Al and JMJM, I agree with most everything in JMJM's post below with the following VERY MINOR personal adaptations:
When I said 'enlightenment is an illusion' in a previous post, I meant the CONCEP of enlightenment is an illusion, the concept that enlightenment is something special and that only monks or ascetics can attain. This is the illusion. I would use the phrases 'realization of Buddha Nature' or 'experiencing Just THIS' instead of 'enlightenment'. I would use the terms 'Buddha Nature' or 'Just THIS' instead of 'life force' or 'energy' or chi. I would delete the second-to-the-last paragraph about 'futile effort' since both JMJM's post below and this post itself (and in fact all response posts) would fall into that category. I do not judge JMJM's post to have been a 'futile effort', and I hope mine is not either. ...Bill! --- In [email protected], Jue Miao Jing Ming - 覺å¦ç²¾æ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Al, > > Enlightenment is not an illusion. That is a state of > connection/transmission can be observed/sensed. Even just from some of > the disciples of an enlightened teacher, one with absolutely peaceful > and open heart, can experience some of the phenomenon. > > Too many people thought that the books they read or the teacher they > learn from are absolute. Actually, we got it when we were born. If > one can feel his inner life force, he is on his way. That is if he is > not blocked by his mind. > > The only real world is the world of energy, which is a flow in constant > flux. By the time anyone tried to describe it, or take a picture to > look at it, it is no longer the same. The only way we can be part of > it, is to sync to it. Flow with it. > > Judging, categorizing, commenting anyone's post is a futile effort for > the ego. > > Fine tune our chi, anyone can connect. > JM > > > > Fitness63 wrote: > > > > From: cid830> We can only follow their teachings if we choose to accept > > them, regardless of whether or not they actually taught them at all. > > > > > What we are talking about is the proverbial LEAP OF FAITH that is > > required > > for any belief system, and thus zen, like any other religion or > > philosophy > > requires that the adherent BELIEVE in what may very well be total fiction. > > > > So is Maya the illusion, or is the actual illusion that enlightenment > > that > > so many strive to achieve and which cannot be objectively measured. After > > all, when a Roshi says that he is enlightened, all we have is his word on > > it, and the word of his peers. Can you measure or otherwise prove > > enlightenment? Is enlightenment itself not an Illusion (Maya)? > > > > > ------------------------------------ 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/
