Bill!, If it was living one of its lives in on a country estate in England, then yes, "condemned" would be an apprpriate choice ; ). I do, however, take your point that the koan doesn't suggest that the fox suffered anymore than we do by being subject to cause and effect (as opposed to being one with it). Mike
From: Bill! <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Wednesday, 7 September 2011, 16:16 Subject: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle Anthony, Mike and Siska, Well you all used or continued to repeat the word 'condemn' which implies it's a bad thing. You didn't say your were 'rewarded' with the life of a fox... But I of all people know how tricky the English language can be when talking about these types of things, so I'll take your word for it. ...Bill! --- In [email protected], siska_cen@... wrote: > > Bill, I never said it is a bad (or good) thing. I don't think Mike did either > ;-) > > Siska > -----Original Message----- > From: "Bill!" <BillSmart@...> > Sender: [email protected] > Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 04:22:41 > To: <[email protected]> > Reply-To: [email protected] > Subject: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle > > ...and what's so bad about living as a fox for 500 years? > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], siska_cen@ wrote: > > > > Hi Mike, > > > > Ah, got your point. > > > > > there is no self, yet.. > > There is no self, no yet ;-) > > > > Siska > > -----Original Message----- > > From: mike brown <uerusuboyo@> > > Sender: [email protected] > > Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 07:28:05 > > To: [email protected]<[email protected]> > > Reply-To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle > > > > Hi Siska, > >  > > Oh, I see. I thought you were asking if saying, "There is and isn't a > > diifference" condemns you to 500 years as a fox. Really, it's just a > > question of neither being absolute nor subjective. For example, there is no > > self, yet... > >  > > Mike > > > > From: "siska_cen@" <siska_cen@> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Tuesday, 6 September 2011, 11:28 > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle > > > > > >  > > Hi Mike, > > > > Don't really get it, if what were true? > > > > Siska > > From: mike brown <uerusuboyo@> > > Sender: [email protected] > > Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 03:17:07 +0100 (BST) > > To: [email protected]<[email protected]> > > ReplyTo: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle > >  > > Hi Siska, > >  > > If that were true, then what wouldn't condemn you to 500 years as a fox? > >  > > Mike > > > > From: "siska_cen@" <siska_cen@> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Monday, 5 September 2011, 18:48 > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle > > > > > >  > > Hi Mike, > > > > > In other words, there is and there isn't a difference. > > > > I like this. > > > > Would statements implying there is or isn't a difference condemn you to 500 > > years as a fox too? :-) > > > > Siska > > From: mike brown <uerusuboyo@> > > Sender: [email protected] > > Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2011 11:17:44 +0100 (BST) > > To: [email protected]<[email protected]> > > ReplyTo: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle > >  > > > > > > >In truth, Two and One are in support of one another. > > > > >>Here it seems that Rev Harvey makes distinction between Two and One. Are > > >>they really different at all? > > > > Siska, > > > > Just as Bill! is condemed to live 500 years as a fox for saying that an > > enlightened person isn't subject to karma (just as he would be if he > > said that an enlightened person is subject to karma), so with this > > question. There is no yes or no. In other words, there is and there isn't a > > difference. > > > > Mike  > > >
