Zen paradox - crossword puzzle clue

Zen Paradox - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On this side you can find all answers for the crossword clue Zen paradox.
Zen The Path Of Paradox Zen
Too low to display
Find answers for the crossword clue: Zen paradox. We have 1 answer for this clue.

Zen: The Path of Paradox

Too low to display
  • Review
  • TAG : Zen paradoxes - Crossword clues & answers - Global Clue
ADD TO CART
  • In the above we have seen how we come to experience the paradoxicality of a Zen dialogue and thus how a Zen puzzle or a Zen paradox comes into being from an dialogic exchange. Pragmatically speaking, Zen paradoxes are paradoxical to those who are not enlightened in Zen. Once a person has Enlightenment, the paradoxes are no longer paradoxical to him even though they remain the same in their linguistic appearance. It is noteworthy that these paradoxes are intended to induce or verify Enlightenment so that they will not appear to be paradoxical any more. In this sense Zen paradoxes are self-resolving, for the paradoxicality is intended as a force or power to transform a person from seeing or experiencing the paradoxicality into a person who will not see or experience such paradoxicality. From a logical point of view, the person involved must achieve a certain understanding of the paradoxes in the light of which the paradoxes lose their paradoxicality. But on the other hand, his understanding must be caused by the paradoxicality of paradoxes in the first place. To see how this is possible is to look into the logic of the formation and dissolution of the Zen paradoxes. It is to find explanation of the paradoxicality of the Zen paradoxes and their dissolution relative to certain understanding.

    One can note the influences Ollie Olsen has made on tracks 3, 5 & 11 ("Lysergide Induction", "Thanatos Awakening" and "Emerald", respectively). Apparently the collaboration between him and Law came as a result of Psy-Harmonics wanting a trancier (as in psy-trance) sound to the album; as opposed to the experimental, minimal/melodic style Law had used previously (check out the "Experiments In Emotion" album for a more accurate representation of the very beginnings of Zen Paradox.)

  • It is simple-minded to say that Zen paradoxes result from violation and negation of logic and reason , for this view will preclude one from giving a rational and logical explanation of the formation of Zen paradoxes and their self-dissolution. The correct way to understand the paradoxicality of Zen paradoxes with their self-dissolution in view, is to see how Zen language functions as well as how Zen methodology applies. In the light of what we have said about these, we might simply say that the language of the Zen paradoxes has a surface semantic structure which is not embedded in or correlated with any common-sensical ontological structure which is its framework of reference. This means that the language of the Zen paradoxes contradicts the background reference presuppositions of surface-level terms in ordinary usage and by doing so points to the singular absence of reference or that of reference framework for the language of the paradoxes. We are caught in a conflict and experience the paradoxicality of the paradoxes if we feel we have to look for the reference of the Zen question or the Zen statement in virtue of its surface semantic demand on the one hand and at the same time feel we have to abolish the surface semantic structure and reformulate it in light of some standard framework of reference on the other. But the crucial point about the paradoxicality of the Zen paradoxes is that the paradoxicality resulting from the lack of link between the semantic structure and the ontological structure of the Zen dialogue is intended to have the force to bring out a deeper meaningfulness for the Zen question or the Zen statement without changing or rejecting the surface form of the semantic structure of such a question or statement. In this sense the language of the Zen paradoxes can be regarded as a dialectical process for revealing a very deep ontological structure by means of or in virtue of the incongruity of the surface semantic structure of the paradoxes in reference to a standard framework of reference.

    The deep ontological structure thus revealed is a framework in which no reference to any category of things is made. It is a framework which does not admit any description of things according to a framework of specific categories or paradigms. For understanding this, we have to mention that this is where the Buddhistic doctrine of non-attachment comes into play. In the spirit of this doctrine, the semantic incongruity (the breakdown of the link between the semantic surface structure and the standard framework of reference) in a Zen paradox leads the mind of the hearer to a state where he realizes that he could not and should not attach any reference to the given semantic structure, and for that matter, to any semantic structure, and thus should directly look into an uncategorizable ontological structure of no specific reference which has been referred to as the ultimate reality of self-nature or mind. The paradoxicality of the Zen paradox therefore forces the mind of the hearer to acquire an ontological insight into the ultimate reality of things and this insight is acquired by foregoing all ontological commitments to all semantic structures or semantic categories of language. Clearly this insight is a generalization based on the abandonment of ontological commitment to a specific semantic structure in a given Zen paradox. Without this ontological generalization or jump one cannot be said to have reached Enlightenment or to have resolved the paradoxicality of the given Zen paradox. Because it is in virtue of this ontological generalization or jump that this particular semantic structure loses its claim on truth and meaning in comparison with other possible semantic structures and that the emptiness of reference for this ontological structure is justified by the emptiness of reference for the totality of ontological structures.

    . zen paradox - eternal brainwave .
    (1993 kk / restless 7 72811-2) cd
    01  00:02:33  01:16:07  opening
    02  01:18:40  07:11:60  say good bye to a dark place
    03  08:30:25  05:57:55  lysegide induction
    04  14:28:05  01:54:45  lambent interlude 1
    05  16:22:50  07:39:00  thanatos awakening
    06  24:01:50  03:46:18  fornicator
    07  27:47:68  06:14:22  vicious cycle
    08  34:02:15  02:25:28  biomechanical psychosis
    09  36:27:43  02:42:32  lambent interlude 2
    10  39:10:00  09:38:43  the light at the end ...?
    11  48:48:43  05:17:45  emerald
    12  54:06:13  07:24:35  floating without chemistry
    13  61:30:48  05:41:27  evening calm
    cd  67:10:00
    (= nova zembla nz001?)

    • . the sonic voyagers . [cd]
    • . zen paradox - eternal brainwave . [cd]
    • . zen paradox - from the shore of a distant land . [cd]
    • . zen paradox - into the abyss . [cd]
    • . zen paradox - numinosum . [cd]
    • . zen paradox - the voyage . [12"]
    remix
    • . .
    compilations
    • . document 01 trance/tribal . [cd]
    • . dream injection . [2xcd]
    • . dungeon of delight . [2xcd]
    • . future noir . [2xcd]
    • . natural born techno . [cd]
    • . natural born techno 2 . [cd]
    • . no.I . [cd]
    • . zeitgeist: a melbourne underground dance compilation . [cd]


    Zen Paradox is the principle name under which Melbourne native Steve Law records and performs electronic music. Primarily involved in the production of techno as well as other more experimental electronic sounds, Law is reputed to have been one of Melbourne's principle live electronic acts since 1994. His first musical efforts were released in cassette form for the Melbourne Ambient Music cassette release in the mid 1980s, then in the early '90s he was a member of industrial music group…

ON ZEN (CH'AN) LANGUAGE AND ZEN PARADOXES* | DeepDyve

. The question has been asked whether this generalization is indeed a generalization or an analogy to the narrow form. The objection to treating it as generalization is that the positive meaningfulness or the relevancy for a certain purpose, the intelligibility or the acceptability value is not a condition for the negative values of such and vice versa. The rebutal is why not? In a concrete example of Zen paradox it can be readily seen that P is meaningful and et al. in virtue of its lack of meaningfulness et al. and vice versa. This can be brought out even more distinctively if we reformulate (B) in