I'm off to bed now. I'll catch up with any subsequent posts in my tomorrow morning (your this evening if you're in the USA)...Bill!
--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "Bill!" <BillSmart@...> wrote: > > Mike, > > You're absolutely right. I plead guilty...but I did as you noticed state all > that with a caveat...for whatever that's worth. I knew I was skating on thin > ice when I wrote that but it was the best I could do to try to reach Merle. > > ...Bill! > > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, mike brown <uerusuboyo@> wrote: > > > > Bill!, > > > > I appreciate that you began your post with a caveat that the meaning of > > Joshu's 'wash your bowls' was just your opinion. However, isn't what you > > wrote (rice-gruel = Buddhism) just a secondary meaning to the koan, and > > worse, an intellectual overlay giving it a meaning in order to be > > understood. Joshu's instruction to the monk to wash his bowl was exactly > > that - to go and wash his bowl. Nothing added necessary because washing > > your bowl, with nothing added, manifests Buddha Nature. Reminds me of the > > Watts quote where he states that spirituality in Christianity is washing > > the dishes while thinking about God. Spirituality in Zen isjust washing the > > dishes. > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Wednesday, 5 September 2012, 10:02 > > Subject: [Zen] Re: clarification of the bowl > > > > > >  > > Merle, > > > > A long, long time ago in a reply to one of your pleas for help to Edgar and > > after reading you two go back and forth and Edgar filling your head with > > all sorts of advice I quoted a story associated with a zen koan. The koan > > is entitled WASH YOUR BOWLS and is Case #7 in THE GATELESS GATE collection. > > I'll repeat it again: > > > > "A monk asked Joshu in all earnestness, "I have just entered the monastery. > > I beg you, Master, please give me instructions. "Joshu asked, "Have you > > eaten your rice gruel yet?" The monk answered, "Yes, I have." Joshu said, > > "Then wash your bowls." The monk attained some realization." > > > > In the above mondo (Japanese - dialog between zen adepts regarding Buddha > > Nature) it is MY OPINION that Joshu used the terms 'rice gruel' to > > represent learning - understanding things; and used 'bowls' to represent > > your discriminating mind - your intellect or rational mind. IN MY OPINION > > what Joshu was saying to the monk was, 'Have you learned all about > > Buddhism? If so then you now have to discard all that because it is only > > with an empty mind free from the illusions of duality and its products that > > you will be able to realize Buddha Nature. > > > > So...when you ask for information and advice Edgar gives it to you. You > > ask about how to deal with attachments and he tells you. From all I've > > seen it's good advice. His advice might indeed reduce the severity of your > > attachments or enable you to better cope with them, but it won't ever > > enable you to end them. Following the analogy of the story he spoons more > > and more rice gruel into your bowl. That's fine if all you want is a lot > > of knowledge (all of which is illusory anyway), but if what you're really > > after is an end to attachments, an end to suffering, then you should be > > looking to halt the creation of duality, illusion and the attachments that > > brings. That is what Joshu refers to IMO as 'wash your bowls'. > > > > There are many ways to do that but the most common way used in Zen Buddhism > > is zazen (zen meditation). > > > > I am not 'obsessed' with bowls and rice gruel, it is Edgar who is obsessed > > with those. I'm 'obsessed' with telling people to stop trying to > > 'understand' zen and start practicing it - and the first step is zazen. > > > > ...Bill! > > > > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote: > > > > > > bill..that is your take on this..as i see it edgar... says there are no > > > bowls..there just is... and that is zen...zen is zen is zen..what's with > > > the bowls anyway..you seem to be obsessed with them..merle > > > à> > > Merle, > > > > > > I forgot to respond to your second question. > > > > > > You may share your bowl with others. Edgar is trying to share a lot of > > > the contents of his bowl with you. The problem is when he does that the > > > contents of both of your bowls just get more full, and sooner of later if > > > you want to realize Buddha Nature you're going to have to empty them - at > > > least temporarily. > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ãâà> > > > Ãâàplease clarify bill..does it matter the size of bowl?... is > > > > the bowl shared with others?...merle > > > > Ãâà> > > > KG, > > > > > > > > 'You' do have a choice and it is the rice that is dirtying your bowl. > > > > Your illusory self is the one responsible for making the choice and > > > > putting more rice in or cleaning the bowl. Your illusory self can > > > > choose one way or the other. > > > > > > > > If you are not creating an illusory self (are manifesting Buddha > > > > Nature) then yes, as you've said before, there is no bowl and there is > > > > no choice to be made. > > > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > > > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Kristopher Grey <kris@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Believing you make such a choice, is blaming the rice for dirtying > > > > > your > > > > > bowl. > > > > > > > > > > KG > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 9/4/2012 9:05 PM, Bill! wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Merle, > > > > > > > > > > > > You are correct that reality comes with no frills, but you do have > > > > > > a > > > > > > choice. You can choose to invent frills (illusions) and become > > > > > > attached to them. Or you can choose not to do that. Choosing not to > > > > > > do > > > > > > and dropping all attachments is called 'washing your bowl'...Bill! > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>, > > > > > > Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ take it as it comes..no frills...you do not have a > > > > > > > choice ..merle > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ > > > > > > > Merle, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >that's when zen is most needed mike...to get you through the day > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should I take it straight or on the rocks? ; ) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > From: Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> > > > > > > > To: "Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>" > > > > > > <Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>> > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, 3 September 2012, 22:31 > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: " dancing with the daffodils" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ that's when zen is most needed mike...to get you > > > > > > > through the > > > > > > day...merle > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ultimately, yes - in day to day living, no. At least not in the > > > > > > story of my life. It's so easy to claim Buddhahood when things are > > > > > > going well, but just watch that little house of cards coming > > > > > > crashing > > > > > > down when you get a nasty hemorrhoids on a hot, sweaty day or your > > > > > > girlfriend cheats on you. That's why even something as simple as > > > > > > being > > > > > > mindful of the breath can be the most difficult thing in the world > > > > > > in > > > > > > such circumstances. You can philosophise your way out of it here > > > > > > quite > > > > > > easily, but meanwhile back in the real world [insert exegesis on > > > > > > 'real > > > > > > world' here].. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > From: Kristopher Grey <kris@> > > > > > > > To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> > > > > > > > Sent: Monday, 3 September 2012, 1:34 > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: " dancing with the daffodils" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ > > > > > > > This matter of whether there is or isn't isn't someone to suffer > > > > > > > is > > > > > > all smoke and mirrors. Suffering appears. This is clear enough. > > > > > > What > > > > > > is this notion of "liberation from" but self relating to self? What > > > > > > appears, appears. What of it? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Clarity, selfless. No self that need to see into itself. No such > > > > > > > conceptual contortions required. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don't settle for nothing. Don't attach to anything. This takes no > > > > > > > effort. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > KG > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 9/2/2012 5:35 PM, mike brown wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ > > > > > > > >Kris, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >There is no one who suffers, but only after the realisation that > > > > > > there isn't even a mind for suffering to happen to is there > > > > > > liberation > > > > > > from it. "Clarity" here reads as insight. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >________________________________ > > > > > > > > From: Kristopher Grey <kris@> > > > > > > > >To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > ><mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> > > > > > > > >Sent: Sunday, 2 September 2012, 20:23 > > > > > > > >Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: " dancing with the daffodils" > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ > > > > > > > >Then you still know too much. ;) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >If it so clear as that, there is nothing to > > > > > > > see. The 'obscuration' all that may show the > > > > > > > way. What you are seeing as separate only > > > > > > > appears to be. All a matter of how you see it. > > > > > > > So who is leading who? Who suffers? In seeking > > > > > > > perfection, it forever eludes. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >The clear minded are equally empty headed. > > > > > > > Don't throw the Buddha out with the bathwater. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >KG > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >PS - Expresses simpler/more obviously > > > > > > > wordlessly - see: 'Wabi Sabi' - > > > > > > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wabi-sabi > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >On 9/2/2012 12:32 PM, mike brown wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ > > > > > > > >>Kris, > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>>I might point out that apparent obscuration is no less reality > > > > > > than apparent clarity > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>Reality is certainly there regardless, but > > > > > > > reality seen with obscuration leads to > > > > > > > suffering, whereas reality seen with > > > > > > > clarity will lead to the cessation of > > > > > > > suffering. That's all I need to know and > > > > > > > that is my witness.ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>Mike > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>________________________________ > > > > > > > >> From: Kristopher Grey <kris@> > > > > > > > >>To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > >><mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> > > > > > > > >>Sent: Sunday, 2 September 2012, 16:11 > > > > > > > >>Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: " dancing with the daffodils" > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ > > > > > > > >>I might point out that apparent obscuration is no less reality > > > > > > than apparent clarity. In doing so, this point only dances around > > > > > > itself - offers nothing you can't realize directly. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>What can anyone say in > > > > > > > response that you will not > > > > > > > directly experience (realize) > > > > > > > as some aspect of this > > > > > > > reality/realization- whether > > > > > > > you realize it or not - just > > > > > > > as when experiencing > > > > > > > meditation/not meditation? > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>This more or less business is > > > > > > > you triangulating your > > > > > > > position. Nothing more, > > > > > > > nothing less. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>KG > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>On 9/2/2012 5:57 AM, mike > > > > > > > brown wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >>ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ > > > > > > > >>>Edgar, > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>>Wouldn't you say tho, that reality is less obscured during, or > > > > > > just after, a long retreat of meditation? > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>>Mike > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>>________________________________ > > > > > > > >>> From: Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> > > > > > > > >>>To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > >>><mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> > > > > > > > >>>Sent: Sunday, 2 September 2012, 1:13 > > > > > > > >>>Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: " dancing with the daffodils" > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>>ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ > > > > > > > >>>Mike, > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>>Well, it's reality either way, but that reality is always > > > > > > changing as happening continually flows through the present moment. > > > > > > But however it changes it is still reality.... > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>>Edgar > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>>On Sep 1, 2012, at 6:09 PM, mike brown wrote: > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>>ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>>Edgar, > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>>Would you say that the world (inner/outer) you look at now is > > > > > > the same as when you're at the end of a sesshin? > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>>Mike > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>>________________________________ > > > > > > > >>>> From: Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> > > > > > > > >>>>To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > > >>>><mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> > > > > > > > >>>>Sent: Saturday, 1 September 2012, 18:44 > > > > > > > >>>>Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: " dancing with the daffodils" > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>>ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ > > > > > > > >>>>ED, > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>>Stop practicing and just BE your Buddha Nature! > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>>Edgar > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>>On Sep 1, 2012, at 12:22 PM, ED wrote: > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>>ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡ > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>Edgar, > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>Therefore, > > > > > > > although each > > > > > > > of us is > > > > > > > complete, we > > > > > > > need to > > > > > > > practice > > > > > > > >>>>>diligently at > > > > > > > all times with > > > > > > > no objective > > > > > > > in mind? > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>--ED > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com > > > > > > <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>, Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote: > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Joe and > > > > > > > Merle, > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> There is > > > > > > > no 'goal' of > > > > > > > enlightenment > > > > > > > to be achieved > > > > > > > without which > > > > > > > you > > > > > > > >>>>>imagine you > > > > > > > are > > > > > > > incomplete.... > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> There is > > > > > > > no > > > > > > > incompleteness. > > > > > > > This > > > > > > > understanding > > > > > > > is an > > > > > > > essential > > > > > > > aspect > > > > > > > >>>>>of > > > > > > > realization... > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Wham! > > > > > > > >>>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>>> Edgar > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
