.....
>
> Not like a snake chasing its tail, I hope.
sometimes......
> > > An illusion is an illusion, just like movies, no problem to talk about
> > > it; the problem arises only if you get wrap around in this "hall of
> > > mirrors" thingy and believe it is real.
> >
> > what *exactly* to consider unreal?......
>
> What eye cannot see and body cannot feel and mind cannot infer within a
> finite steps.
there are many things that the eye cannot see and the body cannot feel.....but
whether a mind can infer or not depends on the individual......and what exactly
is finite?....
> Not if you see there's "no mirror bright" at the first place.
> > > >
> > > > as i said there is no end to it
> > >
> > > As I said it ends when "you see there's 'no mirror bright' at the first
> > > place."
> >
> > for you it "ends" since this is what you believe...
>
> If you'd like to believe that.
it's what i infer from your posts......
*living* which was
> > > > never the intent of our good friend lao
> > >
> > > That's because you believe in "there is no end to it."
> >
> > no end to what?
>
> Good question, no longer remember your own statements [which lead to
> "there is no end to it"]? or you don't know what you were talking about?
i remember more than i put on.....questions are very useful tools......it does
not always imply not understanding.......and how many here actually know
precisely what it is they are talking about?
we are not talking
> > religion
> > > > > > here......
> > > > >
> > > > > When you are talking about "believe" you are talking about religion.
> > > >
> > > > stop, you are making me chuckle out loud which worries my cat......
> > >
> > > "Believing" is yours, it can be stopped only by you and you alone.
> >
> > as in most things but i have no idea what i should stop believing in......
>
> Figured.
no answer i see........is there an answer? can there be an answer?
> > > Sunny, light breeze, blue yonder, lake in the sky,
> >
> > cow manure in the meadow has a way of bringing us back to
reality......there it
> > sits with the sun baking on it against a background of blue sky that is
> > attempting to compete with the lake which has no earthly business being
there.
> > that traitorous breeze waff's the essence du cow to the nostrils of the
> > poet.....who quickly gathers his things and heads home......
>
> Yup, sounds just like those high spirit seeking turists who are
> wondering why they come up here to get jammed in the traffic for.
something like but not quite......
g.
>
> :)
> IS
>
Ichin Shen
>
> "Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message
> news:3B1A60C9...@taomartialarts.com...
> > genein wrote:
>
> > > > > as can most folks......some do not.....
> > > >
> > > > I think you got that backward-some can, but most folks can't.
> > >
> > > depends on the folks that one knows i would imagine.....
> >
> > Really? One thing we know, you don't know the "direct comprehension," as
> > you have to ask; as you don't know the term, and probably don't among
> > the people you know, as you would learn the term from them already. How
> > many people do you say you know? You know how to imagine alright.
>
> asking questions is how i can determine more precisely what is being discussed
> and the depth and quality of knowledge of he who i am speaking to.....
You may think that you were asking question, not sure how you were
finding/reading the answers though. So, what is being discussed here?
> and are
> you asking for a "head count"?
No,
> and yes i have an excellent imagination.....and
> an excellent sense of reality......
just to see how real your "excellent sense of reality" is. Care to
elaborate these statements, "as can most folks......some do not.....",
"depends on the folks that one knows i would imagine....."?
>
> > > > So [debate] to create another illusory mind to see which is illusory?
> > > > >
> > > > > who "creates" (please continue your circular theory)
> > > >
> > > > The one who uses "Psycho wards"? Oh yeah, that's you, if you've
> > > > forgotten.
> > >
> > > i haven't forgotten but don't recall what it has to do with circular
> theory....
> >
> > It began on your "nez spelled backwards. ..."
>
> that would not be circular, that would be in the neighborhood of a spoof.....
So, what is this statement "please continue your circular theory" come
about?
>
> > > > > so we create an illusion to say it does exist?
> > > >
> > > > Don't forget that illusion is a part of reality; an illusion is not the
> > > > problem, only when one thinks that illusion is the real thing the
> > > > problem arises, as after that, there's no telling what is real, what is
> > > > an illusion anymore.
> > >
> > > illusion is a part of reality?.........which part?
> >
> > The part which you pretended to know.
>
> how do you know i am pretending?
"nor is it a treatise on motorcycle maintenence but never the less the
quality of zen is there...." to begin with and the answers to the
questions consequently followed.
> a bit presumptious of you is it not?
As you haven't figured out where I stand, the "presumptious" is yours.
> so what is the answer?
What is not "real"?
>
> ..but imo you seem to be hung up on illusion
> > > perhaps without considering how it plays out in real life....yes there is a
> > > real life and we live it day to day.....
> >
> > Not like a snake chasing its tail, I hope.
>
> sometimes......
Your life...
>
> > > > An illusion is an illusion, just like movies, no problem to talk about
> > > > it; the problem arises only if you get wrap around in this "hall of
> > > > mirrors" thingy and believe it is real.
> > >
> > > what *exactly* to consider unreal?......
> >
> > What eye cannot see and body cannot feel and mind cannot infer within a
> > finite steps.
>
> there are many things that the eye cannot see and the body cannot feel.....but
> whether a mind can infer or not depends on the individual......
Tao/Zen is a reality that is independent of mind,
> and what exactly is finite?....
It terminates at the physical level.
>
> > Not if you see there's "no mirror bright" at the first place.
> > > > >
> > > > > as i said there is no end to it
> > > >
> > > > As I said it ends when "you see there's 'no mirror bright' at the first
> > > > place."
> > >
> > > for you it "ends" since this is what you believe...
> >
> > If you'd like to believe that.
>
> it's what i infer from your posts......
Not sure how you drew the inference, what was my premise?
>
> *living* which was
> > > > > never the intent of our good friend lao
> > > >
> > > > That's because you believe in "there is no end to it."
> > >
> > > no end to what?
> >
> > Good question, no longer remember your own statements [which lead to
> > "there is no end to it"]? or you don't know what you were talking about?
>
> i remember more than i put on.....questions are very useful tools......it does
> not always imply not understanding.......and how many here actually know
> precisely what it is they are talking about?
Yes, the questions were to see how much you do know, and you haven't
come up with much of an answer yet.
>
> we are not talking
> > > religion
> > > > > > > here......
> > > > > >
> > > > > > When you are talking about "believe" you are talking about religion.
> > > > >
> > > > > stop, you are making me chuckle out loud which worries my cat......
> > > >
> > > > "Believing" is yours, it can be stopped only by you and you alone.
> > >
> > > as in most things but i have no idea what i should stop believing in......
> >
> > Figured.
>
> no answer i see........is there an answer? can there be an answer?
"Figured" that "as in most things but you [i] have no idea what you [i]
should stop believing in......"
>
> > > > Sunny, light breeze, blue yonder, lake in the sky,
> > >
> > > cow manure in the meadow has a way of bringing us back to
> reality......there it
> > > sits with the sun baking on it against a background of blue sky that is
> > > attempting to compete with the lake which has no earthly business being
> there.
> > > that traitorous breeze waff's the essence du cow to the nostrils of the
> > > poet.....who quickly gathers his things and heads home......
> >
> > Yup, sounds just like those high spirit seeking turists who are
> > wondering why they come up here to get jammed in the traffic for.
>
> something like but not quite......
So, what is exactly you are saying?
:)
IS
>
> g.
genein
"Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message
> > > > depends on the folks that one knows i would imagine.....
> > >
> > > Really? One thing we know, you don't know the "direct comprehension," as
> > > you have to ask; as you don't know the term, and probably don't among
> > > the people you know, as you would learn the term from them already. How
> > > many people do you say you know? You know how to imagine alright.
> >
> > asking questions is how i can determine more precisely what is being
discussed
> > and the depth and quality of knowledge of he who i am speaking to.....
>
> You may think that you were asking question, not sure how you were
> finding/reading the answers though. So, what is being discussed here?
nothing at first but then it snowballed into more nothing......but then a
glimmer of a discussion seem to present itself.....it has been flickering ever
since but never a clean burn...........
> > and are
> > you asking for a "head count"?
>
> No,
well how should i interpret your last post which read:....."How
many people do you say you know? You know how to imagine alright." a foot count
perhaps?
> > and yes i have an excellent imagination.....and
> > an excellent sense of reality......
>
> just to see how real your "excellent sense of reality" is. Care to
> elaborate these statements, "as can most folks......some do not.....",
> "depends on the folks that one knows i would imagine....."?
i thought they were obvious....but you questioned (for some inexplicable
reason) if i knew anyone....which made no sense....but then being a newsgroup
veteran of many years i accepted it....obviously #1 i can't possibly know
everyone in the world and so my remark must come from those i do
know......hence "most folks" and they all have an excellent sense of
reality....some do not of course.....there is a reality common to all of
us....fire burns, we suffer from cold, we get sick and we die......that is the
reality for *all* of us.....but then there are "beliefs" which differ but have
no real effect on the reality that is common to all of us but can color your
life to some degree good or bad.....some folks believe in a god and the awards
of a heaven,(i know a few) others wait for enlightenment, (i know a few) still
others follow the path of "karma" (yes i know a few of those as
well)........and so on.....but most folks i know tend to believe what is real
and are able to separate that of belief opposed to this "real"....btw the
buddha was a hard core realist......
> > > > i haven't forgotten but don't recall what it has to do with circular
> > theory....
> > >
> > > It began on your "nez spelled backwards. ..."
> >
> > that would not be circular, that would be in the neighborhood of a
spoof.....
>
> So, what is this statement "please continue your circular theory" come
> about?
the quote you mention was in the beginning, but then the thread developed...
> > > > illusion is a part of reality?.........which part?
> > >
> > > The part which you pretended to know.
> >
> > how do you know i am pretending?
>
> "nor is it a treatise on motorcycle maintenence but never the less the
> quality of zen is there...." to begin with and the answers to the
> questions consequently followed.
is it a treatis on motorcycle maintenence? is not the quality of zen there to
be seen by anyone? your point i'm afraid illudes me....what pretence? again you
behave in a presumptuous manner....
> > a bit presumptious of you is it not?
>
> As you haven't figured out where I stand, the "presumptious" is yours.
you have made presumptuious statements which i pointed out now please point out
mine....that would be something i *presumed* was true base on what you
said....you never make clear as to where you stand....i am doing the best i can
with very little....
> > so what is the answer?
> What is not "real"?
that would be a question?
> > ..but imo you seem to be hung up on illusion
> > > > perhaps without considering how it plays out in real life....yes there
is a
> > > > real life and we live it day to day.....
> > >
> > > Not like a snake chasing its tail, I hope.
> >
> > sometimes......
>
> Your life...
and????
> > there are many things that the eye cannot see and the body cannot
feel.....but
> > whether a mind can infer or not depends on the individual......
>
> Tao/Zen is a reality that is independent of mind,
explain it as best you can......
>
> > and what exactly is finite?....
>
> It terminates at the physical level.
not at the mind level?
> > > Not if you see there's "no mirror bright" at the first place.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > as i said there is no end to it
> > > > >
> > > > > As I said it ends when "you see there's 'no mirror bright' at the
first
> > > > > place."
> > > >
> > > > for you it "ends" since this is what you believe...
> > >
> > > If you'd like to believe that.
> >
> > it's what i infer from your posts......
>
> Not sure how you drew the inference, what was my premise?
what terminates at the physical level....and other like thoughts....
> > > Good question, no longer remember your own statements [which lead to
> > > "there is no end to it"]? or you don't know what you were talking about?
> >
> > i remember more than i put on.....questions are very useful tools......it
does
> > not always imply not understanding.......and how many here actually know
> > precisely what it is they are talking about?
>
> Yes, the questions were to see how much you do know, and you haven't
> come up with much of an answer yet.
rereading the above how can you make such a statement? what sort of "turn
around" is this? you are losing your credibilty i am afraid.....
>
> > > Figured.
> >
> > no answer i see........is there an answer? can there be an answer?
>
> "Figured" that "as in most things but you [i] have no idea what you [i]
> should stop believing in......"
you omitted this:...."Believing" is yours, it can be stopped only by you and
you alone".
to which i responded > "as in most things but i have no idea what i should stop
believing in......"......in other words back to you........in short what are
you talking about?
> > > > > Sunny, light breeze, blue yonder, lake in the sky,
> > > >
> > > > cow manure in the meadow has a way of bringing us back to
> > reality......there it
> > > > sits with the sun baking on it against a background of blue sky that is
> > > > attempting to compete with the lake which has no earthly business being
> > there.
> > > > that traitorous breeze waff's the essence du cow to the nostrils of the
> > > > poet.....who quickly gathers his things and heads home......
> > >
> > > Yup, sounds just like those high spirit seeking turists who are
> > > wondering why they come up here to get jammed in the traffic for.
> >
> > something like but not quite......
>
> So, what is exactly you are saying?
it must be grasped intuitively for its best effect.....
g.
> :)
> IS
Ichin Shen
>
> "Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message
>
> > > > > depends on the folks that one knows i would imagine.....
> > > >
> > > > Really? One thing we know, you don't know the "direct comprehension," as
> > > > you have to ask; as you don't know the term, and probably don't among
> > > > the people you know, as you would learn the term from them already. How
> > > > many people do you say you know? You know how to imagine alright.
> > >
> > > asking questions is how i can determine more precisely what is being
> discussed
> > > and the depth and quality of knowledge of he who i am speaking to.....
> >
> > You may think that you were asking question, not sure how you were
> > finding/reading the answers though. So, what is being discussed here?
>
> nothing at first
The question was "What's Zen, again?"
> but then it snowballed into more nothing......
[nothing it is,] if you did mean your answer "nez spelled
backwards....."
> but then a
> glimmer of a discussion seem to present itself.....
as you continued those cute circular answers,
> it has been flickering ever
> since but never a clean burn...........
it never had substance to burn.
>
> > > and are
> > > you asking for a "head count"?
> >
> > No,
>
> well how should i interpret your last post which read:....."How
> many people do you say you know? You know how to imagine alright." a foot count
> perhaps?
"be grasped intuitively," perhaps?
>
> > > and yes i have an excellent imagination.....and
> > > an excellent sense of reality......
> >
> > just to see how real your "excellent sense of reality" is. Care to
> > elaborate these statements, "as can most folks......some do not.....",
> > "depends on the folks that one knows i would imagine....."?
>
> i thought they were obvious....but you questioned (for some inexplicable
> reason) if i knew anyone....which made no sense....but then being a newsgroup
> veteran of many years i accepted it....obviously #1 i can't possibly know
> everyone in the world and so my remark must come from those i do
> know......hence "most folks" and they all have an excellent sense of
> reality....
The question was about how many people can do "direct comprehendsion"?
the answer of "most folks can't" was quite obvious.
Here's the quote which lead to this conclusion,
Quote,
> > Direct comprehension, that is, what is seen AND what is felt,
without
> > deliberation.
>
> my cat can do that easily,
Yup, a cat does that easily, as it has no illusion about mirrored
images.
> as can most folks......some do not.....
I think you got that backward-some can, but most folks can't.
Unquote.
> some do not of course.....there is a reality common to all of
> us....fire burns, we suffer from cold, we get sick and we die......that is the
> reality for *all* of us.....but then there are "beliefs" which differ but have
> no real effect on the reality that is common to all of us but can color your
> life to some degree good or bad.....some folks believe in a god and the awards
> of a heaven,(i know a few) others wait for enlightenment, (i know a few) still
> others follow the path of "karma" (yes i know a few of those as
> well)........and so on.....but most folks i know tend to believe what is real
> and are able to separate that of belief opposed to this "real"....btw the
> buddha was a hard core realist......
As Buddhas advocated, "direct comprehension" remains the core teaching
of Zen Buddhism.
>
> > > > > i haven't forgotten but don't recall what it has to do with circular
> > > theory....
> > > >
> > > > It began on your "nez spelled backwards. ..."
> > >
> > > that would not be circular, that would be in the neighborhood of a
> spoof.....
> >
> > So, what is this statement "please continue your circular theory" come
> > about?
>
> the quote you mention was in the beginning, but then the thread developed...
>
> > > > > illusion is a part of reality?.........which part?
> > > >
> > > > The part which you pretended to know.
> > >
> > > how do you know i am pretending?
> >
> > "nor is it a treatise on motorcycle maintenence but never the less the
> > quality of zen is there...." to begin with and the answers to the
> > questions consequently followed.
>
> is it a treatis on motorcycle maintenence?
No.
> is not the quality of zen there to
> be seen by anyone?
No, it has nothing to do with Zen if you want to talk about the genuine
Zen practice. How many words are needed to describe the simplicity of
"direct comprehension"?
> your point i'm afraid illudes me....
Hundred thousand words for describing a simplicity is not my idea of
"simplicity."
> what pretence? again you
> behave in a presumptuous manner....
How do you describe "simplicity"?
>
> > > a bit presumptious of you is it not?
> >
> > As you haven't figured out where I stand, the "presumptious" is yours.
>
> you have made presumptuious statements which i pointed out now please point out
> mine....
You read the statements and thought you understood the conversation.
> that would be something i *presumed* was true base on what you
> said....you never make clear as to where you stand....i am doing the best i can
> with very little....
My second post onward, and each question you asked.
>
> > > so what is the answer?
>
> > What is not "real"?
>
> that would be a question?
As the answer is quite obvious, the question mark is to encourage you to
seek your own confirmation.
>
> > > ..but imo you seem to be hung up on illusion
> > > > > perhaps without considering how it plays out in real life....yes there
> is a
> > > > > real life and we live it day to day.....
> > > >
> > > > Not like a snake chasing its tail, I hope.
> > >
> > > sometimes......
> >
> > Your life...
>
> and????
It is your prerogative to "sometimes" live "like a snake chasing its
tail"?
>
> > > there are many things that the eye cannot see and the body cannot
> feel.....but
> > > whether a mind can infer or not depends on the individual......
> >
> > Tao/Zen is a reality that is independent of mind,
>
> explain it as best you can......
As Tao/Zen exists independent of you and I, and you and I are just a
random sample of all minds, thus Tao/Zen exists independent of mind.
> >
> > > and what exactly is finite?....
> >
> > It terminates at the physical level.
>
> not at the mind level?
Mind creates illusions, cannot be trusted unless it is trued.
>
> > > > Not if you see there's "no mirror bright" at the first place.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > as i said there is no end to it
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As I said it ends when "you see there's 'no mirror bright' at the
> first
> > > > > > place."
> > > > >
> > > > > for you it "ends" since this is what you believe...
> > > >
> > > > If you'd like to believe that.
> > >
> > > it's what i infer from your posts......
> >
> > Not sure how you drew the inference, what was my premise?
>
> what terminates at the physical level....
A touch that can be "felt"?
> and other like thoughts....
Sun is burning like a nuclear reactor?
>
> > > > Good question, no longer remember your own statements [which lead to
> > > > "there is no end to it"]? or you don't know what you were talking about?
> > >
> > > i remember more than i put on.....questions are very useful tools......it
> does
> > > not always imply not understanding.......and how many here actually know
> > > precisely what it is they are talking about?
> >
> > Yes, the questions were to see how much you do know, and you haven't
> > come up with much of an answer yet.
>
> rereading the above how can you make such a statement? what sort of "turn
> around" is this? you are losing your credibilty i am afraid.....
You may want to read your own posts first before you make such an
insinuation, as what goes around comes around.
> >
> > > > Figured.
> > >
> > > no answer i see........is there an answer? can there be an answer?
> >
> > "Figured" that "as in most things but you [i] have no idea what you [i]
> > should stop believing in......"
>
> you omitted this:...."Believing" is yours, it can be stopped only by you and
> you alone".
>
> to which i responded > "as in most things but i have no idea what i should stop
> believing in......"......in other words back to you........in short what are
> you talking about?
You missed three more exchanges which lead to that,
Quote,
> > > > You may believe anyway you want, Zen is not a belief.
> > >
> > > and so if i believe in zen it is not a belief? we are not talking
religion
> > > here......
> >
> > When you are talking about "believe" you are talking about
religion.
>
> stop, you are making me chuckle out loud which worries my cat......
Unquote.
>
> > > > > > Sunny, light breeze, blue yonder, lake in the sky,
> > > > >
> > > > > cow manure in the meadow has a way of bringing us back to
> > > reality......there it
> > > > > sits with the sun baking on it against a background of blue sky that is
> > > > > attempting to compete with the lake which has no earthly business being
> > > there.
> > > > > that traitorous breeze waff's the essence du cow to the nostrils of the
> > > > > poet.....who quickly gathers his things and heads home......
> > > >
> > > > Yup, sounds just like those high spirit seeking turists who are
> > > > wondering why they come up here to get jammed in the traffic for.
> > >
> > > something like but not quite......
> >
> > So, what is exactly you are saying?
>
> it must be grasped intuitively for its best effect.....
Cute.
:)
IS
>
> g.
genein
> > nothing at first
>
> The question was "What's Zen, again?"
its a question without an answer...thousands of books line bookshelves
everywhere that attempt to define........why do you ask? considering the
context of the post what prompted you to ask?
>
> > but then it snowballed into more nothing......
>
> [nothing it is,] if you did mean your answer "nez spelled
> backwards....."
i have answered that question....
>
> > but then a
> > glimmer of a discussion seem to present itself.....
>
> as you continued those cute circular answers,
if you saw cuteness in my answers then perhaps it was cuteness that you were
looking for.....
>
> > it has been flickering ever
> > since but never a clean burn...........
>
> it never had substance to burn.
correct
>
> >
> > > > and are
> > > > you asking for a "head count"?
> > >
> > > No,
> >
> > well how should i interpret your last post which read:....."How
> > many people do you say you know? You know how to imagine alright." a foot
count
> > perhaps?
>
> "be grasped intuitively," perhaps?
one does not grasp intutively a head or foot count...just count.
> > > just to see how real your "excellent sense of reality" is. Care to
> > > elaborate these statements, "as can most folks......some do not.....",
> > > "depends on the folks that one knows i would imagine....."?
> >
> > i thought they were obvious....but you questioned (for some inexplicable
> > reason) if i knew anyone....which made no sense....but then being a
newsgroup
> > veteran of many years i accepted it....obviously #1 i can't possibly know
> > everyone in the world and so my remark must come from those i do
> > know......hence "most folks" and they all have an excellent sense of
> > reality....
>
> The question was about how many people can do "direct comprehendsion"?
> the answer of "most folks can't" was quite obvious.
again, no one can answer that question without knowing the individual human
heart and there are many, one can only extrapolate from those who one does
know......
>
> Here's the quote which lead to this conclusion,
>
> Quote,
> > > Direct comprehension, that is, what is seen AND what is felt,
> without
> > > deliberation.
> >
> > my cat can do that easily,
>
> Yup, a cat does that easily, as it has no illusion about mirrored
> images.
>
> > as can most folks......some do not.....
my good friends.....yes they are a thinking lot....and very intuitive....
>
> I think you got that backward-some can, but most folks can't.
> Unquote.
just for the record, you are quoting yourself....
>
> > some do not of course.....there is a reality common to all of
> > us....fire burns, we suffer from cold, we get sick and we die......that is
the
> > reality for *all* of us.....but then there are "beliefs" which differ but
have
> > no real effect on the reality that is common to all of us but can color
your
> > life to some degree good or bad.....some folks believe in a god and the
awards
> > of a heaven,(i know a few) others wait for enlightenment, (i know a few)
still
> > others follow the path of "karma" (yes i know a few of those as
> > well)........and so on.....but most folks i know tend to believe what is
real
> > and are able to separate that of belief opposed to this "real"....btw the
> > buddha was a hard core realist......
>
> As Buddhas advocated, "direct comprehension" remains the core teaching
> of Zen Buddhism.
"direct comprehnsion" of what?..........[another leading question]
>
> > > > > The part which you pretended to know.
> > > >
> > > > how do you know i am pretending?
> > >
> > > "nor is it a treatise on motorcycle maintenence but never the less the
> > > quality of zen is there...." to begin with and the answers to the
> > > questions consequently followed.
> >
> > is it a treatis on motorcycle maintenence?
>
> No.
good...
>
> > is not the quality of zen there to
> > be seen by anyone?
>
> No, it has nothing to do with Zen if you want to talk about the genuine
> Zen practice. How many words are needed to describe the simplicity of
> "direct comprehension"?
i said it had the *quality* of zen, i am not speaking of zen practice but of
its essence...another book in the same line is "zen and the art of archery" you
seem to harp on minor chords while ignoring the major theme.......
>
> > your point i'm afraid illudes me....
>
> Hundred thousand words for describing a simplicity is not my idea of
> "simplicity."
your point still illudes me...who is describing?
>
> > what pretence? again you
> > behave in a presumptuous manner....
>
> How do you describe "simplicity"?
non presumptuousness for starters, non judgemental in nature......"simple"
enough for you?
>
> >
> > > > a bit presumptious of you is it not?
> > >
> > > As you haven't figured out where I stand, the "presumptious" is yours.
> >
> > you have made presumptuious statements which i pointed out now please point
out
> > mine....
>
> You read the statements and thought you understood the conversation.
what i think is not a presumption of what i feel you to be.......big
difference, what i think is my opinion and opinions are all that any of us
have.......i do not presume you are wrong because i disagree.......that is the
art of logical thinking.....or any kind of thinking for that matter...is it not
presumptuous of you to consider that i did not understand the conversation but
*you* did? how do you arrive this but by a trick of the mind.....
>
> > that would be something i *presumed* was true base on what you
> > said....you never make clear as to where you stand....i am doing the best i
can
> > with very little....
>
> My second post onward, and each question you asked.
>
> >
> > > > so what is the answer?
> >
> > > What is not "real"?
> >
> > that would be a question?
>
> As the answer is quite obvious, the question mark is to encourage you to
> seek your own confirmation.
and yet you found fault in all questions that i have put to you with the same
idea in mind......>
> > > > > Not like a snake chasing its tail, I hope.
> > > >
> > > > sometimes......
> > >
> > > Your life...
> >
> > and????
>
> It is your prerogative to "sometimes" live "like a snake chasing its
> tail"?
another judement with no substance i am afraid.....and the analogy would be a
snake *swallowing* his tail......>
> >
> > > > there are many things that the eye cannot see and the body cannot
> > feel.....but
> > > > whether a mind can infer or not depends on the individual......
> > >
> > > Tao/Zen is a reality that is independent of mind,
> >
> > explain it as best you can......
>
> As Tao/Zen exists independent of you and I, and you and I are just a
> random sample of all minds, thus Tao/Zen exists independent of mind.
this is just a very common understanding of mind, not necessarily taoist or
zen...taoism is not a thing that can exist independently nor zen.....
>
> > > > and what exactly is finite?....
> > >
> > > It terminates at the physical level.
> >
> > not at the mind level?
>
> Mind creates illusions, cannot be trusted unless it is trued.
who is it that does not trust? how does the mind come to the conclusion that
mind creates illusions and what would these illusions be?
> > > > > > for you it "ends" since this is what you believe...
> > > > >
> > > > > If you'd like to believe that.
> > > >
> > > > it's what i infer from your posts......
> > >
> > > Not sure how you drew the inference, what was my premise?
> >
> > what terminates at the physical level....
>
> A touch that can be "felt"?
i think you are talking of very common experiences.
>
> > and other like thoughts....
>
> Sun is burning like a nuclear reactor?
and a nuclear reactor burns like the sun, they are very similar..
> > > > i remember more than i put on.....questions are very useful
tools......it
> > does
> > > > not always imply not understanding.......and how many here actually
know
> > > > precisely what it is they are talking about?
> > >
> > > Yes, the questions were to see how much you do know, and you haven't
> > > come up with much of an answer yet.
> >
> > rereading the above how can you make such a statement? what sort of "turn
> > around" is this? you are losing your credibilty i am afraid.....
>
> You may want to read your own posts first before you make such an
> insinuation, as what goes around comes around.
i always read my posts, i think you should defend what you say with actual
explained quotes and it was not an insinuation it was a direct statement......
> > > >
> > > > no answer i see........is there an answer? can there be an answer?
> > >
> > > "Figured" that "as in most things but you [i] have no idea what you [i]
> > > should stop believing in......"
> >
> > you omitted this:...."Believing" is yours, it can be stopped only by you
and
> > you alone".
> >
> > to which i responded > "as in most things but i have no idea what i should
stop
> > believing in......"......in other words back to you........in short what
are
> > you talking about?
>
> You missed three more exchanges which lead to that,
lost in space i imagine....
earthly business being
> > > > > Yup, sounds just like those high spirit seeking turists who are
> > > > > wondering why they come up here to get jammed in the traffic for.
> > > >
> > > > something like but not quite......
> > >
> > > So, what is exactly you are saying?
> >
> > it must be grasped intuitively for its best effect.....
>
> Cute.
you seem to see cuteness no matter what you read....i guess it helps in some
way....
do you feel that you are some master authority on zen/taoism.....? in that case
the line forms on the right.......if not, straight answers would be
appreciated....
> IS
>
> >
> > g.
Ichin Shen
>
> "Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message
> news:3B1D8BD2...@taomartialarts.com...
> > > nothing at first
> >
> > The question was "What's Zen, again?"
>
> its a question without an answer...
Without an answer, the question has no meaning, yet, Zen has existed for
more than a couple of thousand years,
> thousands of books line bookshelves
> everywhere that attempt to define........
which began with Sakyamuni (so-call the founder of Buddhism) who did the
"special transmission outside the scriptural teaching" with a smile
without a word spoken. 28 transmission later Bodhi-Dharma came to China
followed the same tradition transmitted to Hui-Ke, the second patriarch
of Chinese Chan-Buddhism, which after six transmission to Hui-Neng, who
set up the Chinese Chan-Buddhism tradition by declaring "direct pointing
to the heart, find oneself's own the Buddha nature and become a Buddha,"
which again without writing/setting up any scriptures. What thousands
books can do to define something such as lack of wording as Chan/Zen?
> why do you ask? considering the
> context of the post what prompted you to ask?
To see whether or not you do know [something about Zen] or just being
mouthy.
> >
> > > but then it snowballed into more nothing......
> >
> > [nothing it is,] if you did mean your answer "nez spelled
> > backwards....."
>
> i have answered that question....
without meaning.
> >
> > > but then a
> > > glimmer of a discussion seem to present itself.....
> >
> > as you continued those cute circular answers,
>
> if you saw cuteness in my answers then perhaps it was cuteness that you were
> looking for.....
Giving an answer without answering the question or an answer without
meaning is what I call "cute."
> >
> > > it has been flickering ever
> > > since but never a clean burn...........
> >
> > it never had substance to burn.
>
> correct
You got this one right.
> >
> > >
> > > > > and are
> > > > > you asking for a "head count"?
> > > >
> > > > No,
> > >
> > > well how should i interpret your last post which read:....."How
> > > many people do you say you know? You know how to imagine alright." a foot
> count
> > > perhaps?
> >
> > "be grasped intuitively," perhaps?
>
> one does not grasp intutively a head or foot count...just count.
Then, you don't know the meaning of "intuitively."
>
> > > > just to see how real your "excellent sense of reality" is. Care to
> > > > elaborate these statements, "as can most folks......some do not.....",
> > > > "depends on the folks that one knows i would imagine....."?
> > >
> > > i thought they were obvious....but you questioned (for some inexplicable
> > > reason) if i knew anyone....which made no sense....but then being a
> newsgroup
> > > veteran of many years i accepted it....obviously #1 i can't possibly know
> > > everyone in the world and so my remark must come from those i do
> > > know......hence "most folks" and they all have an excellent sense of
> > > reality....
> >
> > The question was about how many people can do "direct comprehendsion"?
> > the answer of "most folks can't" was quite obvious.
>
> again, no one can answer that question without knowing the individual human
> heart and there are many, one can only extrapolate from those who one does
> know......
Guess you just don't have the wit.
> >
> > Here's the quote which lead to this conclusion,
> >
> > Quote,
> > > > Direct comprehension, that is, what is seen AND what is felt,
> > without
> > > > deliberation.
> > >
> > > my cat can do that easily,
> >
> > Yup, a cat does that easily, as it has no illusion about mirrored
> > images.
> >
> > > as can most folks......some do not.....
>
> my good friends.....yes they are a thinking lot....and very intuitive....
Don't think that "thinking lot" can be "very intuitive."
>
> >
> > I think you got that backward-some can, but most folks can't.
> > Unquote.
>
> just for the record, you are quoting yourself....
Those were the actual exchanges in earlier posts of this thread.
> >
> > > some do not of course.....there is a reality common to all of
> > > us....fire burns, we suffer from cold, we get sick and we die......that is
> the
> > > reality for *all* of us.....but then there are "beliefs" which differ but
> have
> > > no real effect on the reality that is common to all of us but can color
> your
> > > life to some degree good or bad.....some folks believe in a god and the
> awards
> > > of a heaven,(i know a few) others wait for enlightenment, (i know a few)
> still
> > > others follow the path of "karma" (yes i know a few of those as
> > > well)........and so on.....but most folks i know tend to believe what is
> real
> > > and are able to separate that of belief opposed to this "real"....btw the
> > > buddha was a hard core realist......
> >
> > As Buddhas advocated, "direct comprehension" remains the core teaching
> > of Zen Buddhism.
>
> "direct comprehnsion" of what?..........[another leading question]
The absolute reality [of Zen].
> >
> > > > > > The part which you pretended to know.
> > > > >
> > > > > how do you know i am pretending?
> > > >
> > > > "nor is it a treatise on motorcycle maintenence but never the less the
> > > > quality of zen is there...." to begin with and the answers to the
> > > > questions consequently followed.
> > >
> > > is it a treatis on motorcycle maintenence?
> >
> > No.
>
> good...
> >
> > > is not the quality of zen there to
> > > be seen by anyone?
> >
> > No, it has nothing to do with Zen if you want to talk about the genuine
> > Zen practice. How many words are needed to describe the simplicity of
> > "direct comprehension"?
>
> i said it had the *quality* of zen, i am not speaking of zen practice but of
> its essence...
Without knowing what's Zen, how do you know the "quality" of Zen? True
Zen practice may reflect the essence of Zen, thus leads one into the
realm of enlightenment.
> another book in the same line is "zen and the art of archery" you
> seem to harp on minor chords while ignoring the major theme.......
Yes, it is a good book, which described Master archer Kenzo Awa "demo"
the ultimate simplicity with two shots in one hole, not a word spoken.
Another good book is "Zen Buddhism," by D.T. Suzuki, if you're really
interested in Zen.
> >
> > > your point i'm afraid illudes me....
> >
> > Hundred thousand words for describing a simplicity is not my idea of
> > "simplicity."
>
> your point still illudes me...who is describing?
The author of "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance."
> >
> > > what pretence? again you
> > > behave in a presumptuous manner....
> >
> > How do you describe "simplicity"?
>
> non presumptuousness for starters, non judgemental in nature......"simple"
> enough for you?
Only if you can do just that.
> >
> > >
> > > > > a bit presumptious of you is it not?
> > > >
> > > > As you haven't figured out where I stand, the "presumptious" is yours.
> > >
> > > you have made presumptuious statements which i pointed out now please point
> out
> > > mine....
> >
> > You read the statements and thought you understood the conversation.
>
> what i think is not a presumption of what i feel you to be.......big
> difference, what i think is my opinion and opinions are all that any of us
> have.......i do not presume you are wrong because i disagree.......that is the
> art of logical thinking.....or any kind of thinking for that matter...is it not
> presumptuous of you to consider that i did not understand the conversation but
> *you* did? how do you arrive this but by a trick of the mind.....
As you are not quite sure what I was talking about.
> >
> > > that would be something i *presumed* was true base on what you
> > > said....you never make clear as to where you stand....i am doing the best i
> can
> > > with very little....
> >
> > My second post onward, and each question you asked.
> >
> > >
> > > > > so what is the answer?
> > >
> > > > What is not "real"?
> > >
> > > that would be a question?
> >
> > As the answer is quite obvious, the question mark is to encourage you to
> > seek your own confirmation.
>
> and yet you found fault in all questions that i have put to you with the same
> idea in mind......>
There were a lot of holes/disjoint in you questions, as being pointed
out.
>
> > > > > > Not like a snake chasing its tail, I hope.
> > > > >
> > > > > sometimes......
> > > >
> > > > Your life...
> > >
> > > and????
> >
> > It is your prerogative to "sometimes" live "like a snake chasing its
> > tail"?
>
> another judement with no substance i am afraid.....and the analogy would be a
> snake *swallowing* his tail......>
The snake have to catch its tail before it can "swallow" it, don't you
think?
> > >
> > > > > there are many things that the eye cannot see and the body cannot
> > > feel.....but
> > > > > whether a mind can infer or not depends on the individual......
> > > >
> > > > Tao/Zen is a reality that is independent of mind,
> > >
> > > explain it as best you can......
> >
> > As Tao/Zen exists independent of you and I, and you and I are just a
> > random sample of all minds, thus Tao/Zen exists independent of mind.
>
> this is just a very common understanding of mind, not necessarily taoist or
> zen...taoism is not a thing that can exist independently nor zen.....
Then, what Tao/Zen should depend on to exist?
> >
> > > > > and what exactly is finite?....
> > > >
> > > > It terminates at the physical level.
> > >
> > > not at the mind level?
> >
> > Mind creates illusions, cannot be trusted unless it is trued.
>
> who is it that does not trust? how does the mind come to the conclusion that
> mind creates illusions and what would these illusions be?
Mind is not to be trusted, as it breeds images/illusions in its favor as
the conceited egotism taking hold on it.
> > > > > > > for you it "ends" since this is what you believe...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > If you'd like to believe that.
> > > > >
> > > > > it's what i infer from your posts......
> > > >
> > > > Not sure how you drew the inference, what was my premise?
> > >
> > > what terminates at the physical level....
> >
> > A touch that can be "felt"?
>
> i think you are talking of very common experiences.
> >
> > > and other like thoughts....
> >
> > Sun is burning like a nuclear reactor?
>
> and a nuclear reactor burns like the sun, they are very similar..
Yup, they are thoughts.
>
> > > > > i remember more than i put on.....questions are very useful
> tools......it
> > > does
> > > > > not always imply not understanding.......and how many here actually
> know
> > > > > precisely what it is they are talking about?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, the questions were to see how much you do know, and you haven't
> > > > come up with much of an answer yet.
> > >
> > > rereading the above how can you make such a statement? what sort of "turn
> > > around" is this? you are losing your credibilty i am afraid.....
> >
> > You may want to read your own posts first before you make such an
> > insinuation, as what goes around comes around.
>
> i always read my posts, i think you should defend what you say with actual
> explained quotes and it was not an insinuation it was a direct statement......
"the questions were to see how much you do know, and you haven't come up
with much of an answer yet." You may show some meaningful answers to
refute it.
> > > > >
> > > > > no answer i see........is there an answer? can there be an answer?
> > > >
> > > > "Figured" that "as in most things but you [i] have no idea what you [i]
> > > > should stop believing in......"
> > >
> > > you omitted this:...."Believing" is yours, it can be stopped only by you
> and
> > > you alone".
> > >
> > > to which i responded > "as in most things but i have no idea what i should
> stop
> > > believing in......"......in other words back to you........in short what
> are
> > > you talking about?
> >
> > You missed three more exchanges which lead to that,
>
> lost in space i imagine....
Which shows how you read you own posts.
>
> earthly business being
>
> > > > > > Yup, sounds just like those high spirit seeking turists who are
> > > > > > wondering why they come up here to get jammed in the traffic for.
> > > > >
> > > > > something like but not quite......
> > > >
> > > > So, what is exactly you are saying?
> > >
> > > it must be grasped intuitively for its best effect.....
> >
> > Cute.
>
> you seem to see cuteness no matter what you read....i guess it helps in some
> way....
>
> do you feel that you are some master authority on zen/taoism.....? in that case
> the line forms on the right.......if not, straight answers would be
> appreciated....
It is my practice. I teach Kendo to enter Zen and Tai-Chi to enter Tao,
among other practice.
:)
Ichin Shen
http://taomartialarts.com/sch/school.html
>
> > IS
> >
> > >
> > > g.
Jaybuzin0000
[...s]
g:
>> do you feel that you are some master authority on zen/taoism.....? in that
>>case the line forms on the right
w'hat forms on the left?
-jest curious
about lines drawn up
on m'any waters
genein
"Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message
> > > The question was "What's Zen, again?"
> >
> > its a question without an answer...
>
> Without an answer, the question has no meaning, yet, Zen has existed for
> more than a couple of thousand years,
actually not.....but i cannot put my finger on the book where i read of its
inception it was a product of chinese chan but the zen that we know is taken
from the japanese and falls very much short of a couple of thousand
years.....but how important are dates?
>
> > thousands of books line bookshelves
> > everywhere that attempt to define........
>
> which began with Sakyamuni (so-call the founder of Buddhism) who did the
> "special transmission outside the scriptural teaching" with a smile
> without a word spoken. 28 transmission later Bodhi-Dharma came to China
> followed the same tradition transmitted to Hui-Ke, the second patriarch
> of Chinese Chan-Buddhism, which after six transmission to Hui-Neng, who
> set up the Chinese Chan-Buddhism tradition by declaring "direct pointing
> to the heart, find oneself's own the Buddha nature and become a Buddha,"
> which again without writing/setting up any scriptures. What thousands
> books can do to define something such as lack of wording as Chan/Zen?
i have the original teachings of chan buddhism (the transmission of the lamp)
in book form of course and thousands of words....
>
> > why do you ask? considering the
> > context of the post what prompted you to ask?
>
> To see whether or not you do know [something about Zen] or just being
> mouthy.
your terms describe your intent.....
>
> > > > but then it snowballed into more nothing......
> > >
> > > [nothing it is,] if you did mean your answer "nez spelled
> > > backwards....."
> >
> > i have answered that question....
>
> without meaning.
to a bushman a dialog by einstein may well have no meaning.......not intended
to insult you of course but i know no other way to convey to you that when one
does not understand, it does not follow the other is at fault....
> > if you saw cuteness in my answers then perhaps it was cuteness that you
were
> > looking for.....
>
> Giving an answer without answering the question or an answer without
> meaning is what I call "cute."
you are being once again judgemental........
>
> > > > it has been flickering ever
> > > > since but never a clean burn...........
> > >
> > > it never had substance to burn.
> >
> > correct
>
> You got this one right.
and you too is see........what would be the score?
>
> > > > > > you asking for a "head count"?
> > > > >
> > > > > No,
> > > >
> > > > well how should i interpret your last post which read:....."How
> > > > many people do you say you know? You know how to imagine alright." a
foot
> > count
> > > > perhaps?
> > >
> > > "be grasped intuitively," perhaps?
> >
> > one does not grasp intutively a head or foot count...just count.
>
> Then, you don't know the meaning of "intuitively."
and once again you judge relative to your own knowledge.......very un-zen like.
> > > The question was about how many people can do "direct comprehendsion"?
> > > the answer of "most folks can't" was quite obvious.
> >
> > again, no one can answer that question without knowing the individual human
> > heart and there are many, one can only extrapolate from those who one does
> > know......
>
> Guess you just don't have the wit.
i will admit to that.....i generally attempt to take great care not to exceed
my "authority" rather than condemn others unjustly......lack of wit in this
case is good....
>
> > > > my cat can do that easily,
> > >
> > > Yup, a cat does that easily, as it has no illusion about mirrored
> > > images.
> > >
> > > > as can most folks......some do not.....
> >
> > my good friends.....yes they are a thinking lot....and very intuitive....
>
> Don't think that "thinking lot" can be "very intuitive."
why not......? there are levels of thinking, and thinking is what you are doing
right now.......it is hoped that is......
>
> > > I think you got that backward-some can, but most folks can't.
> > > Unquote.
> >
> > just for the record, you are quoting yourself....
>
> Those were the actual exchanges in earlier posts of this thread.
yes and as i said you are quoting yourself......
>
> > "direct comprehnsion" of what?..........[another leading question]
>
> The absolute reality [of Zen].
enlightenment iow's.....
> > > > is it a treatis on motorcycle maintenence?
> > >
> > > No.
> >
> > good...
> > >
> > > > is not the quality of zen there to
> > > > be seen by anyone?
> > >
> > > No, it has nothing to do with Zen if you want to talk about the genuine
> > > Zen practice. How many words are needed to describe the simplicity of
> > > "direct comprehension"?
> >
> > i said it had the *quality* of zen, i am not speaking of zen practice but
of
> > its essence...
>
> Without knowing what's Zen, how do you know the "quality" of Zen? True
> Zen practice may reflect the essence of Zen, thus leads one into the
> realm of enlightenment.
once again you are assuming that somehow you are in the "master" seat and of
course in command of all that is true..........
>
> > another book in the same line is "zen and the art of archery" you
> > seem to harp on minor chords while ignoring the major theme.......
>
> Yes, it is a good book, which described Master archer Kenzo Awa "demo"
> the ultimate simplicity with two shots in one hole, not a word spoken.
except in the book.......
>
> Another good book is "Zen Buddhism," by D.T. Suzuki, if you're really
> interested in Zen.
i read "zen buddhism" many years ago, my interest in zen is a long one.......i
hesitate to give you a list of the books that line my shelf since i fear that
you would take this information and based on your past posts somehow malign my
intent.....but this too will give you fodder for your zen "canon".....
>
> > > > your point i'm afraid illudes me....
> > >
> > > Hundred thousand words for describing a simplicity is not my idea of
> > > "simplicity."
> >
> > your point still illudes me...who is describing?
>
> The author of "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance."
he is not describing simplicity, he is attempting to give you a "feeling" for
himself and his situations......just as one note cannot hope to give the same
feeling from beethoven 9th as an entire score.......
>
> > >
> > > > what pretence? again you
> > > > behave in a presumptuous manner....
> > >
> > > How do you describe "simplicity"?
> >
> > non presumptuousness for starters, non judgemental in nature......"simple"
> > enough for you?
>
> Only if you can do just that.
one attempts and that is all that can be asked..........
> > what i think is not a presumption of what i feel you to be.......big
> > difference, what i think is my opinion and opinions are all that any of us
> > have.......i do not presume you are wrong because i disagree.......that is
the
> > art of logical thinking.....or any kind of thinking for that matter...is it
not
> > presumptuous of you to consider that i did not understand the conversation
but
> > *you* did? how do you arrive this but by a trick of the mind.....
>
> As you are not quite sure what I was talking about.
no one can be quite sure of the intent of another...especially in newsgroups
> > > > > What is not "real"?
> > > >
> > > > that would be a question?
> > >
> > > As the answer is quite obvious, the question mark is to encourage you to
> > > seek your own confirmation.
> >
> > and yet you found fault in all questions that i have put to you with the
same
> > idea in mind......>
>
> There were a lot of holes/disjoint in you questions, as being pointed
> out.
according to *your* lights.........once again, judgemental.........
> > > It is your prerogative to "sometimes" live "like a snake chasing its
> > > tail"?
> >
> > another judement with no substance i am afraid.....and the analogy would be
a
> > snake *swallowing* his tail......>
>
> The snake have to catch its tail before it can "swallow" it, don't you
> think?
yes but too many analogies spoil the broth.
> > > As Tao/Zen exists independent of you and I, and you and I are just a
> > >random sample of all minds, thus Tao/Zen exists independent of mind.
> >
> > this is just a very common understanding of mind, not necessarily taoist or
> > zen...taoism is not a thing that can exist independently nor zen.....
>
> Then, what Tao/Zen should depend on to exist?
without mind, tao or zen (a product of mind) would have no meaning....but it
does not depend on mind but mind is needed....
> > > > not at the mind level?
> > >
> > > Mind creates illusions, cannot be trusted unless it is trued.
> >
> > who is it that does not trust? how does the mind come to the conclusion
that
> > mind creates illusions and what would these illusions be?
>
> Mind is not to be trusted, as it breeds images/illusions in its favor as
> the conceited egotism taking hold on it.
and again who is it that does not trust?.....mind?
then perhaps you simply failed to understand due to any number of
causes.....one mans meaninful answer is anothers trash depending his outlook.
> > >
> > > You missed three more exchanges which lead to that,
> >
> > lost in space i imagine....
>
> Which shows how you read you own posts.
read it all the time......
> > > > > So, what is exactly you are saying?
> > > >
> > > > it must be grasped intuitively for its best effect.....
> > >
> > > Cute.
> >
> > you seem to see cuteness no matter what you read....i guess it helps in
some
> > way....
> >
> > do you feel that you are some master authority on zen/taoism.....? in that
case
> > the line forms on the right.......if not, straight answers would be
> > appreciated....
>
> It is my practice. I teach Kendo to enter Zen and Tai-Chi to enter Tao,
> among other practice.
i am afraid as the saying goes here in new york "that and $1.50 will get you on
the subway"......i do not wish to minimize what it is you are doing but you
appear to have a wish to be he who *knows*........not acceptable in a newsgroup
that should attempt an exchange of ideas......
g.
Ichin Shen
>
> "Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message
>
> > > > The question was "What's Zen, again?"
> > >
> > > its a question without an answer...
> >
> > Without an answer, the question has no meaning, yet, Zen has existed for
> > more than a couple of thousand years,
>
> actually not.....but i cannot put my finger on the book where i read of its
> inception it was a product of chinese chan but the zen that we know is taken
> from the japanese and falls very much short of a couple of thousand
> years.....
Not even that, "Zen" to you is only a word spelled in three letters in
English, but meaning?
"Zen" is only an English translation from Japanese; in Japanese, "Zen"
is written as the same character as Chinese "Chan," and its practice was
transmitted from China.
> but how important are dates?
Not as important as the practice, but a history may show you an
environment how the practice came about, which may lead, hopefully, you
a glimpse of what Zen is.
> >
> > > thousands of books line bookshelves
> > > everywhere that attempt to define........
> >
> > which began with Sakyamuni (so-call the founder of Buddhism) who did the
> > "special transmission outside the scriptural teaching" with a smile
> > without a word spoken. 28 transmission later Bodhi-Dharma came to China
> > followed the same tradition transmitted to Hui-Ke, the second patriarch
> > of Chinese Chan-Buddhism, which after six transmission to Hui-Neng, who
> > set up the Chinese Chan-Buddhism tradition by declaring "direct pointing
> > to the heart, find oneself's own the Buddha nature and become a Buddha,"
> > which again without writing/setting up any scriptures. What thousands
> > books can do to define something such as lack of wording as Chan/Zen?
>
> i have the original teachings of chan buddhism (the transmission of the lamp)
> in book form of course and thousands of words....
It will not do you anything, if you're not going to read it, or read it
without knowing what is in there.
> >
> > > why do you ask? considering the
> > > context of the post what prompted you to ask?
> >
> > To see whether or not you do know [something about Zen] or just being
> > mouthy.
>
> your terms describe your intent.....
Intent it is.
> >
> > > > > but then it snowballed into more nothing......
> > > >
> > > > [nothing it is,] if you did mean your answer "nez spelled
> > > > backwards....."
> > >
> > > i have answered that question....
> >
> > without meaning.
>
> to a bushman a dialog by einstein may well have no meaning.......not intended
> to insult you of course but i know no other way to convey to you that when one
> does not understand, it does not follow the other is at fault....
Yes, if you use a [esoteric] language only you might know the meaning,
you are not communicating.
>
> > > if you saw cuteness in my answers then perhaps it was cuteness that you
> were
> > > looking for.....
> >
> > Giving an answer without answering the question or an answer without
> > meaning is what I call "cute."
>
> you are being once again judgemental........
Only to reflect what's in the questions and answers.
> >
> > > > > it has been flickering ever
> > > > > since but never a clean burn...........
> > > >
> > > > it never had substance to burn.
> > >
> > > correct
> >
> > You got this one right.
>
> and you too is see........what would be the score?
Is "score" the only thing you can reflect of?
> >
> > > > > > > you asking for a "head count"?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > No,
> > > > >
> > > > > well how should i interpret your last post which read:....."How
> > > > > many people do you say you know? You know how to imagine alright." a
> foot
> > > count
> > > > > perhaps?
> > > >
> > > > "be grasped intuitively," perhaps?
> > >
> > > one does not grasp intutively a head or foot count...just count.
> >
> > Then, you don't know the meaning of "intuitively."
>
> and once again you judge relative to your own knowledge.......very un-zen like.
While you don't know what's Zen, what is un-Zen like? What's "intuit,"
again?
>
> > > > The question was about how many people can do "direct comprehendsion"?
> > > > the answer of "most folks can't" was quite obvious.
> > >
> > > again, no one can answer that question without knowing the individual human
> > > heart and there are many, one can only extrapolate from those who one does
> > > know......
> >
> > Guess you just don't have the wit.
>
> i will admit to that.....
Admitting does not change the fact, only affirm it,
> i generally attempt to take great care not to exceed
> my "authority" rather than condemn others unjustly......lack of wit in this
> case is good....
and be proud of it make it even worse.
> >
> > > > > my cat can do that easily,
> > > >
> > > > Yup, a cat does that easily, as it has no illusion about mirrored
> > > > images.
> > > >
> > > > > as can most folks......some do not.....
> > >
> > > my good friends.....yes they are a thinking lot....and very intuitive....
> >
> > Don't think that "thinking lot" can be "very intuitive."
>
> why not......? there are levels of thinking, and thinking is what you are doing
> right now.......it is hoped that is......
That is to say you have no idea what "intuitive" is.
Yet, you don't know that Japanese Zen was transmitted from China,
> my interest in zen is a long one.......i
> hesitate to give you a list of the books that line my shelf
Books, or a knowledge/practice for that matter, is not a product that
you pay for it and take it home then it becomes yours,
> since i fear that
> you would take this information and based on your past posts somehow malign my
> intent.....but this too will give you fodder for your zen "canon".....
if you don't study/practice to digest what's in it and turn it to a
"physical" knowledge of your own, it is just like the excess stuff that
piled up in your garage, which serve no purpose but occupy space.
Only to reflect what's in the questions and answers.
>
> > > > It is your prerogative to "sometimes" live "like a snake chasing its
> > > > tail"?
> > >
> > > another judement with no substance i am afraid.....and the analogy would be
> a
> > > snake *swallowing* his tail......>
> >
> > The snake have to catch its tail before it can "swallow" it, don't you
> > think?
>
> yes but too many analogies spoil the broth.
>
> > > > As Tao/Zen exists independent of you and I, and you and I are just a
> > > >random sample of all minds, thus Tao/Zen exists independent of mind.
> > >
> > > this is just a very common understanding of mind, not necessarily taoist or
> > > zen...taoism is not a thing that can exist independently nor zen.....
> >
> > Then, what Tao/Zen should depend on to exist?
>
> without mind, tao or zen (a product of mind) would have no meaning....
As Tao/Zen exists independent of minds,
> but it
> does not depend on mind but mind is needed....
it has meaning only in no-mind; no, mind is not needed.
>
> > > > > not at the mind level?
> > > >
> > > > Mind creates illusions, cannot be trusted unless it is trued.
> > >
> > > who is it that does not trust? how does the mind come to the conclusion
> that
> > > mind creates illusions and what would these illusions be?
> >
> > Mind is not to be trusted, as it breeds images/illusions in its favor as
> > the conceited egotism taking hold on it.
>
> and again who is it that does not trust?.....mind?
Asking question without seeking answer?
So it is.
>
> > > >
> > > > You missed three more exchanges which lead to that,
> > >
> > > lost in space i imagine....
> >
> > Which shows how you read you own posts.
>
> read it all the time......
Just passing time?
>
> > > > > > So, what is exactly you are saying?
> > > > >
> > > > > it must be grasped intuitively for its best effect.....
> > > >
> > > > Cute.
> > >
> > > you seem to see cuteness no matter what you read....i guess it helps in
> some
> > > way....
> > >
> > > do you feel that you are some master authority on zen/taoism.....? in that
> case
> > > the line forms on the right.......if not, straight answers would be
> > > appreciated....
> >
> > It is my practice. I teach Kendo to enter Zen and Tai-Chi to enter Tao,
> > among other practice.
>
> i am afraid as the saying goes here in new york "that and $1.50 will get you on
> the subway"......i do not wish to minimize what it is you are doing but you
> appear to have a wish to be he who *knows*........not acceptable in a newsgroup
> that should attempt an exchange of ideas......
And you don't think that ideas have been exchanged? Yes, a New Yorker
alright, "that and $1.50 will get you on the subway," round-around but
going nowhere.
I rest, :)
IS
genein
> genein wrote:
> >
> > "Ichin Shen" <taichi...@taomartialarts.com> wrote in message
> >
> > > > > The question was "What's Zen, again?"
> > > >
> > > > its a question without an answer...
> > >
> > > Without an answer, the question has no meaning, yet, Zen has existed for
> > > more than a couple of thousand years,
> >
> > actually not.....but i cannot put my finger on the book where i read of its
> > inception it was a product of chinese chan but the zen that we know is
taken from the japanese and falls very much short of a couple of thousand
> > years.....
>
> Not even that, "Zen" to you is only a word spelled in three letters in
> English, but meaning?
suzuki spent an entire chapter on this, it cannot be explained in a
nutshell...please refer back to my beethoven comment.....same thing.....some
say zen "just is" which is not a very satisfying answer.....would you accept
"seeing into the nature of one's being"? probably not.....
>
> "Zen" is only an English translation from Japanese; in Japanese, "Zen"
> is written as the same character as Chinese "Chan," and its practice was
> transmitted from China.
i am aware of that as most are in this newsgroup....
>
> > but how important are dates?
>
> Not as important as the practice, but a history may show you an
> environment how the practice came about, which may lead, hopefully, you
> a glimpse of what Zen is.
the date would still not be important only the *event*......
>
> > > > thousands of books line bookshelves
> > > > everywhere that attempt to define........
>
What thousands
> > > books can do to define something such as lack of wording as Chan/Zen?
are you suggesting to do away with all books of zen including "the zen teaching
of huang po" for example?
> >
> > i have the original teachings of chan buddhism (the transmission of the
lamp)
> > in book form of course and thousands of words....
>
> It will not do you anything, if you're not going to read it, or read it
> without knowing what is in there.
why do you continue to assume this sort of nonsense?
>
> > > To see whether or not you do know [something about Zen] or just being
> > > mouthy.
> >
> > your terms describe your intent.....
>
> Intent it is.
glad you agree.....
> > > > i have answered that question....
> > >
> > > without meaning.
> >
> > to a bushman a dialog by einstein may well have no meaning.......not
intended
> > to insult you of course but i know no other way to convey to you that when
one
> > does not understand, it does not follow the other is at fault....
>
> Yes, if you use a [esoteric] language only you might know the meaning,
> you are not communicating.
ok....explain in ordinary language to any bushman the workings of a combustion
engine or television.....he will not understand so would that mean that you are
at fault?....that would be an extreme analogy but it was meant to wake you up
to the fact that because you may not understand something it does not follow
that it is wrong.....
> > > > if you saw cuteness in my answers then perhaps it was cuteness that you
> > were
> > > > looking for.....
> > >
> > > Giving an answer without answering the question or an answer without
> > > meaning is what I call "cute."
> >
> > you are being once again judgmental........
>
> Only to reflect what's in the questions and answers.
but judgmental never the less and i might add without cause...
> > > You got this one right.
> >
> > and you too is see........what would be the score?
>
> Is "score" the only thing you can reflect of?
that would be a jibe.
> > > Then, you don't know the meaning of "intuitively."
> >
> > and once again you judge relative to your own knowledge.......very un-zen
like.
>
> While you don't know what's Zen, what is un-Zen like? What's "intuit,"
> again?
good lord man....do give it up...what color is a yellow banana?
>
> > >
> > > Guess you just don't have the wit.
> >
> > i will admit to that.....
>
> Admitting does not change the fact, only affirm it,
i affirm it....
>
> > i generally attempt to take great care not to exceed
> > my "authority" rather than condemn others unjustly......lack of wit in this
> > case is good....
>
> and be proud of it make it even worse.
you are what is known as a nit picker......are you proud of this? and as you
can see this thread has been reduced to that level....
> > > Don't think that "thinking lot" can be "very intuitive."
> >
> > why not......? there are levels of thinking, and thinking is what you are
doing
> > right now.......it is hoped that is......
>
> That is to say you have no idea what "intuitive" is.
no, it is to say that you are not keeping up....what color is a yellow banana
again?
> > > Another good book is "Zen Buddhism," by D.T. Suzuki, if you're really
> > > interested in Zen.
> >
> > i read "zen buddhism" many years ago,
>
> Yet, you don't know that Japanese Zen was transmitted from China,
do take the time to read my posts....what do you see? nothing? perhaps a 3rd
and or a 4th reading might be of some help....
> > my interest in zen is a long one.......i
> > hesitate to give you a list of the books that line my shelf
>
> Books, or a knowledge/practice for that matter, is not a product that
> you pay for it and take it home then it becomes yours,
would it surprise you to know that once again you have uttered a rather common
observation.....it's a given..
>
> > since i fear that
> > you would take this information and based on your past posts somehow malign
my
> > intent.....but this too will give you fodder for your zen "canon".....
>
> if you don't study/practice to digest what's in it and turn it to a
> "physical" knowledge of your own, it is just like the excess stuff that
> piled up in your garage, which serve no purpose but occupy space.
as i said......
> > > > your point still eludes me...who is describing?
> > >
> > > The author of "Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance."
> >
> > he is not describing simplicity, he is attempting to give you a "feeling"
for
> > himself and his situations......just as one note cannot hope to give the
same
> > feeling from beethoven 9th as an entire score.......
no response? well just maybe the point got to you? it would save some time if
it did....
> > > > and yet you found fault in all questions that i have put to you with
the
> > same
> > > > idea in mind......>
> > >
> > > There were a lot of holes/disjoint in you questions, as being pointed
> > > out.
> >
> > according to *your* lights.........once again, judgmental.........
>
> Only to reflect what's in the questions and answers.
and an excellent excuse to be judgmental......without cause....by saying there
were a lot of holes etc did not advance your argument, just a loose cannon of
words establishing and illuminating nothing..
> > >
> > > The snake have to catch its tail before it can "swallow" it, don't you
> > > think?
> >
> > yes but too many analogies spoil the broth.
> >
> > > > > As Tao/Zen exists independent of you and I, and you and I are just a
> > > > >random sample of all minds, thus Tao/Zen exists independent of mind.
> > > >
> > > > this is just a very common understanding of mind, not necessarily
taoist or
> > > > zen...taoism is not a thing that can exist independently nor zen.....
> > >
> > > Then, what Tao/Zen should depend on to exist?
> >
> > without mind, tao or zen (a product of mind) would have no meaning....
>
> As Tao/Zen exists independent of minds,
read below, perhaps the 2nd time might prove to be more effective.......
> > but it
> > does not depend on mind but mind is needed....
>
> it has meaning only in no-mind; no, mind is not needed.
"many people are afraid to empty their minds lest they may plunge into the
void. they do not know that their own mind is the void." huang po.
>
> > >
> > > Mind is not to be trusted, as it breeds images/illusions in its favor as
> > > the conceited egotism taking hold on it.
> >
> > and again who is it that does not trust?.....mind?
>
> Asking question without seeking answer?
when one seeks answers, one asks questions....that is how it is done in zen, in
the office, at home or away....the question is rather standard in zen........no
answer i see.....
> > > "the questions were to see how much you do know, and you haven't come up
> > > with much of an answer yet." You may show some meaningful answers to
> > > refute it.
> >
> > then perhaps you simply failed to understand due to any number of
> > causes.....one mans meaningful answer is another's trash depending his
outlook.
>
> So it is.
yes it is.....
>
> > >
> > > Which shows how you read you own posts.
> >
> > read it all the time......
>
> Just passing time?
better than passing gas.......
> > > It is my practice. I teach Kendo to enter Zen and Tai-Chi to enter Tao,
> > > among other practice.
> >
> > i am afraid as the saying goes here in new york "that and $1.50 will get
you on
> > the subway"......i do not wish to minimize what it is you are doing but you
> > appear to have a wish to be he who *knows*........not acceptable in a
newsgroup that should attempt an exchange of ideas......
>
> And you don't think that ideas have been exchanged?
not the way you go about it.......
Yes, a New Yorker
> alright, "that and $1.50 will get you on the subway," round-around but
> going nowhere.
the subway system goes everywhere and nowhere depending on he who rides.....
>
> I rest, :)
> IS
> > > Ichin Shen