Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[ED]

Indeed! - and a very desirable trait in others.   --ED



--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Rose P  wrote:
>

That can still be acknowledged and then held though, surely?   Rose



Inclusivity is apealing - until the beliefs of the other group are
experienced as detrimental to groups we identify with.

--ED


> Glimpses of how other people and groups of people might approach these
things is always interesting to me. Inclusivity appeals, for some
reason.
>
> Rose

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[Rose P]

That can still be acknowledged and then held though, surely?
 
Rose

--- On Thu, 9/16/10, ED  wrote:


From: ED 
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, September 16, 2010, 1:49 PM


  





Inclusivity is apealing - until the beliefs of the other group are
experienced as detrimental to groups we identify with.

--ED

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Rose P  wrote:
>
> Glimpses of how other people and groups of people might approach these
things is always interesting to me. Inclusivity appeals, for some
reason.
>
> Rose









  

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[ED]

Inclusivity is apealing - until the beliefs of the other group are
experienced as detrimental to groups we identify with.

--ED



--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Rose P  wrote:
>
> Glimpses of how other people and groups of people might approach these
things is always interesting to me. Inclusivity appeals, for some
reason.
>
> Rose






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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[Rose P]

Kirk
 
Fascinating stuff you write, it's really grabbed my attention. I look forward 
to reading more of your posts.
 
Rose

--- On Wed, 9/15/10, salik888  wrote:


From: salik888 
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Wednesday, September 15, 2010, 4:03 PM


  



Dear Rose

Glad you liked the sharing. I stop a while in this Caravansarai, this Zendo, to 
sip tea and see the travelers come and go . . . 

Kind of reminds me of the bar scene in Star Wars . . .

I think I saw Bobo Fet come through the door.

best wishes

Kirk

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Rose P  wrote:
>
> Hi Kirk
>  
> I really enjoy reading the poetry of Rumi. I don't know a lot about Sufism 
> but it certainly looks interesting.
>  
> Rose
> 
> --- On Tue, 9/14/10, salik888  wrote:
> 
> 
> From: salik888 
> Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Tuesday, September 14, 2010, 5:32 PM
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
> 
> Dear Bill
> 
> The Imam behind the controversial Islam Community Center is a Sufi, and he 
> has done some good things to further and mediate tensions in the past with 
> education and a more pluralistic viewpoint, or so it seems. I don't know much 
> about him, but do know that he is Sufi and used to come on Cable News and put 
> forth a moderate position, which means nothing -- that's politics.
> 
> On the other hand, Sufism in the West, as well as the East I assume, has been 
> suffering from decades of competing with the Salafi (Wahabi) expression of 
> Islam. Also, it has had a difficult history with legalism in Shia Islam as 
> well. For whatever reason what I call "The Super Sufis" spend much of their 
> time winking and nodding toward the universal expression and reality of 
> Sufism but putting forth that there is no Sufism without Islam, so they make 
> it contained within Islam, specifically. They do all this with legalistic 
> proofs and historical assertions that all the great Sufis were followers of 
> Islamic Shariah, Muftis, Muslim Saints, Hadith Scholars, what have you. They 
> take great care to trace the Silsila (Orders/Tariqa) back to the Prophet 
> Muhammad, peace be upon him. 
> 
> Of course, any impartial objective sociological rational investigation of 
> this will show otherwise -- that Sufism was a reality without a name before 
> and in the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), and that, since it is not a 
> Religion perse, it operated within Dar Al Islam once Islam was the religion 
> of the people as Esoteric Schools that had a variety of Religious 
> practitioners. You could say it preceded Bahai in its Universalism. It also 
> had connections to Hermetic, Gnostic, Zorastrian, and Christian wanderers. 
> Sufism is about personal transformation (alchemy) and the symbolism of The 
> Bees, among many other things. It is a school without a schoolhouse offering 
> -- poetry, sober mystics, drunken mystics, magistrates, wanderers, musicians, 
> merchants, philosophers, metaphysicians, psychologists, warriors, etc . . . 
> So there really are not any contradictions with Sufism in the realm of Islam, 
> as well as Christianity, Judaism, Zen, Tibetan Buddhism,
 Shiavite
> Vedanta, Vedanta, etc . . . many of the great Sufi teachers in India held 
> dual citizenships. Hazrat Inayat Khan, one of the first Sufi teachers in the 
> West had a Hindu Guru as well as involvement in Four Major Sufi Orders. I 
> guess the closest we have in the West is the old associations of Freemasonry. 
> At least there are close parrallels, in fact many believe that Freemasonry 
> came from Sufi Origins.
> 
> So, current Sufi Scholarship in the West and the rising immigration to the 
> West has created a Sufi that is much more inclined to compete with the 
> decayed forms of Imamism, Wahhabism, Salafism -- in short, false Sufism. 
> 
> Bill -- 
> 
> My connection to Sufism was at first that I was coming out of Zen Buddhist 
> background. Of course I had been raised by Christians. It was from Zen 
> Buddhists that I first heard about the Sufis. When I delved into the study of 
> it one thing lead to another and then pretty soon I was amongst most Middle 
> Easterners practicing Islamic Sufism and following of Shariah. For those 
> years I practiced nominally as a Muslim Sufi -- salat, ramadan, mosque on 
> friday, gatherings for zikr (chanting), study of fiqh (legal), instructions 
> in shariah, and Quran study, with some Arabic, enough to recite prayers and 
> practice daily, and chant the shorter Surahs (chapters of Quran). 
> 
> However, probably because of having the Zen background, and because of the 
> inconsistencies in my studies, I began to see so

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[salik888]

Dear Edgar

You are so right, but to go on, you could read Hafiz as well . . . and let's 
not forget Ryokan, one of my favorites, or Tufu.

best wishes

Kirk

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Edgar Owen  wrote:
>
> Those of you who appreciate Rumi should also read Tagore.
> 
> Edgar
> 
> 
> 
> On Sep 15, 2010, at 3:47 AM, Rose P wrote:
> 
> > Hi Kirk
> >  
> > I really enjoy reading the poetry of Rumi. I don't know a lot about Sufism 
> > but it certainly looks interesting.
> >  
> > Rose
> > 
> > --- On Tue, 9/14/10, salik888  wrote:
> > 
> > From: salik888 
> > Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> > To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> > Date: Tuesday, September 14, 2010, 5:32 PM
> > 
> >  
> > Dear Bill
> > 
> > The Imam behind the controversial Islam Community Center is a Sufi, and he 
> > has done some good things to further and mediate tensions in the past with 
> > education and a more pluralistic viewpoint, or so it seems. I don't know 
> > much about him, but do know that he is Sufi and used to come on Cable News 
> > and put forth a moderate position, which means nothing -- that's politics.
> > 
> > On the other hand, Sufism in the West, as well as the East I assume, has 
> > been suffering from decades of competing with the Salafi (Wahabi) 
> > expression of Islam. Also, it has had a difficult history with legalism in 
> > Shia Islam as well. For whatever reason what I call "The Super Sufis" spend 
> > much of their time winking and nodding toward the universal expression and 
> > reality of Sufism but putting forth that there is no Sufism without Islam, 
> > so they make it contained within Islam, specifically. They do all this with 
> > legalistic proofs and historical assertions that all the great Sufis were 
> > followers of Islamic Shariah, Muftis, Muslim Saints, Hadith Scholars, what 
> > have you. They take great care to trace the Silsila (Orders/Tariqa) back to 
> > the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. 
> > 
> > Of course, any impartial objective sociological rational investigation of 
> > this will show otherwise -- that Sufism was a reality without a name before 
> > and in the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), and that, since it is not a 
> > Religion perse, it operated within Dar Al Islam once Islam was the religion 
> > of the people as Esoteric Schools that had a variety of Religious 
> > practitioners. You could say it preceded Bahai in its Universalism. It also 
> > had connections to Hermetic, Gnostic, Zorastrian, and Christian wanderers. 
> > Sufism is about personal transformation (alchemy) and the symbolism of The 
> > Bees, among many other things. It is a school without a schoolhouse 
> > offering -- poetry, sober mystics, drunken mystics, magistrates, wanderers, 
> > musicians, merchants, philosophers, metaphysicians, psychologists, 
> > warriors, etc . . . So there really are not any contradictions with Sufism 
> > in the realm of Islam, as well as Christianity, Judaism, Zen, Tibetan 
> > Buddhism, Shiavite Vedanta, Vedanta, etc . . . many of the great Sufi 
> > teachers in India held dual citizenships. Hazrat Inayat Khan, one of the 
> > first Sufi teachers in the West had a Hindu Guru as well as involvement in 
> > Four Major Sufi Orders. I guess the closest we have in the West is the old 
> > associations of Freemasonry. At least there are close parrallels, in fact 
> > many believe that Freemasonry came from Sufi Origins.
> > 
> > So, current Sufi Scholarship in the West and the rising immigration to the 
> > West has created a Sufi that is much more inclined to compete with the 
> > decayed forms of Imamism, Wahhabism, Salafism -- in short, false Sufism. 
> > 
> > Bill -- 
> > 
> > My connection to Sufism was at first that I was coming out of Zen Buddhist 
> > background. Of course I had been raised by Christians. It was from Zen 
> > Buddhists that I first heard about the Sufis. When I delved into the study 
> > of it one thing lead to another and then pretty soon I was amongst most 
> > Middle Easterners practicing Islamic Sufism and following of Shariah. For 
> > those years I practiced nominally as a Muslim Sufi -- salat, ramadan, 
> > mosque on friday, gatherings for zikr (chanting), study of fiqh (legal), 
> > instructions in shariah, and Quran study, with some Arabic, enough to 
> > recite prayers and practice daily, and chant the shorter Surahs (chapters 
> > of Quran). 
> > 
> > However, probably because of having the Zen background, and bec

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[salik888]

Dear Rose

Glad you liked the sharing.  I stop a while in this Caravansarai, this Zendo, 
to sip tea and see the travelers come and go . . . 

Kind of reminds me of the bar scene in Star Wars . . .

I think I saw Bobo Fet come through the door.


best wishes

Kirk

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Rose P  wrote:
>
> Hi Kirk
>  
> I really enjoy reading the poetry of Rumi. I don't know a lot about Sufism 
> but it certainly looks interesting.
>  
> Rose
> 
> --- On Tue, 9/14/10, salik888  wrote:
> 
> 
> From: salik888 
> Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Tuesday, September 14, 2010, 5:32 PM
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
> 
> Dear Bill
> 
> The Imam behind the controversial Islam Community Center is a Sufi, and he 
> has done some good things to further and mediate tensions in the past with 
> education and a more pluralistic viewpoint, or so it seems. I don't know much 
> about him, but do know that he is Sufi and used to come on Cable News and put 
> forth a moderate position, which means nothing -- that's politics.
> 
> On the other hand, Sufism in the West, as well as the East I assume, has been 
> suffering from decades of competing with the Salafi (Wahabi) expression of 
> Islam. Also, it has had a difficult history with legalism in Shia Islam as 
> well. For whatever reason what I call "The Super Sufis" spend much of their 
> time winking and nodding toward the universal expression and reality of 
> Sufism but putting forth that there is no Sufism without Islam, so they make 
> it contained within Islam, specifically. They do all this with legalistic 
> proofs and historical assertions that all the great Sufis were followers of 
> Islamic Shariah, Muftis, Muslim Saints, Hadith Scholars, what have you. They 
> take great care to trace the Silsila (Orders/Tariqa) back to the Prophet 
> Muhammad, peace be upon him. 
> 
> Of course, any impartial objective sociological rational investigation of 
> this will show otherwise -- that Sufism was a reality without a name before 
> and in the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), and that, since it is not a 
> Religion perse, it operated within Dar Al Islam once Islam was the religion 
> of the people as Esoteric Schools that had a variety of Religious 
> practitioners. You could say it preceded Bahai in its Universalism. It also 
> had connections to Hermetic, Gnostic, Zorastrian, and Christian wanderers. 
> Sufism is about personal transformation (alchemy) and the symbolism of The 
> Bees, among many other things. It is a school without a schoolhouse offering 
> -- poetry, sober mystics, drunken mystics, magistrates, wanderers, musicians, 
> merchants, philosophers, metaphysicians, psychologists, warriors, etc . . . 
> So there really are not any contradictions with Sufism in the realm of Islam, 
> as well as Christianity, Judaism, Zen, Tibetan Buddhism, Shiavite
>  Vedanta, Vedanta, etc . . . many of the great Sufi teachers in India held 
> dual citizenships. Hazrat Inayat Khan, one of the first Sufi teachers in the 
> West had a Hindu Guru as well as involvement in Four Major Sufi Orders. I 
> guess the closest we have in the West is the old associations of Freemasonry. 
> At least there are close parrallels, in fact many believe that Freemasonry 
> came from Sufi Origins.
> 
> So, current Sufi Scholarship in the West and the rising immigration to the 
> West has created a Sufi that is much more inclined to compete with the 
> decayed forms of Imamism, Wahhabism, Salafism -- in short, false Sufism. 
> 
> Bill -- 
> 
> My connection to Sufism was at first that I was coming out of Zen Buddhist 
> background. Of course I had been raised by Christians. It was from Zen 
> Buddhists that I first heard about the Sufis. When I delved into the study of 
> it one thing lead to another and then pretty soon I was amongst most Middle 
> Easterners practicing Islamic Sufism and following of Shariah. For those 
> years I practiced nominally as a Muslim Sufi -- salat, ramadan, mosque on 
> friday, gatherings for zikr (chanting), study of fiqh (legal), instructions 
> in shariah, and Quran study, with some Arabic, enough to recite prayers and 
> practice daily, and chant the shorter Surahs (chapters of Quran). 
> 
> However, probably because of having the Zen background, and because of the 
> inconsistencies in my studies, I began to see something seriously wrong. As I 
> studied the Poets, some Scholars, and the history of what most were 
> practicing, and the mindless devotion to the Shaykhs and authority that many 
> so called Dervishes (students) displayed, I came to the conclusion that I had 
> to leave the practice of Islam and take up t

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[salik888]

Dear Artie

I am a little confused by such emphatic posts, perhaps you can elaborate.

Why would "zen" in the US be shallow, could you give some evidence of this?

Are these people you talk about that make money just using "zen" to make money? 
 

Haven't most Zen lineages been in the business to pull in money.  Zen in terms 
of Organization, has always had a variety of experiences with money.  Money is 
part of the "zen" path.  

Why are they not teaching, what is the proof of this "not teaching."


donkey is wearing his shades today, still unhappy

K among the curious


--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "roloro1557"  wrote:
>
> I can't speak for others of course. What I'm saying is the opposite,
> much of the "zen" practiced in the US is shallow. This is partly because many 
> people in the US are shallow, but it is also because many "teachers" and 
> "masters" and other so-called experts are out to make money (as we have been 
> discussing in another thread) rather that actually teach.
> 
> 
> 
> --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Chris Austin-Lane  wrote:
> >
> > Surely you aren't saying that Zen has made the US more shallow?
>






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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[Rose P]

Hi Kirk
 
I really enjoy reading the poetry of Rumi. I don't know a lot about Sufism but 
it certainly looks interesting.
 
Rose

--- On Tue, 9/14/10, salik888  wrote:


From: salik888 
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, September 14, 2010, 5:32 PM


  



Dear Bill

The Imam behind the controversial Islam Community Center is a Sufi, and he has 
done some good things to further and mediate tensions in the past with 
education and a more pluralistic viewpoint, or so it seems. I don't know much 
about him, but do know that he is Sufi and used to come on Cable News and put 
forth a moderate position, which means nothing -- that's politics.

On the other hand, Sufism in the West, as well as the East I assume, has been 
suffering from decades of competing with the Salafi (Wahabi) expression of 
Islam. Also, it has had a difficult history with legalism in Shia Islam as 
well. For whatever reason what I call "The Super Sufis" spend much of their 
time winking and nodding toward the universal expression and reality of Sufism 
but putting forth that there is no Sufism without Islam, so they make it 
contained within Islam, specifically. They do all this with legalistic proofs 
and historical assertions that all the great Sufis were followers of Islamic 
Shariah, Muftis, Muslim Saints, Hadith Scholars, what have you. They take great 
care to trace the Silsila (Orders/Tariqa) back to the Prophet Muhammad, peace 
be upon him. 

Of course, any impartial objective sociological rational investigation of this 
will show otherwise -- that Sufism was a reality without a name before and in 
the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), and that, since it is not a Religion 
perse, it operated within Dar Al Islam once Islam was the religion of the 
people as Esoteric Schools that had a variety of Religious practitioners. You 
could say it preceded Bahai in its Universalism. It also had connections to 
Hermetic, Gnostic, Zorastrian, and Christian wanderers. Sufism is about 
personal transformation (alchemy) and the symbolism of The Bees, among many 
other things. It is a school without a schoolhouse offering -- poetry, sober 
mystics, drunken mystics, magistrates, wanderers, musicians, merchants, 
philosophers, metaphysicians, psychologists, warriors, etc . . . So there 
really are not any contradictions with Sufism in the realm of Islam, as well as 
Christianity, Judaism, Zen, Tibetan Buddhism, Shiavite
 Vedanta, Vedanta, etc . . . many of the great Sufi teachers in India held dual 
citizenships. Hazrat Inayat Khan, one of the first Sufi teachers in the West 
had a Hindu Guru as well as involvement in Four Major Sufi Orders. I guess the 
closest we have in the West is the old associations of Freemasonry. At least 
there are close parrallels, in fact many believe that Freemasonry came from 
Sufi Origins.

So, current Sufi Scholarship in the West and the rising immigration to the West 
has created a Sufi that is much more inclined to compete with the decayed forms 
of Imamism, Wahhabism, Salafism -- in short, false Sufism. 

Bill -- 

My connection to Sufism was at first that I was coming out of Zen Buddhist 
background. Of course I had been raised by Christians. It was from Zen 
Buddhists that I first heard about the Sufis. When I delved into the study of 
it one thing lead to another and then pretty soon I was amongst most Middle 
Easterners practicing Islamic Sufism and following of Shariah. For those years 
I practiced nominally as a Muslim Sufi -- salat, ramadan, mosque on friday, 
gatherings for zikr (chanting), study of fiqh (legal), instructions in shariah, 
and Quran study, with some Arabic, enough to recite prayers and practice daily, 
and chant the shorter Surahs (chapters of Quran). 

However, probably because of having the Zen background, and because of the 
inconsistencies in my studies, I began to see something seriously wrong. As I 
studied the Poets, some Scholars, and the history of what most were practicing, 
and the mindless devotion to the Shaykhs and authority that many so called 
Dervishes (students) displayed, I came to the conclusion that I had to leave 
the practice of Islam and take up the implementation of Sufism. I realized 
almost everyone I was coming in contact with was just operating under some kind 
of quasi-Religious affiliation that said they were and are the "True Islam" and 
that was the "real Sufism" . . . So I left. There was not much difference 
between who I was interacting with and Pentecostal nutcases on television. The 
Order I was apart of even began doing initiation online by putting your hands 
on screen and teaching that we were in the end of times so blessings were 
needed for so many. Of course no one knows
 anything about their bank accounts I am sure. Basically it was all Religious 
exploitive excesses by people dressing up in turbans and sufi clothes . . .

We 

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[roloro1557]

LOL! :-)

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> Artie,
> 
> Commoditization is just another culture item we (the USA) have to share with
> the world.
> 
> Let the sharing begin!
> 






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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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

RE: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[BillSmart]

Artie,

Commoditization is just another culture item we (the USA) have to share with
the world.

Let the sharing begin!

..Bill!

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of roloro1557
Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 5:39 PM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

  
I think cultural sharing is wonderful. But I still think commoditization is
rampant in America, and not just in the area of religion/spirituality, but
in all areas. I agree the flower does bloom out of the mud, I just think
there's a whole lotta' mud in the US!

Artie

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Chris Austin-Lane  wrote:
>
> I think it is more than that. People are shallow, sure, that's
> nothing new. 
> 
> We celebrate Diwali at my work place, Chinese New Year, Superbowl
> Sunday, and Christmas. Sure, the Diwali is different than in Andhra
> Pradesh, but it's not some external trendy thing US born folks are
> doing - it is a gift offered from the Indian born folks for their
> pleasure and for us US born folks to enjoy as well.
> 
> I think your words over-emphasize the power of commoditization - the
> flower blooms among the mud after all.
> 



__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 5451 (20100914) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 

__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 5451 (20100914) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 
 

__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 5451 (20100914) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 





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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[roloro1557]

I can't speak for others of course. What I'm saying is the opposite,
much of the "zen" practiced in the US is shallow. This is partly because many 
people in the US are shallow, but it is also because many "teachers" and 
"masters" and other so-called experts are out to make money (as we have been 
discussing in another thread) rather that actually teach.



--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Chris Austin-Lane  wrote:
>
> Surely you aren't saying that Zen has made the US more shallow?  






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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[salik888]

of the ring.  
I had to leave.

First things first, Sufism calls the teacher to you, not you to the teacher.  
There is a great deal of preparation in first things first before you are even 
ready for a Sufi teacher.  It is not a wider application and expression, it is 
purely esoteric and has very little to do with democratic ideals or eastern 
authoritarian excessess.  But westerners gobble this shit up, trust me.  

So, I am left with my Sufi studies, curriculum, a few teachers, my ongoing 
approach to the two subjects -- Zen and Sufism.  It appears that my life has 
been very much about these two paths.  In my estimation, choosing would not be 
possible, and would only be superficial.  I certainly have been associated with 
Soto Zen Buddhism longer, and have practiced and studied Zen Buddhism longer.  
They both have incredible implementation and possibilities in the west. 


For anyone interested you could take a look at the following organizations that 
were began by Sufis in the west. Of course the Religionists continuously tell 
their followers they are the false teachers.  But by their fruits they shall be 
known, right?  Take a look at the current controversy -- while the Imam has his 
right to put the Community Center there, you have to question his judgements.  

http://ishkbooks.com/books/index.html

http://www.beshara.org/

Interestingly enough, it is the Gurdjieffians in their own way that have kept 
Sufi teaching models alive, which is whole other subject.  This has been my 
experience . . . Sufism really is an Esoteric School that operates with current 
cultural realities.  The Fourth Way schools, the real ones, still do this.  

And then of course, we are back to Zen, which I am glad to return to as much as 
I can.

Appreciate the opportunity to post and to teach a little, shed some light, etc 
. . . 

What we were talking about in terms of commercialization of Eastern Wisdom is 
addressed particularly within my tradition -- they focus on education, 
children's literacy, thinking, cognitive patterns, business, pyschology, 
sociology, politics, service, health, etc . . . it is truly a whollistic 'in 
the world but not of the world' application.  That is clearest expression of 
what Sufism is -- you work in the world in an esoteric manner, share where you 
can, and let your life be your message . . . 

How does this begin?  The beginning of the path is  -- manners . . . you have 
perfect manners and take that into the world.

But, well, donkey is never happy.

Nasrudin Story

Nasruddin put up with the school for some months. After he left, he bought his 
wife some new suits and things for the home and found that he still had enough 
for a bicycle. A neighbour, passing by, said, "That is a fine bike, Hodja.  
Where are you going to go on it?" "Well," replied Nasruddin, I still have to 
give that some more thought, but I can tell you where I am not going."

K among the stable feeders









   

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> Kirk,
> 
>  
> 
> I heard the imam behind the controversial Islam Community Center near
> `Ground Zero' in NYC is a Sufi Muslim.
> 
>  
> 
> Sufism is described as a mystical practice within Islam -  a subset of Islam
> just as most people would classify Zen as a subset of Mahayana Buddhism
> which of course is a subset of Buddhism.  Is that how you see it?  Is that
> how you practice it?
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks...Bill!
> 
>  
> 
> From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of salik888
> Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010 9:16 PM
> To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> 
>  
> 
>   
> 
> Dear Mike
> 
> Good questions and good post. It is interesting that perhaps we have come to
> a little of the same conclusions, only I derived it from an impact of
> Japanese Soto and Rinzai Zen Buddhism in America and you are seeing the
> reality of culture and the inner life of Zen in Japan.
> 
> To a certain extent, I would have to say that while the Japanese intentions
> probably would automatically be implementing and apply the Zen (Tradition),
> I would not say this is entirely true. I will explain. But before I do,
> having said that, I would like to point out something derived from the
> Perennialist/Traditionalist School of Comparative Religion, which is a
> Philosophical and Metaphysical overview of Ancient Traditions perse -- that
> on an exoteric level, the outward manifestation of the Tradition, of course
> the Japanese would be closer to this reality, although the West could and
> should be doing this as well. So, I would say that Zen is in good hands with
> the Japanese under the onslaught of post modernist times and Secularism,
> which steam rolls everything in the name of progress. On the oth

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[roloro1557]

I think cultural sharing is wonderful. But I still think commoditization is 
rampant in America, and not just in the area of religion/spirituality, but in 
all areas. I agree the flower does bloom out of the mud, I just think there's a 
whole lotta' mud in the US!

Artie

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Chris Austin-Lane  wrote:
>
> I think it is more than that.  People are shallow, sure, that's
> nothing new.  
> 
> We celebrate Diwali at my work place, Chinese New Year, Superbowl
> Sunday, and Christmas.  Sure, the Diwali is different than in Andhra
> Pradesh, but it's not some external trendy thing US born folks are
> doing - it is a gift offered from the Indian born folks for their
> pleasure and for us US born folks to enjoy as well.
> 
> I think your words over-emphasize the power of commoditization - the
> flower blooms among the mud after all.
> 






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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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

RE: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[BillSmart]

Kirk,

 

I heard the imam behind the controversial Islam Community Center near
‘Ground Zero’ in NYC is a Sufi Muslim.

 

Sufism is described as a mystical practice within Islam -  a subset of Islam
just as most people would classify Zen as a subset of Mahayana Buddhism
which of course is a subset of Buddhism.  Is that how you see it?  Is that
how you practice it?

 

Thanks...Bill!

 

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of salik888
Sent: Monday, September 13, 2010 9:16 PM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

 

  

Dear Mike

Good questions and good post. It is interesting that perhaps we have come to
a little of the same conclusions, only I derived it from an impact of
Japanese Soto and Rinzai Zen Buddhism in America and you are seeing the
reality of culture and the inner life of Zen in Japan.

To a certain extent, I would have to say that while the Japanese intentions
probably would automatically be implementing and apply the Zen (Tradition),
I would not say this is entirely true. I will explain. But before I do,
having said that, I would like to point out something derived from the
Perennialist/Traditionalist School of Comparative Religion, which is a
Philosophical and Metaphysical overview of Ancient Traditions perse -- that
on an exoteric level, the outward manifestation of the Tradition, of course
the Japanese would be closer to this reality, although the West could and
should be doing this as well. So, I would say that Zen is in good hands with
the Japanese under the onslaught of post modernist times and Secularism,
which steam rolls everything in the name of progress. On the other hand,
Zen, the esoteric, which is what is essential, the inner life, this no
culture can place any claim to. It is the reality and the slipperiest of
fish to obtain -- as the Sufis say, the kernal and the kernal. 

In the case of Americans or Westerner plundering the Tradition of Zen. I
think that is two answers -- first, there are some who have kept up the
Traditions of Soto and Rinzai very well, but expressing a natural sense of
American Transcendentalism. We sort of have our own secrets and gnostics
inherent in our experience. That is culture and the Tradition, like the
differences between Chinese Chan and Japanese Zen. And then of course there
has been those that have expressed an anything goes sort of Zen, or Zen and
this and Zen and that. So, in short, I don't think Zen Buddhism is under
anymore attack in America than Japan, at least on the esoteric level. 

I do think there is a possibility in both Japan and the West for any
Tradition, whether that be Sufis or Zen, for it to continuously be under
attack from Secularism and syncretism. This is post modern information age
times. In some sense it is what is wrong at the heart of the Middle East . .
. not only is Islam fighting the Secular West, but more importantly they are
fighting themselves, in terms of post modern times. Technological and
Western individualism and syncretism has made advances on their civilization
(traditional culture)and they are having a sort of nighmarish reform that we
are all witnessing. Trust me, it probably was not much fun in Europe for
many during the upheaval post Reformation. 

So, in perspective Zen is alive and well. It offers a good Tradition and
leans on its pluralistic expression. The Sufis do likewise, however they are
on the run in Saudi Arabia and Iran, the two major power brokers in Middle
Eastern culture. When the Sufis can practice again in Mecca, you will know
that its all turned for the better. But in the case of Zen, and even in
China, which I hear Buddhism is flourishing after all these years, as I
said, I think the prospects look good.

best wishes

Kirk

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> , mike
brown  wrote:
>
> Kirk,
> 
> The below was an interesting read. If I read it correctly. you seem to be
saying 
> that practioners of Zen need to adapt their practice to suit their own 
> particular cultural milieu. As someone who is living in Japan, and isÂ
reminded 
> daily of the chasm between Asian/western thinking, I think I'd have to
agree. 
> 'Zen' is Japanese, but what is at the heart of Zen is not. The change
towards a 
> more western approach to Zen, however, is slow and incremental and maybe
that's 
> as it should be. I wonder tho, will a more western approach to Zen
include it as 
> 'just' part of a wider, eclectic system of religious/philisophical etc.Â
study 
> and practice - or will the efficacy of Zen be diluted by such an approach
(the 
> traditional Japanese viewpoint).
> 
> Mike  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ____________
> .From: salik888 
> To: zen_fo...@... 
> Sent: Mon, 13 September, 2010 2:28:50
> Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
&g

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[roloro1557]

Hi Mike-

I think what you've stated below is already happening, and is precisely because 
of the deep chasm between eastern and western thinking you also mentioned.

Artie

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, mike brown  wrote:
 
> I wonder tho, will a more western approach to Zen include it as 
> 'just' part of a wider, eclectic system of religious/philisophical etc. study 
> and practice - or will the efficacy of Zen be diluted by such an approach 
> (the 
> traditional Japanese viewpoint).
> 
> Mike 






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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[roloro1557]

Hi Kristy :-)

I'll read what Bill has to say and await your next post on the subject :-)

Artie


--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Kristy McClain  wrote:
>
> *chuckles*
>  
> Touche..
>  
> I think the current trend is known as "integral Spirituality", spear-headed 
> by Andrew Cohen  and Ken Wilber. (EnlighteNext Magazine).  Sort of a 
> meta-physical, mathmatical new age movement centered on "consciousness".  
> Other devotes include Barbara Marx Huibbard, Depak Chopra amd a host of 
> inter-faith leaders which include zen monks and even Gempo Roshi.
> 
> I'll share more on this topic later, as Bill offered some intriguing 
> thoughts..
>  
> I wish it were a rainy day here today. I'm ready for a season change.










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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明]

 Well Bill,

If you agreed on #3, that all words are illusory, then perhaps "your 
insistent denial based on your teacher's words" could itself be illusory?


My teacher reminded us constantly, "don't swallow my words as is.  All 
spoken, written, thinking dharma are just form.  If you experience it, 
then it is yours.  Otherwise, they are just forms."


The label of chi and karma are indeed form, but the experience of chi 
and karma requires practice, so is the experience of spirituality and 
the wisdom this practice contains.


"The way is not hard, if we don't pick or choose."  Xin Xin Ming by the 
Third Patriarch.


Every way leads somewhere determined by the quieting of our 
discriminating mind.  Not just while meditating, but in every second of 
our daily lives.


BoddhiDharma also said, "When we sever all external associations and 
quiet all internal murmur, then we are on the way."


Don't take my words for it.  Don't take anyone's words.  Just Experience.

With all due respect, I have said nothing,
JMJM

On 9/10/2010 7:49 PM, billsm...@hhs1963.org wrote:


JMJM,

Thanks for your reply.

I've numbered your points so I can refer to them more easily.

The zen I practice, the items that seem to be the same are 3, 4, 5 and 
6; although I'd have to investigate what you mean by 3 and 6 before I 
could be 100% sure.


As you know I consider both chi and karma illusory, teaching tools at 
best and comforting superstitions at worst.


...Bill!

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> 
[mailto:Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
<mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Jue Miao Jing Ming 
- 

Sent: Friday, September 10, 2010 10:48 PM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

Hello Bill,

As always, thank you for your detailed explanation. Let me get some of 
our definitions listed.

1. Chi is just a medium. The wisdom it contains is the spirit.
2. We all have chi, without it we die. Some can sense it. Some don't 
care.
3. In Chan, only True Form is not illusion. Everything else is, 
including this post of mine.
4. Every practice, no matter how different, is just a bridge. Some 
longer and some shorter.

5. Some bridge enable us to help others more efficiently.
6. The end result is still the same -- liberate ourselves and others 
from sufferings.

7. Depending on our karma, our paths are shaped.
Thank you as always,
JMJM

On 9/10/2010 6:24 AM, billsm...@hhs1963.org 
<mailto:BillSmart%40HHS1963.org> wrote:


JMJM,

Please don't take my posts as some kind of 'official' Zen Buddhist 
position. It's not. It's my position and I'm willing to take 
responsibility for it and explain it when asked.


If y

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> 
[mailto:Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
<mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Jue Miao Jing Ming 
- 

Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 12:30 PM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

I always know that Zen and Chan are the same in description, but 
different in practice. Now I am certain the missing practice in Zen is 
the "Mystic Inner Witness" practice or 『秘密內證法』 in Chinese.


[Bill!] I'm not sure what the 'Mystic Inner Witness' practice is, but 
I think I can guess. It sounds like something described by many in the 
West as the 'watcher' or the 'witness'. A bodiless awareness that 
passively and exclusively observes. If it is this it is not taught in 
Japanese Renzai/Soto Zen Buddhism. I have experienced this phenomenon 
while sitting, and when I questioned my Roshi (Zen Teacher) about it 
during dokusan (private interview) I was told to just ignore it, that 
is was just maya (illusion). I did that and after a short while I 
never experienced it again.


That's the reason Zen lost its spirituality and became an everyday 
rationalization, as described by you.

[Bill!] 'Spirit' is defined by Merriam-Webster Online as:
"1: an animating or vital principle held to give life to physical 
organisms

2: a supernatural being or essence"
Using those definitions as a basis for 'spirituality', I think you are 
referring to #1 - which I also think you call 'chi'. Again, during my 
beginning Japanese Renzai Zen Buddhist training, and when working on 
the 'breakthrough' koan 'Mu', I was encouraged to generate 'joriki', 
which was described as a 'ball of energy, like a small fire, located 
in my 'hara' (a spot just below the navel). I was told it would help 
me build up my ability to focus and achieve the necessary 
concentration that was necessary to pass

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[Kristy McClain]

Oh no...quite the reverse.
 
I think what I meant was that it is the inherent westernized values system that 
has--in my opinion, tainted the otherwise traditional teachings.  I also agree 
that mercenaries have existed since the  dawn of man.  Perhaps its not all 
bad... People who ordinarily are indifferent to anything spiritual or 
"inward-bound" are taking note , and signing up for all this. Time will tell 
which direction it leads..
 
*bows*
 
kristy


--- On Mon, 9/13/10, Chris Austin-Lane  wrote:


From: Chris Austin-Lane 
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, September 13, 2010, 2:40 PM


  




Surely you aren't saying that Zen has made the US more shallow?  Quick fixes, 
the gospel of getting lots of money, and similar things have been a part of US 
culture for a long time.  I don't find them particularly useful, but it's by no 
means some recent trend in the US.  The forms now have changed as there are 
more religious traditions around, but the dynamic is not new.  


Disclaimer:  I grew up practicing Christianity down the street from PTL, Jim 
Baker's "Christian" emporium where it was often said that "God doesn't want us 
to have tacky things."  In my book, Eckhart Tolle has a ways to go before his 
words are that far astray from the cyprus tree in the garden.  


--Chris




On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 9:55 AM, Kristy McClain  wrote:









*bows* to Kirk et al;)
 
I address my comments to your last paragraph  on what indeed is happening to 
zen in the west.  I am by no  means a scholar on the  topic. I offer my 
observations as I see a troublesome trend.  I  have been concerned in recent 
years about the commercialization of spiritual practices, like zen.  Retreats, 
books, CD's, other media and the internet have made  spirituality a lucative 
venture. Radio programs like Hayhouseradio.com, among many others, suggest they 
exist as a means to "spread the message".  Ok, I don't have a problem  if 
people  have money or not.  But I am tired of attraction laws, and affirmations 
and chants and meditations, that propose this is a process of coercing some 
karmic force that can lead  you to enlightenment while sitting in a Rolls 
Royce, ( a-la- Louise Hays of Hayhouse).  Maybe I'm naively purist, but 
something seems fundamentally wrong to me.  
 
I am puzzled by the statement in all these books that the "answer" is not in a 
book, but  it still costs $24.95 to gleen this "truth".  Retreat fees are 
outrageous. Omega, Spirit Rock, and the like-- all are reaping big rewards, and 
I do  indeed think it has corrupted the translation and transmission of the 
teachings and its history.
 
One other thought..
 
In the west, there has been this effort to manipulate the  dharma so as to be 
acceptable to  the westernized student mind-set and culture.  Hence, the "Big 
Mind" process.  While many rave over this technique, it has never worked for 
me.  It simply feels like Jungian group therapy.  I see value in the process 
for many seeking better self-awareness and coping skills in life.  
 
But I don't see how it relates to Soto, Rinzai or any other traditional 
teaching.
 
Moreover, though American myself, I am sick and tired of the needyiness  for 
self-gratification many Westerners feel they are entitled to.  A sense of 
entitlement could perhaps sum up a western mind-set.
 
Kristy



 
 
 


--- On Mon, 9/13/10, salik888  wrote:







In the case of Americans or Westerner plundering the Tradition of Zen. I think 
that is two answers -- first, there are some who have kept up the Traditions of 
Soto and Rinzai very well, but expressing a natural sense of American 
Transcendentalism. We sort of have our own secrets and gnostics inherent in our 
experience. That is culture and the Tradition, like the differences between 
Chinese Chan and Japanese Zen. And then of course there has been those that 
have expressed an anything goes sort of Zen, or Zen and this and Zen and that. 
So, in short, I don't think Zen Buddhism is under anymore attack in America 
than Japan, at least on the esoteric level. 

I do think there is a possibility in both Japan and the West for any Tradition, 
whether that be Sufis or Zen, for it to continuously be under attack from 
Secularism and syncretism. This is post modern information age times. In some 
sense it is what is wrong at the heart of the Middle East . . . not only is 
Islam fighting the Secular West, but more importantly they are fighting 
themselves, in terms of post modern times. Technological and Western 
individualism and syncretism has made advances on their civilization 
(traditional culture)and they are having a sort of nighmarish reform that we 
are all witnessing. Trust me, it probably was not much fun in Europe for many 
during the upheaval post Reformation. 

So, in perspective Ze

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[Chris Austin-Lane]

l these years, as I
> said, I think the prospects look good.
>
> best wishes
>
> Kirk
>
> --- In 
> Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com<http://us.mc552.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>,
> mike brown  wrote:
> >
> > Kirk,
> >
> > The below was an interesting read. If I read it correctly. you seem to be
> saying
> > that practioners of Zen need to adapt their practice to suit their own
> > particular cultural milieu. As someone who is living in Japan, and
> is reminded
> > daily of the chasm between Asian/western thinking, I think I'd have to
> agree.
> > 'Zen' is Japanese, but what is at the heart of Zen is not. The change
> towards a
> > more western approach to Zen, however, is slow and incremental and maybe
> that's
> > as it should be. I wonder tho, will a more western approach to Zen
> include it as
> > 'just' part of a wider, eclectic system of religious/philisophical
> etc. study
> > and practice - or will the efficacy of Zen be diluted by such an approach
> (the
> > traditional Japanese viewpoint).
> >
> > Mike Â
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> > .From: salik888 
> > To: zen_fo...@...
> > Sent: Mon, 13 September, 2010 2:28:50
> > Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> >
> > Â
> > Dear Ed
> >
> > I appreciate the affirmation, you never know what is going to be taken
> out of
> > context in the wrong way in the peanut gallery. Nevertheless, at some
> time,
> > later for me than sooner, and really through the Sufis, who have a
> different way
> > of explaining psychology, where they break down the levels of delusion
> and
> > attachment, it became clear to me, at least for myself what my overall
> aim is
> > and could be.
> >
> >
> > We were talking about mysticism earlier, in my estimation a wholly
> unproductive
> > discussion, since people would be speaking about the end results and
> their
> > definition of this -- enlightenment, cosmic concsiousness, etc . . . The
> reason
> > I bring this up is that it has to do with greed and not realizing first
> things
> > first. If you look at Zen Masters, Texts, and Sufi Masters, you will find
> plenty
> > of address about having your mind on the wrong things first --
> enlightenment.
> > The Sufis would address this as a sort of greed that operates and is
> furthered
> > in the Nafs, The Commmanding Self, that is overlayed with personal
> experiences,
> > wrong education, trauma, prejudices, opinions, and all the seven deadly
> sins.
> > Oftentimes we bring our lower instincts into our practice without ever
> realizing
> > it, through worldly conditioning.
> >
> >
> > I have witnessed plenty of ego maniacs who are very clear in terms of
> their
> > meditation practice, or their pious dedication to their path, but are as
> greedy
> > as if they were thieves.
> >
> >
> > Now, having said that, I realize that I am a thief as well, robbing this
> and
> > taking that. Now we are in the realm of what a Zen Buddhist Master used
> to talk
> > about -- the big doubt. He was not doubting the tradition, but doubting
> our own
> > sincerity and utilization of the tradition. This can be useful, make us
> human
> > and humble . . . keep us from being big shits, big know it alls, big
> kahunas . .
> > . there are big kahunas in Zen and big Kahunas in Sufism too, in fact
> lots more
> > in Sufism, since it has a devotional nature to teachers at times.
> >
> >
> > I think what is needed sometimes is fresh perspective on an ancient
> message.
> > That is pretty much it. There is really nothing new, and I don't say this
> to
> > bring attention to myself, although there is that, we are all looking for
>
> > attention, or we would be doing something else, but also as a reminder.
> As the
> > Sufis say, we are forgetful people. Remembrance on the path is a useful
> tool. We
> > want to keep our practice and path alive and vital, not by rote, fall
> victim to
> > Japanese cultural customs of order and clarity. This is a by-product of
> Soto
> > Zen, and only gets you so far -- a bad imitation of Japanese
> practitioners.
> >
> >
> > At times I am very excited to see the expression of Zen Buddhism in
> America, it
> > appears to be trying to keep the tradition alive and deal with cultural
> > conditioning that might not be applicable. Let's keep in mind the
> expression of
> > Chan 

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[Chris Austin-Lane]

I think it is more than that.  People are shallow, sure, that's
nothing new.  But I wouldn't say that there is no change recently in
the degree of various cultures mixing around.  I had a most
interesting conversation with my Indian-born co-workers the other day
about how their parents want the grand-kids to be more traditional
than is going to be the case, and the parents just want them to be
some what Indian, but can already see the great gap between their
upbringing and their kids upbringing.

We celebrate Diwali at my work place, Chinese New Year, Superbowl
Sunday, and Christmas.  Sure, the Diwali is different than in Andhra
Pradesh, but it's not some external trendy thing US born folks are
doing - it is a gift offered from the Indian born folks for their
pleasure and for us US born folks to enjoy as well.

I think your words over-emphasize the power of commoditization - the
flower blooms among the mud after all.

My obligatory Zen joke: there is no deeper meaning in zen.  There is
just the zen meal and the zen art and the zen bulletin board.

On Mon, Sep 13, 2010 at 12:17 AM, roloro1557  wrote:
> The "New Age" movement (in the US at least) is also partly responsible for 
> this.
>
> Also (at least in the US) spirituality is commoditized like everything else 
> and every 10 years or so there is a new spiritual fad. In the 80's Native 
> American spiritual tradition was all the rage, then in the 90's it was 
> Celtic. . .
>
> I don't know what it is now because I haven't been paying any attention 
> (happily).
>
> On a broader cultural level anything Asian has been "hot" here in America for 
> probably at least the last 20 years- art, food, spiritual, cultural ideas, 
> etc. But it is all very shallow and most Americans have no real grasp of the 
> deeper meanings. The label of "culture vulture" is very true of many if not 
> most Americans in my observation.
>
> And yes, I'm an American, just in case anyone was wondering. . . .
>




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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[Kristy McClain]

*bows* to Kirk et al;)
 
I address my comments to your last paragraph  on what indeed is happening to 
zen in the west.  I am by no  means a scholar on the  topic. I offer my 
observations as I see a troublesome trend.  I  have been concerned in recent 
years about the commercialization of spiritual practices, like zen.  Retreats, 
books, CD's, other media and the internet have made  spirituality a lucative 
venture. Radio programs like Hayhouseradio.com, among many others, suggest they 
exist as a means to "spread the message".  Ok, I don't have a problem  if 
people  have money or not.  But I am tired of attraction laws, and affirmations 
and chants and meditations, that propose this is a process of coercing some 
karmic force that can lead  you to enlightenment while sitting in a Rolls 
Royce, ( a-la- Louise Hays of Hayhouse).  Maybe I'm naively purist, but 
something seems fundamentally wrong to me.  
 
I am puzzled by the statement in all these books that the "answer" is not in a 
book, but  it still costs $24.95 to gleen this "truth".  Retreat fees are 
outrageous. Omega, Spirit Rock, and the like-- all are reaping big rewards, and 
I do  indeed think it has corrupted the translation and transmission of the 
teachings and its history.
 
One other thought..
 
In the west, there has been this effort to manipulate the  dharma so as to be 
acceptable to  the westernized student mind-set and culture.  Hence, the "Big 
Mind" process.  While many rave over this technique, it has never worked for 
me.  It simply feels like Jungian group therapy.  I see value in the process 
for many seeking better self-awareness and coping skills in life.  
 
But I don't see how it relates to Soto, Rinzai or any other traditional 
teaching.
 
Moreover, though American myself, I am sick and tired of the needyiness  for 
self-gratification many Westerners feel they are entitled to.  A sense of 
entitlement could perhaps sum up a western mind-set.
 
Kristy
 
 
 


--- On Mon, 9/13/10, salik888  wrote:







In the case of Americans or Westerner plundering the Tradition of Zen. I think 
that is two answers -- first, there are some who have kept up the Traditions of 
Soto and Rinzai very well, but expressing a natural sense of American 
Transcendentalism. We sort of have our own secrets and gnostics inherent in our 
experience. That is culture and the Tradition, like the differences between 
Chinese Chan and Japanese Zen. And then of course there has been those that 
have expressed an anything goes sort of Zen, or Zen and this and Zen and that. 
So, in short, I don't think Zen Buddhism is under anymore attack in America 
than Japan, at least on the esoteric level. 

I do think there is a possibility in both Japan and the West for any Tradition, 
whether that be Sufis or Zen, for it to continuously be under attack from 
Secularism and syncretism. This is post modern information age times. In some 
sense it is what is wrong at the heart of the Middle East . . . not only is 
Islam fighting the Secular West, but more importantly they are fighting 
themselves, in terms of post modern times. Technological and Western 
individualism and syncretism has made advances on their civilization 
(traditional culture)and they are having a sort of nighmarish reform that we 
are all witnessing. Trust me, it probably was not much fun in Europe for many 
during the upheaval post Reformation. 

So, in perspective Zen is alive and well. It offers a good Tradition and leans 
on its pluralistic expression. The Sufis do likewise, however they are on the 
run in Saudi Arabia and Iran, the two major power brokers in Middle Eastern 
culture. When the Sufis can practice again in Mecca, you will know that its all 
turned for the better. But in the case of Zen, and even in China, which I hear 
Buddhism is flourishing after all these years, as I said, I think the prospects 
look good.

best wishes

Kirk

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, mike brown  wrote:
>
> Kirk,
> 
> The below was an interesting read. If I read it correctly. you seem to be 
> saying 
> that practioners of Zen need to adapt their practice to suit their own 
> particular cultural milieu. As someone who is living in Japan, and 
> is reminded 
> daily of the chasm between Asian/western thinking, I think I'd have to agree. 
> 'Zen' is Japanese, but what is at the heart of Zen is not. The change towards 
> a 
> more western approach to Zen, however, is slow and incremental and maybe 
> that's 
> as it should be. I wonder tho, will a more western approach to Zen include 
> it as 
> 'just' part of a wider, eclectic system of religious/philisophical 
> etc. study 
> and practice - or will the efficacy of Zen be diluted by such an approach 
> (the 
> traditional Japanese viewpoint).
> 
> Mike  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[salik888]

Kristy


I look forward to hearing something about the Integralists.  I have studied 
them, particularly in relationship to Perennialism/Traditionalism (Guenon, 
Schoun, Coomaraswamy) . . . They have some connections to the Esalen Institute 
as well.

But, I will wait to see where this post goes.

best wishes

Kirk

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Kristy McClain  wrote:
>
> *chuckles*
>  
> Touché..
>  
> I think the current trend is known as "integral Spirituality", spear-headed 
> by Andrew Cohen  and Ken Wilber. (EnlighteNext Magazine).  Sort of a 
> meta-physical, mathmatical new age movement centered on "consciousness".  
> Other devotées include Barbara Marx Huibbard, Depak Chopra amd a host of 
> inter-faith leaders which include zen monks and even Gempo Roshi.
>  
> I'll share more on this topic later, as Bill offered some intriguing 
> thoughts..
>  
> I wish it were  a rainy day here today.  I'm ready for a season change.
>  
> Kristy
> 
> 
> --- On Mon, 9/13/10, roloro1557  wrote:
> 
> 
> From: roloro1557 
> Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, September 13, 2010, 1:17 AM
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
> 
> The "New Age" movement (in the US at least) is also partly responsible for 
> this. 
> 
> Also (at least in the US) spirituality is commoditized like everything else 
> and every 10 years or so there is a new spiritual fad. In the 80's Native 
> American spiritual tradition was all the rage, then in the 90's it was 
> Celtic. . . 
> 
> I don't know what it is now because I haven't been paying any attention 
> (happily).
> 
> On a broader cultural level anything Asian has been "hot" here in America for 
> probably at least the last 20 years- art, food, spiritual, cultural ideas, 
> etc. But it is all very shallow and most Americans have no real grasp of the 
> deeper meanings. The label of "culture vulture" is very true of many if not 
> most Americans in my observation.
> 
> And yes, I'm an American, just in case anyone was wondering. . . . 
> 
> Artie
>






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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[salik888]

Dear Mike

Good questions and good post.  It is interesting that perhaps we have come to a 
little of the same conclusions, only I derived it from an impact of Japanese 
Soto and Rinzai Zen Buddhism in America and you are seeing the reality of 
culture and the inner life of Zen in Japan.

To a certain extent, I would have to say that while the Japanese intentions 
probably would automatically be implementing and apply the Zen (Tradition), I 
would not say this is entirely true.  I will explain.  But before I do, having 
said that, I would like to point out something derived from the 
Perennialist/Traditionalist School of Comparative Religion, which is a 
Philosophical and Metaphysical overview of Ancient Traditions perse -- that on 
an exoteric level, the outward manifestation of the Tradition, of course the 
Japanese would be closer to this reality, although the West could and should be 
doing this as well.  So, I would say that Zen is in good hands with the 
Japanese under the onslaught of post modernist times and Secularism, which 
steam rolls everything in the name of progress.  On the other hand, Zen, the 
esoteric, which is what is essential, the inner life, this no culture can place 
any claim to. It is the reality and the slipperiest of fish to obtain -- as the 
Sufis say, the kernal and the kernal.  

In the case of Americans or Westerner plundering the Tradition of Zen.  I think 
that is two answers -- first, there are some who have kept up the Traditions of 
Soto and Rinzai very well, but expressing a natural sense of American 
Transcendentalism.  We sort of have our own secrets and gnostics inherent in 
our experience.  That is culture and the Tradition, like the differences 
between Chinese Chan and Japanese Zen.  And then of course there has been those 
that have expressed an anything goes sort of Zen, or Zen and this and Zen and 
that.  So, in short, I don't think Zen Buddhism is under anymore attack in 
America than Japan, at least on the esoteric level.  

I do think there is a possibility in both Japan and the West for any Tradition, 
whether that be Sufis or Zen, for it to continuously be under attack from 
Secularism and syncretism.  This is post modern information age times.  In some 
sense it is what is wrong at the heart of the Middle East . . . not only is 
Islam fighting the Secular West, but more importantly they are fighting 
themselves, in terms of post modern times.  Technological and Western 
individualism and syncretism has made advances on their civilization 
(traditional culture)and they are having a sort of nighmarish reform that we 
are all witnessing.  Trust me, it probably was not much fun in Europe for many 
during the upheaval post Reformation.  

So, in perspective Zen is alive and well. It offers a good Tradition and leans 
on its pluralistic expression.  The Sufis do likewise, however they are on the 
run in Saudi Arabia and Iran, the two major power brokers in Middle Eastern 
culture.  When the Sufis can practice again in Mecca, you will know that its 
all turned for the better.  But in the case of Zen, and even in China, which I 
hear Buddhism is flourishing after all these years, as I said, I think the 
prospects look good.

best wishes

Kirk

 


--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, mike brown  wrote:
>
> Kirk,
> 
> The below was an interesting read. If I read it correctly. you seem to be 
> saying 
> that practioners of Zen need to adapt their practice to suit their own 
> particular cultural milieu. As someone who is living in Japan, and 
> is reminded 
> daily of the chasm between Asian/western thinking, I think I'd have to agree. 
> 'Zen' is Japanese, but what is at the heart of Zen is not. The change towards 
> a 
> more western approach to Zen, however, is slow and incremental and maybe 
> that's 
> as it should be. I wonder tho, will a more western approach to Zen include 
> it as 
> 'just' part of a wider, eclectic system of religious/philisophical 
> etc. study 
> and practice - or will the efficacy of Zen be diluted by such an approach 
> (the 
> traditional Japanese viewpoint).
> 
> Mike  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ____________
> .From: salik888 
> To: zen_fo...@... 
> Sent: Mon, 13 September, 2010 2:28:50
> Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> 
>   
> Dear Ed
> 
> I appreciate the affirmation, you never know what is going to be taken out of 
> context in the wrong way in the peanut gallery. Nevertheless, at some time, 
> later for me than sooner, and really through the Sufis, who have a different 
> way 
> of explaining psychology, where they break down the levels of delusion and 
> attachment, it became clear to me, at least for myself what my overall aim is 
> and could be. 
> 
> 
> We were talking about mysticism earlier, in my estimatio

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[Kristy McClain]

*chuckles*
 
Touché..
 
I think the current trend is known as "integral Spirituality", spear-headed by 
Andrew Cohen  and Ken Wilber. (EnlighteNext Magazine).  Sort of a 
meta-physical, mathmatical new age movement centered on "consciousness".  Other 
devotées include Barbara Marx Huibbard, Depak Chopra amd a host of inter-faith 
leaders which include zen monks and even Gempo Roshi.
 
I'll share more on this topic later, as Bill offered some intriguing thoughts..
 
I wish it were  a rainy day here today.  I'm ready for a season change.
 
Kristy


--- On Mon, 9/13/10, roloro1557  wrote:


From: roloro1557 
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, September 13, 2010, 1:17 AM


  



The "New Age" movement (in the US at least) is also partly responsible for 
this. 

Also (at least in the US) spirituality is commoditized like everything else and 
every 10 years or so there is a new spiritual fad. In the 80's Native American 
spiritual tradition was all the rage, then in the 90's it was Celtic. . . 

I don't know what it is now because I haven't been paying any attention 
(happily).

On a broader cultural level anything Asian has been "hot" here in America for 
probably at least the last 20 years- art, food, spiritual, cultural ideas, etc. 
But it is all very shallow and most Americans have no real grasp of the deeper 
meanings. The label of "culture vulture" is very true of many if not most 
Americans in my observation.

And yes, I'm an American, just in case anyone was wondering. . . . 

Artie









  

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[roloro1557]

The "New Age" movement (in the US at least) is also partly responsible for 
this. 

Also (at least in the US) spirituality is commoditized like everything else and 
every 10 years or so there is a new spiritual fad. In the 80's Native American 
spiritual tradition was all the rage, then in the 90's it was Celtic. . .  

I don't know what it is now because I haven't been paying any attention 
(happily).

On a broader cultural level anything Asian has been "hot" here in America for 
probably at least the last 20 years- art, food, spiritual, cultural ideas, etc. 
But it is all very shallow and most Americans have no real grasp of the deeper 
meanings. The label of "culture vulture" is very true of many if not most 
Americans in my observation.

And yes, I'm an American, just in case anyone was wondering. . . . 

Artie








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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[ChrisAustinLane]

Living in the US but in this funny year of 2010 it seems like there is the 
beginning of a global culture with many varieties of cultural practice coming 
together to form interesting combinations. I am Episcopal, practice soto zen 
and take my kids to get Miso soup and California rolls when we need some 
reliable fast food. 

I think a big task for all culture and religions at this point of history is to 
separate out the positive aspects for their existence from the 
exclusionary/tribalistic/only one path aspects of their historical legacy. I am 
a proud reader of Anglo-Saxon and happy to claim my inner Prussian when those 
bits of myself manifest into my family's morning routine (better on time than 
happy, is my training). But I condemn whole-heartedly any notion of essential 
differences based on race or even the actual existence of real racial groupings 
as something more than a cultural construct. 

Thanks,
Chris Austin-Lane
Sent from a cell phone

On Sep 12, 2010, at 7:51 PM, mike brown  wrote:

> 
> 
> Kirk,
>  
> The below was an interesting read. If I read it correctly. you seem to be 
> saying that practioners of Zen need to adapt their practice to suit their own 
> particular cultural milieu. As someone who is living in Japan, and is 
> reminded daily of the chasm between Asian/western thinking, I think I'd have 
> to agree. 'Zen' is Japanese, but what is at the heart of Zen is not. The 
> change towards a more western approach to Zen, however, is slow and 
> incremental and maybe that's as it should be. I wonder tho, will a more 
> western approach to Zen include it as 'just' part of a wider, eclectic system 
> of religious/philisophical etc. study and practice - or will the efficacy of 
> Zen be diluted by such an approach (the traditional Japanese viewpoint).
>  
> Mike  
> 
> .From: salik888 
> To: zen_fo...@yahoogroups.comto 
> Sent: Mon, 13 September, 2010 2:28:50
> Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> 
> Dear Ed
> 
> I appreciate the affirmation, you never know what is going to be taken out of 
> context in the wrong way in the peanut gallery. Nevertheless, at some time, 
> later for me than sooner, and really through the Sufis, who have a different 
> way of explaining psychology, where they break down the levels of delusion 
> and attachment, it became clear to me, at least for myself what my overall 
> aim is and could be. 
> 
> We were talking about mysticism earlier, in my estimation a wholly 
> unproductive discussion, since people would be speaking about the end results 
> and their definition of this -- enlightenment, cosmic concsiousness, etc . . 
> . The reason I bring this up is that it has to do with greed and not 
> realizing first things first. If you look at Zen Masters, Texts, and Sufi 
> Masters, you will find plenty of address about having your mind on the wrong 
> things first -- enlightenment. The Sufis would address this as a sort of 
> greed that operates and is furthered in the Nafs, The Commmanding Self, that 
> is overlayed with personal experiences, wrong education, trauma, prejudices, 
> opinions, and all the seven deadly sins. Oftentimes we bring our lower 
> instincts into our practice without ever realizing it, through worldly 
> conditioning. 
> 
> I have witnessed plenty of ego maniacs who are very clear in terms of their 
> meditation practice, or their pious dedication to their path, but are as 
> greedy as if they were thieves. 
> 
> Now, having said that, I realize that I am a thief as well, robbing this and 
> taking that. Now we are in the realm of what a Zen Buddhist Master used to 
> talk about -- the big doubt. He was not doubting the tradition, but doubting 
> our own sincerity and utilization of the tradition. This can be useful, make 
> us human and humble . . . keep us from being big shits, big know it alls, big 
> kahunas . . . there are big kahunas in Zen and big Kahunas in Sufism too, in 
> fact lots more in Sufism, since it has a devotional nature to teachers at 
> times. 
> 
> I think what is needed sometimes is fresh perspective on an ancient message. 
> That is pretty much it. There is really nothing new, and I don't say this to 
> bring attention to myself, although there is that, we are all looking for 
> attention, or we would be doing something else, but also as a reminder. As 
> the Sufis say, we are forgetful people. Remembrance on the path is a useful 
> tool. We want to keep our practice and path alive and vital, not by rote, 
> fall victim to Japanese cultural customs of order and clarity. This is a 
> by-product of Soto Zen, and only gets you so far -- a bad imitation of 
> Japanese practitioners. 
> 
> At times I am very excited to see the expression of Zen Budd

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[mike brown]

Kirk,

The below was an interesting read. If I read it correctly. you seem to be 
saying 
that practioners of Zen need to adapt their practice to suit their own 
particular cultural milieu. As someone who is living in Japan, and is reminded 
daily of the chasm between Asian/western thinking, I think I'd have to agree. 
'Zen' is Japanese, but what is at the heart of Zen is not. The change towards a 
more western approach to Zen, however, is slow and incremental and maybe that's 
as it should be. I wonder tho, will a more western approach to Zen include 
it as 
'just' part of a wider, eclectic system of religious/philisophical etc. study 
and practice - or will the efficacy of Zen be diluted by such an approach (the 
traditional Japanese viewpoint).

Mike  





.From: salik888 
To: zen_fo...@yahoogroups.comto 
Sent: Mon, 13 September, 2010 2:28:50
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

  
Dear Ed

I appreciate the affirmation, you never know what is going to be taken out of 
context in the wrong way in the peanut gallery. Nevertheless, at some time, 
later for me than sooner, and really through the Sufis, who have a different 
way 
of explaining psychology, where they break down the levels of delusion and 
attachment, it became clear to me, at least for myself what my overall aim is 
and could be. 


We were talking about mysticism earlier, in my estimation a wholly unproductive 
discussion, since people would be speaking about the end results and their 
definition of this -- enlightenment, cosmic concsiousness, etc . . . The reason 
I bring this up is that it has to do with greed and not realizing first things 
first. If you look at Zen Masters, Texts, and Sufi Masters, you will find 
plenty 
of address about having your mind on the wrong things first -- enlightenment. 
The Sufis would address this as a sort of greed that operates and is furthered 
in the Nafs, The Commmanding Self, that is overlayed with personal experiences, 
wrong education, trauma, prejudices, opinions, and all the seven deadly sins. 
Oftentimes we bring our lower instincts into our practice without ever 
realizing 
it, through worldly conditioning. 


I have witnessed plenty of ego maniacs who are very clear in terms of their 
meditation practice, or their pious dedication to their path, but are as greedy 
as if they were thieves. 


Now, having said that, I realize that I am a thief as well, robbing this and 
taking that. Now we are in the realm of what a Zen Buddhist Master used to talk 
about -- the big doubt. He was not doubting the tradition, but doubting our own 
sincerity and utilization of the tradition. This can be useful, make us human 
and humble . . . keep us from being big shits, big know it alls, big kahunas . 
. 
. there are big kahunas in Zen and big Kahunas in Sufism too, in fact lots more 
in Sufism, since it has a devotional nature to teachers at times. 


I think what is needed sometimes is fresh perspective on an ancient message. 
That is pretty much it. There is really nothing new, and I don't say this to 
bring attention to myself, although there is that, we are all looking for 
attention, or we would be doing something else, but also as a reminder. As the 
Sufis say, we are forgetful people. Remembrance on the path is a useful tool. 
We 
want to keep our practice and path alive and vital, not by rote, fall victim to 
Japanese cultural customs of order and clarity. This is a by-product of Soto 
Zen, and only gets you so far -- a bad imitation of Japanese practitioners. 


At times I am very excited to see the expression of Zen Buddhism in America, it 
appears to be trying to keep the tradition alive and deal with cultural 
conditioning that might not be applicable. Let's keep in mind the expression of 
Chan in China and then Zen in Japan. Once again, the Sufis have addressed this 
thoroughly, in terms of pluralism -- one path, many permissions. 


As anyone might be able to gather my area of practice and specialization has 
been mostly Soto Zen and Sufism. I have delved into the Hermetic traditions 
considerably, as they related to Sufism. I have not joined the Tibetan 
discussion but have found it interesting, since I know very little about the 
Dalai Lama other than he wears glasses and has a nice smile and appears to be 
everywhere. I don't know much about the Basques either, other than Ernest 
Hemingway sure thought they were swell. So hopefully my offerings will serve as 
crumbs to strengthen you heart in the path, nor detract. 


Thank you all for letting me post here . . . 

Donkey is never happy.

K among the permissive

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "ED"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> Kirk wrote:
> 
> > I think it is safe to say that Zen is a path that addresses the
> > experiential with zazen as its central methodology -- a sort of
> undoing of yourself,
> > the condit

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[salik888]

Dear Ed

I appreciate the affirmation, you never know what is going to be taken out of 
context in the wrong way in the peanut gallery.  Nevertheless, at some time, 
later for me than sooner, and really through the Sufis, who have a different 
way of explaining psychology, where they break down the levels of delusion and 
attachment, it became clear to me, at least for myself what my overall aim is 
and could be. 

We were talking about mysticism earlier, in my estimation a wholly unproductive 
discussion, since people would be speaking about the end results and their 
definition of this -- enlightenment, cosmic concsiousness, etc . . . The reason 
I bring this up is that it has to do with greed and not realizing first things 
first.  If you look at Zen Masters, Texts, and Sufi Masters, you will find 
plenty of address about having your mind on the wrong things first -- 
enlightenment.  The Sufis would address this as a sort of greed that operates 
and is furthered in the Nafs, The Commmanding Self, that is overlayed with 
personal experiences, wrong education, trauma, prejudices, opinions, and all 
the seven deadly sins.  Oftentimes we bring our lower instincts into our 
practice without ever realizing it, through worldly conditioning.  

I have witnessed plenty of ego maniacs who are very clear in terms of their 
meditation practice, or their pious dedication to their path, but are as greedy 
as if they were thieves.  

Now, having said that, I realize that I am a thief as well, robbing this and 
taking that.  Now we are in the realm of what a Zen Buddhist Master used to 
talk about -- the big doubt.  He was not doubting the tradition, but doubting 
our own sincerity and utilization of the tradition.  This can be useful, make 
us human and humble . . . keep us from being big shits, big know it alls, big 
kahunas . . . there are big kahunas in Zen and big Kahunas in Sufism too, in 
fact lots more in Sufism, since it has a devotional nature to teachers at 
times.  

I think what is needed sometimes is fresh perspective on an ancient message.  
That is pretty much it.  There is really nothing new, and I don't say this to 
bring attention to myself, although there is that, we are all looking for 
attention, or we would be doing something else, but also as a reminder.  As the 
Sufis say, we are forgetful people.  Remembrance on the path is a useful tool.  
We want to keep our practice and path alive and vital, not by rote, fall victim 
to Japanese cultural customs of order and clarity.  This is a by-product of 
Soto Zen, and only gets you so far -- a bad imitation of Japanese 
practitioners. 

At times I am very excited to see the expression of Zen Buddhism in America, it 
appears to be trying to keep the tradition alive and deal with cultural 
conditioning that might not be applicable.  Let's keep in mind the expression 
of Chan in China and then Zen in Japan.  Once again, the Sufis have addressed 
this thoroughly, in terms of pluralism -- one path, many permissions. 

As anyone might be able to gather my area of practice and specialization has 
been mostly Soto Zen and Sufism.  I have delved into the Hermetic traditions 
considerably, as they related to Sufism.  I have not joined the Tibetan 
discussion but have found it interesting, since I know very little about the 
Dalai Lama other than he wears glasses and has a nice smile and appears to be 
everywhere.  I don't know much about the Basques either, other than Ernest 
Hemingway sure thought they were swell.  So hopefully my offerings will serve 
as crumbs to strengthen you heart in the path, nor detract. 

Thank you all for letting me post here . . .   

Donkey is never happy.

K among the permissive

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "ED"  wrote:
>
> 
> 
> Kirk wrote:
> 
> > I think it is safe to say that Zen is a path that addresses the
> > experiential with zazen as its central methodology -- a sort of
> undoing of yourself,
> > the conditioned cultural and experiential part of your personality
> that
> > continuously reacts and feeds your ego.
> >
> > Think of it this way, while you are reading this you are already
> reacting
> > inside in an automatic way. Zen seeks to loosen the bounds of your
> false
> > self and return you to your natural state. Part of the reason why Zen
> > honors spontaneity, clarity, nature and a sense of the primordial
> untouched
> > mother that feeds us all.
> 
> 
> 
> Greetings!
> 
> I resonate strongly with the above statements on zen. Does anyone hold a
> different perspective?
> 
> --ED
> 
> 
> 
> --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, novelidea8@ wrote:
> >
> > Greetings
> >
> > In my estimation there really is no way to assert what Zen is, whether
> you
> > are restricting it to zazen; or opening it to a wider religious and
> > cultural discussion. The best we can do is just admit we fall short
> and perhaps
> > point to our own experience, to presence. Of course we could ask
> ourselves
> > who is being present?
> >
> > 

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[ED]

Kirk wrote:

> I think it is safe to say that Zen is a path that addresses the
> experiential with zazen as its central methodology -- a sort of
undoing of yourself,
> the conditioned cultural and experiential part of your personality
that
> continuously reacts and feeds your ego.
>
> Think of it this way, while you are reading this you are already
reacting
> inside in an automatic way. Zen seeks to loosen the bounds of your
false
> self and return you to your natural state. Part of the reason why Zen
> honors spontaneity, clarity, nature and a sense of the primordial
untouched
> mother that feeds us all.



Greetings!

I resonate strongly with the above statements on zen. Does anyone hold a
different perspective?

--ED



--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, novelid...@... wrote:
>
> Greetings
>
> In my estimation there really is no way to assert what Zen is, whether
you
> are restricting it to zazen; or opening it to a wider religious and
> cultural discussion. The best we can do is just admit we fall short
and perhaps
> point to our own experience, to presence. Of course we could ask
ourselves
> who is being present?
>
> So repeating zazen zazen zazen with platitudes to support it, or
explaining
> big Zen and little zen, does do much but tell us something about who
is
> doing the talking and perhaps who is doing the listening here.
>
> I think it is safe to say that Zen is a path that addresses the
> experiential with zazen as its central methodology -- a sort of
undoing of yourself,
> the conditioned cultural and experiential part of your personality
that
> continuously reacts and feeds your ego.
>
> Think of it this way, while you are reading this you are already
reacting
> inside in an automatic way. Zen seeks to loosen the bounds of your
false
> self and return you to your natural state. Part of the reason why Zen
> honors spontaneity, clarity, nature and a sense of the primordial
untouched
> mother that feeds us all.
>
> In this respect Zen shares a great deal in common with Sufism,
although the
> methods might be a great deal different.
>
> Best wishes
>
> Kirk

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[salik888]

Dear Anthony

Thank you for the compliment and the literarl correction. Perhaps this will 
help you not take Donkey so literally.

Narudin Tale

Nasrudin's donkey, frightened by something on the road, opened a fast run, 
carrying nasrudin on his back. The villagers, unaccustomed to see Nasrudin 
moving at such unusual pace, started laughing and yelled: "hey, nasrudin, where 
are you going in  such a hurry?!" "i have no idea!" shouted nasrudin back, "ask 
my donkey!"

So, now we are back to -- Donkey is never happy.

If you pay attention you will see many donkeys on the loose in here, they 
outnumber the indivduals in here a thousand to one . . . 

K among the oats carriers

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Anthony Wu  wrote:
>
> Kirk,
>  
> Out of your sophistication, one thing is wrong: a donkey is happy, despite 
> the heavy load he carries, because he 'does not know'.
>  
> Anthony
> 
> --- On Sat, 11/9/10, novelid...@...  wrote:
> 
> 
> From: novelid...@... 
> Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Saturday, 11 September, 2010, 10:54 AM
> 
> 
>   
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dear Bill,
>  
> Always glad to help the mental gymnastics so ever-present in zen circles, and 
> I do mean circles . . . you see, it just can't be done . . . 
>  
> And well, as the Sufis say, Donkey is never happy.
>  
> Best wishes
>  
> Kirk
>  
>  
> 
> In a message dated 9/10/2010 7:50:37 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, 
> billsm...@... writes:
>   
> 
> Kirk,
> 
> My comments are embedded below:
> 
> You wrote:
> 
> In my estimation there really is no way to assert what Zen is, whether you 
> are restricting it to zazen; or opening it to a wider religious and cultural 
> discussion...
> [Bill!] No way to assert what Zen is? How sad...
> 
> I think it is safe to say that Zen is a path that addresses the experiential 
> with zazen as its central methodology -- a sort of undoing of yourself, the 
> conditioned cultural and experiential part of your personality that 
> continuously reacts and feeds your ego.
> [Bill!] Thanks for your assertion of what Zen is! I feel better now. 
> 
> 
> ...Bill!
> 
> 
> 
> __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
> database 5441 (20100910) __
> 
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> 
> http://www.eset.com
>






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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[Anthony Wu]

Kirk,
 
Out of your sophistication, one thing is wrong: a donkey is happy, despite the 
heavy load he carries, because he 'does not know'.
 
Anthony

--- On Sat, 11/9/10, novelid...@aol.com  wrote:


From: novelid...@aol.com 
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Saturday, 11 September, 2010, 10:54 AM


  




Dear Bill,
 
Always glad to help the mental gymnastics so ever-present in zen circles, and I 
do mean circles . . . you see, it just can't be done . . . 
 
And well, as the Sufis say, Donkey is never happy.
 
Best wishes
 
Kirk
 
 

In a message dated 9/10/2010 7:50:37 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, 
billsm...@hhs1963.org writes:
  

Kirk,

My comments are embedded below:

You wrote:

In my estimation there really is no way to assert what Zen is, whether you are 
restricting it to zazen; or opening it to a wider religious and cultural 
discussion...
[Bill!] No way to assert what Zen is? How sad...

I think it is safe to say that Zen is a path that addresses the experiential 
with zazen as its central methodology -- a sort of undoing of yourself, the 
conditioned cultural and experiential part of your personality that 
continuously reacts and feeds your ego.
[Bill!] Thanks for your assertion of what Zen is! I feel better now. 


...Bill!



__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 5441 (20100910) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[roloro1557]

Bill-

:-) Seems simple to me, but I'm not exactly new at this!

Thank you-
Artie





--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> Artie,
> 
> I agree with every word of your post below.Bill!
> 
> From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of roloro1557
> 
> In my direct experience there is nothing at all mystical about zen 







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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[novelidea8]

Dear Bill,
 
Always glad to help the mental gymnastics so ever-present in zen circles,  
and I do mean circles . . . you see, it just can't be done . . . 
 
And well, as the Sufis say, Donkey is never happy.
 
Best wishes
 
Kirk
 
 
 
In a message dated 9/10/2010 7:50:37 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
billsm...@hhs1963.org writes:

 
 
 
Kirk,

My comments are embedded below:

You wrote:

In my  estimation there really is no way to assert what Zen is, whether you 
are  restricting it to zazen; or opening it to a wider religious and 
cultural  discussion...
[Bill!] No way to assert what Zen is? How sad...

I  think it is safe to say that Zen is a path that addresses the 
experiential  with zazen as its central methodology -- a sort of undoing of 
yourself, 
the  conditioned cultural and experiential part of your personality that  
continuously reacts and feeds your ego.
[Bill!] Thanks for your assertion  of what Zen is! I feel better now.  


...Bill!



__ Information from ESET NOD32  Antivirus, version of virus 
signature database 5441 (20100910)  __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

_http://www.eset.com_ (http://www.eset.com/) 

RE: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[BillSmart]

JMJM,

Thanks for your reply.

I've numbered your points so I can refer to them more easily.

The zen I practice, the items that seem to be the same are 3, 4, 5 and 6; 
although I'd have to investigate what you mean by 3 and 6 before I could be 
100% sure.

As you know I consider both chi and karma illusory, teaching tools at best and 
comforting superstitions at worst.

...Bill!

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Jue Miao Jing Ming - 
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2010 10:48 PM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

  
Hello Bill,

As always, thank you for your detailed explanation.  Let me get some of our 
definitions listed.
1. Chi is just a medium.  The wisdom it contains is the spirit. 
2. We all have chi, without it we die. Some can sense it.  Some don't care. 
3. In Chan, only True Form is not illusion.  Everything else is, including this 
post of mine.
4. Every practice, no matter how different, is just a bridge.  Some longer and 
some shorter.
5. Some bridge enable us to help others more efficiently.
6. The end result is still the same -- liberate ourselves and others from 
sufferings.
7. Depending on our karma, our paths are shaped. 
Thank you as always,
JMJM

On 9/10/2010 6:24 AM, billsm...@hhs1963.org wrote: 
  
JMJM,

Please don't take my posts as some kind of 'official' Zen Buddhist position. 
It's not. It's my position and I'm willing to take responsibility for it and 
explain it when asked.

If y

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Jue Miao Jing Ming - 
Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 12:30 PM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

I always know that Zen and Chan are the same in description, but different in 
practice. Now I am certain the missing practice in Zen is the "Mystic Inner 
Witness" practice or 『秘密內證法』 in Chinese.

[Bill!] I'm not sure what the 'Mystic Inner Witness' practice is, but I think I 
can guess. It sounds like something described by many in the West as the 
'watcher' or the 'witness'. A bodiless awareness that passively and exclusively 
observes. If it is this it is not taught in Japanese Renzai/Soto Zen Buddhism. 
I have experienced this phenomenon while sitting, and when I questioned my 
Roshi (Zen Teacher) about it during dokusan (private interview) I was told to 
just ignore it, that is was just maya (illusion). I did that and after a short 
while I never experienced it again.

That's the reason Zen lost its spirituality and became an everyday 
rationalization, as described by you.
[Bill!] 'Spirit' is defined by Merriam-Webster Online as:
"1: an animating or vital principle held to give life to physical organisms 
2: a supernatural being or essence"
Using those definitions as a basis for 'spirituality', I think you are 
referring to #1 - which I also think you call 'chi'. Again, during my beginning 
Japanese Renzai Zen Buddhist training, and when working on the 'breakthrough' 
koan 'Mu', I was encouraged to generate 'joriki', which was described as a 
'ball of energy, like a small fire, located in my 'hara' (a spot just below the 
navel). I was told it would help me build up my ability to focus and achieve 
the necessary concentration that was necessary to pass the koan. After passing 
'Mu' I asked my Roshi about joriki and if I needed to continue to generate and 
accumulate it. He replied that it was not necessary to do that anymore, that it 
was a form of maya and that although useful as a teaching technique it could 
actually become a hindrance when doing Shikan taza (clear mind zazen) which is 
the direct expression of Buddha Nature. So, if 'chi' is what you mean when you 
say 'Zen has lost its spirituality', you are correct. It is necessary to 
discard that along with all other illusions. 

Well??
[Bill!] I am well, thank you. And you?

On 9/8/2010 9:00 PM, billsm...@hhs1963.org wrote: 

JMJM,

You asked if "...Zen has a "mystic" practice?"

My short answer would be definitely NO.

My long answer would be: Buddhism may have mystical practices, and therefore 
Zen Buddhism may also; but zen in and of itself is the opposite of mysticism as 
the term is usually used. It is nothing special. It is available to all 
sentient beings. It is just everyday life. Zen practice is the 'cypress tree in 
the garden', 'three-pounds of flax', 'a dried shit-stick'. Zen practice is Just 
THIS!

An addendum (long one) to my long answer is: I differentiate Zen Buddhism and 
zen. I do not believe zen is co-dependent with, exclusively associated with or 
a merely a sub-set of Buddhism. I do of course recognize a sub-set or sect of

RE: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[BillSmart]

Kirk,

My comments are embedded below:

You wrote:
 
In my estimation there really is no way to assert what Zen is, whether you are 
restricting it to zazen; or opening it to a wider religious and cultural 
discussion...
[Bill!]  No way to assert what Zen is?  How sad...
 
I think it is safe to say that Zen is a path that addresses the experiential 
with zazen as its central methodology -- a sort of undoing of yourself, the 
conditioned cultural and experiential part of your personality that 
continuously reacts and feeds your ego.
[Bill!] Thanks for your assertion of what Zen is!  I feel better now.  
 
 
...Bill!
 
 

__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 5441 (20100910) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 





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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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

RE: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[BillSmart]

Artie,

 

I agree with every word of your post below.Bill!

 

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of roloro1557
Sent: Friday, September 10, 2010 12:55 PM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

 

  

In my direct experience there is nothing at all mystical about zen - nor is
there anything mystical about it as the old Chinese masters taught it. And I
do think this is why many people have such a hard time with zen - they are
looking for something mystical, they cannot believe it really is that
simple: "Everyday mind is zen mind" or "Marvelous spiritual power; chopping
wood and carrying water!" or "If you want to understand zen directly, the
normal mind is zen mind." And my favorite: "Someone asked Xuedou, 'What is
the living meaning of zen?' Xuedou said, 'The mountains are high, the oceans
are wide.' "

Until you "get it" these things don't seem to make sense and people think
there must be some deep mystical thing they are missing. After you "get it"
you realize it was there all along! ;-)

Artie





__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 5441 (20100910) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[roloro1557]

Hi Kirk :-)

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, novelid...@... wrote:
>
> Greetings
>  
> In my estimation there really is no way to assert what Zen is, 

I very much agree. . . 

> I think it is safe to say that Zen is a path that addresses the  
> experiential with zazen as its central methodology -- a sort of undoing of  
> yourself, 
> the conditioned cultural and experiential part of your personality  that 
> continuously reacts and feeds your ego.  

Yes! :-) beautifully, excellently stated! :-)


Thanks for your excellent post :-)
Artie






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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明]

 Hello Bill,

As always, thank you for your detailed explanation.  Let me get some of 
our definitions listed.


   * Chi is just a medium.  The wisdom it contains is the spirit.
   * We all have chi, without it we die. Some can sense it.  Some don't
 care.
   * In Chan, only True Form is not illusion.  Everything else is,
 including this post of mine.
   * Every practice, no matter how different, is just a bridge.  Some
 longer and some shorter.
   * Some bridge enable us to help others more efficiently.
   * The end result is still the same -- liberate ourselves and others
 from sufferings.
   * Depending on our karma, our paths are shaped.

Thank you as always,
JMJM

On 9/10/2010 6:24 AM, billsm...@hhs1963.org wrote:


JMJM,

Please don't take my posts as some kind of 'official' Zen Buddhist 
position. It's not. It's my position and I'm willing to take 
responsibility for it and explain it when asked.


If y

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> 
[mailto:Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
<mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Jue Miao Jing Ming 
- 

Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 12:30 PM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

I always know that Zen and Chan are the same in description, but 
different in practice. Now I am certain the missing practice in Zen is 
the "Mystic Inner Witness" practice or 『秘密內證法』 in Chinese.


[Bill!] I'm not sure what the 'Mystic Inner Witness' practice is, but 
I think I can guess. It sounds like something described by many in the 
West as the 'watcher' or the 'witness'. A bodiless awareness that 
passively and exclusively observes. If it is this it is not taught in 
Japanese Renzai/Soto Zen Buddhism. I have experienced this phenomenon 
while sitting, and when I questioned my Roshi (Zen Teacher) about it 
during dokusan (private interview) I was told to just ignore it, that 
is was just maya (illusion). I did that and after a short while I 
never experienced it again.


That's the reason Zen lost its spirituality and became an everyday 
rationalization, as described by you.

[Bill!] 'Spirit' is defined by Merriam-Webster Online as:
"1: an animating or vital principle held to give life to physical 
organisms

2: a supernatural being or essence"
Using those definitions as a basis for 'spirituality', I think you are 
referring to #1 - which I also think you call 'chi'. Again, during my 
beginning Japanese Renzai Zen Buddhist training, and when working on 
the 'breakthrough' koan 'Mu', I was encouraged to generate 'joriki', 
which was described as a 'ball of energy, like a small fire, located 
in my 'hara' (a spot just below the navel). I was told it would help 
me build up my ability to focus and achieve the necessary 
concentration that was necessary to pass the koan. After passing 'Mu' 
I asked my Roshi about joriki and if I needed to continue to generate 
and accumulate it. He replied that it was not necessary to do that 
anymore, that it was a form of maya and that although useful as a 
teaching technique it could actually become a hindrance when doing 
Shikan taza (clear mind zazen) which is the direct expression of 
Buddha Nature. So, if 'chi' is what you mean when you say 'Zen has 
lost its spirituality', you are correct. It is necessary to discard 
that along with all other illusions.


Well??
[Bill!] I am well, thank you. And you?

On 9/8/2010 9:00 PM, billsm...@hhs1963.org 
<mailto:BillSmart%40HHS1963.org> wrote:


JMJM,

You asked if "...Zen has a "mystic" practice?"

My short answer would be definitely NO.

My long answer would be: Buddhism may have mystical practices, and 
therefore Zen Buddhism may also; but zen in and of itself is the 
opposite of mysticism as the term is usually used. It is nothing 
special. It is available to all sentient beings. It is just everyday 
life. Zen practice is the 'cypress tree in the garden', 'three-pounds 
of flax', 'a dried shit-stick'. Zen practice is Just THIS!


An addendum (long one) to my long answer is: I differentiate Zen 
Buddhism and zen. I do not believe zen is co-dependent with, 
exclusively associated with or a merely a sub-set of Buddhism. I do of 
course recognize a sub-set or sect of Buddhism called 'Zen Buddhism'. 
I refer to this in my posts as 'Zen' with an upper-case 'Z' to denote 
it is a proper noun. I use 'zen', which I believe to simply be the 
direct experience of reality, with a lower-case 'z' to refer to 
non-denominational zen.


For me Zen Buddhism is a Buddhist expression of zen. It has taken the 
essence of zen and has encased it wi

RE: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[BillSmart]

JMJM,

Please don't take my posts as some kind of 'official' Zen Buddhist position.  
It's not.  It's my position and I'm willing to take responsibility for it and 
explain it when asked.


If y


From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Jue Miao Jing Ming - 
Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 12:30 PM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

I always know that Zen and Chan are the same in description, but different in 
practice.  Now I am certain the missing practice in Zen is the "Mystic Inner 
Witness" practice or 『秘密內證法』 in Chinese.

[Bill!]  I'm not sure what the 'Mystic Inner Witness' practice is, but I think 
I can guess.  It sounds like something described by many in the West as the 
'watcher' or the 'witness'.  A bodiless awareness that passively and 
exclusively observes.  If it is this it is not taught in Japanese Renzai/Soto 
Zen Buddhism.  I have experienced this phenomenon while sitting, and when I 
questioned my Roshi (Zen Teacher) about it during dokusan (private interview) I 
was told to just ignore it, that is was just maya (illusion).  I did that and 
after a short while I never experienced it again.

That's the reason Zen lost its spirituality and became an everyday 
rationalization, as described by you.
[Bill!]  'Spirit' is defined by Merriam-Webster Online as:
"1: an animating or vital principle held to give life to physical organisms 
 2: a supernatural being or essence"
Using those definitions as a basis for 'spirituality', I think you are 
referring to #1 - which I also think you call 'chi'.  Again, during my 
beginning Japanese Renzai Zen Buddhist training, and when working on the 
'breakthrough' koan 'Mu', I was encouraged to generate 'joriki', which was 
described as a 'ball of energy, like a small fire, located in my 'hara' (a spot 
just below the navel).  I was told it would help me build up my ability to 
focus and achieve the necessary concentration that was necessary to pass the 
koan.  After passing 'Mu' I asked my Roshi about joriki and if I needed to 
continue to generate and accumulate it.  He replied that it was not necessary 
to do that anymore, that it was a form of maya and that although useful as a 
teaching technique it could actually become a hindrance when doing Shikan taza 
(clear mind zazen) which is the direct expression of Buddha Nature.  So, if 
'chi' is what you mean when you say 'Zen has lost its spirituality', you are 
correct.  It is necessary to discard that along with all other illusions.  

Well??
[Bill!]  I am well, thank you.  And you?

On 9/8/2010 9:00 PM, billsm...@hhs1963.org wrote: 
  
JMJM,

You asked if "...Zen has a "mystic" practice?"

My short answer would be definitely NO.

My long answer would be: Buddhism may have mystical practices, and therefore 
Zen Buddhism may also; but zen in and of itself is the opposite of mysticism as 
the term is usually used. It is nothing special. It is available to all 
sentient beings. It is just everyday life. Zen practice is the 'cypress tree in 
the garden', 'three-pounds of flax', 'a dried shit-stick'. Zen practice is Just 
THIS!

An addendum (long one) to my long answer is: I differentiate Zen Buddhism and 
zen. I do not believe zen is co-dependent with, exclusively associated with or 
a merely a sub-set of Buddhism. I do of course recognize a sub-set or sect of 
Buddhism called 'Zen Buddhism'. I refer to this in my posts as 'Zen' with an 
upper-case 'Z' to denote it is a proper noun. I use 'zen', which I believe to 
simply be the direct experience of reality, with a lower-case 'z' to refer to 
non-denominational zen.

For me Zen Buddhism is a Buddhist expression of zen. It has taken the essence 
of zen and has encased it with the religious dogma of Buddhism. A further 
extension of this would be 'Japanese Zen Buddhism' as contrasted with 'Korean 
Zen Buddhism'. These have been further encased with culture values associated 
with the Japanese or Korean cultures. This layering goes on and on and on until 
the layers are so thick the kernel or essence which is zen is sometimes 
completely obscured. This is also true of Christianity, and I believe all other 
'religions'. In fact that is what I think most 'religions' are: a stylized 
expression of zen - which as I said above very often puts more emphasis on the 
layers of 'style' than the kernel of 'zen'.

I think there are certainly 'mystic practices' within most religions. I think 
religions encourage the belief in 'mysticism' to protect the layers they've 
overlaid on the basic kernel of

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[Maria Lopez]

Kirk wrote:
 
In this respect Zen shares a great deal in common with Sufism, although the 
methods might be a great deal different".
 
I've found it that while sensing through the universal heart beyond any duality 
there is no suffism and not even zen.  At those moments there is just,  what 
there is there free from any concepts or ideas.   eg: This last July during a 
holiday with some members of the family and visiting the place where we were 
born and grow I had a severe crisis of mobility. We were hosted in a private 
house.  And just the following day of our stay there I had a funny sensation in 
my body...and I knew at those moments that mobility crisis was on its way.  In 
fact just in a few minutes I tried to leave my bed and fallen on it.  and 
couldn't leave it.  (I suffer from a disability in my lower back and sometimes 
this leads me to severe crisis of mobility).  As I am very familiar with my 
body through the practice of zen I knew at those moments that I had to stay in 
bed that day and release that blockage of pain by stopping there just where I 
was.  No
 suffism, no mysticism of any kindJust pure zen.  In the evening our 
hostess lend me a crutchet and not only I could leave my bed but also going for 
an out dinner.  The pain was still there, the mobility too but under control. 
And if you could see the photo the waitress took during that dinner you would 
see a shining face, though a bit marked by the pain.  And this is useful zen.  
 
Nice to hear from you again.  Thanks for the chat.
Mayka
 
 
This post of course it doesn't intend to be a contradiction to yourself 
personal experience.  is intention is only to point it out that when all of a 
sudden an event, something happen to us, there is no more to it that just that 
present moment.  
 
Mayka
 

--- On Fri, 10/9/10, novelid...@aol.com  wrote:


From: novelid...@aol.com 
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Friday, 10 September, 2010, 8:57


  




Greetings
 
In my estimation there really is no way to assert what Zen is, whether you are 
restricting it to zazen; or opening it to a wider religious and cultural 
discussion.  The best we can do is just admit we fall short and perhaps point 
to our own experience, to presence.  Of course we could ask ourselves who is 
being present?  
 
So repeating zazen zazen zazen with platitudes to support it, or explaining big 
Zen and little zen, does do much but tell us something about who is doing the 
talking and perhaps who is doing the listening here.  
 
I think it is safe to say that Zen is a path that addresses the experiential 
with zazen as its central methodology -- a sort of undoing of yourself, the 
conditioned cultural and experiential part of your personality that 
continuously reacts and feeds your ego.  
 
Think of it this way, while you are reading this you are already reacting 
inside in an automatic way.  Zen seeks to loosen the bounds of your false self 
and return you to your natural state.  Part of the reason why Zen honors 
spontaneity, clarity, nature and a sense of the primordial untouched mother 
that feeds us all.
 
In this respect Zen shares a great deal in common with Sufism, although the 
methods might be a great deal different.  
 
Best wishes
 
Kirk
 
 
 
It shares a great deal of common
 

In a message dated 9/9/2010 10:55:19 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, 
roloro1...@yahoo.com writes:
  

In my direct experience there is nothing at all mystical about zen - nor is 
there anything mystical about it as the old Chinese masters taught it. And I do 
think this is why many people have such a hard time with zen - they are looking 
for something mystical, they cannot believe it really is that simple: "Everyday 
mind is zen mind" or "Marvelous spiritual power; chopping wood and carrying 
water!" or "If you want to understand zen directly, the normal mind is zen 
mind." And my favorite: "Someone asked Xuedou, 'What is the living meaning of 
zen?' Xuedou said, 'The mountains are high, the oceans are wide.' "

Until you "get it" these things don't seem to make sense and people think there 
must be some deep mystical thing they are missing. After you "get it" you 
realize it was there all along! ;-)

Artie

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[novelidea8]

Greetings
 
In my estimation there really is no way to assert what Zen is, whether you  
are restricting it to zazen; or opening it to a wider religious and 
cultural  discussion.  The best we can do is just admit we fall short and 
perhaps  
point to our own experience, to presence.  Of course we could ask ourselves  
who is being present?  
 
So repeating zazen zazen zazen with platitudes to support it, or explaining 
 big Zen and little zen, does do much but tell us something about who is 
doing  the talking and perhaps who is doing the listening here.  
 
I think it is safe to say that Zen is a path that addresses the  
experiential with zazen as its central methodology -- a sort of undoing of  
yourself, 
the conditioned cultural and experiential part of your personality  that 
continuously reacts and feeds your ego.  
 
Think of it this way, while you are reading this you are already reacting  
inside in an automatic way.  Zen seeks to loosen the bounds of your false  
self and return you to your natural state.  Part of the reason why Zen  
honors spontaneity, clarity, nature and a sense of the primordial untouched  
mother that feeds us all.
 
In this respect Zen shares a great deal in common with Sufism, although the 
 methods might be a great deal different.  
 
Best wishes
 
Kirk
 
 
 
It shares a great deal of common
 
 
In a message dated 9/9/2010 10:55:19 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
roloro1...@yahoo.com writes:

 
 
 
In my direct experience there is nothing at all mystical about zen - nor is 
 there anything mystical about it as the old Chinese masters taught it. And 
I  do think this is why many people have such a hard time with zen - they 
are  looking for something mystical, they cannot believe it really is that 
simple:  "Everyday mind is zen mind" or "Marvelous spiritual power; chopping 
wood and  carrying water!" or "If you want to understand zen directly, the 
normal mind  is zen mind." And my favorite: "Someone asked Xuedou, 'What is 
the living  meaning of zen?' Xuedou said, 'The mountains are high, the oceans 
are wide.'  "

Until you "get it" these things don't seem to make sense and people  think 
there must be some deep mystical thing they are missing. After you "get  it" 
you realize it was there all along! ;-)

Artie

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[roloro1557]

In my direct experience there is nothing at all mystical about zen - nor is 
there anything mystical about it as the old Chinese masters taught it. And I do 
think this is why many people have such a hard time with zen - they are looking 
for something mystical, they cannot believe it really is that simple: "Everyday 
mind is zen mind" or "Marvelous spiritual power; chopping wood and carrying 
water!" or "If you want to understand zen directly, the normal mind is zen 
mind." And my favorite: "Someone asked Xuedou, 'What is the living meaning of 
zen?' Xuedou said, 'The mountains are high, the oceans are wide.' "

Until you "get it" these things don't seem to make sense and people think there 
must be some deep mystical thing they are missing. After you "get it" you 
realize it was there all along! ;-)

Artie






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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[DP]

To use another example, the Christian sect often associated with mysticism, the 
Quakers, also sit in silence and find much enlightenment (in a "small E" sense) 
in the everyday.

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> DP,
> 
> I guess I could go with that - 'everyday stuff is mystical'.  Just as I could 
> say 'everyday stuff is holy', or 'everyday stuff is special'.
> 
> I understand what statements like these are trying to convey.
> 
> As I said before, this sounds like an interesting book.
> 
> ...Bill!
> 
> 
> From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf 
> Of DP
> Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 7:48 PM
> To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> 
>   
> 
> However, Underhill's point is that the "everyday stuff" IS mystical, 
> depending on how you look at it. 
> 
> --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
> >
> > JMJM,
> > 
> > You bring up a very good question.
> > 
> > According to Merriam-Webster Online the definitions of these words and my 
> > opinion as how they could be applied to zen are:
> > 
> > MYSTICAL
> > 1:a : having a spiritual meaning or reality that is neither apparent to the 
> > senses nor obvious to the intelligence
> > [Bill!] Zen is not 'spiritual' and is definitely apparent to the senses, so 
> > this definition doesn't seem to fit. Zen is however not obvious, nor even 
> > accessible as far as I'm concerned, to the intelligence.
> > b : involving or having the nature of an individual's direct subjective 
> > communion with God or ultimate reality
> > [Bill!] This is pretty close, although I would take out the words 
> > 'subjective' and 'God or ultimate' which leaves 'direct communion with 
> > reality'.
> > 
> > MYSTICISM
> > 1: the experience of MYSTICAL union or direct communion with ultimate 
> > reality reported by MYSTICS
> > [Bill!] I could live with this definition. 
> > 2: the belief that direct knowledge of God, spiritual truth, or ultimate 
> > reality can be attained through subjective experience (as intuition or 
> > insight)
> > [Bill!] Again, this is close, but I don't associate Buddha Nature with 
> > intuition or insight - although I know in the West these could be used as a 
> > poor substitute. 
> > 3:a : vague speculation : a belief without sound basis
> > [Bill!] I don't like this one at all.
> > b : a theory postulating the possibility of direct and intuitive 
> > acquisition of ineffable knowledge or power 
> > [Bill!] This is pretty close. I like the word 'ineffable'. That definitely 
> > fits. I don't like the words 'intuitive, acquisition, knowledge and power'.
> > 
> > In English, 'mysticism' is generally associated with God or 'hidden' 
> > knowledge or insight. I associate zen with just everyday stuff. It's no big 
> > deal.
> > 
> > ...Bill!
> > 
> > From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On 
> > Behalf Of Jue Miao Jing Ming - 
> > Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 2:14 AM
> > To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> > 
> > 
> > Dear all, 
> > 
> > I have a question. In Chinese, the Tibetan practice is literally translated 
> > as the "Mystic Order", the Chan practice is literally translated as the 
> > "Grand Mystic Order". Chan is the grand one, because Rong-Shu Patriarch 
> > brought the Chan to Tibet and affected their practice.
> > 
> > In Chan 『秘密內è‰æ³•ã€ "Mystic Inner 
> > Witness Dharma" means an inward practice enabling heart to heart witness of 
> > Buddha. That's all. There is really nothing mystic about it.
> > 
> > Is the term "mystic or mysticism" means the same as the I described above 
> > or not?
> > 
> > Much obliged,
> > _/\_
> > JMJM
> > 
> > On 9/7/2010 8:13 AM, DP wrote: 
> > 
> > That's kind of the point of the book. She is trying to bring mysticism down 
> > to Earth, as it were. She wants to show that not only monks can do it.
> > 
> > --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
> > >
> > > DP,
> > > 
> > > I haven't heard of this book, but it does sound interesting.
> > > 
> > > I don't, however, associate mysti

RE: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[BillSmart]

Kirk,

I addressed some of this in a post that I wrote before I read your post here, 
and I hope that post adequately addressed my opinions on this subject.  
Additional comments specific to this post of yours are embedded below:

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 
novelid...@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 10:34 PM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

  
Dear Bill
 
Well, no doubt much of what you say is true.  Nevertheless, one can't keep from 
assessing Zen in this manner (mystical), which is a word like 'spiritual' that 
has lost its meaning, they both sort of twist in the wind at peoples 
convenience.
[Bill!] Agreed!

Having said that while Zen has much dialogue about the mundane, indeed, in many 
other traditions the mundane is, everyday, nothing special aspect is emphasized 
as well, particularly in it exoteric application.  I don't think we can make 
the mistake of getting all Zenny and saying that Zen is a special case, 
something wholly different from other paths . . . the obviousness of this 
speaks for itself . . .
[Bill!] I agree with the above statements, but probably not quite the same way 
you meant it.  See my previous post about ‘zen’ being the kernel on which most 
religions are based.

 While I would agree that Zen puts forth a unique expression of nothing 
special, emphasizing Zazen and Shikan Taza, at the same time that cannot put 
Zen in a particularly advantageous category
[Bill!] I do place Zen Buddhism (especially Japanese Soto Zen Buddhism teaching 
of shikan taza) in a little more advantageous position because it has the least 
amount of extraneous layers covering the kernel - at least in my opinion.

 . . . you might as well start saying that Jesus died for our sins if that is 
the case.  The only thing we can safely assert is well, who is making the 
assertion about nothing special.
[Bill!] I’m not sure what you meant by this, but the belief that Jesus died for 
our sins to me is just another example of the layers that tend to obscure the 
fundamental teaching of Jesus which is simply '...love one another' (John 13:34)
 

So I would say that while I don't like the word mystical all that much, Zen 
Buddhism, at least Soto Zen, which I am familiar with, does have a mystical 
flavor to it.
[Bill!] I was a student of a school that had a dual Japanese Soto/Renzai Zen 
Buddhist lineage for over 10 years and I never was made aware of any mystical 
teachings.  Could you give me an example?

Nothing special can't be special because its nothing special and others don't 
know that . . . that whole game is played way to much in the Zen Community.
[Bill!] If this core zen teaching is played as a game or taught as something 
mystical (esoteric), I agree with your assessment.  But this is the core 
teaching of zen.  Nothing more than that.  All else is extraneous and most 
likely detrimental.
 
best wishes
 
Kirk
[Bill!] Bill!!
 
In a message dated 9/8/2010 12:41:27 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time, 
billsm...@hhs1963.org writes:
  
JMJM,

You bring up a very good question.

According to Merriam-Webster Online the definitions of these words and my 
opinion as how they could be applied to zen are:

MYSTICAL
1:a : having a spiritual meaning or reality that is neither apparent to the 
senses nor obvious to the intelligence
[Bill!] Zen is not 'spiritual' and is definitely apparent to the senses, so 
this definition doesn't seem to fit. Zen is however not obvious, nor even 
accessible as far as I'm concerned, to the intelligence.
b : involving or having the nature of an individual's direct subjective 
communion with God or ultimate reality
[Bill!] This is pretty close, although I would take out the words 'subjective' 
and 'God or ultimate' which leaves 'direct communion with reality'.

MYSTICISM
1: the experience of MYSTICAL union or direct communion with ultimate reality 
reported by MYSTICS
[Bill!] I could live with this definition. 
2: the belief that direct knowledge of God, spiritual truth, or ultimate 
reality can be attained through subjective experience (as intuition or insight)
[Bill!] Again, this is close, but I don't associate Buddha Nature with 
intuition or insight - although I know in the West these could be used as a 
poor substitute. 
3:a : vague speculation : a belief without sound basis
[Bill!] I don't like this one at all.
b : a theory postulating the possibility of direct and intuitive acquisition of 
ineffable knowledge or power 
[Bill!] This is pretty close. I like the word 'ineffable'. That definitely 
fits. I don't like the words 'intuitive, acquisition, knowledge and power'.

In English, 'mysticism' is generally associated with God or 'hidden' knowledge 
or insight. I associate zen with just everyday stuff. It'

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明]

 Bill,

I always know that Zen and Chan are the same in description, but 
different in practice.  Now I am certain the missing practice in Zen is 
the "Mystic Inner Witness" practice or 『秘密內證法』 in Chinese.


That's the reason Zen lost its spirituality and became an everyday 
rationalization, as described by you.


Well??
JM

On 9/8/2010 9:00 PM, billsm...@hhs1963.org wrote:


JMJM,

You asked if "...Zen has a "mystic" practice?"

My short answer would be definitely NO.

My long answer would be: Buddhism may have mystical practices, and 
therefore Zen Buddhism may also; but zen in and of itself is the 
opposite of mysticism as the term is usually used. It is nothing 
special. It is available to all sentient beings. It is just everyday 
life. Zen practice is the 'cypress tree in the garden', 'three-pounds 
of flax', 'a dried shit-stick'. Zen practice is Just THIS!


An addendum (long one) to my long answer is: I differentiate Zen 
Buddhism and zen. I do not believe zen is co-dependent with, 
exclusively associated with or a merely a sub-set of Buddhism. I do of 
course recognize a sub-set or sect of Buddhism called 'Zen Buddhism'. 
I refer to this in my posts as 'Zen' with an upper-case 'Z' to denote 
it is a proper noun. I use 'zen', which I believe to simply be the 
direct experience of reality, with a lower-case 'z' to refer to 
non-denominational zen.


For me Zen Buddhism is a Buddhist expression of zen. It has taken the 
essence of zen and has encased it with the religious dogma of 
Buddhism. A further extension of this would be 'Japanese Zen Buddhism' 
as contrasted with 'Korean Zen Buddhism'. These have been further 
encased with culture values associated with the Japanese or Korean 
cultures. This layering goes on and on and on until the layers are so 
thick the kernel or essence which is zen is sometimes completely 
obscured. This is also true of Christianity, and I believe all other 
'religions'. In fact that is what I think most 'religions' are: a 
stylized expression of zen - which as I said above very often puts 
more emphasis on the layers of 'style' than the kernel of 'zen'.


I think there are certainly 'mystic practices' within most religions. 
I think religions encourage the belief in 'mysticism' to protect the 
layers they've overlaid on the basic kernel of zen, and to justify the 
creation of hierarchies within the religion - like lay people, monks, 
priests, prophets, 'mystics', etc... 'Mysticism' protects the religion 
by shielding it from access by most of the 'lay people' so the upper 
hierarchies, such as priest classes, can continue to define and 
reinforce the adherence to the layers. Although 'mystics' are 
sometimes seen as rouges and revolutionaries in a religion, they only 
are allowed to do so under the watchful eye and approval of the 
religions upper hierarchies. Of course some 'mystics' are not 
accepted, and they are either denounced as 'heretics' or, if they are 
popular enough, might succeed in breaking off a group into a sect or 
even a new religion - such as Jesus did.


...Bill!

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> 
[mailto:Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
<mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Jue Miao Jing Ming 
- 

Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 12:56 AM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

Hello Bill and all,

Thank you for your answer. As we both know definitions are just 
labels, my next question is whether Zen has a "mystic" practice?


Since Chan is the "Grand Mystic", the foundation of our Chan practice 
is "Inner observation and witnessing the direction unification with 
the universe, including all the phenomena as well as the life force 
that caused everything."


Through this practice, there will be no conflict between our mind and 
our heart. Both the logic and the universal truth will be one. The 
discriminating mind will be wise to accept all.


What can you comment?

Thank you for your time to read my post,
JM

On 9/8/2010 12:40 AM, billsm...@hhs1963.org 
<mailto:BillSmart%40HHS1963.org> wrote:


JMJM,

You bring up a very good question.

According to Merriam-Webster Online the definitions of these words and 
my opinion as how they could be applied to zen are:


MYSTICAL
1:a : having a spiritual meaning or reality that is neither apparent 
to the senses nor obvious to the intelligence
[Bill!] Zen is not 'spiritual' and is definitely apparent to the 
senses, so this definition doesn't seem to fit. Zen is however not 
obvious, nor even accessible as far as I'm concerned, to the intellig

RE: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[BillSmart]

DP,

I guess I could go with that - 'everyday stuff is mystical'.  Just as I could 
say 'everyday stuff is holy', or 'everyday stuff is special'.

I understand what statements like these are trying to convey.

As I said before, this sounds like an interesting book.

...Bill!


From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 
DP
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 7:48 PM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

  

However, Underhill's point is that the "everyday stuff" IS mystical, depending 
on how you look at it. 

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> JMJM,
> 
> You bring up a very good question.
> 
> According to Merriam-Webster Online the definitions of these words and my 
> opinion as how they could be applied to zen are:
> 
> MYSTICAL
> 1:a : having a spiritual meaning or reality that is neither apparent to the 
> senses nor obvious to the intelligence
> [Bill!] Zen is not 'spiritual' and is definitely apparent to the senses, so 
> this definition doesn't seem to fit. Zen is however not obvious, nor even 
> accessible as far as I'm concerned, to the intelligence.
> b : involving or having the nature of an individual's direct subjective 
> communion with God or ultimate reality
> [Bill!] This is pretty close, although I would take out the words 
> 'subjective' and 'God or ultimate' which leaves 'direct communion with 
> reality'.
> 
> MYSTICISM
> 1: the experience of MYSTICAL union or direct communion with ultimate reality 
> reported by MYSTICS
> [Bill!] I could live with this definition. 
> 2: the belief that direct knowledge of God, spiritual truth, or ultimate 
> reality can be attained through subjective experience (as intuition or 
> insight)
> [Bill!] Again, this is close, but I don't associate Buddha Nature with 
> intuition or insight - although I know in the West these could be used as a 
> poor substitute. 
> 3:a : vague speculation : a belief without sound basis
> [Bill!] I don't like this one at all.
> b : a theory postulating the possibility of direct and intuitive acquisition 
> of ineffable knowledge or power 
> [Bill!] This is pretty close. I like the word 'ineffable'. That definitely 
> fits. I don't like the words 'intuitive, acquisition, knowledge and power'.
> 
> In English, 'mysticism' is generally associated with God or 'hidden' 
> knowledge or insight. I associate zen with just everyday stuff. It's no big 
> deal.
> 
> ...Bill!
> 
> From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf 
> Of Jue Miao Jing Ming - 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 2:14 AM
> To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> 
> 
> Dear all, 
> 
> I have a question. In Chinese, the Tibetan practice is literally translated 
> as the "Mystic Order", the Chan practice is literally translated as the 
> "Grand Mystic Order". Chan is the grand one, because Rong-Shu Patriarch 
> brought the Chan to Tibet and affected their practice.
> 
> In Chan 『秘密內è‰æ³•ã€ "Mystic Inner Witness Dharma" means an inward 
> practice enabling heart to heart witness of Buddha. That's all. There is 
> really nothing mystic about it.
> 
> Is the term "mystic or mysticism" means the same as the I described above or 
> not?
> 
> Much obliged,
> _/\_
> JMJM
> 
> On 9/7/2010 8:13 AM, DP wrote: 
> 
> That's kind of the point of the book. She is trying to bring mysticism down 
> to Earth, as it were. She wants to show that not only monks can do it.
> 
> --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
> >
> > DP,
> > 
> > I haven't heard of this book, but it does sound interesting.
> > 
> > I don't, however, associate mysticism with zen, or with `seeing the world as
> > it is' (which I do associate with zen). How could anyone call that
> > mysticism? Or with spiritualism as so many are wont to do?
> > 
> > …Bill!
> > 
> > From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> > Of DP
> > Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 9:22 PM
> > To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> > 
> > 
> > I recently downloaded this ebook from a public domain site (the book is
> > nearly 100 year old) and I have to say I'm very impressed with it. Underhill
> > was an ANglo-Catholic, but her main focus is on how anyone can appreciate
> > the m

RE: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[BillSmart]

JMJM,

You asked if "...Zen has a "mystic" practice?"

My short answer would be definitely NO.

My long answer would be:  Buddhism may have mystical practices, and therefore 
Zen Buddhism may also; but zen in and of itself is the opposite of mysticism as 
the term is usually used.  It is nothing special.  It is available to all 
sentient beings.  It is just everyday life.  Zen practice is the 'cypress tree 
in the garden', 'three-pounds of flax', 'a dried shit-stick'.  Zen practice is 
Just THIS!

An addendum (long one) to my long answer is:  I differentiate Zen Buddhism and 
zen.  I do not believe zen is co-dependent with, exclusively associated with or 
a merely a sub-set of Buddhism.  I do of course recognize a sub-set or sect of 
Buddhism called 'Zen Buddhism'.  I refer to this in my posts as 'Zen' with an 
upper-case 'Z' to denote it is a proper noun. I use 'zen', which I believe to 
simply be the direct experience of reality, with a lower-case 'z' to refer to 
non-denominational zen.

For me Zen Buddhism is a Buddhist expression of zen.  It has taken the essence 
of zen and has encased it with the religious dogma of Buddhism.  A further 
extension of this would be 'Japanese Zen Buddhism' as contrasted with 'Korean 
Zen Buddhism'.  These have been further encased with culture values associated 
with the Japanese or Korean cultures.  This layering goes on and on and on 
until the layers are so thick the kernel or essence which is zen is sometimes 
completely obscured.  This is also true of Christianity, and I believe all 
other 'religions'.  In fact that is what I think most 'religions' are: a 
stylized expression of zen - which as I said above very often puts more 
emphasis on the layers of 'style' than the kernel of 'zen'.

I think there are certainly 'mystic practices' within most religions.  I think 
religions encourage the belief in 'mysticism' to protect the layers they've 
overlaid on the basic kernel of zen, and to justify the creation of hierarchies 
within the religion - like lay people, monks, priests, prophets, 'mystics', 
etc...  'Mysticism' protects the religion by shielding it from access by most 
of the 'lay people' so the upper hierarchies, such as priest classes, can 
continue to define and reinforce the adherence to the layers.  Although 
'mystics' are sometimes seen as rouges and revolutionaries in a religion, they 
only are allowed to do so under the watchful eye and approval of the religions 
upper hierarchies.  Of course some 'mystics' are not accepted, and they are 
either denounced as 'heretics' or, if they are popular enough, might succeed in 
breaking off a group into a sect or even a new religion - such as Jesus did.

...Bill! 



From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Jue Miao Jing Ming - 
Sent: Thursday, September 09, 2010 12:56 AM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

  
Hello Bill and all,

Thank you for your answer. As we both know definitions are just labels, my next 
question is whether Zen has a "mystic" practice?

Since Chan is the "Grand Mystic", the foundation of our Chan practice is "Inner 
observation and witnessing the direction unification with the universe, 
including all the phenomena as well as the life force that caused everything."

Through this practice, there will be no conflict between our mind and our 
heart.  Both the logic and the universal truth will be one.  The discriminating 
mind will be wise to accept all.

What can you comment?

Thank you for your time to read my post,
JM


On 9/8/2010 12:40 AM, billsm...@hhs1963.org wrote: 
  
JMJM,

You bring up a very good question.

According to Merriam-Webster Online the definitions of these words and my 
opinion as how they could be applied to zen are:

MYSTICAL
1:a : having a spiritual meaning or reality that is neither apparent to the 
senses nor obvious to the intelligence
[Bill!] Zen is not 'spiritual' and is definitely apparent to the senses, so 
this definition doesn't seem to fit. Zen is however not obvious, nor even 
accessible as far as I'm concerned, to the intelligence.
b : involving or having the nature of an individual's direct subjective 
communion with God or ultimate reality
[Bill!] This is pretty close, although I would take out the words 'subjective' 
and 'God or ultimate' which leaves 'direct communion with reality'.

MYSTICISM
1: the experience of MYSTICAL union or direct communion with ultimate reality 
reported by MYSTICS
[Bill!] I could live with this definition. 
2: the belief that direct knowledge of God, spiritual truth, or ultimate 
reality can be attaine

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[novelidea8]

Dear Bill
 
Well, no doubt much of what you say is true.  Nevertheless, one can't  keep 
from assessing Zen in this manner (mystical), which is a word like  
'spiritual' that has lost its meaning, they both sort of twist in the wind at  
peoples convenience.  Having said that while Zen has much dialogue about  the 
mundane, indeed, in many other traditions the mundane is, everyday, nothing  
special aspect is emphasized as well, particularly in it exoteric  
application.  I don't think we can make the mistake of getting all Zenny  and 
saying 
that Zen is a special case, something wholly different from other  paths . . 
. the obviousness of this speaks for itself . . . While I would agree  that 
Zen puts forth a unique expression of nothing special, emphasizing Zazen  
and Shikan Taza, at the same time that cannot put Zen in a particularly  
advantageous category . . . you might as well start saying that Jesus died for  
our sins if that is the case.  The only thing we can safely assert is well,  
who is making the assertion about nothing special.
 
So I would say that while I don't like the word mystical all that much, Zen 
 Buddhism, at least Soto Zen, which I am familiar with, does have a 
mystical  flavor to it.  
 
Nothing special can't be special because its nothing special and others  
don't know that . . . that whole game is played way to much in the Zen  
Community.
 
best wishes
 
Kirk
 
 
In a message dated 9/8/2010 12:41:27 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,  
billsm...@hhs1963.org writes:

 
 
 
JMJM,

You bring up a very good question.

According to  Merriam-Webster Online the definitions of these words and my 
opinion as how  they could be applied to zen are:

MYSTICAL
1:a : having a spiritual  meaning or reality that is neither apparent to 
the senses nor obvious to the  intelligence
[Bill!] Zen is not 'spiritual' and is definitely apparent to  the senses, 
so this definition doesn't seem to fit. Zen is however not  obvious, nor even 
accessible as far as I'm concerned, to the  intelligence.
b : involving or having the nature of an individual's direct  subjective 
communion with God or ultimate reality
[Bill!] This is pretty  close, although I would take out the words 
'subjective' and 'God or ultimate'  which leaves 'direct communion with 
reality'.

MYSTICISM
1: the  experience of MYSTICAL union or direct communion with ultimate 
reality  reported by MYSTICS
[Bill!] I could live with this definition. 
2: the  belief that direct knowledge of God, spiritual truth, or ultimate 
reality can  be attained through subjective experience (as intuition or 
insight)
[Bill!]  Again, this is close, but I don't associate Buddha Nature with 
intuition or  insight - although I know in the West these could be used as a 
poor  substitute. 
3:a : vague speculation : a belief without sound  basis
[Bill!] I don't like this one at all.
b : a theory postulating the  possibility of direct and intuitive 
acquisition of ineffable knowledge or  power 
[Bill!] This is pretty close. I like the word 'ineffable'. That  definitely 
fits. I don't like the words 'intuitive, acquisition, knowledge and  power'.

In English, 'mysticism' is generally associated with God or  'hidden' 
knowledge or insight. I associate zen with just everyday stuff. It's  no big 
deal.

...Bill!

From: _zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com)   
[mailto:_zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com) ] On  
Behalf Of Jue Miao Jing Ming - 
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010  2:14 AM
To: _zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com) 
Subject:  Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

Dear all, 

I  have a question. In Chinese, the Tibetan practice is literally 
translated as  the "Mystic Order", the Chan practice is literally translated as 
the 
"Grand  Mystic Order". Chan is the grand one, because Rong-Shu Patriarch 
brought the  Chan to Tibet and affected their practice.

In Chan 『秘密內證法』 "Mystic  Inner Witness Dharma" means an inward practice 
enabling heart to heart witness  of Buddha. That's all. There is really 
nothing mystic about it.

Is the  term "mystic or mysticism" means the same as the I described above 
or  not?

Much obliged,
_/\_
JMJM

On 9/7/2010 8:13 AM, DP  wrote: 

That's kind of the point of the book. She is trying to bring  mysticism 
down to Earth, as it were. She wants to show that not only monks can  do it.

--- In _zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com_ (mailto:Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com) ,  
 wrote:
>
> DP,
> 
> I haven't  heard of this book, but it does sound interesting.
> 
> I don't,  however, associate mysticism with zen, or with `seeing the 
world as
> it  is' (which I do associate with zen). How could anyone call that
>  mysticism

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[Anthony Wu]

JMJM,
 
As a poor student of Bill's, I try to make the following comments:
 
-  Zen is not mysticism, and has nothing to do with God or universe. Zen is 
everyday life.
-  Zen has no 'mystic' practice, nor is it trying to witness the unification 
with the universe.
-  Zen does not treat definations as 'labels', but it sometimes uses them as 
koans to help in practice.
 
If I am wrong, I prepare to accept Bill's reeduction, and instead of taking his 
laptop, I will just get his iPad.
 
As regards the 'Chan', your practice seems to be different from what the word 
normally refers to (Chan usually means 'dyana' in a wide sense). The word 
'grand mystic' confuses. me. It looks like the heart Chan is influenced by 
Tantra, because of the manupilation of chi at the heart chakra. When you say 
some of your colleagues can take away bad karma from you, that is one step away 
from Buddhism, since Buddhism says only you yourself can influence your own 
karma, not even Sakyamuni can do that. 
 
Mysticisam is different from the Chinese word 'mizong', which means Tantra and 
has a lot to do with mantras. Do you rely on mantras?
 
Anthony

--- On Thu, 9/9/10, Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明  wrote:


From: Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明 
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, 9 September, 2010, 1:56 AM


  



Hello Bill and all,

Thank you for your answer. As we both know definitions are just labels, my next 
question is whether Zen has a "mystic" practice?

Since Chan is the "Grand Mystic", the foundation of our Chan practice is "Inner 
observation and witnessing the direction unification with the universe, 
including all the phenomena as well as the life force that caused everything."

Through this practice, there will be no conflict between our mind and our 
heart.  Both the logic and the universal truth will be one.  The discriminating 
mind will be wise to accept all.

What can you comment?

Thank you for your time to read my post,
JM


On 9/8/2010 12:40 AM, billsm...@hhs1963.org wrote: 
  

JMJM,

You bring up a very good question.

According to Merriam-Webster Online the definitions of these words and my 
opinion as how they could be applied to zen are:

MYSTICAL
1:a : having a spiritual meaning or reality that is neither apparent to the 
senses nor obvious to the intelligence
[Bill!] Zen is not 'spiritual' and is definitely apparent to the senses, so 
this definition doesn't seem to fit. Zen is however not obvious, nor even 
accessible as far as I'm concerned, to the intelligence.
b : involving or having the nature of an individual's direct subjective 
communion with God or ultimate reality
[Bill!] This is pretty close, although I would take out the words 'subjective' 
and 'God or ultimate' which leaves 'direct communion with reality'.

MYSTICISM
1: the experience of MYSTICAL union or direct communion with ultimate reality 
reported by MYSTICS
[Bill!] I could live with this definition. 
2: the belief that direct knowledge of God, spiritual truth, or ultimate 
reality can be attained through subjective experience (as intuition or insight)
[Bill!] Again, this is close, but I don't associate Buddha Nature with 
intuition or insight - although I know in the West these could be used as a 
poor substitute. 
3:a : vague speculation : a belief without sound basis
[Bill!] I don't like this one at all.
b : a theory postulating the possibility of direct and intuitive acquisition of 
ineffable knowledge or power 
[Bill!] This is pretty close. I like the word 'ineffable'. That definitely 
fits. I don't like the words 'intuitive, acquisition, knowledge and power'.

In English, 'mysticism' is generally associated with God or 'hidden' knowledge 
or insight. I associate zen with just everyday stuff. It's no big deal.

...Bill!

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Jue Miao Jing Ming - 
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 2:14 AM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

Dear all, 

I have a question. In Chinese, the Tibetan practice is literally translated as 
the "Mystic Order", the Chan practice is literally translated as the "Grand 
Mystic Order". Chan is the grand one, because Rong-Shu Patriarch brought the 
Chan to Tibet and affected their practice.

In Chan 『秘密內證法』 "Mystic Inner Witness Dharma" means an inward practice enabling 
heart to heart witness of Buddha. That's all. There is really nothing mystic 
about it.

Is the term "mystic or mysticism" means the same as the I described above or 
not?

Much obliged,
_/\_
JMJM

On 9/7/2010 8:13 AM, DP wrote: 

That's kind of the point of the book. She is trying to bring

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明]

 Hello Bill and all,

Thank you for your answer. As we both know definitions are just labels, 
my next question is whether Zen has a "mystic" practice?


Since Chan is the "Grand Mystic", the foundation of our Chan practice is 
"Inner observation and witnessing the direction unification with the 
universe, including all the phenomena as well as the life force that 
caused everything."


Through this practice, there will be no conflict between our mind and 
our heart.  Both the logic and the universal truth will be one.  The 
discriminating mind will be wise to accept all.


What can you comment?

Thank you for your time to read my post,
JM


On 9/8/2010 12:40 AM, billsm...@hhs1963.org wrote:


JMJM,

You bring up a very good question.

According to Merriam-Webster Online the definitions of these words and 
my opinion as how they could be applied to zen are:


MYSTICAL
1:a : having a spiritual meaning or reality that is neither apparent 
to the senses nor obvious to the intelligence
[Bill!] Zen is not 'spiritual' and is definitely apparent to the 
senses, so this definition doesn't seem to fit. Zen is however not 
obvious, nor even accessible as far as I'm concerned, to the intelligence.
b : involving or having the nature of an individual's direct 
subjective communion with God or ultimate reality
[Bill!] This is pretty close, although I would take out the words 
'subjective' and 'God or ultimate' which leaves 'direct communion with 
reality'.


MYSTICISM
1: the experience of MYSTICAL union or direct communion with ultimate 
reality reported by MYSTICS

[Bill!] I could live with this definition.
2: the belief that direct knowledge of God, spiritual truth, or 
ultimate reality can be attained through subjective experience (as 
intuition or insight)
[Bill!] Again, this is close, but I don't associate Buddha Nature with 
intuition or insight - although I know in the West these could be used 
as a poor substitute.

3:a : vague speculation : a belief without sound basis
[Bill!] I don't like this one at all.
b : a theory postulating the possibility of direct and intuitive 
acquisition of ineffable knowledge or power
[Bill!] This is pretty close. I like the word 'ineffable'. That 
definitely fits. I don't like the words 'intuitive, acquisition, 
knowledge and power'.


In English, 'mysticism' is generally associated with God or 'hidden' 
knowledge or insight. I associate zen with just everyday stuff. It's 
no big deal.


...Bill!

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> 
[mailto:Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
<mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf Of Jue Miao Jing Ming 
- ????

Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 2:14 AM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

Dear all,

I have a question. In Chinese, the Tibetan practice is literally 
translated as the "Mystic Order", the Chan practice is literally 
translated as the "Grand Mystic Order". Chan is the grand one, because 
Rong-Shu Patriarch brought the Chan to Tibet and affected their practice.


In Chan 『秘密內證法』 "Mystic Inner Witness Dharma" means an inward 
practice enabling heart to heart witness of Buddha. That's all. There 
is really nothing mystic about it.


Is the term "mystic or mysticism" means the same as the I described 
above or not?


Much obliged,
_/\_
JMJM

On 9/7/2010 8:13 AM, DP wrote:

That's kind of the point of the book. She is trying to bring mysticism 
down to Earth, as it were. She wants to show that not only monks can 
do it.


--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>, 
 wrote:

>
> DP,
>
> I haven't heard of this book, but it does sound interesting.
>
> I don't, however, associate mysticism with zen, or with `seeing the 
world as

> it is' (which I do associate with zen). How could anyone call that
> mysticism? Or with spiritualism as so many are wont to do?
>
> …Bill!
>
> From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> 
[mailto:Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
<mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>] On Behalf

> Of DP
> Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 9:22 PM
> To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
>
>
> I recently downloaded this ebook from a public domain site (the book is
> nearly 100 year old) and I have to say I'm very impressed with it. 
Underhill
> was an ANglo-Catholic, but her main focus is on how anyone can 
appreciate

> the mysticism of everyday life by seeing the world as it is, without
> categorization. I think this sounds very Zen, and I wonder if anyon

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[DP]

However, Underhill's point is that the "everyday stuff" IS mystical, depending 
on how you look at it. 

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> JMJM,
> 
> You bring up a very good question.
> 
> According to Merriam-Webster Online the definitions of these words and my 
> opinion as how they could be applied to zen are:
> 
> MYSTICAL
> 1:a : having a spiritual meaning or reality that is neither apparent to the 
> senses nor obvious to the intelligence
> [Bill!]  Zen is not 'spiritual' and is definitely apparent to the senses, so 
> this definition doesn't seem to fit.  Zen is however not obvious, nor even 
> accessible as far as I'm concerned, to the intelligence.
>   b : involving or having the nature of an individual's direct subjective 
> communion with God or ultimate reality
> [Bill!]  This is pretty close, although I would take out the words 
> 'subjective' and 'God or ultimate' which leaves 'direct communion with 
> reality'.
> 
> MYSTICISM
> 1: the experience of MYSTICAL union or direct communion with ultimate reality 
> reported by MYSTICS
> [Bill!]  I could live with this definition. 
> 2: the belief that direct knowledge of God, spiritual truth, or ultimate 
> reality can be attained through subjective experience (as intuition or 
> insight)
> [Bill!]  Again, this is close, but I don't associate Buddha Nature with 
> intuition or insight - although I know in the West these could be used as a 
> poor substitute. 
> 3:a : vague speculation : a belief without sound basis
> [Bill!]  I don't like this one at all.
>   b : a theory postulating the possibility of direct and intuitive 
> acquisition of ineffable knowledge or power 
> [Bill!] This is pretty close.  I like the word 'ineffable'.  That definitely 
> fits.  I don't like the words 'intuitive, acquisition, knowledge and power'.
> 
> In English, 'mysticism' is generally associated with God or 'hidden' 
> knowledge or insight.  I associate zen with just everyday stuff.  It's no big 
> deal.
> 
> ...Bill!
> 
> From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf 
> Of Jue Miao Jing Ming - 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 2:14 AM
> To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> 
>   
> Dear all, 
> 
> I have a question.  In Chinese, the Tibetan practice is literally translated 
> as the "Mystic Order",  the Chan practice is literally translated as the 
> "Grand Mystic Order".  Chan is the grand one, because Rong-Shu Patriarch 
> brought the Chan to Tibet and affected their practice.
> 
> In Chan 『秘密內證法』 "Mystic Inner Witness Dharma" means an inward 
> practice enabling heart to heart witness of Buddha.  That's all.  There is 
> really nothing mystic about it.
> 
> Is the term "mystic or mysticism" means the same as the I described above or 
> not?
> 
> Much obliged,
> _/\_
> JMJM
> 
> On 9/7/2010 8:13 AM, DP wrote: 
>   
> That's kind of the point of the book. She is trying to bring mysticism down 
> to Earth, as it were. She wants to show that not only monks can do it.
> 
> --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
> >
> > DP,
> > 
> > I haven't heard of this book, but it does sound interesting.
> > 
> > I don't, however, associate mysticism with zen, or with `seeing the world as
> > it is' (which I do associate with zen). How could anyone call that
> > mysticism? Or with spiritualism as so many are wont to do?
> > 
> > …Bill!
> > 
> > From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> > Of DP
> > Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 9:22 PM
> > To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> > 
> >   
> > I recently downloaded this ebook from a public domain site (the book is
> > nearly 100 year old) and I have to say I'm very impressed with it. Underhill
> > was an ANglo-Catholic, but her main focus is on how anyone can appreciate
> > the mysticism of everyday life by seeing the world as it is, without
> > categorization. I think this sounds very Zen, and I wonder if anyone else
> > had read it.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
> > database 5429 (20100906) __
> > 
> > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> > 
> > http://www.eset.com
> > 
> > 
> > __ Information

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[DP]

However, Underhill's point is that the "everyday stuff" IS mystical, depending 
on how you look at it. 

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> JMJM,
> 
> You bring up a very good question.
> 
> According to Merriam-Webster Online the definitions of these words and my 
> opinion as how they could be applied to zen are:
> 
> MYSTICAL
> 1:a : having a spiritual meaning or reality that is neither apparent to the 
> senses nor obvious to the intelligence
> [Bill!]  Zen is not 'spiritual' and is definitely apparent to the senses, so 
> this definition doesn't seem to fit.  Zen is however not obvious, nor even 
> accessible as far as I'm concerned, to the intelligence.
>   b : involving or having the nature of an individual's direct subjective 
> communion with God or ultimate reality
> [Bill!]  This is pretty close, although I would take out the words 
> 'subjective' and 'God or ultimate' which leaves 'direct communion with 
> reality'.
> 
> MYSTICISM
> 1: the experience of MYSTICAL union or direct communion with ultimate reality 
> reported by MYSTICS
> [Bill!]  I could live with this definition. 
> 2: the belief that direct knowledge of God, spiritual truth, or ultimate 
> reality can be attained through subjective experience (as intuition or 
> insight)
> [Bill!]  Again, this is close, but I don't associate Buddha Nature with 
> intuition or insight - although I know in the West these could be used as a 
> poor substitute. 
> 3:a : vague speculation : a belief without sound basis
> [Bill!]  I don't like this one at all.
>   b : a theory postulating the possibility of direct and intuitive 
> acquisition of ineffable knowledge or power 
> [Bill!] This is pretty close.  I like the word 'ineffable'.  That definitely 
> fits.  I don't like the words 'intuitive, acquisition, knowledge and power'.
> 
> In English, 'mysticism' is generally associated with God or 'hidden' 
> knowledge or insight.  I associate zen with just everyday stuff.  It's no big 
> deal.
> 
> ...Bill!
> 
> From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf 
> Of Jue Miao Jing Ming - 
> Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 2:14 AM
> To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> 
>   
> Dear all, 
> 
> I have a question.  In Chinese, the Tibetan practice is literally translated 
> as the "Mystic Order",  the Chan practice is literally translated as the 
> "Grand Mystic Order".  Chan is the grand one, because Rong-Shu Patriarch 
> brought the Chan to Tibet and affected their practice.
> 
> In Chan 『秘密內證法』 "Mystic Inner Witness Dharma" means an inward 
> practice enabling heart to heart witness of Buddha.  That's all.  There is 
> really nothing mystic about it.
> 
> Is the term "mystic or mysticism" means the same as the I described above or 
> not?
> 
> Much obliged,
> _/\_
> JMJM
> 
> On 9/7/2010 8:13 AM, DP wrote: 
>   
> That's kind of the point of the book. She is trying to bring mysticism down 
> to Earth, as it were. She wants to show that not only monks can do it.
> 
> --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
> >
> > DP,
> > 
> > I haven't heard of this book, but it does sound interesting.
> > 
> > I don't, however, associate mysticism with zen, or with `seeing the world as
> > it is' (which I do associate with zen). How could anyone call that
> > mysticism? Or with spiritualism as so many are wont to do?
> > 
> > …Bill!
> > 
> > From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> > Of DP
> > Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 9:22 PM
> > To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> > Subject: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> > 
> >   
> > I recently downloaded this ebook from a public domain site (the book is
> > nearly 100 year old) and I have to say I'm very impressed with it. Underhill
> > was an ANglo-Catholic, but her main focus is on how anyone can appreciate
> > the mysticism of everyday life by seeing the world as it is, without
> > categorization. I think this sounds very Zen, and I wonder if anyone else
> > had read it.
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
> > database 5429 (20100906) __
> > 
> > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> > 
> > http://www.eset.com
> > 
> > 
> > __ Information

RE: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[BillSmart]

JMJM,

You bring up a very good question.

According to Merriam-Webster Online the definitions of these words and my 
opinion as how they could be applied to zen are:

MYSTICAL
1:a : having a spiritual meaning or reality that is neither apparent to the 
senses nor obvious to the intelligence
[Bill!]  Zen is not 'spiritual' and is definitely apparent to the senses, so 
this definition doesn't seem to fit.  Zen is however not obvious, nor even 
accessible as far as I'm concerned, to the intelligence.
  b : involving or having the nature of an individual's direct subjective 
communion with God or ultimate reality
[Bill!]  This is pretty close, although I would take out the words 'subjective' 
and 'God or ultimate' which leaves 'direct communion with reality'.

MYSTICISM
1: the experience of MYSTICAL union or direct communion with ultimate reality 
reported by MYSTICS
[Bill!]  I could live with this definition. 
2: the belief that direct knowledge of God, spiritual truth, or ultimate 
reality can be attained through subjective experience (as intuition or insight)
[Bill!]  Again, this is close, but I don't associate Buddha Nature with 
intuition or insight - although I know in the West these could be used as a 
poor substitute. 
3:a : vague speculation : a belief without sound basis
[Bill!]  I don't like this one at all.
  b : a theory postulating the possibility of direct and intuitive acquisition 
of ineffable knowledge or power 
[Bill!] This is pretty close.  I like the word 'ineffable'.  That definitely 
fits.  I don't like the words 'intuitive, acquisition, knowledge and power'.

In English, 'mysticism' is generally associated with God or 'hidden' knowledge 
or insight.  I associate zen with just everyday stuff.  It's no big deal.

...Bill!

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of 
Jue Miao Jing Ming - ????
Sent: Wednesday, September 08, 2010 2:14 AM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

  
Dear all, 

I have a question.  In Chinese, the Tibetan practice is literally translated as 
the "Mystic Order",  the Chan practice is literally translated as the "Grand 
Mystic Order".  Chan is the grand one, because Rong-Shu Patriarch brought the 
Chan to Tibet and affected their practice.

In Chan 『秘密內證法』 "Mystic Inner Witness Dharma" means an inward practice enabling 
heart to heart witness of Buddha.  That's all.  There is really nothing mystic 
about it.

Is the term "mystic or mysticism" means the same as the I described above or 
not?

Much obliged,
_/\_
JMJM

On 9/7/2010 8:13 AM, DP wrote: 
  
That's kind of the point of the book. She is trying to bring mysticism down to 
Earth, as it were. She wants to show that not only monks can do it.

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> DP,
> 
> I haven't heard of this book, but it does sound interesting.
> 
> I don't, however, associate mysticism with zen, or with `seeing the world as
> it is' (which I do associate with zen). How could anyone call that
> mysticism? Or with spiritualism as so many are wont to do?
> 
> …Bill!
> 
> From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of DP
> Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 9:22 PM
> To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> 
>   
> I recently downloaded this ebook from a public domain site (the book is
> nearly 100 year old) and I have to say I'm very impressed with it. Underhill
> was an ANglo-Catholic, but her main focus is on how anyone can appreciate
> the mysticism of everyday life by seeing the world as it is, without
> categorization. I think this sounds very Zen, and I wonder if anyone else
> had read it.
> 
> 
> 
> __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
> database 5429 (20100906) __
> 
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> 
> http://www.eset.com
> 
> 
> __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
> database 5429 (20100906) __
> 
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> 
> http://www.eset.com
>


-- 
Be Enlightened In This Life - We ALL Can
http://chanjmjm.blogspot.com
http://www.heartchan.org



__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 5432 (20100907) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 

__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 5432 (20100907) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 





Current 

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明]

 Dear all,

I have a question.  In Chinese, the Tibetan practice is literally 
translated as the "Mystic Order",  the Chan practice is literally 
translated as the "Grand Mystic Order".  Chan is the grand one, because 
Rong-Shu Patriarch brought the Chan to Tibet and affected their practice.


In Chan 『秘密內證法』 "Mystic Inner Witness Dharma" means an inward 
practice enabling heart to heart witness of Buddha.  That's all.  There 
is really nothing mystic about it.


Is the term "mystic or mysticism" means the same as the I described 
above or not?


Much obliged,
_/\_
JMJM

On 9/7/2010 8:13 AM, DP wrote:


That's kind of the point of the book. She is trying to bring mysticism 
down to Earth, as it were. She wants to show that not only monks can 
do it.


--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com , 
 wrote:

>
> DP,
>
> I haven't heard of this book, but it does sound interesting.
>
> I don't, however, associate mysticism with zen, or with `seeing the 
world as

> it is' (which I do associate with zen). How could anyone call that
> mysticism? Or with spiritualism as so many are wont to do?
>
> …Bill!
>
> From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com  
[mailto:Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
] On Behalf

> Of DP
> Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 9:22 PM
> To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com 
> Subject: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
>
>
> I recently downloaded this ebook from a public domain site (the book is
> nearly 100 year old) and I have to say I'm very impressed with it. 
Underhill
> was an ANglo-Catholic, but her main focus is on how anyone can 
appreciate

> the mysticism of everyday life by seeing the world as it is, without
> categorization. I think this sounds very Zen, and I wonder if anyone 
else

> had read it.
>
>
>
> __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
signature

> database 5429 (20100906) __
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
> __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
signature

> database 5429 (20100906) __
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>




--
Be Enlightened In This Life - We ALL Can
http://chanjmjm.blogspot.com
http://www.heartchan.org

Re: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[DP]

That's kind of the point of the book. She is trying to bring mysticism down to 
Earth, as it were. She wants to show that not only monks can do it.

--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com,  wrote:
>
> DP,
> 
> I haven't heard of this book, but it does sound interesting.
> 
> I don't, however, associate mysticism with zen, or with `seeing the world as
> it is' (which I do associate with zen).  How could anyone call that
> mysticism?  Or with spiritualism as so many are wont to do?
> 
> …Bill!
> 
> From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
> Of DP
> Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 9:22 PM
> To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill
> 
>   
> I recently downloaded this ebook from a public domain site (the book is
> nearly 100 year old) and I have to say I'm very impressed with it. Underhill
> was an ANglo-Catholic, but her main focus is on how anyone can appreciate
> the mysticism of everyday life by seeing the world as it is, without
> categorization. I think this sounds very Zen, and I wonder if anyone else
> had read it.
> 
> 
> 
> __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
> database 5429 (20100906) __
> 
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> 
> http://www.eset.com
>  
> 
> __ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
> database 5429 (20100906) __
> 
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> 
> http://www.eset.com
>






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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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

RE: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

[BillSmart]

DP,

I haven’t heard of this book, but it does sound interesting.

I don’t, however, associate mysticism with zen, or with ‘seeing the world as
it is’ (which I do associate with zen).  How could anyone call that
mysticism?  Or with spiritualism as so many are wont to do?

…Bill!

From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of DP
Sent: Monday, September 06, 2010 9:22 PM
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Zen] Practical Mysticism - Evelyn Underhill

  
I recently downloaded this ebook from a public domain site (the book is
nearly 100 year old) and I have to say I'm very impressed with it. Underhill
was an ANglo-Catholic, but her main focus is on how anyone can appreciate
the mysticism of everyday life by seeing the world as it is, without
categorization. I think this sounds very Zen, and I wonder if anyone else
had read it.



__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 5429 (20100906) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 

__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature
database 5429 (20100906) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com
 





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:
zen_forum-dig...@yahoogroups.com 
zen_forum-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
zen_forum-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com

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