If you meet the Buddha, kill him.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by RyanWind

Well he said, "I am emotion" and I remembered I already debated him about that months ago and got nowhere. I think there is a language problem. I can break the post down:

In my current mind ...I am emotion , self is emotion ...

In English, emotions refer to feelings, which are different from logic and reasoning. Typically, if somebody is emotions, it means they are pretty much out of control. Their logic and reasoning has been overridden/shut down by out of control emotional outbursts. It's like how alcohol can take over when a person is drunk. Anger is one emotion that can shut down all rational thinking when it is out of control. Really, being overwhelmed by emotions is an off and on thing. At some point a person's more calm state returns and like an alcoholic that is then faced with what crazy things they did while drunk, the person who "lost it" emotionally is then faced with the stuff they did while totally under the control of their emotions... road rage is an example or fighting.

I exist as long as I am emotion and I am constantly travelling in a natural process into the original state free of all emotion .......

So what does this mean? What does saying "I am emotion" mean? Doesn't really apply in English. He is defining the word emotion in some unusual way. Perhaps he could take out the word emotion and use something like false self or thought. Like I am thought.... seeking a state transcendent to thought.

this process is Buddhism and the original state of nothingness is Buddha ......so if one reach that state into Buddha there will no longer attached with any emotion...no longer is emotion..no longer " a self".

So this could be re-written as:

The process of transcending thought and the memory based false self is Buddhism. This state of "nothingness" is what Buddha achieved and taught. If a person reached that state that Buddha realized, there will no longer be attachment to thought or thoughts caused negative emotions.... no longer a thought based self.

I think 'self is emotion' refers to the fundamental self-reference involved with emotional reactivity, which is, in Buddhist philosophy, the aversions and desires at the nidus of suffering.

Emotional neutrality, or non-reactivity, characterises meditation. Of course emotions are felt just as they always are, but the difference is they are not avoided or resisted and hence pass along in their own good time. Becoming overwhelmed is not a emotional issue per-se, but a issue of reacting so intensely that one loses their balance and stability of mind. A person can feel deep emotions, and emotional storms, without further reacting to them and thereby becoming overwhelmed. Non-attachment really refers to the passing of feelings, experiences, without becoming highly reactive to them.

[row37]

Best to not over think this. The road in the saying is the path we are on. No one is actually looking for the Buddha on a road, as Sidharta has been dead for a long, long time. What we're talking about is our CONCEPTION of the buddha, what buddhism is, where the path leads, what enlightenment is, etc. Conceptions are not reality, so if we are stuck in conceptions (which is how nearly all of us spend our days and nights), then we cannot see or experience truth/reality/call it what you will.

This is just one person's interpretation. Ultimately it means different things to different people. It can also mean that we shouldn't get caught in the trap of spiritual pride and worship anything, including buddhahood. So if we feel those thoughts or feelings arise, kill them. This is allegedly an old Zen story, and it was addressed to specific individuals by a Zen master at a specific time for a specific purpose. Since the message of Zen is that we cannot wake up as long as we are attached to things, what it means today is of no real importance. It's just an old Zen saying, but I like a lot of these things for some reason.

At least this one makes more literal sense than koans, but if koans made sense they wouldn't be koans. When I first heard Josua's koan "Why did Bodhidharma come to China? The oak tree in the garden", I had absolutely no idea what that meant, which is as it should be, as Koans are not about empirical, logical thought. Finally this became brilliantly clear, I was excited, then it didn't mean too much. This is like Ishin's realization....." Before I had studied Zen for thirty years, I saw mountains as mountains, and waters as waters. When I arrived at a more intimate knowledge, I came to the point where I saw that mountains are not mountains, and waters are not waters. But now that I have got its very substance I am at rest. For it's just that I see mountains once again as mountains, and waters once again as waters". This is a cautionary tale of the danger of Zen sickness, or becoming obsessed with Zen (stinks of Zen) instead of simply seeing reality as it is. Nothing special, reality just as it is.

[Gem]

Originally Posted by row37

Best to not over think this.

Ok, don't

The road in the saying is the path we are on. No one is actually looking for the Buddha on a road, as Sidharta has been dead for a long, long time. What we're talking about is our CONCEPTION of the buddha, what buddhism is, where the path leads, what enlightenment is, etc. Conceptions are not reality, so if we are stuck in conceptions (which is how nearly all of us spend our days and nights), then we cannot see or experience truth/reality/call it what you will.

This is just one person's interpretation. Ultimately it means different things to different people. It can also mean that we shouldn't get caught in the trap of spiritual pride and worship anything, including buddhahood. So if we feel those thoughts or feelings arise, kill them. This is allegedly an old Zen story, and it was addressed to specific individuals by a Zen master at a specific time for a specific purpose. Since the message of Zen is that we cannot wake up as long as we are attached to things, what it means today is of no real importance. It's just an old Zen saying, but I like a lot of these things for some reason.

It's just a saying that took off, went viral, because it sounds kinda cool and some famous bloke dressed in robes happened to say it. If, for example I coined it in a Buddhist thread, people would call it cynical and snide, disrespectful of their religion ad so on.

At least this one makes more literal sense than koans, but if koans made sense they wouldn't be koans. When I first heard Josua's koan "Why did Bodhidharma come to China? The oak tree in the garden", I had absolutely no idea what that meant, which is as it should be, as Koans are not about empirical, logical thought. Finally this became brilliantly clear, I was excited, then it didn't mean too much. This is like Ishin's realization....." Before I had studied Zen for thirty years, I saw mountains as mountains, and waters as waters. When I arrived at a more intimate knowledge, I came to the point where I saw that mountains are not mountains, and waters are not waters. But now that I have got its very substance I am at rest. For it's just that I see mountains once again as mountains, and waters once again as waters". This is a cautionary tale of the danger of Zen sickness, or becoming obsessed with Zen (stinks of Zen) instead of simply seeing reality as it is. Nothing special, reality just as it is.

Well, it's a koan only because of who says it. If I said it it wouldn't be a koan.

[Jared.L]

I think it is about not worshiping your guru, but taking only valuable experience from them.

[Jyotir]

Hi Jared.L,

I think it is about not worshiping your guru, but taking only valuable experience from them.

Then again,
if they are authentic,
worshipping them means worshipping the Highest*,
which is the exact same thing as, "taking only valuable experience from them".

What is their valuable experience?
Full realisation of the Highest.



~ J


* The Highest by nature and definition, always includes within oneself - only within oneself, THAT hasn't been realized, which is why the conduit of the Guru - including worshipping or serving of the (realized) Highest within the Guru, is a significant expedient.