seeker242 wrote:/johnny\ wrote:
lol! you're totally right! there is zero point in trying too argue logic into any zen statements! it's a tradition that relies heavily on non logical statements and statements that are incorrectly worded (as far as logic and proper social interaction are concerned). and the idea is always that you should look at it from a different perspective that is totally different than the way you normally do. saying anything in zen makes no sense can so easily be argued it's amazing. i don't know what i was thinking. seriously, totally sarcasm free.
it is a little frustrating, but it is entirely true! every statement can mean what it should mean, or something TOTALLY different! "not relying on words or speech" taken literally does imply pantomime or telepathic instruction, so i certainly am correct in that sense. but taken in a "zen" way can mean whatever the heck you want it too mean, so i am totally wrong in that sense.
I pretty much agree with all of that ha!one point i want too make though is you said:seeker242 wrote:I don't think that it the case. It can be conveyed, but the issue is whether or not the other person understands the conveyance."if the other person doesn't understand, then they are not being taught anything.
I completely agree with that too! Which is precisely why Zen Masters say things like "Nothing that I can say can help you!" And then they encourage you to practice more to find this stuff out for yourself. Because if you don't find it out for yourself, then it's pretty much useless. If "the truth" is not "your truth", then you really have not found the truth to begin with. A teacher can say how to practice so that you can find the truth for yourself, but he can not make you see the ultimate truth. If he could, all you would have to do is read a book or listen to a dharma talk and get enlightenment without doing any actual practicing. But obviously that does not happen all too often.yes, a koan makes no sense at first but one can work up too understanding, but this working up too understanding is totally reliant upon having learned how to practice the koan, why too practice it, what zen is, etc., etc. and every single step of the way, including the speaking of the "oak tree in the garden" koan, involves words and speech.
The point is that a reflection of the moon in a pond, is not the same as the moon itself. The words are just the reflection of the moon, not the moon itself.really this is pointless semantics though. you really nailed it on the head with:seeker242 wrote:It is nonsensical, but only if you use conceptual thinking to try to understand it.seriously, this is a classic, unbeatable zen style argument-destroying statement. if you had stopped there i wouldn't have rambled on about conveyor belts and all the other nonsense lol! thanks for taking the time though
I agree Zen is totally nonsensical! It defies logic and reason, but that is the whole point to begin with. But considering that zen is a "non-dual tradition", this is not that inappropriate. IMO, Zen is really about the actual daily life practice, rather than philosophizing about stuff. My teacher says "We don't read books to get understanding, we read books to get motivation to practice!"
But if you don't agree, that is fine. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. But what it really comes down to is the actual, real life, day to day practicing. I think pretty much everyone would agree with that...maybe!
i agree! zen is so bare bones that it doesn't have much room for anything, let alone logic! it's one big spur, pushing you toward awakening. thanks for all your thoughts