After reading u/linseed 's amazing OP I came up with/remembered this. Can anyone help me see the error in this interpretation? What am I missing?
Free translation/interpretation of GG case 1:
Q: "Dog Buddha nature possess, yes or no?"
A: " absence of possession"
SoE: In usual Zen manner, disregarding the question, attacking its foundation.
Or:
Q: Do I have it?
A: can't be had.
My verse:
Reduced to absurdity, In just one line of text. Reductio ad absurdum, from you i now expect.
In prose: I made a bold claim, how exactly am I wrong?
Participants will be awarded a virtual banana 🍌 Bananas are not transferable, and utterly meaningless, not depending on any quality except my subjective perception of usefulness to my understanding. If anyone gets something out of it as well, award a fruit of your own. Anyone can at any time. I'm neither teacher nor expert nor authority on anything. I'm here to learn. Who's with me?
Edit: mobile... formatting...
Submitted March 18, 2021 at 04:48PM by SoundOfEars https://ift.tt/3eRohX7
No comments:
Post a Comment