ED, Although I have some doubts about some of your points, that does not stop me admiring your 'clear mind' (in the sense of smartness).
One minor point: Chan is not a monopoly of JM's Heart Chan. The word is a Chinese corrupt form of the Indian 'jhana'. Its history dates back to the Indus Valley culture. For reference and enlightenment, see Bill Smart's 'Zen Predates Buddhism'. Anthony --- On Fri, 14/1/11, ED <[email protected]> wrote: From: ED <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Zen] Differences Tao/Chan, which older To: [email protected] Date: Friday, 14 January, 2011, 10:28 PM Bill and All, All systems, whether philosophical, psychological scientific, religious, etc. or mixed rest on basic beliefs, principles, postulates and assumptions. In Zen, for instance, some of these premises might be: o Buddha Nature is a reality o Non-rational experiencing is of the essence, and the rational mind is a delusion o Realizing Buddha Nature should be the primary goal of one's life o Experiencing kensho-satori is the mark of one's having commenced the process of experiencing Buddha Nature o A more ongoing experience of "Just THIS" facilitates the occurrence of kensho-satori o Regular and intense Shikantaza practice facilitates the ongoing state of "Just THIS" o No blind reliance on religious texts, but blind dependence on the guidance of Zen teachers is acceptable o An accredited Roshi is necessary to ascertain one's experience of kensho-satori o etc. Chan has a few more premises like the existence of Chi, etc. --ED --- In [email protected], "Bill!" <BillSmart@...> wrote: > > Kristy, > > Just THIS is my attempt to communicate direct experience. > > Whether you believe that or not is up to you. > > ...Bill! > --- In [email protected], Kristy McClain healthyplay1@ wrote: > > > > Bill, > > > > I disagree. It is your belief about your experience. > > > > Kristy > > Just THIS is not a belief, it is experience...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], Kristy McClain <healthyplay1@> wrote: > > > > > > So is "just this". k ;) > > > Science is a belief system...Bill! > > > > > > --- In [email protected], JMJM wrote: > > > > > > > > Hello TMSO, > > > > > > > > I would say both are NOT believe systems. > > > > > > > > From my limited understanding, Tao is a system, or school well > > > > documented. It primarily focuses on attaining immortality. I mean with > > > > herbs, exercises, etc. etc. > > > > > > > > Chan is just a nick name for the entire universe for thousands of > > > > years. I was curious to its origin many years ago. I dug here and > > > > there and could not find an answer. Even Wikipedia stated, if I > > > > remember correctly, "the original of Chan can not be traced." > > > > > > > > Chan did not have an official teaching order until BodhiDharma showed > > > > up. But my teacher often pointed out how incomplete are some of the > > > > Buddhist interpretation. > > > > > > > > Our school is really about direct, really is direct, experience. That's > > > > all. > > > > > > > > Sorry, these are my best answers. JM > > > > On 1/12/2011 2:57 PM, taomtnsage1 wrote: > > > > > > > > > > To Jue Miao Jing Ming- Could you please tell me some of the > > > > > differences between Tao and Chan. Also, which belief system developed > > > > > first. Thanks for your help
