Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!axiom!adelie!mirror!rayssd!dpw
From: dpw@rayssd.UUCP (Darryl P. Wagoner)
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc
Subject: Re: Re: first *real* message in talk.philosophy.misc
Message-ID: <152@rayssd.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 15-Sep-86 13:27:01 EDT
Article-I.D.: rayssd.152
Posted: Mon Sep 15 13:27:01 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 16-Sep-86 05:33:36 EDT
References: <2526@cbosgd.UUCP> <4069@reed.UUCP> <4071@reed.UUCP> <611@micomvax.UUCP>
Sender: dpw@rayssd.UUCP (Darryl P. Wagoner @ Raytheon Co., Portsmouth RI)
Organization: Raytheon Co., Portsmouth RI
Lines: 23

> 
> In answer to your proposal, I'll suggest leaving Zen Buddhism out of
> the discussion.  I recently picked up a book about the subject, and
> in browsing through it before reading it I came to the last page where
> it was admitted "There is nothing in it" (i.e. Zen Buddhism).  It's
> amazing that a religion/philosophy survives which candidly admits
> its own uselessness.
> 

It sounds like to me that this paragraph is a clever way of starting
a discussion about Zen Buddhism.  At one point in time I called myself
a Zen Buddhist and some times I still do (Depending on the company I
am with).  I feed that "There is nothing in it" has been taken out
of context.  Of course to define Zen is to define it wrong.  Because
of this, I think to "leave out Zen because some book said that 'There
is nothing in it'" is kinda oneside.
-- 
	Darryl Wagoner
	Raytheon Co.; Portsmouth RI; (401)-847-8000 x4089

best path             {allegra|gatech|mirror|raybed2}  ---------\
next best             {linus|ihnp4|pyrbos} ---------------------->!rayssd!dpw
if all else fails     {brunix|cci632} -------------------------/