Well it sure seems to me that some kind of disconnect happened 
between what the Buddha taught, and the teaching of an "Inner Self."

I'd certainly like to hear what anyone thinks after reading this 


"I teach the Dhamma for the abandoning of the gross acquisition of a 
self.. I also teach the Dhamma for the abandoning of the mind-made 
acquisition of a self...  I also teach the Dhamma for the abandoning 
of the formless acquisition of a self"


> Good morning Bill and Cathy,
> If we detach from the "perceived general definitions of Zen", 
couldn't five or six or fifty one be just menifestations and messages 
of Zen at that moment of witness relative to that moment only, which 
is impermanant and transient, which may be received only by our 
consiousness and not to our Inner Self?
> The witness of the moment is important to calm our mind, train 
ourselves to be, as you stated, "no self", "no mind".  What is after 
that?  Or is there? 
> Is there a disconnect in the teachings after 2500 years? Is there 
one true which is also all? Or is it important?
> With palms together,
> Bill Smart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:                               On 
Tuesday, June 20 kahtychen wrote:
>  [Kahty...]Zen is five ... and six, ... and sometimes even fifty 
>  Yesterday
>  when I was doing dishes, zen was fourteen.
>  Beautiful!  Crisp!  To-the-point.  No clouds.  No fog.  No smoke 
>  mirrors.
>  Thank you...Bill!
> ---------------------------------
> Ring'em or ping'em. Make  PC-to-phone calls as low as 1ยข/min with 
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Yahoo! Groups gets a make over. See the new email design.

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:

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:

Reply via email to