Hi Kristy, I've just realised that I'll never get thru all the posts since the tsunami, so I'm just gonna cut to the most recent postings.
> I fully accept Bill's statement that zen is a-ethical. I agree, but this doesn't give us the full picture either. If you look at many of the illustrations of Buddhist iconography you can see that to the right of buddha sits Manjusri (Bodhisattva of Wisdom)) and to his left sits Samantabhadra (Bodhisattva of Compassion). Without these two, Buddha is crippled. Without wisdom, compassion becomes a weak form of sentimentality - without compassion, wisdom becomes cold and abstract. I know this is not about "ethics" per se, but I find in Zen circles too much of the latter is prevalent (I put myself in this category). Mike ________________________________ From: Kristy McClain <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Fri, 18 March, 2011 5:03:55 Subject: Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen Hi Steve, Very good points. I wonder about this as well. Whether its a fake-it-till-you-make-it-thing or not, part of my own dis-illusionment with all such practices, beit zen Dzogchen, kunalini and the rest--results from what I perceive as a big hypocracy. Masters go on and on about ego-less no self existence, yet their own egos are vested in gathering students, book deals, and the attention they receive. Especially when its trendy to claim to be on a spiritual path these days. A lot of this just rings hollow to me right now. I've been quite critical of many ideas presented on the forum, probably because a lot of it is a "been there--done that -thing. I've taught yoga-- learned all about this kundalini stuff.. did the zen retreats and practices. Read the books. Stopped reading to go within. And the like. Ed's comments a couple of days about the steps on the path to enlightment , reminded me of a book series that I own-- but never finished reading. I decided to grab one, and read it on the plane east-- (meaning Maryland-- not the bid "East" in Asia;) The series is aptly titled, "Steps on the Path to Enlightment". Its a 5-book series, and I grabbed the one volume of the shelf that would likely irritate me. Its Vol II-- "Karma". But if i can stomach it-- perhaps i can learn enough to better understand Anthony--as i have admired him for a long time. I--myself am in the midst of inner change, which makes me grumpy at times. I fully accept Bill's statement that zen is a-ethical. The problem I'm having, is that I simply don't want to live that way. I'm willing to sign on to some suffering as a result. For me-- equanimity is just not where I want to be right now. I want to be involved in the world in such a way that I will undoubtedly "feel" pain and hurt and frustration due to the people and problems I will be involved with. I'll try to follow-up with a comment to ED later.. Be well ~ k~ --- On Thu, 3/17/11, SteveW <[email protected]> wrote: >From: SteveW <[email protected]> >Subject: Re: [Zen] First Master of Dzogchen >To: [email protected] >Date: Thursday, March 17, 2011, 11:55 AM > > > > > >--- In [email protected], Kristy McClain <healthyplay1@...> wrote: >> >> ED, >>  >>  >> I have comments on the attached but will offer them later. But wanted to >>share this now.. >> >>  >> Does this line-up with the teachers you had? k >>  >>  >> Hi Kristy. While I certainly agree with the assessment that the >>inherently-existing ego-self is an illusion, I cannot help but wonder how >>many >>supposedly enlightened masters are just faking it. It is one thing to >>understand >>that the ego has no inherent existence, and quite another thing to live your >>life that way. But who knows? Maybe Kundalini yoga is the magic bullet. For >>that >>matter, I cannot help but wonder how many people who assert that "everything >>is >>perfect in being what it is" really react to people, places and things with >>perfect equanimity. >> >Steve >> >> > > >
