[Buddha-l] Pure Conversation vs koan

[Stuart Lachs]

---
On Wednesday, August 01, 2007, Richard Hayes wrote:
> It sounds "zenny" only because it sounds so traditionally Buddhist. I can
> easily imagine almost any Buddhist of any tradition interpreting "pure" in
> that way. Just out of curiosity, Curt, what did you expect "pure" to mean?
> (Or did you simply have no expectations at all, as would be true of, say, 
> an
> agnostic?)

Some years ago Mario Pocesci wrote a paper where in he translated a few 
paragraphs for Ma-tsu.
He then translated the same material only adding the sources of the 
material, which were from one sutra or another.
Essentially, Ma-tsu had taken lines from one sutra or another and ran them 
together with connecting phrases.
The first translation sounded "zenny." The second translation giving the 
sources of the lines as in " As the Lotus Sutra
says,....Then the Vimilakirti Sutra adds, ...." sounded very much like 
traditional Buddhism. It was interesting to see
how my own perception of the Ma-tsu material changed so by adding the 
sources.

Sorry, but I do not remember the title of Mario's paper.

Stuart