Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-11 Thread Fitness63 
Miami Fla. Have you ever lived here? 

  - Original Message - 
  From: Jody W. Ianuzzi 
  To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 9:02 AM
  Subject: Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self


  Hi Al,

  Yes, we live about 40 miles north of West Palm Beach. Where are you?

  JODY

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-10 Thread Bill Smart 
Dear Flower of the Lotus,

Thank you for your posting.  I always think getting everyone's 
defintions of terms is very important.

Although I've already given my defintion, I'll give it here again:

Sprituality is Maya.  It is a sub-division of Maya into a dualism of 
corporal (physical including energy) and spiritual.  We experience 
items in the corporal division through our physical sense of touch 
(which is usually further divided into touch, sight, hear, taste, and 
smell).  We experience spirutalism though our sense of 
imagination/intuition/soul/spirit.

Thanks for playing...Bill! 

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "Mayka" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Dear Donald and Bill
> 
> I love the dharma discussions you both have from time to time.  You 
both are good 
> stimulants leading one to deep thought. 
> 
>  I'm rather busy in the last months and have no much friee time 
left to dedicate in the list.  
> However, I appreciate the creation of interesting threads.
> 
> It would be iinteresting the way that everyone in the list 
understands spirituality.  It seems 
> that we have a different way of understanding this word.  In the 
process of good 
> communication I have found important to establish an affinity with 
the different ways we 
> all understand something.  
> 
> For instance, to me spirituality is the continuos evolution as 
human beings . Like our 
> bodies and minds were our private garden.  A beautiful garden that 
needs to be 
> continuosly look after, taking careA garden that is like this 
or like that because we 
> choose to be. The Master Piece of our life.  Making it real, truly 
alive, truthful, beatiful and 
> good. Taking good care of the weeds. With peace, perseverance and 
disciplining our 
> undisciplined minds.
> 
> Greetings to all
> MAYKA
> 





Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-10 Thread Jody W. Ianuzzi 
Hi Al,

Yes, we live about 40 miles north of West Palm Beach.  Where are you?

JODY



Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-10 Thread Mayka 
Dear Donald and Bill

I love the dharma discussions you both have from time to time.  You both are 
good 
stimulants leading one to deep thought. 

 I'm rather busy in the last months and have no much friee time left to 
dedicate in the list.  
However, I appreciate the creation of interesting threads.

It would be iinteresting the way that everyone in the list understands 
spirituality.  It seems 
that we have a different way of understanding this word.  In the process of 
good 
communication I have found important to establish an affinity with the 
different ways we 
all understand something.  

For instance, to me spirituality is the continuos evolution as human beings . 
Like our 
bodies and minds were our private garden.  A beautiful garden that needs to be 
continuosly look after, taking careA garden that is like this or like that 
because we 
choose to be. The Master Piece of our life.  Making it real, truly alive, 
truthful, beatiful and 
good. Taking good care of the weeds. With peace, perseverance and disciplining 
our 
undisciplined minds.

Greetings to all
MAYKA






--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Bill, What is your definition of spiritualism & spirituality in the 
> common day context? Thanks, JM
> 
> Bill Smart wrote:
> >
> > JMJM,
> >
> > Thanks for your clarifications.
> >
> > Much of your description of Chi below sounds like Buddha Nature as
> > that term is used in English translations of Japanese Zen Buddhist
> > writings. Are you aware of this, and is there indeed a difference or
> > are these two concepts the pretty much the same?
> >
> > Your comments about how people can use Chi are good examples of the
> > spritualism I reject and classify as maya, but they're entertaining
> > to think about.
> >
> > ...Bill!
> >
> > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com , 
> > Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > Good questions Bill,
> > >
> > > Chi is pronounced Cheee. In Japnese it is pronounced Ki, like
> > ReiKi.
> > > In new Chinese, it is spelled Qi, but pronounced the same.
> > >
> > > #2 is the detailed answer. Chi is the universal life force and
> > > therefore it is always one and connected. Yet, it could be
> > blocked. If
> > > it were blocked in our body, like teachings of QiGong or
> > acupuncture,
> > > then we become sick or injured. It if blocks our mind, we becomes
> > > crazy. These blockages are called karma in Buddhist terms and just
> > > blockage in traditional Chinese medicine.
> > >
> > > Because Chi is pure energy, not visible, not in any form. There
> > are
> > > occasion people take vantage of its illusiveness. So beware, as
> > pointed
> > > out by Edgar. Some martial artists can hurt you even without
> > touching
> > > you. Doctors can heal you also without touching you. I have had
> > both
> > > type of experiences many times.
> > >
> > > Sometimes, Chi is used as a descriptor. For instance, your Chi is
> > bad,
> > > meaning you don't look too well. This calligraphy has no chi,
> > meaning,
> > > it flows bad.
> > >
> > > Let me know if you have any other question.
> > > JM
> > >
> > > Bill Smart wrote:
> > > >
> > > > JMJM,
> > > >
> > > > You wrote:
> > > > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
> >   > 40yahoogroups.com>,
> > > > Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精æËÅ"Å
½
> > > >  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > The Chi of us can be connected to Chi of others only if we don't
> > > > use our
> > > > > mind, eyes, mouth, nose, etc.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think maybe some of our difficulty in communicating comes down
> > to
> > > > word usage.
> > > >
> > > > In the above sentence, do you mean:
> > > >
> > > > 1. I have my Chi and you have your Chi, but the Chi's are not now
> > > > connected, and the only way (or at least part of the way) I can
> > > > connect to your Chi is to not use my senses?
> > > >
> > > > 2. Or...I have Chi and you have Chi, and the Chi is the same Chi
> > so
> > > > by definition is already connected, but the only way I can sense
> > or
> > > > become aware of that connection is to not use my senses?
> > > >
> > > > 3. Or...something else?
> > > >
> > > > Also, is 'Chi' pronouced 'chee' (like the first part of 'cheese',
> > > > or 'key' with a hard 'c' pronounced like 'k'; and is it also
> > > > sometimes rendered into English as 'Qi'?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks...Bill!
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>





Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-10 Thread Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 
Chris, We are all equal under the sun.  We are all supported by the same 
universal life force.  Big or small, teacher or students are labels 
invented for us to survive in the impermanent formed world.  In the real 
world of universal life force, we are just bunch of invisible, nameless 
energy groupings.  :-)



cid830 wrote:
>
> >You may have missed the big fish but gotten some little ones.<
>
> {{{Nibble}}} {{{Nibble}}}
>
>  



Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-09 Thread Fitness63 
Yes, what about you?

  - Original Message - 
  From: Jody W. Ianuzzi 
  To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 11:37 PM
  Subject: Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self


  Hi Al,

  Do you live in Florida?

  JODY

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-09 Thread Jody W. Ianuzzi 
Hi Al,

Do you live in Florida?

JODY



Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-09 Thread Fitness63 
No, but the person who introduced me to zazen about 30 years ago had been a 
judo instructor in Cuba, and he was always talking about CHI and that zazen 
focused your CHI and made it stronger and that you would become more aware of 
your CHI through zazen. 

Al

  - Original Message - 
  From: Jody W. Ianuzzi 
  To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
  Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 11:44 AM
  Subject: Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self


  Fitness 63, do you practice judo? I have practiced judo for 37 years.

  JODY

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-09 Thread cid830 
>You may have missed the big fish but gotten some little ones.<


{{{Nibble}}}  {{{Nibble}}}




Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-09 Thread Jody W. Ianuzzi 
Fitness 63, do you practice judo?  I have practiced judo for 37 years.

JODY



Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-09 Thread Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 
On the contrary, Al.  What I meant was, if Bill admitted at the 
beginning that Zen is just a mental balancing exercise, then my point is 
made. Since his did not agree with my observation, yet his Inner Self 
did, he had convinced himself that there could be spirituality.  
Spirituality in my dictionary is Buddha Nature.  :-)

There is no one to convert to no where.  Just some are more delusional 
than others.  No offense.

Fitness63 wrote:
>
> From: Jue Miao Jing Ming - >Hi Bill, Your post was what I expected. If 
> you
> had mentioned in the first place that spirituality to you has no meaning,
> then I don't have to write that many posts. :-) JM
>
> You sound like a missionary who tries to convert a heathen and then says
> "What could I expect from a heathen" when the conversion fails!!
>
> That is funny when I see things in zen that are just like Christianity 
> and
> then it makes me wonder if the cynics are right.
>
> Then again, I learned something from this, so thanks for trying to 
> convert
> Bill. You may have missed the big fish but gotten some little ones.
>
>  



Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-08 Thread Fitness63 
From: Jue Miao Jing Ming - >Hi Bill, Your post was what I expected. If you 
had mentioned in the first place that spirituality to you has no meaning, 
then I don't have to write that many posts. :-) JM

You sound like a missionary who tries to convert a heathen and then says 
"What could I expect from a heathen" when the conversion fails!!

That is funny when I see things in zen that are just like Christianity and 
then it makes me wonder if the cynics are right.

Then again, I learned something from this, so thanks for trying to convert 
Bill. You may have missed the big fish but gotten some little ones. 




Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-08 Thread Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 
Hi Bill, Your post was what I expected.  If you had mentioned in the 
first place that spirituality to you has no meaning, then I don't have 
to write that many posts.  :-)  JM

Bill Smart wrote:
>
> JMJM,
>
> I am not the one who first brought up the subject of spirituality and
> used that term in these posts. That was you.
>
> It all started in you post 11750 on 04Sep when you posted: "I suspect
> that Zen is just a mental balancing excercise
> without spirituality." That generated a lot of posting activity from
> many people, including me lauding that assertion.
>
> You then started this particular thread in post 11814 on 07 Sep that
> has 'true spirituality' in the title. (That begs the question
> what 'false spirituality' is, but I didn't ask that of you.)
>
> To answer you present question, I beleive all spirituality is maya,
> so I really don't know how to define it any more detailed than that.
> All spirituality is an illusion - true spirituality, false
> sprituality, blue sprituality, bad sprituality, etc...
>
> ...Bill!
>
> --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com , 
> Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Bill, What is your definition of spiritualism & spirituality in the
> > common day context? Thanks, JM
> >
> > Bill Smart wrote:
> > >
> > > JMJM,
> > >
> > > Thanks for your clarifications.
> > >
> > > Much of your description of Chi below sounds like Buddha Nature as
> > > that term is used in English translations of Japanese Zen Buddhist
> > > writings. Are you aware of this, and is there indeed a difference
> or
> > > are these two concepts the pretty much the same?
> > >
> > > Your comments about how people can use Chi are good examples of
> the
> > > spritualism I reject and classify as maya, but they're
> entertaining
> > > to think about.
> > >
> > > ...Bill!
> > >
> > > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
>   40yahoogroups.com>,
> > > Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Good questions Bill,
> > > >
> > > > Chi is pronounced Cheee. In Japnese it is pronounced Ki, like
> > > ReiKi.
> > > > In new Chinese, it is spelled Qi, but pronounced the same.
> > > >
> > > > #2 is the detailed answer. Chi is the universal life force and
> > > > therefore it is always one and connected. Yet, it could be
> > > blocked. If
> > > > it were blocked in our body, like teachings of QiGong or
> > > acupuncture,
> > > > then we become sick or injured. It if blocks our mind, we
> becomes
> > > > crazy. These blockages are called karma in Buddhist terms and
> just
> > > > blockage in traditional Chinese medicine.
> > > >
> > > > Because Chi is pure energy, not visible, not in any form. There
> > > are
> > > > occasion people take vantage of its illusiveness. So beware, as
> > > pointed
> > > > out by Edgar. Some martial artists can hurt you even without
> > > touching
> > > > you. Doctors can heal you also without touching you. I have had
> > > both
> > > > type of experiences many times.
> > > >
> > > > Sometimes, Chi is used as a descriptor. For instance, your Chi
> is
> > > bad,
> > > > meaning you don't look too well. This calligraphy has no chi,
> > > meaning,
> > > > it flows bad.
> > > >
> > > > Let me know if you have any other question.
> > > > JM
> > > >
> > > > Bill Smart wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > JMJM,
> > > > >
> > > > > You wrote:
> > > > > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
> 
> > >   > > 40yahoogroups.com>,
> > > > > Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙
> ç²¾æËÅ"Ž
> > > > >  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The Chi of us can be connected to Chi of others only if we
> don't
> > > > > use our
> > > > > > mind, eyes, mouth, nose, etc.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I think maybe some of our difficulty in communicating comes
> down
> > > to
> > > > > word usage.
> > > > >
> > > > > In the above sentence, do you mean:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. I have my Chi and you have your Chi, but the Chi's are not
> now
> > > > > connected, and the only way (or at least part of the way) I
> can
> > > > > connect to your Chi is to not use my senses?
> > > > >
> > > > > 2. Or...I have Chi and you have Chi, and the Chi is the same
> Chi
> > > so
> > > > > by definition is already connected, but the only way I can
> sense
> > > or
> > > > > become aware of that connection is to not use my senses?
> > > > >
> > > > > 3. Or...something else?
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, is 'Chi' pronouced 'chee' (like the first part
> of 'cheese',
> > > > > or 'key' with a hard 'c' pronounced like 'k'; and is it also
> > > > > sometimes rendered into English as 'Qi'?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks...Bill!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>  



Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! T

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-08 Thread Bill Smart 
Al, I'm at Ox Herding Pictures stage 42...

Concepts like chi, karma, dharma, buddha nature and bovine bunching 
pictures are teaching tools - training wheels.  Use them if you want 
to, but don't get too ATTACHED to them.

Just sit...Bill!

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "Fitness63" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> From: Bill Smart>Your comments about how people can use Chi are 
good 
> examples of the spritualism I reject and classify as maya, but 
they're 
> entertaining to think about.>
> 
> You must be aware of your CHI if you meditate regularly.
> 
> This was interesting, from The Anelects of Confucius:
> 
> The [morally] noble man guards himself against three things. When 
he is 
> young, his xue-qi has not yet stabilized, so he guards himself 
against 
> sexual passion. When he reaches his prime, his xue-qi is not easily 
subdued, 
> so he guards himself against combativeness. When he reaches old 
age, his 
> xue-qi is already depleted, so he guards himself against 
acquisitiveness.
> 
> What stage are you at Bill, if you no longer feel your CHI?
> 
> If you want, I will let you feel my CHI.
> 
> Al The Pal
>





Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-08 Thread Bill Smart 
JMJM,

I am not the one who first brought up the subject of spirituality and 
used that term in these posts.  That was you.

It all started in you post 11750 on 04Sep when you posted: "I suspect 
that Zen is just a mental balancing excercise
without spirituality."  That generated a lot of posting activity from 
many people, including me lauding that assertion.

You then started this particular thread in post 11814 on 07 Sep that 
has 'true spirituality' in the title.  (That begs the question 
what 'false spirituality' is, but I didn't ask that of you.)

To answer you present question, I beleive all spirituality is maya, 
so I really don't know how to define it any more detailed than that.  
All spirituality is an illusion - true spirituality, false 
sprituality, blue sprituality, bad sprituality, etc...

...Bill!

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Bill, What is your definition of spiritualism & spirituality in the 
> common day context? Thanks, JM
> 
> Bill Smart wrote:
> >
> > JMJM,
> >
> > Thanks for your clarifications.
> >
> > Much of your description of Chi below sounds like Buddha Nature as
> > that term is used in English translations of Japanese Zen Buddhist
> > writings. Are you aware of this, and is there indeed a difference 
or
> > are these two concepts the pretty much the same?
> >
> > Your comments about how people can use Chi are good examples of 
the
> > spritualism I reject and classify as maya, but they're 
entertaining
> > to think about.
> >
> > ...Bill!
> >
> > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com , 
> > Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > Good questions Bill,
> > >
> > > Chi is pronounced Cheee. In Japnese it is pronounced Ki, like
> > ReiKi.
> > > In new Chinese, it is spelled Qi, but pronounced the same.
> > >
> > > #2 is the detailed answer. Chi is the universal life force and
> > > therefore it is always one and connected. Yet, it could be
> > blocked. If
> > > it were blocked in our body, like teachings of QiGong or
> > acupuncture,
> > > then we become sick or injured. It if blocks our mind, we 
becomes
> > > crazy. These blockages are called karma in Buddhist terms and 
just
> > > blockage in traditional Chinese medicine.
> > >
> > > Because Chi is pure energy, not visible, not in any form. There
> > are
> > > occasion people take vantage of its illusiveness. So beware, as
> > pointed
> > > out by Edgar. Some martial artists can hurt you even without
> > touching
> > > you. Doctors can heal you also without touching you. I have had
> > both
> > > type of experiences many times.
> > >
> > > Sometimes, Chi is used as a descriptor. For instance, your Chi 
is
> > bad,
> > > meaning you don't look too well. This calligraphy has no chi,
> > meaning,
> > > it flows bad.
> > >
> > > Let me know if you have any other question.
> > > JM
> > >
> > > Bill Smart wrote:
> > > >
> > > > JMJM,
> > > >
> > > > You wrote:
> > > > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
> >   > 40yahoogroups.com>,
> > > > Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙
ç²¾æËÅ"Ž
> > > >  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > The Chi of us can be connected to Chi of others only if we 
don't
> > > > use our
> > > > > mind, eyes, mouth, nose, etc.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think maybe some of our difficulty in communicating comes 
down
> > to
> > > > word usage.
> > > >
> > > > In the above sentence, do you mean:
> > > >
> > > > 1. I have my Chi and you have your Chi, but the Chi's are not 
now
> > > > connected, and the only way (or at least part of the way) I 
can
> > > > connect to your Chi is to not use my senses?
> > > >
> > > > 2. Or...I have Chi and you have Chi, and the Chi is the same 
Chi
> > so
> > > > by definition is already connected, but the only way I can 
sense
> > or
> > > > become aware of that connection is to not use my senses?
> > > >
> > > > 3. Or...something else?
> > > >
> > > > Also, is 'Chi' pronouced 'chee' (like the first part 
of 'cheese',
> > > > or 'key' with a hard 'c' pronounced like 'k'; and is it also
> > > > sometimes rendered into English as 'Qi'?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks...Bill!
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>





Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-08 Thread Fitness63 
From: Bill Smart>Your comments about how people can use Chi are good 
examples of the spritualism I reject and classify as maya, but they're 
entertaining to think about.>

You must be aware of your CHI if you meditate regularly.

This was interesting, from The Anelects of Confucius:

The [morally] noble man guards himself against three things. When he is 
young, his xue-qi has not yet stabilized, so he guards himself against 
sexual passion. When he reaches his prime, his xue-qi is not easily subdued, 
so he guards himself against combativeness. When he reaches old age, his 
xue-qi is already depleted, so he guards himself against acquisitiveness.

What stage are you at Bill, if you no longer feel your CHI?

If you want, I will let you feel my CHI.

Al The Pal




Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-08 Thread Fitness63 
From: Bill Smart> I think the major difference between Chan and zen is 
spiritualism, which inlcudes things like Chi.>

Every class that I ever took on zazen said that the focus of the mind in the 
navel is because that is where the CHI is.

The hands together with the triangle over your CHI to focus on the CHI.

The Judo teacher that I knew talked about CHI all the time, I know that 
there are Japanese zen words that deal with CHI, I think it is SHI, but it 
is the same thing.






Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-08 Thread Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 
Bill, What is your definition of spiritualism & spirituality in the 
common day context? Thanks, JM

Bill Smart wrote:
>
> JMJM,
>
> Thanks for your clarifications.
>
> Much of your description of Chi below sounds like Buddha Nature as
> that term is used in English translations of Japanese Zen Buddhist
> writings. Are you aware of this, and is there indeed a difference or
> are these two concepts the pretty much the same?
>
> Your comments about how people can use Chi are good examples of the
> spritualism I reject and classify as maya, but they're entertaining
> to think about.
>
> ...Bill!
>
> --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com , 
> Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Good questions Bill,
> >
> > Chi is pronounced Cheee. In Japnese it is pronounced Ki, like
> ReiKi.
> > In new Chinese, it is spelled Qi, but pronounced the same.
> >
> > #2 is the detailed answer. Chi is the universal life force and
> > therefore it is always one and connected. Yet, it could be
> blocked. If
> > it were blocked in our body, like teachings of QiGong or
> acupuncture,
> > then we become sick or injured. It if blocks our mind, we becomes
> > crazy. These blockages are called karma in Buddhist terms and just
> > blockage in traditional Chinese medicine.
> >
> > Because Chi is pure energy, not visible, not in any form. There
> are
> > occasion people take vantage of its illusiveness. So beware, as
> pointed
> > out by Edgar. Some martial artists can hurt you even without
> touching
> > you. Doctors can heal you also without touching you. I have had
> both
> > type of experiences many times.
> >
> > Sometimes, Chi is used as a descriptor. For instance, your Chi is
> bad,
> > meaning you don't look too well. This calligraphy has no chi,
> meaning,
> > it flows bad.
> >
> > Let me know if you have any other question.
> > JM
> >
> > Bill Smart wrote:
> > >
> > > JMJM,
> > >
> > > You wrote:
> > > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
>   40yahoogroups.com>,
> > > Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明
> > >  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The Chi of us can be connected to Chi of others only if we don't
> > > use our
> > > > mind, eyes, mouth, nose, etc.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I think maybe some of our difficulty in communicating comes down
> to
> > > word usage.
> > >
> > > In the above sentence, do you mean:
> > >
> > > 1. I have my Chi and you have your Chi, but the Chi's are not now
> > > connected, and the only way (or at least part of the way) I can
> > > connect to your Chi is to not use my senses?
> > >
> > > 2. Or...I have Chi and you have Chi, and the Chi is the same Chi
> so
> > > by definition is already connected, but the only way I can sense
> or
> > > become aware of that connection is to not use my senses?
> > >
> > > 3. Or...something else?
> > >
> > > Also, is 'Chi' pronouced 'chee' (like the first part of 'cheese',
> > > or 'key' with a hard 'c' pronounced like 'k'; and is it also
> > > sometimes rendered into English as 'Qi'?
> > >
> > > Thanks...Bill!
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>  



Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-08 Thread Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 










Great.  I think we finally understand each other.  Yes, beyond "just
this" into impermanent form of things, we need to focus deeper into the
essence of things - chi - which connects everything together.  Do give
it a try.  JM 

Bill Smart wrote:

  
  JMJM,
  
I'm not arguing with you. I don't really care what names we use such 
as Chan/zen, Chi/JUST THIS, po-TAY-to/po-TAH-to. I only care that
when 
we use these terms we know what they mean, or at leat know whether 
we're referring to the same thing or not.
  
>From you postings I don't think JMJM's Chan is the same thing as 
Bill!'s Zen Buddhism, and especially not Bill!'s zen. I also don't 
think JMJM's Chi is the same as Bill!'s JUST THIS!
  
>From what I've gleaned so far I think the major difference (and
maybe 
the only difference) between Chan and Zen Buddhism is Chan's focus on 
Chi. I think the major difference between Chan and zen is 
spiritualism, which inlcudes things like Chi.
  
I do enjoy our posting exchanges, even when I'm disapointed.
  
I do like your title: JMJM, Roshi - American Zen Association.
  
Do you like mine? Bill! 
  
  
  
 

__._,_.___









Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are reading! Talk about it today!








   







  
  Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional 
  Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) 
  Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured 
   
Visit Your Group 
   |
  
Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use
   |
  
   Unsubscribe 
   
 

  




__,_._,___

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-08 Thread Bill Smart 
JMJM,

Thanks for your clarifications.

Much of your description of Chi below sounds like Buddha Nature as 
that term is used in English translations of Japanese Zen Buddhist 
writings.  Are you aware of this, and is there indeed a difference or 
are these two concepts the pretty much the same?

Your comments about how people can use Chi are good examples of the 
spritualism I reject and classify as maya, but they're entertaining 
to think about.

...Bill!

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Good questions Bill,
> 
> Chi is pronounced Cheee.  In Japnese it is pronounced Ki, like 
ReiKi.  
> In new Chinese, it is spelled Qi, but pronounced the same.
> 
> #2 is the detailed answer.  Chi is the universal life force and 
> therefore it is always one and connected.  Yet, it could be 
blocked.  If 
> it were blocked in our body, like teachings of QiGong or 
acupuncture, 
> then we become sick or injured.  It if blocks our mind, we becomes 
> crazy.  These blockages are called karma in Buddhist terms and just 
> blockage in traditional Chinese medicine.
> 
> Because Chi is pure energy, not visible, not in any form.  There 
are 
> occasion people take vantage of its illusiveness.  So beware, as 
pointed 
> out by Edgar.  Some martial artists can hurt you even without 
touching 
> you. Doctors can heal you also without touching you.  I have had 
both 
> type of experiences many times.
> 
> Sometimes, Chi is used as a descriptor.  For instance, your Chi is 
bad, 
> meaning you don't look too well.  This calligraphy has no chi, 
meaning, 
> it flows bad. 
> 
> Let me know if you have any other question.
> JM
> 
> Bill Smart wrote:
> >
> > JMJM,
> >
> > You wrote:
> > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com , 
> > Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > The Chi of us can be connected to Chi of others only if we don't
> > use our
> > > mind, eyes, mouth, nose, etc.
> > >
> >
> > I think maybe some of our difficulty in communicating comes down 
to
> > word usage.
> >
> > In the above sentence, do you mean:
> >
> > 1. I have my Chi and you have your Chi, but the Chi's are not now
> > connected, and the only way (or at least part of the way) I can
> > connect to your Chi is to not use my senses?
> >
> > 2. Or...I have Chi and you have Chi, and the Chi is the same Chi 
so
> > by definition is already connected, but the only way I can sense 
or
> > become aware of that connection is to not use my senses?
> >
> > 3. Or...something else?
> >
> > Also, is 'Chi' pronouced 'chee' (like the first part of 'cheese',
> > or 'key' with a hard 'c' pronounced like 'k'; and is it also
> > sometimes rendered into English as 'Qi'?
> >
> > Thanks...Bill!
> >
> >
>





Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-08 Thread Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 
Good questions Bill,

Chi is pronounced Cheee.  In Japnese it is pronounced Ki, like ReiKi.  
In new Chinese, it is spelled Qi, but pronounced the same.

#2 is the detailed answer.  Chi is the universal life force and 
therefore it is always one and connected.  Yet, it could be blocked.  If 
it were blocked in our body, like teachings of QiGong or acupuncture, 
then we become sick or injured.  It if blocks our mind, we becomes 
crazy.  These blockages are called karma in Buddhist terms and just 
blockage in traditional Chinese medicine.

Because Chi is pure energy, not visible, not in any form.  There are 
occasion people take vantage of its illusiveness.  So beware, as pointed 
out by Edgar.  Some martial artists can hurt you even without touching 
you. Doctors can heal you also without touching you.  I have had both 
type of experiences many times.

Sometimes, Chi is used as a descriptor.  For instance, your Chi is bad, 
meaning you don't look too well.  This calligraphy has no chi, meaning, 
it flows bad. 

Let me know if you have any other question.
JM

Bill Smart wrote:
>
> JMJM,
>
> You wrote:
> --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com , 
> Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > The Chi of us can be connected to Chi of others only if we don't
> use our
> > mind, eyes, mouth, nose, etc.
> >
>
> I think maybe some of our difficulty in communicating comes down to
> word usage.
>
> In the above sentence, do you mean:
>
> 1. I have my Chi and you have your Chi, but the Chi's are not now
> connected, and the only way (or at least part of the way) I can
> connect to your Chi is to not use my senses?
>
> 2. Or...I have Chi and you have Chi, and the Chi is the same Chi so
> by definition is already connected, but the only way I can sense or
> become aware of that connection is to not use my senses?
>
> 3. Or...something else?
>
> Also, is 'Chi' pronouced 'chee' (like the first part of 'cheese',
> or 'key' with a hard 'c' pronounced like 'k'; and is it also
> sometimes rendered into English as 'Qi'?
>
> Thanks...Bill!
>
>  



Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-08 Thread Bill Smart 
JMJM,

I'm not arguing with you.  I don't really care what names we use such 
as Chan/zen, Chi/JUST THIS, po-TAY-to/po-TAH-to.  I only care that when 
we use these terms we know what they mean, or at leat know whether 
we're referring to the same thing or not.

>From you postings I don't think JMJM's Chan is the same thing as 
Bill!'s Zen Buddhism, and especially not Bill!'s zen.  I also don't 
think JMJM's Chi is the same as Bill!'s JUST THIS!

>From what I've gleaned so far I think the major difference (and maybe 
the only difference) between Chan and Zen Buddhism is Chan's focus on 
Chi.  I think the major difference between Chan and zen is 
spiritualism, which inlcudes things like Chi.

I do enjoy our posting exchanges, even when I'm disapointed.

I do like your title: JMJM, Roshi - American Zen Association.

Do you like mine?  Bill!  




Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-08 Thread Bill Smart 
JMJM,

You wrote:
--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The Chi of us can be connected to Chi of others only if we don't 
use our 
> mind, eyes, mouth, nose, etc.  
> 

I think maybe some of our difficulty in communicating comes down to 
word usage.

In the above sentence, do you mean:

1.  I have my Chi and you have your Chi, but the Chi's are not now 
connected, and the only way (or at least part of the way) I can 
connect to your Chi is to not use my senses?

2.  Or...I have Chi and you have Chi, and the Chi is the same Chi so 
by definition is already connected, but the only way I can sense or 
become aware of that connection is to not use my senses?

3.  Or...something else?

Also, is 'Chi' pronouced 'chee' (like the first part of 'cheese', 
or 'key' with a hard 'c' pronounced like 'k'; and is it also 
sometimes rendered into English as 'Qi'?

Thanks...Bill!




Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-08 Thread Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 
Well Edgar,

You are correct scientifically speaking.  Since Bill is in another 
domain, I was trying to utilizing HIS term to make him aware of my points.

Everything is Chi.  But the chi of the Form is impermanent and Chi of 
the essence is universal.  (This could be confusing to Bill.)

Indeed it is not simple, if we try to describe it.  Yet it is instant, 
if we just sync to it at every bite and every look.

Enjoy,
JM

Edgar Owen wrote:
>
> Hi JM,
>
>
> I don't think it is quite that simple. Watching a tree is watching its 
> form, yes, but as you say in your last paragraph the chi of all 
> 'things' does interact so the chi of all things is continually 
> interacting. Even looking at something requires some interaction of 
> chi since vision and the senses are also manifestations of chi. 
> However when one eats an apple one takes in the 'entire' chi of the 
> apple (not really accurate terminology since actually all chi is a 
> single interacting flow and the 'thing' boundaries are cognitive 
> constructs and observer dependent) and incorporates a part of it into 
> one's being temporarily. Chi is always flowing in and out, thus 'empty 
> yourself and you will be filled'.
>
> In other words one has to remember that even form is ripples of chi, 
> so there is nothing, not even looking, that is not an aspect or form 
> of chi. The trick is not to become too distracted by the forms 
> themselves and think they are the real things, rather than the chi 
> itself which is what takes on the forms.
>
> PS: Thanks for the kind words re my posts of yesterday!
>
> Edgar
>
>
>
> On Sep 8, 2008, at 10:41 AM, Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 wrote:
>
>> Excellent question Bill,
>>
>> Watching a tree is watching its form. Eating an apple is eating its 
>> form. Did not Heart Sutra asks us to quiet all Skandha, all sensories.
>>
>> The Chi of us can be connected to Chi of others only if we don't use our 
>> mind, eyes, mouth, nose, etc. True form to true form.
>>
>> We are now onto something. Let me know your response.
>> JM
>>
>> Bill Smart wrote:
>> >
>> > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
>>  , 
>> > Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明
>> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > >
>> > > ...all Zen is from Chan.
>> >
>> > >From what I've heard from you of Chan, I'd say zen is bare bones Chan,
>> > stripped of all of what seems to me to be it's superfulous and self-
>> > indulgent superstitions.
>> >
>> > > Whatever the incident, whether watching a tree or eating an apple,
>> > > always try to connect to the Chi of it...
>> >
>> > When watching a tree, just watch. When eating an apple, just eat.
>> >
>> > JMJM, you're getting me confused...do YOU have Chi and also the APPLE
>> > has Chi, or is this all the same Chi? And if it is all the same Chi,
>> > why do you have to TRY to connect with it? Aren't you ALREADY
>> > connected with it?
>> >
>> > ...Bill!
>> >
>> > 
>>
>
>  



Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-08 Thread Edgar Owen 

Hi JM,

I don't think it is quite that simple. Watching a tree is watching  
its form, yes, but as you say in your last paragraph the chi of all  
'things' does interact so the chi of all things is continually  
interacting. Even looking at something requires some interaction of  
chi since vision and the senses are also manifestations of chi.  
However when one eats an apple one takes in the 'entire' chi of the  
apple (not really accurate terminology since actually all chi is a  
single interacting flow and the 'thing' boundaries are cognitive  
constructs and observer dependent) and incorporates a part of it into  
one's being temporarily. Chi is always flowing in and out, thus  
'empty yourself and you will be filled'.


In other words one has to remember that even form is ripples of chi,  
so there is nothing, not even looking, that is not an aspect or form  
of chi. The trick is not to become too distracted by the forms  
themselves and think they are the real things, rather than the chi  
itself which is what takes on the forms.


PS: Thanks for the kind words re my posts of yesterday!

Edgar



On Sep 8, 2008, at 10:41 AM, Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 wrote:


Excellent question Bill,

Watching a tree is watching its form. Eating an apple is eating its
form. Did not Heart Sutra asks us to quiet all Skandha, all sensories.

The Chi of us can be connected to Chi of others only if we don't  
use our

mind, eyes, mouth, nose, etc. True form to true form.

We are now onto something. Let me know your response.
JM

Bill Smart wrote:
>
> --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com ,

> Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > ...all Zen is from Chan.
>
> >From what I've heard from you of Chan, I'd say zen is bare bones  
Chan,

> stripped of all of what seems to me to be it's superfulous and self-
> indulgent superstitions.
>
> > Whatever the incident, whether watching a tree or eating an apple,
> > always try to connect to the Chi of it...
>
> When watching a tree, just watch. When eating an apple, just eat.
>
> JMJM, you're getting me confused...do YOU have Chi and also the  
APPLE

> has Chi, or is this all the same Chi? And if it is all the same Chi,
> why do you have to TRY to connect with it? Aren't you ALREADY
> connected with it?
>
> ...Bill!
>
>

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-08 Thread Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 










Hi Bill,  Still thinking.  Superstition is a label, just like maya is a
label.  Chan is one.  One is everything.  All phenomenon is always
there. Any labeling is the act of human mind. Don't pick or choose.(Xin
Xin Ming)  No need to have an opinion.

I am not arguing with you.  Just point a way, a way benefited me
tremendously.  It just happened to be called Chan.  I can call it Zen. 
Then we may really have an argument based who said what.  You don't
have to try Chan.  Each of us are bound by our own karma shaping our
own journey.  All words are relative to the original moment, like an
incident.  When that moment passes, it is no longer relevant.

If you recalled, "Buddha never said a single word."  Let go of
everything you know of Zen, meaning purify your mind.

Detach from all forms and formlessness.  In Sync with Buddha Heart. 
Chan is that simple.  

Or staying in our Chi and not our senses 24/7. 
JM
Roshi - American Zen Association - you like this title?  :-)


Bill Smart wrote:

  
  --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED]ps.com,
Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]..> wrote:
>
> ...all Zen is from Chan. 
  
>From what I've heard from you of Chan, I'd say zen is bare bones
Chan, 
stripped of all of what seems to me to be it's superfulous and self-
indulgent superstitions.
  
> Whatever the incident, whether watching a tree or eating an apple,
  
> always try to connect to the Chi of it...
  
When watching a tree, just watch. When eating an apple, just eat. 
  
JMJM, you're getting me confused...do YOU have Chi and also the APPLE 
has Chi, or is this all the same Chi? And if it is all the same Chi, 
why do you have to TRY to connect with it? Aren't you ALREADY 
connected with it?
  
...Bill!
  
  
  
 

__._,_.___









Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are reading! Talk about it today!








   







  
  Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional 
  Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required) 
  Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured 
   
Visit Your Group 
   |
  
Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use
   |
  
   Unsubscribe 
   
 

  




__,_._,___

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-08 Thread Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 
Excellent question Bill,

Watching a tree is watching its form.  Eating an apple is eating its 
form.  Did not Heart Sutra asks us to quiet all Skandha, all sensories.

The Chi of us can be connected to Chi of others only if we don't use our 
mind, eyes, mouth, nose, etc.  True form to true form.

We are now onto something.  Let me know your response.
JM

Bill Smart wrote:
>
> --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com , 
> Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > ...all Zen is from Chan.
>
> >From what I've heard from you of Chan, I'd say zen is bare bones Chan,
> stripped of all of what seems to me to be it's superfulous and self-
> indulgent superstitions.
>
> > Whatever the incident, whether watching a tree or eating an apple,
> > always try to connect to the Chi of it...
>
> When watching a tree, just watch. When eating an apple, just eat.
>
> JMJM, you're getting me confused...do YOU have Chi and also the APPLE
> has Chi, or is this all the same Chi? And if it is all the same Chi,
> why do you have to TRY to connect with it? Aren't you ALREADY
> connected with it?
>
> ...Bill!
>
>  



Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-08 Thread Bill Smart 
--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ...all Zen is from Chan. 

>From what I've heard from you of Chan, I'd say zen is bare bones Chan, 
stripped of all of what seems to me to be it's superfulous and self-
indulgent superstitions.
 
> Whatever the incident, whether watching a tree or eating an apple, 
> always try to connect to the Chi of it...

When watching a tree, just watch.  When eating an apple, just eat.  

JMJM, you're getting me confused...do YOU have Chi and also the APPLE 
has Chi, or is this all the same Chi?  And if it is all the same Chi, 
why do you have to TRY to connect with it?  Aren't you ALREADY 
connected with it?

...Bill!




Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-07 Thread Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 
Well Al, It is not important how Zen is the same or not to Chan, because 
these are mental comparisons in the realm of forms, form of words, 
though in Chinese and Japanese writing they are identical, because after 
all Zen is from Chan. 

Whatever the incident, whether watching a tree or eating an apple, 
always try to connect to the Chi of it, instead of describing, 
comparing, labeling with one's mind.   Whatever we do, instead of being 
affected by the impermanent form, try to connect to the permanent but 
always changing Chi.  That is all.

If you discover that you are confused, then perhaps you are thinking.  
Drop the thinking, trust your heart, the original Divine.

The world is One, meaning complete and whole and always providing.  
There is no need to be defeated by labels, they are human creations.
JM

Fitness63 wrote:
>
> From: Jue Miao Jing Ming - The question is what is reality. According to
> Diamond Sutra, reality is Buddha, or Final Form. Then only after we 
> surpass
> Form and Formlessness, then we see Buddha. Final form is the universal
> support of all forms, which is the life energy of everything. How can 
> we be
> connected with that energy? Scientists would suggest that we sync with it
> through our own energy. How else? Both posts by Edgar, the one about "our
> purpose in life and Chi" are both right on.>
>
> It is seeming to me that Chan and Zen are not so far apart then, though I
> think that the insistence on ignoring karma, dharma, and chi are more 
> about
> style than substance.
>
> These zen boys and girls want to be different and that is all about ego,
> IMHO.
>
> Ego is very prevalent among almost every group that I participate in,
> especially religious groups.
>
>  



Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-07 Thread Fitness63 
From: Jue Miao Jing Ming - The question is what is reality. According to 
Diamond Sutra, reality is Buddha, or Final Form. Then only after we surpass 
Form and Formlessness, then we see Buddha. Final form is the universal 
support of all forms, which is the life energy of everything. How can we be 
connected with that energy? Scientists would suggest that we sync with it 
through our own energy. How else? Both posts by Edgar, the one about "our 
purpose in life and Chi" are both right on.>

It is seeming to me that Chan and Zen are not so far apart then, though I 
think that the insistence on ignoring karma, dharma, and chi are more about 
style than substance.

These zen boys and girls want to be different and that is all about ego, 
IMHO.

Ego is very prevalent among almost every group that I participate in, 
especially religious groups. 




Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-07 Thread Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 
Hi Al,

The question is what is reality.  According to Diamond Sutra, reality is 
Buddha, or Final Form.  Then only after we surpass Form and 
Formlessness, then we see Buddha.  Final form is the universal support 
of all forms, which is the life energy of everything.  How can we be 
connected with that energy?  Scientists would suggest that we sync with 
it through our own energy.  How else?

Both posts by Edgar, the one about "our purpose in life and Chi" are 
both right on.

Actually Edgar explained Chi much clearer than I did. Hats off to you. 
Accept my bowl.
JM

Fitness63 wrote:
>
> From: Jue Miao Jing Ming - Each of us can live in the ZONE 24/7, by
> abandoning our mind, enhance our spirituality, using chi as the medium to
> sync to the universal consciousness.>
>
> According to some, the CHI is maya and there is nothing but JUST THIS 
> which
> is lurching forward experiencing reality directly?
>
> I guess what I do not understand is that you seem to say that 
> spirituality,
> karma, dharma are all part of the Chan process while Edgar, Bill, and 
> Mike
> seem to say that spirituality is an illusion along with everything else.
>
> It is confusing.
>
>  



Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-07 Thread Edgar Owen 

Fitness63, Bill, JM et al,

Just because we recognize that what is is illusion doesn't mean we  
don't have to deal with it, or that it isn't part of the THIS (in  
Bill's terminology). The problem is when we get involved in  
conceptualizing spirituality (gods, demons, spirits etc.) and get  
distracted from direct experience.


As to JM's discussion of chi, that is something many don't  
understand. The concept is very simple and one of direct experience,  
chi has nothing to do with spirituality per se. If one closes one's  
eyes and becomes aware of the internal feeling of the various parts  
of one's body, and then of the internal feeling of one's whole body,  
that is what is called the energy body. That is the most direct  
experience there is, and that feeling is a feeling of energy, the  
entire energy body is simply one's chi. One's actual being is simply  
chi, nothing more, nothing less. It is the ontological energy of  
one's existence. On the other hand, one's material body is a  
cognitive construct, in that sense the material body is an illusion,  
it is empty form filled with chi which is the real body. It is the  
chi that is real since that is one's direct experience.


Once this is recognized it is quite easy to find one can exercise  
some degree of control over the flow of chi within one's energy body.  
Chi can be moved by the mind, the breath, and by the hands. One can  
also move another person's chi to some extent with the hands fairly  
easily. Since chi is simply OE, it is also the substance of all of  
reality and constantly flows into and out of the energy body as one  
interacts with the 'external world'. Once this basic principle is  
grasped one can go much further either in martial arts, qi gong, feng  
shui (a lot of hype though in that though the basic principle is  
sound), and various meditations.


So spirituality in the sense of beliefs in gods, spirits, demons,  
ghosts, parapsychology etc. is a distraction  from realization since  
such beliefs occupy the mind as thoughts. Zen neither believes or  
disbelieves in such things. If they should appear, fine, but most  
likely that will be just another illusion instead.


Chi, on the other hand, is the very substance of direct experience.  
Chi is reality. One does have some control over chi, but only as one  
force among many other forces. There is also a lot of hype about the  
degree of chi control and chi power claimed by some.


Edgar



On Sep 7, 2008, at 3:23 PM, Fitness63 wrote:


From: Jue Miao Jing Ming - Each of us can live in the ZONE 24/7, by
abandoning our mind, enhance our spirituality, using chi as the  
medium to

sync to the universal consciousness.>

According to some, the CHI is maya and there is nothing but JUST  
THIS which

is lurching forward experiencing reality directly?

I guess what I do not understand is that you seem to say that  
spirituality,
karma, dharma are all part of the Chan process while Edgar, Bill,  
and Mike
seem to say that spirituality is an illusion along with everything  
else.


It is confusing.

Re: [Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-07 Thread Fitness63 
From: Jue Miao Jing Ming - Each of us can live in the ZONE 24/7, by 
abandoning our mind, enhance our spirituality, using chi as the medium to 
sync to the universal consciousness.>

According to some, the CHI is maya and there is nothing but JUST THIS which 
is lurching forward experiencing reality directly?

I guess what I do not understand is that you seem to say that spirituality, 
karma, dharma are all part of the Chan process while Edgar, Bill, and Mike 
seem to say that spirituality is an illusion along with everything else.

It is confusing. 




Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

[Zen] Chan - a true spirituality - the Inner Self

2008-09-07 Thread Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 
Hi All,

Often we said to our selves, I hate myself.  What's the origin of that? 
Often when we go shopping, our decisions are more promptu then logical.  
What's the cause of that? In our mind is a flawless software program, 
where does all the inspirations coming from?

Communication experts often mention to us, our spoken words only affects 
20% of our communication.  The rest is in the unspoken.  Is it not true 
that often we made up our mind, whether to trust or like the guy, before 
a single word is uttered?  What made that up?  Through thinking? Or an 
intuitive something?

How can Kobe shoot 83 points in a game?  Tiger makes a 50 foot put?  
Einstein derived the E=MC2?  Beethoven's symphonies?  Michaelangelo's 
sculptures?  Through thinking, analyzing?  Or a connection of some sort? 

Each of us can live in the ZONE 24/7, by abandoning our mind, enhance 
our spirituality, using chi as the medium to sync to the universal 
consciousness.  Dedicated Chan practitioner can easily witness the 
workings of Inner Self separate from his mind.

Don't take my word for it.  Practice and you shall witness.

JM
This is the outline of a speech I gave in our retreat, Monterey, CA.  
May 2008.





Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are 
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/