I was very moved by the kindnest of this post of yours towards my
person. I'm not very used to this kind of treatment from practioners
in the net. I was taken aback and blushed in shyness and
embarresment while I was reading it. However, I feel my
responsability to tell you that I'm just amongst the thousands of
anonymous officially direct disciples from Thich Nhat Hanh. It
wouldn't be fair on Thich Nhat Hanh saying that I'm representing him
since my meetings with his monastic sangha have been just very few
alone the years. Though it's true that I'm very receptive to his
teaching. When I first met him I told my sangha "That man is like me
but in enlightened version. The day my mind will be pure I'll be
like him but in a woman version. I must know how he has done to
become like this." And they all laugh because of my temper and strong
Sadly, but enviromental conditiones were not right for me to join
the monastic sangha and spend enough time amongst them so that I
could be be trained appropiately. And because of that I can not let
you or anyone here see me as Thich Nhat Hanh representant. My
training has been most of it by myself alone and just very
occassional retreats with them. I love and respect them too much to
pretend something I am not.
"Just This" and "Just That" didn't intend to give a sense of duality
but to lead you to the understanding in connection with karma, form
and not form that everything interbeing with each other. The form
contains the non form and viceverse.
I understand karma as the action and the reaction of that action.
Even if you would be very mindful and deeply concentrated in
continuos alerteness to everything that is going on in the present
moment, still you create karma. Your karma here will be the energy
produced by your awareness. Whatever we do is going to have a
Thanks for being just as you are. knowing that you are there
practicing I feel a little less lonely in the practice.
--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "Bill Smart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thank you for your very candid and profound post. I appreciate
> sharing with the forum your admiration for Thich Nhat Hanh. You
> representing him and his teachings very, very well.
> Please remember that I don't get your posts in my email, and I
> always check the website. So, if you have a post you want to
> specifically to me or to assure my awareness of the post, please
> email it to me directly as you have in the past.
> My comments are embedded in your post below:
> --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "Mayka" <flordeloto@> wrote:
> > Bill;
> > I have no idea if Thich Nhat Hanh is a self proclaimed Buddhist
> > not. Knowing him a little bit I can not see him doing any
> > proclamation about anything for he's a very wise, sweet, humble
> > profoundly peaceful man. I know about him that he has turn round
> > dharma wheel and created a new way slightly different way
> > from the tradition he comes from. This is natural, the dharma is
> > something alive which comes first from guiding books and
> > and becames through daily direct experience practice a living
> > I can say for sure about him that whatever he teaches is
> > that he has experienced first by himself. He won't ever talk
> > something that he has not experienced first. In fact one amongst
> > multi remarkable skills is to reduce to the minimum the use of
> > that can create distraction in the mind and using words that are
> > simple but a smack to the intelectual mind, individualism and
> > person who is looking for sophisticated discourses and candy
> > would find Thic Nhat Hanh tedious and boring. Or on the other
> > a perosn who can also be intelectual but has reached to
> > that intelectuality can be a boundary when this is not used in
> > appropiate way, then that person, if receptive enough, would find
> > Thich Nhat Hanh a very enlightened person.
> > My direct experience about him is that he is a living Buddha. I
> > sense, touch and see that in all his body language, his living
> > dharma, his energy, in each action he does.... When he pass on
> > dharma he doesn't pass on just words but also pass on his direct
> > experience about it!. So the words become like something very
> > and real in him. He never talks about something that he has not
> > experiencing first by himself.
> Thank you again for your vivid description of Thich Nhat Hanh and
> your impression of him. He is honored to have you as a student.
> One of the things you've said above rings especially true for this
> forum: living dharma cannot be expressed by words alone -
> in only written text. It's only from face-to-face contact with
> as you describe that you can fully appreciate their total
> in the dharma.
> > The tradition he teaches I'm not sure but I'm under the impresion
> > that has its roots in Mahayana Buddhism.
> Zen Buddhism does have it's roots in Mahayana Buddhism. Some
> Zen is a type of Mahayana Buddhism, and some beleive Zen is the
> evolution (culmination) of Mahayana Buddhim and is a branch of its
> own. I assum Thich Nhat Hanh being Vietnamese would have grown up
> under the influence of Theravada Buddhism, but anyway Theravada is
> not mutually exclusive from Mahayana Buddhsim.
> As you and I both know and have said repeatedly, none of these
> or terms are really important. I usually only bring these up in
> response to someone else's post referring to some specific type of
> Buddhism. I'm not really overly concerned with Buddhism. All you
> Buddhists can give it what ever names, and divide it up into
> categories you want.
> > I have never hear before zen without the influence of buddhism or
> > having as buddhism in its root. Interesting also the simplicity
> > seem to follow your own practice.
> I know what you say is true. Most people (99.9%?) inextricably
> assocaiate zen and Buddhism. Some think it is just one of the many
> branches of Buddhism. Some, like the Vispassana Buddhists here in
> Thailand, think Zen is not a part of Buddhism at all - more like a
> cult, a derranged and impure psuedo-Buddhism. Some think of Zen as
> the culmination of all Buddhism - the most pure form.
> I think of zen as pre-dating Buddhism, Hinduism, Judiasm,
> Christianity and all other religions. I think of zen as the core
> most other religions, and these other religions, including
> are zen with a lot of extra crap stuck all over it. In a lot of
> religions the extra crap is so thick that the zen core is totally
> obsucured. I do think that in Zen Buddhism, even with all the crap
> attached, at least the zen core is recognizable and accessible.
> >I like from it [Bill's zen practice] how direct is and
> > its simplicity. I also like from it how open is to criticism,
> > the fact that one can talk about positve things and negative
> > happening to one in a very open way. In constrast to the profound
> > wisdom from Thich Nhat Hanh I have always found difficult to
> > myself in the non monastic sanghas due to its kind of Disneyland
> > of doing. I certainly share with you that as a practicioner I
> > like to wave but to deal with what it comes as it comes alone.
> > Though, I do lack of the mental stability over my emotions and
> > solidity you seem to have.
> I also feel a close connection with you, even though we often
> disagree, or at least seem to disagree. I respect your perspective
> and enjoy your posts.
> > You say that you practice from the perspective "Just This".
> But "Just
> > This" can not exist without "Just That".
> Your statement above is actually true. As soon as you say 'this',
> you imply there is a 'that'. This is a good example of dualistic
> thinking, but something that is all but impossible to extract from
> our language. Language ASSUMES and is based on dualism. This is
> zen masters often refrain from giving language-based answers to
> questions like 'What is Buddha Nature?'. As soon as you open your
> mouth to speak, you're lost. So what do they do?
> Sometimes they do use language, but in such a non-ordinary way that
> the listener cannot take their reponose literaly. Examples of
> are 'mu', or 'the cypress tree in the garden', or 'dried shit on a
> stick'. Sometimes they just yell something that is not a word at
> all, like 'Katz!' or 'Wah!'. Since these are not words they cannot
> be misunderstood. Sometimes they don't speak but just slap the
> floor, or turn around and walk away. They do avoid using ordinary
> langauage if at all possible.
> If you and I were face-to-face and your were to ask me about Buddha
> Nature I would not say 'Just THIS!'. I would demostrate Buddha
> Nature. The best way I figured out how to do this in writing like
> this forum is to type Just THIS!
> > zen or buddhism are not bigger or smaller. They may be different
> > ways in which the dharma is transmitted and nothing else.
> When I say zen is smaller than Buddhism, I mean zen is the core and
> Buddhism (or Hinduism or Christianity) is the packaging. Like zen
> the marrow and Buddhsim is the bone which contains but hides the
> marrow, or maybe even Buddhism is the entire body. It's hard to
> to the marrow if you have to hack through the body and the bone.
> > I'm truly happy to see you active in the list. Sorry if we can't
> > help oneselves by letting you lurking. I suppose we all miss you
> > very much. The zen forum is not the same without you, JM, Mike,
> > Edgar....
> > A respectuos bow to you
> > Mayka
> El gusto es mio...
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:
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: