Merle, We don't need to argue. I don't think of most of these posts as 'arguing' as I do 'discussions'. Just because I disagree with you and state my opposing position doesn't mean (to me) that I'm 'arguing' with you. I don't 'Google', I 'Bing'. (This is not meant to be an augmentative statement.) I did 'Bing' 'third eye' and found a nice article on Wikipedia at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_eye <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_eye> . It mentions a belief or concept of a 'third eye' in Hinduism (which I most closely associate it with), Taoism (which might mean it's recognized in Chan also - but only JMJM could say for sure), Christianity (which I think is a stretch), Gnosticism, Theosophy, and Rosicrucianism. There is no mention of Buddhism and certainly not zen. On a more personal note I could tell you to my recollection a 'third eye' was not ever mentioned during my years of training in Zen Buddhism. Do you have any other assignment for me regarding 'third eye' and Buddhism or zen?...Bill!
--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@...> wrote: > > > >  bill..bill bill..why must we argue?..i am me and you are you. > .. you are the zen of zen since you have been zenning for so long you have "forgotten" to forget the "rules". > .cos from what i gather there are no "rules"..and none in art either...artists are free to do what they will >  how much of your attention have you paid to art  in your lifespan? > you know what you like and i'd say that would be the gist of it >  that's fine >  however if you think for one moment i am going to swallow your pill about the third eye not being zen..think again,... > if you have no understanding of the third eye at least do some homework..and google >  for christ sake and buddha's >  and then report back to me with the facts and not your interpretation of what you  believe the facts mean >  i skip and i sing..i dance and i laugh..through the daffodils at your blindness >  try the third eye >  you never know..a new reality >  the dawning of a new age for you..in enlightenment >  "woh" you will say and nod "ah ha"! >  experience is the mother of reality >  merle > > > > >  > Merle, > > Good post and question. My response is embedded below: > > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Merle Lester merlewiitpom@ wrote: > > > > i love order bill. > > > > ... that's logic in play.. > > [Bill!] Yes Merle, I love it too. My entire professional career is based on developing and applying logic. I love it so much that I have learned (through zen training - koan study specifically) that I must be very careful not to become attached to my love of logic. That might be why you see me protesting much to most of Edgar's posts. > > > . are you telling me you have changed your mind now..? > > [No, I'm not sure where you got that impression. Because I say there is some role for logic in art? Yes, there is a role (or could be a role), but it is not the primary process. The more logic put into art the more art approaches engineering - and the more creativity put into engineering the more it approaches art. Art and engineering are actually the same things - human creations. They only differ on the emphasis of logic versus creativity employed. > > > > . logic is part and parcel of any human endeavour > >  we live in an ordered world > > [Bill!] Logic is indeed part and parcel of any human endeavor, but not of Buddha Nature. There is no dualisitc 'part and parcel' in Buddha Nature. It is holistic. It is Just THIS! > > >  what planet are you coming from?...merle > > [Bill!] I don't come FROM anywhere. I am. I am here. I am here now. > > ...Bill! > > > > >  > > > > > > > Edgar, > > > > > > The operative word here is 'big'. Logic does not plays a 'big' part in engineering. Logic does not play a 'big' part in art. I didn't say it doesn't play any part. > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > >> > > >> On Sep 7, 2012, at 4:58 AM, billsmart wrote: > > >> > > >>> Logic plays a big part in engineering, not art...Bill!. > > >
