Mayka, In this case, I think the Buddhist concept is reasonable. The degree of the sin on killing depends on the degree of development of the life that is killed. If one kills an arahant, his sin is much more serious than killing an ant. On the matter of suffering, if we can quantify it, it would be a good idea. For instance, we can put weights on different life forms, the more developed they are, the higher weights they get. Then you get a high mark, if you only kill, maybe unintentionally some cockroaches, but not a single monkey. Anthony
--- On Thu, 28/7/11, Maria Lopez <[email protected]> wrote: From: Maria Lopez <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: Zen elements? To: [email protected] Date: Thursday, 28 July, 2011, 8:53 AM Anthony; It's about reducing as much suffering from other forms of life. In whatever way one may understands this will act consecuently. Mayka --- On Wed, 27/7/11, Anthony Wu <[email protected]> wrote: From: Anthony Wu <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: Zen elements? To: [email protected] Date: Wednesday, 27 July, 2011, 23:00 Mayka, Vegetarianism is a good thing, for health reasons and others. But living in this 'evil' world involves killing one way or the other. Killing bacteria, to begin with, then plants, and further small living beings unwittingly, for example, ants and cockroaches. For thousands of years, that is the contention between the Jains and Buddhists. The former is always on the alert not to kill anything unintentionally. So he uses a broom while he walks to drive away any small insects in the way in front. But the Buddhist is more pragmatic to allow killing insects for the purpose of cleaning a pond. By the way, the Jains survive up to now, impressing the world by beautiful temples donated by merchants who make their money in an honest way. You finds some Jains even in the UK. Thus have I heard. Anthony --- On Wed, 27/7/11, Maria Lopez <[email protected]> wrote: From: Maria Lopez <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: Zen elements? To: [email protected] Date: Wednesday, 27 July, 2011, 2:37 PM Anthony; I take your remark as an affectionate opinion you have about Bill. Our Bill is unique in his multiple skillful ways of presenting zen even when he's not a vegetarian. Don't you think?. Mayka --- On Tue, 26/7/11, Anthony Wu <[email protected]> wrote: From: Anthony Wu <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: Zen elements? To: [email protected] Date: Tuesday, 26 July, 2011, 22:40 Mayka, You can see from your experiences that how magnanimous and liberal our Bill roshi is on this site. Anthony --- On Tue, 26/7/11, Maria Lopez <[email protected]> wrote: From: Maria Lopez <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: Zen elements? To: [email protected] Date: Tuesday, 26 July, 2011, 8:20 AM Bill: I'd like partially disagree with your statement about that there is no preaching in zen. Perhaps in real zen you're right there is no preaching but in the zen found in the Internet groups where a Teacher or Roshi is present there, Not only there is preaching but also there is an enormous repression imposed over its members. It's a zen borne in the USA and it's perverse, fanatic, psychological violent to its members. In this respect I'm very lucky and websites of that kind they usually put me soon into moderation. And at those moments I know that I'm in a faking pretentious zen group. This was the case in the Zen Living Group yesterday in which I've been put into moderation for no real serious transgression done but just giving responses to mails received. And I've been put into moderation without been warned, told and neither the participants of the group have been inform about it. And someone who came out asking to be deleted from the group after reading the response from the Roshi to me. He was insulted with nasty language by one of the fanatic Roshi followers. Not that I care much as I don't usually am an active participant over that group. Saying this only to illustrate that preaching, perversion, agresion, represion, imposition of views and ideas do exist in American zen. Mayka --- On Mon, 25/7/11, Bill! <[email protected]> wrote: From: Bill! <[email protected]> Subject: [Zen] Re: Zen elements? To: [email protected] Date: Monday, 25 July, 2011, 2:34 Mayka, Thanks for your excellent definition of 'preaching'. I agree with it. In that sense I do not beleive zen teachers 'preach'. If they do they've lost the immediateness and sponteneiety that characterizes zen. I do suspect many Buddhist teachers preach. Chrisitians, Jews and Muslims preach a lot. IMO. ...Bill! --- In [email protected], Maria Lopez <flordeloto@...> wrote: > > ED and Bill; >  > The word "Preaching" sounds to me as a monotonous repetitive lethany of > religious catechisms.  There are times in which we all "preach" which > means that what we say is not alive in us at the moment of being expressed > out. We only repeat what we heard or even maybe occasionally have > experienced. But that is not alive in us at the present moment of > talking. Then, there are other times in which the receiver has a complex > with "preaching" and as a result of that mental formation,  everything > he/she hears is received as preaching. >  > Mayka >  >  > --- On Sun, 24/7/11, Bill! <BillSmart@...> wrote: > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@...> > Subject: [Zen] Re: Zen elements? > To: [email protected] > Date: Sunday, 24 July, 2011, 9:03 > > >  > > > > ED, > > I had to look up the word 'sententious'. Merriam-Webster Online defines it as: > a: given to or abounding in aphoristic expression > b: given to or abounding in excessive moralizing > > Then I had to look up 'aphoristic'. Merriam-Webster Online defines it as: > a: a concise statement of a principle > b: terse formulation of a truth or sentiment > > With those definitions in mind I'd say: > - zen defnitely favors aphorisitic expressions but does absolutely no > moralizing > - Christianity favors aphorisitic experssions and defintitely likes to > moralize. > > So my answer to your question below is, "No, not entirely." > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], "ED" <seacrofter001@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Is it the case that sententious preaching, rational and/or non-rational, > > is an element that Zen and Christianity tend to hold in common? > > >
