Agreed... An eminently rational statement.... Edgar
On Jun 13, 2013, at 2:27 AM, Bill! wrote: > Edgar, > > There is nothing for which a human being NEEDS as teacher. You could > conceivably invent calculus on your own if you came to a situation where you > needed it. However most humans do learn from teachers starting with your > parents. It saves a lot of time and effort because you don't have to 'invent > the wheel' every generation. The body of knowledge is passed through teaching. > > It's no different with zen. A good teacher can help you get started and > shepherd you though difficult patches. He/she cannot learn things for you but > can certainly help you learn. And yes, there does come a time when you've > exhausted your teachers' ability to assist and then must go our on your own, > but you do so from that very substantial base of your learning. > > ...Bill! > > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote: > > > > Bill, > > > > Yes, in the limited teacher student context. But as I've explained before > > reality is the ONLY real teacher. Human teachers may or may not serve as > > little pieces of reality that facilitate pointing out Buddha Nature. > > > > But there is NO NEED AT ALL to 'convince' your teacher to pass the koan. > > You either realize Buddha Nature or you don't. If you do the teacher is no > > longer relevant.... > > > > One demonstrates Buddha Nature to Buddha Nature by realizing Buddha Nature. > > NO teacher necessary other than reality itself. > > > > Only dependent personalities think teachers are a necessity. Did you need a > > teacher to start breathing when you were born? > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > On Jun 11, 2013, at 3:43 AM, Bill! wrote: > > > > > Edgar, > > > > > > Yes, demonstrating Buddha Nature is the 'answer' or 'solution' to all > > > koans. And yes, that could involve pointing, or an utterance, or some > > > other action or even silence and no action. And yes, you do have to > > > 'convince' your teacher to pass the koan - at least if you want to gain > > > his/her verification that you have passed the koan. > > > > > > After you have passed the koan there was at least in my case then some > > > rational conversation about the structure of the koan and on what it was > > > specifically designed to focus. These discussions were intended to > > > prepare you for becoming a teacher. > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Bill, > > > > > > > > There is only one answer or solution to ALL koans. And that is Buddha > > > > Nature. So all one has to do in response to any koan is simply to point > > > > to anything at all and convincingly bring attention to its Buddha > > > > Nature. > > > > > > > > But as I say repeatedly anything at all can be a koan to get you to > > > > that realization. Reality itself is ultimately the ONLY koan.... even > > > > in its seemingly most insignificant aspect... > > > > > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jun 9, 2013, at 9:17 PM, Bill! wrote: > > > > > > > > > Edgar, > > > > > > > > > > I agree with Joe here. > > > > > > > > > > All the 'breakthrough' koans (the first ones that are specifically > > > > > designed to induce kensho (first experience of Buddha Nature)require > > > > > a demonstration rather than an explanation. For example my first koan > > > > > was Joshu's MU and my teacher's request was to "BRING me Mu" and > > > > > "SHOW me Mu" - certainly not "explain what Joshu's answer 'Mu' means". > > > > > > > > > > In later koans, although still requiring actions or demonstrations, > > > > > there is some room for intellectual discussions with your teacher, > > > > > although these discussions are usually focused on just what the koan > > > > > is specifically designed to accomplish rather than a discussion on > > > > > the meaning of the actual content. > > > > > > > > > > This has been my experience with koan study anyway, and this was with > > > > > two different zen masters - although admittedly the two zen masters > > > > > were from the same 'school' and they themselves had a teacher:student > > > > > relationship at one time. > > > > > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > > > > > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "Joe" <desert_woodworker@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Edgar, > > > > > > > > > > > > If YOU take things literally, then that's what YOU do. > > > > > > > > > > > > Anyone who passes the koan "What is the sound of One Hand?", makes > > > > > > a demonstration. It's easy, at that time. After that work. What are > > > > > > you all hung up about? > > > > > > > > > > > > Edgar, note, too: my practice has been not too much on koans; after > > > > > > a few, my teacher saw the road ahead for me, and that was not > > > > > > koans. Either, "no need", or "no aptitude". > > > > > > > > > > > > From my point of view, after a point, it was: > > > > > > > > > > > > "No need for gumdrops along the way". > > > > > > > > > > > > Yet, all Hail! for folks who go on this way longer that I did. > > > > > > > > > > > > I took my Doctor's prescription and switched modalities. > > > > > > > > > > > > Hail! > > > > > > > > > > > > I'm lucky to have had such a teacher. May you be lucky in this way, > > > > > > in some life. > > > > > > > > > > > > --Joe > > > > > > > > > > > > > Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Joe, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The point of my reply to your post both of which you obsessively > > > > > > > snipped is this > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Your post went against even the view of koans you are supposed to > > > > > > > believe in as an orthodox zennist. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You and Bill claim that koans have no solution but are to be > > > > > > > discarded in a satori. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But instead your post claimed that you not only understood the > > > > > > > sound of one hand but could produce it yourself. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thus you don't even understand the naive view of koans Bill > > > > > > > does... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You are not supposed to take the koan to heart as if it actually > > > > > > > expressed something but to discard it... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Even Bill knows that... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
