Bill, it is always a pleasure to communicate to you. JM
Bill Smart wrote:
>
> JMJM,
>
> Thanks for your reply. The titles were confusing to me. This reply
> post of your is less confusing - only just slightly.
>
> Bill! (I've dropped the Big Fish title since it was superfluous and
> probably confusing.)
>
> --- In [email protected] <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>,
> Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺妙精明
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Hello Big Fish,
> >
> > It is always a pleasure to read your post. Always so serious and
> > straight from the heart. Especially this post. Because...
> >
> > Before I reply, please excuse me first. Because I trapped you with
> this
> > small statement to illustrate a point. hahaha...
> >
> > Roshi（è€å¸«ï¼‰ - is indeed a Japanese pronunciation for the same
> > character of (è€å¸«ï¼‰ pronounces Lao-Shi in Chinese, which is
> what I am
> > called in the Chinese community.
> > While the naming of American Zen Association has the opposite
> story. At
> > the time of our registration, I thought Zen is Chan, because they
> are
> > the same character in Chinese.
> >
> > Now what is the point? The point is, labels are confusing. That's
> > all.... And you fell for it. Sorry.
> >
> > It does not matter at all, my friend. State of our Inner Self is
> the
> > only thing matters.
> >
> > I will address your other longer post after dinner. OK? Stay
> Tuned.
> >
> > Sorry again,
> > _/\_
> > JM
> >
> >
> > Bill Smart wrote:
> > >
> > > JMJM:
> > >
> > > AND ANOTHER THING...
> > >
> > > (Sorry for the second posting so soon after my last, but I'm on my
> > > second cup of tea this mornig and my inner self is in a frenzy. It
> > > wants to reach out and CHI someone!)
> > >
> > > Here is my question:
> > >
> > > You are a teacher in a Chan school. Chan is Chinese. You spell and
> > > pronouce Chi as 'Chi' which is modern Chinese (as opposed to 'ki'
> as
> > > in Japnese' or 'qi' traditional or some other kind of Chinese.)
> Your
> > > family name is Hwong. Isn't that Chinese also?
> > >
> > > So...and here comes the question...Why is your title 'Roshi',
> which
> > > is Japanese?
> > >
> > > Enquiring no-minds want to know...
> > >
> > > Bill!, Big Fish
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected]
> <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> <mailto:Zen_Forum%
> 40yahoogroups.com>,
> > > "Bill Smart" <BillSmart@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > JMJM,
> > > >
> > > > I DID NOT agree with you that zen was 'just a mind-balancing
> > > > exercise'. I agreed with you that zen was not spritual. Zen is
> no-
> > > > mind, so there is nothing to balance - WYSIWYG, no adjustments
> > > > necessary.
> > > >
> > > > I'm not sure what your remark below about my 'inner self'
> means. I
> > > > guess you think I have an 'inner self' and that you know more
> about
> > > > what it's doing than I. Please continue to let me know what it's
> > > up
> > > > to. I'd hate to have my inner self sneak up on me and surprise
> me.
> > > >
> > > > Buddha Nature, which I have called 'JUST THIS', is not in the
> realm
> > > > of sprituality or maya. It is real. It is reality.
> > > >
> > > > Buddha Nature and Chi are not the same, or at least Buddha
> Nature,
> > > as
> > > > I know it, is not the same as what you have described Chi to be.
> > > > You've described Chi as a universal energy that you can connect
> > > with
> > > > and detect in others, that you can cultivate and accumulate,
> that
> > > you
> > > > can learn to direct and channel, that you can use to heal
> yourself
> > > > and others, that misuse can harm yourself and others, that you
> > > > describe things you like as to having 'good' Chi and things you
> > > don't
> > > > as having 'bad' Chi. This sounds more like something sung about
> in
> > > > the Beach Boy's song 'Good Vibrations'. (Good hamony there...)
> > > >
> > > > Some of the above qualities overlap with Buddha Nature, but
> > > certainly
> > > > not all of them. Buddha Nature is universal but you could not
> call
> > > > it energy (or at least I wouldn't). You can 'connect' with it by
> > > > becoming aware of it. You could say you can cultivate it, but
> what
> > > > you really do is cultivate your awareness of it. You cannot
> > > > accumulate it in the sense of 'storing it up', but you can
> > > strengthen
> > > > your awareness of it. You cannot direct or channel it, you
> follow
> > > > it. You cannot use it to heal yourself and others, although the
> > > > awareness of it has healing in the sense of acceptance and
> peace.
> > > > You cannot use it to harm yourself or others, other than
> > > > intentionally or unintentionally misrepresenting Buddha Nature
> to
> > > > others. There is no 'good' or 'bad' Buddha Nature.
> > > >
> > > > As you have described Chi, I think it has the same relationship
> > > with
> > > > Buddha Nature as I now beleive Chan has with zen. Chi
> represents a
> > > > spritualized version of Buddha Nature as does Chan vis-a-vis
> zen,
> > > > complete with add-on surpernatural qualities, superstitions,
> > > wishful
> > > > thinking and lots of attachment-magnets.
> > > >
> > > > (I just now made up the term attachment-magnets. Pretty cool,
> > > huh?
> > > > Feel free to use it without feeling obligated to cite me.)
> > > >
> > > > JMJM, you didn't comment on my title before when it was Bill!. I
> > > > just got a new one: Big Fish. How do you like it? Does it have
> > > good
> > > > Chi or bad Chi? Can I heal or hurt someone with it? If I can, Al
> > > > had better WATCH OUT!
> > > >
> > > > ...Bill!, Big Fish
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected]
> <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>
> > > <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>, Jue Miao Jing Ming -
> 覺妙精明
> > > > <chan.jmjm@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > On the contrary, Al. What I meant was, if Bill admitted at the
> > > > > beginning that Zen is just a mental balancing exercise, then
> my
> > > > point is
> > > > > made. Since his did not agree with my observation, yet his
> Inner
> > > > Self
> > > > > did, he had convinced himself that there could be
> spirituality.
> > > > > Spirituality in my dictionary is Buddha Nature. :-)
> > > > >
> > > > > There is no one to convert to no where. Just some are more
> > > > delusional
> > > > > than others. No offense.
> > > > >
> > > > > Fitness63 wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From: Jue Miao Jing Ming - >Hi Bill, Your post was what I
> > > > expected. If
> > > > > > you
> > > > > > had mentioned in the first place that spirituality to you
> has
> > > no
> > > > meaning,
> > > > > > then I don't have to write that many posts. :-) JM
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You sound like a missionary who tries to convert a heathen
> and
> > > > then says
> > > > > > "What could I expect from a heathen" when the conversion
> fails!!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That is funny when I see things in zen that are just like
> > > > Christianity
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > then it makes me wonder if the cynics are right.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Then again, I learned something from this, so thanks for
> trying
> > > > to
> > > > > > convert
> > > > > > Bill. You may have missed the big fish but gotten some
> little
> > > > ones.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
------------------------------------
Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are
reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
