On Mon, 01 Aug 2011 08:53:46 -0400, "Ryan Hackel" <deeplogic@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >Since we're on the subject of the Spock Rule, I have a question from a >recent session that I've been meaning to bring up. >The rule was "A koan has the Buddha Nature if the first letter of each >color in a stack of pyramids, read from top to bottom, spells out a >legit Scrabble-acceptable word." For example, a stack of pyramids with >a "B"lue on top of an "O"range on top of a "G"reen spells "BOG" and thus >has the Buddha Nature, while a stack of Red-Purple-Yellow spells 'RPY" >and lacks the Buddha Nature. >Our cunning master argued that the BH was a function of the pyramids >alone, independent of other things, and met the Spock Rule. I >countered, saying that it falsely assumed that Spock can spell in the >English language. (We also argued about whether purple also counted as >violet.) >Bottom Line: Does a rule that involves spelling or language violate the >Spock Rule? I hold that it does, because the language that the colors of the pyramids are named in is not inherent to the pyramids, their relationship to each other, or to the surface. You and I speak English, but what if Spock were to transport that koan to a table in (say) Helsinki, where the colors are named in Finnish? Given that Finns play Scrabble in their own language, does the koan still have the Buddha-nature?