Good Morning Bill, Chris, Mel and All,
Thank you for your feedback. Because these terminology is not in the
"usual" zen dictionary. I needed to know whether I should continue on
this path, though Chan uses primarily Tao in practice and Buddhism in
describing spirituality. I also sensed that probably people are too
nice to me and left my post alone, because Zen does not speak this way. :-)
Buddha taught for 49 years. And his teachings probably contains the
most material describing various states of spirituality. I sense
probably it is time to talk a little about spirituality.
Words such as Kensho, Satori, Samadhi are all from Buddhism and are all
labels for a certain spiritual state, or realm, or level, or whatever
you prefer. Nonetheless, spiritual states are difficult to describe no
matter what label we use.
The goal here is trying to connect spirituality with our daily life, in
other words explain the relationship of our heart and our mind how to
relate them to our practice.
On the other hand, I noticed that there are very few discussion about
nirvana, enlightenment, Buddhahood. These are the essence of our
practice. These are not goals, as rejected by Zen purest, but
spirituality states we could witness. After 6, 7 years on this forum, I
sense it is probably time to say it clearly that "we all can be
enlightened in this life." Buddha did it in 13 years. My teacher did
it in 8 years. Why can't we.
We all can. Yet we have to start with the unfiltered communication and
the unfiltered practice with an engaged and honest witness. If the
communication are filtered by our mind, then the rest of it will also be
filtered out.
JM
Be Enlightened In This Life - We ALL Can
http://chanjmjm.blogspot.com
http://www.heartchan.org
On 3/12/2011 5:30 AM, Mel wrote:
Hi JMJM
My understanding of Bodhisattva over the years from Deshimaru-sensei's
teachings was that this was(and is) the human level. It's not a
priestly life but holy nevertheless, and a life led amongst other
fellow mortals. One lives amongst both the clean and corrupt
Compassion...well...compassion is perhaps that very thing that will
always be a source of distance between myself and many Zen followers I
come across face-to-face or online. To me personally, nature had
always had its ugly side, as well as its beauty.
Dualistically-speaking, Zen and nature are one and the same. What
happens in the rainforest is not always pretty, and nor is it in the
daily processes of our modern human civilization
In my reading of the Bodhisattva's Vow, I came across...
...'our ancestors gave tender care to beasts and birds with
compassionate minds and hearts'...
..'we can be sympathetic and affectionate with foolish people,
particularly with someone who becomes a sworn enemy and persecutes us
with abusive language'....
It's unfortunate but the first above concerning birds and beasts
is very good fuel for those with a vegetarian, or vegan agenda. As for
the next one below, things can get a little confused. I think we have
to ask ourselves how much sympathy, affection, foolishness, and so
forth are enough, or not enough. Many sworn Buddhists I've come across
also blow the bugle on that famous Semite belief....'thou shalt not
kill'...and to them I asked,"Then how am I to protect myself and my
loved ones?" They say one does right so things don't fly that way, and
I say that humans being humans, nothing is ever guaranteed
I'm sure there are more than a few peace-loving Buddhists out there
who would rather die than raise a hand of anger, and in a way I
understand where they're coming from, because death brings about a
return to Buddha itself, although not in the Semitic sense nor in the
sense that Lao, Thai, and others around the Mekong River do(But they
believe such, and that's fine and that's what works for them)
Buddha be praised
Mel
