Bill, Your statement makes a lot of zenist sense. In that sense, the wild fox is right that you don't have to follow causative rules. Unfortunately, we live on the ground and not high up in the sky. That is why I haven't been liberated. Anthony
--- On Sat, 21/5/11, Bill! <[email protected]> wrote: From: Bill! <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Zen] Buddha Nature To: [email protected] Date: Saturday, 21 May, 2011, 9:47 AM Anthony, I think the insistence of the belief that these are true is a hinderance. This is the stuff of religion. Religions are hinderances to the realization of truth - Buddha Nature. Religions try to make you conform to a set of expectations that are not necessarily your own. They can never lead to freedom and liberation. ...Bill! --- In [email protected], Anthony Wu <wuasg@...> wrote: > > ED, >  > If most people believe a story is a historical fact (though it may not), it > is a more efficient teaching tool. On the other hand, if most of them believe > it is a funny myth (such as that of a wild fox), it is also an efficient > teaching tool, but a different type. >  > Anthony > > --- On Fri, 20/5/11, ED <seacrofter001@...> wrote: > > > From: ED <seacrofter001@...> > Subject: Re: [Zen] Buddha Nature > To: [email protected] > Date: Friday, 20 May, 2011, 10:14 PM > > >  > > > > > > Anthony, > Very few if any fundamental beliefs in any religion can be proven to be > facts. . > To you these fundamental beliefs are myths; to Bill they are teaching tools; > to me they are basic premises of the religion. > And for me these three modes of viewing fundamental beliefs are essentially > equivalent. > --ED >  > --- In [email protected], Anthony Wu <wuasg@> wrote: > > > > Bill, > >  > > That is also what I mean. Still, there are different kinds of stories. Some > > are supported by historical facts, others are myths. > >  > > Anthony >  > > Anthony, > > > > It doesn't make any difference if all these stories are myths or not. > > That's not the point. They're just teaching tools. > > > > ...Bill! >  >
