LET US NOT MAKE ARBITRARY CONJECTURES ABOUT THE GREATEST MATTERS. -- Heraclitus
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 8:05 AM, Edgar Owen <[email protected]> wrote: > ** > > > Bill and JM, > > Tao is the universal life force that is and moves the universe. My name > for it is ontological energy, the energy of being. This is the single > substance of the universe. All the individual things of the universe are > empty forms that arise in ontological energy as waves and ripples and > currents arise in an ocean of water. Just as waves are forms only of water > and have no self substance, all the things of the world have no self > substances but consist only of the sea of ontological energy in which they > arise. > > Chi is this Tao or ontological energy manifesting as the life force of > some individual being or thing. Buddha nature is another name for the same > thing. These are words we use when talking about individual manifestations > of Tao. It's like saying the real underlying substance of this being or > thing is ontological energy; the substance of this wave is water. > > The present moment is the same thing as ontological energy. They are both > the living substance of the universe = the universe. > > Consciousness is an individual observer's participation in this reality > from the perspective of its particular singularity. > > All that exists is the underlying sea of ontological energy and whatever > forms arise within it in the present moment. It defines and creates the > present moment because for something to be real and actual it must also be > present. > > This is reality. Realization is the direct experience of reality. Illusion > is experiencing the forms as things in themselves rather than > manifestations of ontological energy. Illusion arises because the mind > constructs a simulation of the actual reality in which we think we live. > This simulation models the world in terms of its individual things and > fleshes them out with qualities such as color and hardness and > meaningfulness and attachments and desires, none of which actually exist in > the external world of forms which consist only of information. > > The world of forms is not a physical world but a world of forms which > consist only of in-form-ation. The actual being of this form world is not > at all like our mind's simulation of it. It has no colors, sounds, > attachments, meanings. Those are added in our mind's simulation to make it > easier and more meaningful for us to function within even though they are > illusion. > > The world of forms evolves according to the innate logical rules of > ontological energy just as water waves can evolve only according to the > nature of the water in which they arise. This is called causality but there > is no causality in the sense of prior states determining subsequent states, > there is actually only the evolution of forms according to rules in clock > time. > > I'll stop here as I suspect people are getting bored... > > Only one last note: The observer (you or I) is also just another empty > form that arises in the formless sea of ontological energy = Tao = reality > = the present moment.... > > Edgar > > > > On Jan 13, 2012, at 10:19 PM, 覺妙精明 wrote: > > > > Oh, I need to be careful here, Bill. Please note there is this word of > "universal" also in the definition. Some chi are localized and not > universal. Some chi are dirty and unclean... :-) > > On 1/13/2012 7:03 PM, Bill! wrote: > > > > z*** Repost to correct typos *** > > JMJM, > > So...without any intention of trying to trap you with words and terms > because I know how difficult it is to explain things like in text... > > You described 'Buddha' as "universal life force and wisdom". I think (I > didn't go back to check) that I've seen you describe 'chi' as 'universal > life force'. That would lead me to believe the difference between 'Buddha' > and 'chi' might be the 'wisdom' part. > > Is that right? Or am I reading these defintions too literally? > > And if that's not right, what is the difference and relationship between > your concepts of 'Buddha' and 'chi'? > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], 覺妙精明 > <chan.jmjm@...><chan.jmjm@...>wrote: > > > > Hi Bill, Chi means energy in general, or life force. That's all chi > > means. In the Chinese culture, Fengshui, acupuncture, Taichi, etc. are > > all based on chi. Perhaps ask some China men in Thailand may give you > > more detailed examples. In short, most China may tell you that, without > > chi, the world is dead. jm > > > > On 1/13/2012 6:16 PM, Bill! wrote: > > > > > > JMJM, > > > > > > As always, thanks for your contribution. > > > > > > How does "Buddha in the general term is the "universal life force and > > > wisdom"" differ from your concept of 'chi' - or are the two just > > > different terms for the same thing? > > > > > > Thanks...Bill! > > > > > > --- In [email protected] > > > <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com><Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>, > > > > 覺妙精明 <chan.jmjm@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Bill & Mel and All, > > > > > > > > All the interpretation so far are close. Let me say a bit more. > > > > > > > > Buddha in the general term is the "universal life force and wisdom". > > > > When someone is "in sync" to it, this person is honored with the > title > > > > of Buddha, such as Guatama Buddha, Guanyin Buddha, etc. > > > > > > > > Because it is the "universal life force and wisdom", it is everywhere > > > > and in everything, because it manifested all. > > > > > > > > And this universal life force and wisdom possess certain > > > > characteristics. Or in ordinary language, it functions by following a > > > > certain set of laws. This set of principles is also called the Laws > of > > > > Nature, the Nature of the Universe, or Buddha Nature, or Self Nature. > > > > Everything in the universe functions according to this set of > > > > principles. My teacher has identify seven of them. If you are > > > > interested, I can share with you. > > > > > > > > Therefore, meditate to enhance our chi is critical to be in sync with > > > > the universal life force and wisdom. Like a radio receiver, it > requires > > > > power to be sensitive. As our energy enhances, then we can witness > > > > spiritual healing, karma transfer, the TriKaya, etc., phenomena in > the > > > > spiritual domain. Then we could intuitively witness our own Buddha > > > > Nature and its manifestation in everyday life, without having to > > > rely on > > > > external teachings through unreliable words. > > > > > > > > Yes, we are able to "just get it" within ourselves. > > > > JM > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 1/13/2012 2:02 AM, Bill! wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Mel, > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for your reply. You said a lot and I don't want to comment > on > > > > > every little thing, but one thing you talked about is worth a few > > > words: > > > > > > > > > > The word/name 'Buddha' is confusing to many because it is both the > > > > > name (title actually) given to Guatama Siddartha after he became > > > > > enlightened - or so the story goes. I think 'Buddha' is a title > that > > > > > means 'one who has awakened'. This historical person is called > > > > > 'Buddha' or 'the Buddha' by many, but he was not the first or > > > > > certainly only Buddha. > > > > > > > > > > 'Buddha' is also used as a shortened version of 'Buddha Nature' or > > > > > 'Buddha Mind'. You'll hear many people say things like 'everyone > is a > > > > > Buddha', or 'everyone has a Buddha inside him'. What they should be > > > > > saying (IMO) is 'everyone has Buddha Nature' and it is just a > matter > > > > > of realizing or becoming aware of Buddha Nature which you already > > > have. > > > > > > > > > > Mel or anyone else, let me know if you understand these terms in a > > > > > different way. > > > > > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected] > > > <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> <Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> > > > <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> <Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>, > > > > > Mel <gunnar19632000@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hello Bill and all > > > > > > > > > > > > People refer to that Great All out there as 'god', and yet > Taoists > > > > > have come up with TAO...and many involved with Zen in today's world > > > > > have referred to it as 'buddha'. I suppose it really depends from > > > > > which religious background the individual comes from. I have not > > > > > succeeded yet in going through the whole Bible(both Old and New, > plus > > > > > the Apocrypha) but I do believe that Christians at least have > > > > > enquired(judging from what I had read so far in online scriptural > > > > > discussions) whether the One and Supreme Creator has hands, wings, > > > > > feet, etc....in other words, an actual, physical being or make. > Being > > > > > so, the atheist camp would then say things such as,"If so, then > > > Yahweh > > > > > can't possibly be in more than one place at the same time"....and > yet > > > > > all of the Big 3 Faiths teach their followers that the Holy Father > > > > > sees all, and knows all. This then brings the question of....how > big > > > > > is God exactly? Huge to the point that he sees and knows all? Is > this > > > > > about > > > > > > size? How is He exactly...everywhere? > > > > > > > > > > > > Buddha. The world knows he was just a man. According to the late > > > Zen > > > > > teacher Deshimaru-sensei, there are sources to indicate that he > died > > > > > from eating poisoned food, or pork. However, we do not worship(in > the > > > > > religious sense) the man who lived long ago. I personally do not > know > > > > > yet where the idea of 'buddha' being the same as 'god' or 'tao' > being > > > > > all and one...and the same thing. I personally accept it(minus the > > > > > Yahwe part). Let me first point out however, that my only source > for > > > > > the moment is Zen Mind Beginners Mind...and TaoTeChing(trans., > John H > > > > > McDonald) to a very limited extent. With Buddha, there are no arms, > > > > > legs, eyes...and so forth...to mention, and yet the late Zen > teacher > > > > > (Shunryu) Suzuki-sensei say that Buddha is everywhere. One may then > > > > > conclude...does Yahweh rest within Buddha's realm? If Yahweh has an > > > > > actual physical form, does He then exist within Buddha's embrace? I > > > > > personally do not know, but I can only speak of what I believe, or > > > > > > what my personal interpretation(s) is > > > > > > > > > > > > I have 2 'buddha'-like statues in my room that I bow to before > and > > > > > after zazen, or when I leave. However, this bowing is no more > > > > > different to me when I bow to my meal before I eat, and afterwards. > > > > > With this in mind, there is a parallel here with the Christian and > > > > > Jewish faiths(I'm lacking on info for the moment with Islam on this > > > > > one). But, these little 'buddhas' I own are not representative of > > > some > > > > > Being out there. They are worthy of respect because they represent > > > > > something much higher and worthy than my own dualistic > > > > > desires...especially greed and attachment > > > > > > > > > > > > Having said the above so far, is Buddha then made of air that > that > > > > > travels around the planet and therefore sees and knows all, and > > > > > therefore everywhere? To me personally, Buddha has not got the > > > actual, > > > > > physical form I had described above...and yet Buddha is everywhere. > > > > > People new to Zen will not comprehend this easily, nor will it sit > > > > > easily with them if they understand, because there are no actual > > > > > descriptions, instructions, directions of faith or worship...and > so on > > > > > > > > > > > > In Buddha's grace > > > > > > Mel > > > > > > > > > > > > PS. I have mentioned the need for sincerity when it comes to > > > > > Zen...or Buddha if one prefers. What this means for the new seekers > > > > > is....how badly do you want Buddha? For my part as a Karate > student, > > > > > the only way I can get through works such as... > > > > > > > > > > > > - A Book of 5 Rings > > > > > > - Hagakure > > > > > > > > > > > > ...is through Zen/Buddha. No goal, no attainment...if one must > die, > > > > > then one must die. It's all about living this moment, and the next, > > > > > and the next, and the next.... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> <Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> > <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> <Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com> > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, 12 January 2012 6:50 PM > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Zen] New to Group > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Mel, > > > > > > > > > > > > Just to get you to share a little more with us I'll respond to > your > > > > > post below: > > > > > > > > > > > > 'God' is supposed to be everywhere too, just like you said > > > Buddha was. > > > > > > > > > > > > So, do you think they're both (God and Buddha)in the same place > > > > > (everywhere) together? Or do you think they are the same thing? Or > > > what? > > > > > > > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
