As soon as you see something, you already start to intellectualize it.
As soon as you intellectualize something, it is no longer what you saw.
~ Sunryu Suzuki
I call these intellectualizations 'perceptions' or 'delusions'.
...Bill!
Bill,
Sure, but the point you miss in what Suzuki says is that there actually was a
SOMETHING that you originally saw that originated the illusion. You deny there
is anything 'out there' in an actual world of forms and believe your delusions
arise spontaneously in your mind with no external sou
Edgar,
You make a dubious interpretation; I'll make one that can't be doubted.
It need not be that the Roshi means there is a "something".
The Roshi starts: "As soon as you see something... ".
He need not have said it this way, and neither do we. He and we might have
spoken as the Buddha did:
Joe,
If you really think this is matter of bad English then he shouldn't write
something in English that wasn't correct. That would be unbecoming of a Zen
teacher.
But the statement is both good English AND good Zen. It's your's and Bill's
interpretation that seems to be off.
Edgar
On Jul
Edgar,
I wouldn't know about bad English.
But I suspect that philosophizing by someone not native to or rigorously
trained in a language is fraught with the possibility or near occasion of
misinterpretation.
Even a good language translator cannot give a good translation if the
translator is n
Joe,
Boy, talk about intellectualizing!
:-)
Edgar
On Jul 1, 2013, at 7:49 PM, Joe wrote:
> Edgar,
>
> I wouldn't know about bad English.
>
> But I suspect that philosophizing by someone not native to or rigorously
> trained in a language is fraught with the possibility or near occasion of
Edgar,
Nope, I'm not talking about intellectualizing.
I'm talking about our subject.
I know you're up to it, so c'mon! When you have a chance; if you want.
--Joe
> Edgar Owen wrote:
>
> Joe,
>
> Boy, talk about intellectualizing!
> :-)
>
> Edgar
>
> On Jul 1, 2013, at 7:49 PM, Joe wrote:
Edgar,
Yes, I understand that yours is definitely the pluralistic* point-of-view on
this. You believe you are 'in here' and everything else is 'out there'. That
is how I perceive things also, but I know that is delusion.
You have again mis-characterized my description on this. I don't think
Joe,
My point was that your long post consisted entirely of large scale
intellectualization The so called intellectualization of my post was two
concise sentences. Your intellectualization was 20 some often run-on
sentences
Edgar
On Jul 1, 2013, at 9:09 PM, Joe wrote:
> Edgar,
>
>
Bill,
But what is 'our' experience 'of'?
That seems to be the core problem... You don't seem to get the point that by
claiming it's 'our' experience you already assume the dualism you reject...
Edgar
On Jul 2, 2013, at 5:39 AM, Bill! wrote:
> Edgar,
>
> Yes, I understand that yours is defi
Edgar,
But your reply to my post should interest no one here, as it is about form and
style, not about substance and content.
Do you have a substantive reply on topic? Else, we'll let it go.
tnx,
--Joe
> Edgar Owen wrote:
>
> My point was that your long post consisted entirely of large sca
Form is nothing other than emptiness.the style is the message?
Thanks,
--Chris
301-270-6524
On Jul 2, 2013 9:42 AM, "Joe" wrote:
> Edgar,
>
> But your reply to my post should interest no one here, as it is about form
> and style, not about substance and content.
>
> Do you have a substantive re
Chris,
I'd answer, "No."
Form and style and content are emptiness.
Content is content. Style is style.
Apples and oranges are conjoined with a conjunction, not an equals-sign;
otherwise, so-much for "diversity".
--Joe
> Chris Austin-Lane wrote:
>
> Form is nothing other than emptiness.the
Joe,
How your mind changes with the wind of convenience! First intellectualization
is critically important when you claim I do it in two lines, and then of no
importance at all as you do it in 20 or more?
Edgar
On Jul 2, 2013, at 12:42 PM, Joe wrote:
> Edgar,
>
> But your reply to my post
Your communication is received as much by its style as its message.
Thanks,
--Chris
301-270-6524
On Jul 2, 2013 9:55 AM, "Joe" wrote:
> Chris,
>
> I'd answer, "No."
>
> Form and style and content are emptiness.
>
> Content is content. Style is style.
>
> Apples and oranges are conjoined with a
Edgar,
Still no reply from you on substance. That's OK.
To review, the key point is that the Roshi is not establishing a Metaphysics.
He is talking about experience, and what the mind of some will do during and
after, again noted in experience.
The awakened person during and after experience
joe...not the apple and oranges sing song..be more creative..merle
Chris,
I'd answer, "No."
Form and style and content are emptiness.
Content is content. Style is style.
Apples and oranges are conjoined with a conjunction, not an equals-sign;
otherwise, so-much for "diversity".
--Joe
Hi, Merle,
Welcome back to the Agora.
A funny thing happened on the way to the Food Court... what was that about
fruits, now?
My creativity works in fits and starts. And it's all for a good cause, if not
always for a good effect. It takes two; or a village, I forget.
BTW, I couldn't read mu
Edgar,
No, I'm not assuming it's a pluralistic experience as I know you do. I may use
language and sentence structures that describe it pluralistically, but I try
conscientiously to avoid that.
I looked in my post below and didn't see anywhere that I'd used the phrase "our
experience of", but
Bill,
I agree with that but that is not the way you say it. You nearly always say
it's OUR experience and illusions are in YOUR mind... That's solipsism, not
Zen...
The true view is that experience PRIOR TO THE DUALISM OF EXPERIENCER AND
EXPERIENCED is the only truth and the only reality.
Th
hi joe... music is the universal language of love some would say...
the brilliance of written musical notes is that it is a universal language
and brings us closer to the realisation we are all ONE
i would say to your friend..we are all ONE
some have one cousin some have many
at the end
Edgar,
If I do as you state "nearly always say it's OUR experience and illusions are
in YOUR mind..." then I apologize because that's not what I mean to say - and
in fact I don't think that is what I do say. In any event I will take more
care in the future when describing such things.
As far
The form of this thread has demonstrated its own content. It is its own
example. Beautiful!
On Wed, 7/3/13, Bill! wrote:
Subject: Re: [Zen] Intellectualizing -
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, July 3, 2013, 10:04 AM
Edgar
Gotta love music
audio art : visual art :: time : space
sound : light :: notes : color
tone : hue :: pitch : brightness
On Wed, 7/3/13, Merle Lester wrote:
Subject: Re: [Zen] Intellectualizing -
To: "Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com"
Date:
Merle,
Please take care of yourself, and take those meds to completion, so as not to
foster mutated Super-Bacteria. But you know the drill.
Music for me is something that comes from the fingers. If I played other
instruments -- like wind instruments -- it might be different, but fingers are
joe..many thanks...mending now... merle
Merle,
Please take care of yourself, and take those meds to completion, so as not to
foster mutated Super-Bacteria. But you know the drill.
Music for me is something that comes from the fingers. If I played other
instruments -- like wind instrumen
beautiful joe..thanks for sharing..the joy of simplicity...and one would just
play this by ear...wonderbah!...merle
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thumb_piano
Yours in Music, Painting, and Penicillin,
--Joe
Dear Merle,
I *like* the way you snip!
Thanks!
The Kalimba is a good instrument for Zen students, or those wishing to become
so. I say this to be right on topic. I won't say why it's so: you (one...)
must do the experiment, as usual.
--Joe
> Merle Lester wrote:
>
> beautiful joe..thanks
28 matches
Mail list logo
