So Anthony do you really believe that you know something that does not exist? I would like to see such a thing?
--- In [email protected], Anthony Wu <wuasg@...> wrote: > > Mike, >  > Only just now you said atoms and empty space, and the rest don't. That is a > materialistic view, which have existed (besides atoms and space) thousands of > years. >  > Anthony > > > ________________________________ > From: mike brown <uerusuboyo@...> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Wednesday, 18 January 2012, 0:13 > Subject: Re: [Zen] When you began learning about buddhism, How did your > friends & family react? > >  > Hi Anthony, > > My point is that labeling phenonema and things is all just opinion. Saying I > am, or am not, a Buddhist (for example) is to miss the point of Zen. Same > with labeling phenonema as 'cause and effect' or 'freewill'. These things > simply don't exist in the universe. We can claim they exist in the sense that > counting exists, yet the number 4 doesn't. Same with unicorns and Buddhists. > > Mike > > > > > > --- On Sun, 15/1/12, Anthony Wu <wuasg@...> wrote: > > > >From: Anthony Wu <wuasg@...> > >Subject: Re: [Zen] When you began learning about buddhism, How did your > >friends & family react? > >To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> > >Date: Sunday, 15 January, 2012, 8:53 > > > > > > > >Mike, > > > >I am surprised you take that materialistic view. So all of your vipassana > >with ensuing red, brown, crimson lights are just hallucinations. > > > >Anthony > > > >________________________________ > >From: mike brown <uerusuboyo@...> > >To: [email protected] > >Sent: Saturday, 14 January 2012, 21:29 > >Subject: Re: [Zen] When you began learning about buddhism, How did your > >friends & family react? > > > > > >Siska, > > > > Nothing exists except atoms and empty space; everything else is just > >opinion. > > > >                                                                                                             > > - Democritus > > > > > >Mike > > > >--- On Sat, 14/1/12, siska_cen@... <siska_cen@...> wrote: > > > > > >>From: siska_cen@... <siska_cen@...> > >>Subject: Re: [Zen] When you began learning about buddhism, How did your > >>friends & family react? > >>To: [email protected] > >>Date: Saturday, 14 January, 2012, 23:17 > >> > >> > >> > >>Hi Bill,It took a while for me to figure this :-) I'm rather slow, perhaps > >>lately, if not always.The idea that cause and effect is illusory is quite > >>new to me. I remember Anthony mentioning it before, but didn't really sink > >>in. I thought the concept of cause and effect is something that is parallel > >>to dependent origination, which is to say that everything is simultaneously > >>affecting many other things in such complicated manner that our mind cannot > >>really grasp it. Even if it can, it is actually of no use. As you said, the > >>mind needs it to 'feel' secure.I never thought it as illusory though. > >>Whatever we think about it IS illusory.Siska > >> > >>________________________________ > >> > >>From: "Bill!" <BillSmart@...> > >>Sender: [email protected] > >>Date: Wed, 11 Jan 2012 02:19:25 -0000 > >>To: <[email protected]> > >>ReplyTo: [email protected] > >>Subject: Re: [Zen] When you began learning about buddhism, How did your > >>friends family react? > >>Siska,Yes, the concept of cause-and-effect is illusory.The belief in > >>cause-and-effect is an attempt by your discriminating mind to 'understand' > >>reality, to 'make sense'of experience which is fundamentally chaotic. It is > >>a process of breaking up wholistic experience (Just THIS!) into pieces, and > >>then to categorize and even directly associating some pieces with others by > >>assigning a dependent cause-and-effect relationship to these pairs or sets > >>of pieces. The establishment of these cause-and-effect relationships are > >>done to fit your needs at the time. They are not absolute, objective or > >>real. They are relational, subjective and illusory - this is because they > >>are dependent upon your dualistic concept of self/other. The illusion of > >>cause-and-effect helps you feel more comfortable and gives you a certain > >>sense of control of life.The concept of karma is a spritualized version of > >>cause-and-effect which is usually thought of as purely a physical > relationship.The letting go of this illusion is sometimes referred to in zen > stories as 'leaping into the abyss', or 'taking a step off the 100-ft > flagpole'. These are teachings telling you that you must let go of your > attachments (espcially to logic and the belief in cause-and-effect), come out > of your fantasy comfort zone, throw away your illusory security blanket and > throw yourself completly into the stark unknown and unknowable.There's no > comforting assurance of cause-and-effect there. Just THIS!...Bill! --- In > [email protected], siska_cen@ wrote:>> Hi Bill,> > > The killing is > not the cause and the dieing the effect.> Would you then say that cause and > effect is illusory?> > Siska> -----Original Message-----> From: "Bill!" > <BillSmart@>> Sender: [email protected]> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 > 08:18:32 > To: <[email protected]>> Reply-To: > [email protected]> Subject: Re: [Zen] When you began learning about > buddhism, How > did your friends & family react?> > Anthony,> > When I said 'outside agency' > I meant 'outside of you' or 'other than you'. When you say 'karma functions > by itself' you are implying that karma exists independently of you; like when > you say 'not my will but Yours (God's) be done' you are implying that God > exists independently of you. You are implying that 'karma' and 'God' are > 'outside agencies' - outside of and/or separate from you.> > I am saying that > both the concept of 'karma' and 'God' and all their supposed attributes and > associated powers/activites are NOT separate from you. That are created by > you - by your discriminating mind. They are illusory.> > If you kill, there > is killing. If you are killed, you die. If you loot, there is looting. If you > are looted, you loose property. The killing is not the cause and the dieing > the effect. It is the same action viewed or described from two perspectives. > It is Just THIS!> > This is my experience...Bill!> > > --- In [email protected], Anthony Wu <wuasg@> wrote:> >> > Bill,> > > à> > The difference is that karma does not rely on God or any other > 'outside agent'. It functions by itself. On the other hand, if you deny > karma, does that mean whatever you do, whether killing, looting or burning, > does not have any effects? You may say you rely on law to take care of it. > But that is part of karma, at the human level. Nevertheless, it is more > realistic than reliance on God. if all are illusory, killing and looting will > be out of control. In that case, believing in God is better than believing in > nothing.> > à> > Anthony> > > > > > ________________________________> > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@>> > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Monday, 9 > January 2012, 13:00> > Subject: Re: [Zen] When you began learning about > buddhism, How did your friends & family react?> > > > > > à> > Anthony,> > > > > How are they different concepts?> > > > Both have to do with > action/reaction (cause and effect), and both exist as a concept in your > mind.> > > > Labeling some actions/reactions or cause/effect as good or bad > (good deeds lead to reward or sin leads to punishment; or accumulation of > [bad] karma leads to being re-born as a toad) is just packaging. Likewise > attributng the enforcement of actions/reactions or cause/effect to an outside > agency such as karma or God is also just packaging.> > > > It all looks the > same to me - illusory, dualistic packaging.> > > > ...Bill! > > > > --- In > [email protected], Anthony Wu <wuasg@> wrote:> > >> > > Bill,> > > > Ãâà> > > It is a different message you wrap in the same envelope.> > > > Ãâà> > > Anthony> > > > > > > > > ________________________________> > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@>> > > To: [email protected] > > > Sent: > Monday, 9 January 2012, 9:15> > > Subject: Re: [Zen] When you began learning > about buddhism, How did your friends & family react?> > > > > > > > > > Ãâà> > > Anthony,> > > > > > You definition of karma is well > stated, but why do you not think that definition could not also be applied to > the Christian concept of sin/obedience and Hell/Heaven?> > > > > > For me > it's the same message in a different envelope.> > > > > > ...Bill!> > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Anthony Wu <wuasg@> wrote:> > > >> > > > > That is not karma, but reward and punishment by God. Karma is action and > reaction by yourself through your own mind (or Buddha nature).> > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > Anthony> > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________> > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@>> > > > To: > [email protected] > > > > Sent: Sunday, 8 January 2012, 18:03> > > > > Subject: Re: [Zen] When you began learning about buddhism, How did your > friends & family react?> > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > Christians beleive in 'karma' also: if you're 'good' you go to Heaven and if > you're > 'bad' you go to Hell...Bill!> > > > > > > > --- In > [email protected], Anthony Wu <wuasg@> wrote:> > > > >> > > > > > ItÃÆ'Ã'âââ¬à ¡ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàis not at all surprising that you > got a funny reaction from people surrounding you when you said you were > interested in Buddhism. Try doing the same thing with Moslems, and you get a > funnier response. Even in this forum, which is less hostile to Buddhism, you > find different views on it. > > > > > > ÃÆ'Ã'âââ¬à ¡ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > The key point in Buddhism > is karma. But Hinduism also agrees to karma. The difference between the two > is the former insists that karma is your own business, nobody else can help > you change it. However, in Hinduism, there are powerful deities who respond > to your requests and assist you. Don't forget we are a zen forum, and there > are a view I term chaotic zen, which denies anything on karma, or any laws or > rules. They say everything is in chaos. On > the other hand, you will also hear all kinds of Buddhist views here. I hope > you have fun here. > > > > > ÃÆ'Ã'âââ¬à ¡ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > Anthony> > > > > ÃÆ'Ã'âââ¬à ¡ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > ÃÆ'Ã'âââ¬à ¡ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________> > > > > From: dan_guzy <dan_guzy@>> > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > Sent: Saturday, 7 January 2012, > 16:08> > > > > Subject: [Zen] When you began learning about buddhism, How did > your friends & family react?> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'Ã'âââ¬à ¡ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > I seem to be having > trouble with this. I'm new to buddhism, just recently starting reading up on > it the past several months, although technically I've been exposed to it for > many years through a variety of tv shows, movies, etc. My favorite was Kung > Fu: The Legend Continues. Don't know why, but the scenes with the shoalin > temple > and buddhist monks were always my favorite. > > > > > > > > > > Although I > haven't come right out and said to my family (except for my sister) that I'm > learning about Buddhism, they've seen the books and notes I leave to myself > pertaining to it. So far, it has not been encouraging. They kind of give a > disgusted look or a groan when they see it that suggests that they are not > happy about it. They are catholics. I'm an atheist (which they've known for > years). When I finally told my sister that I'd like to visit a temple in > town, she got disqusted and said "why? You'll never go with me to my church, > but you'll go to a buddhist church?" I didn't know what to say, so I told her > the truth, that I didn't feel anything for catholicism anymore, and that it > didn't feel like the right religion for me. She wasn't pleased.> > > > > > > > > > > Then today I was having a chat with a co-worker and boss at work. I get > along great with both of them, known them for several > years. My co-worker mentioned she and her husband were atheists, so I told > her I was too. We both got a kick out of it realizing that we never knew that > about each other. Then I mentioned to her that I had been reading up on > buddhism lately, and she gave the same kind of groan I've been hearing from > my family. My boss just sort of gave a look of shock and disbelief, didn't > say anything. I couple of weeks or so before that, I was discussing various > books with another boss that we like to read, and I mentioned one I'd been > reading called the Peaceful Warrior. He asked what it was about so I told > him, and when I mentioned it has a buddhist theme to it, he gave a funny > look.> > > > > > > > > > What's funny about all of this is that I've always > figured buddhism to be one of the most revered and highly respected forms of > philosophy and religion on earth. Even growing up I felt that way. When I go > online to Yahoo Answers R&S forum to ask a question pertaining > to it, I haven't had any bad replies over a single question, and if any of > you have ever been on there, you know they can be harsh sometimes in that > section. So it really threw me for a loop seeing all these crazy reactions > from people I know.> > > > > > > > > > Did any of you get these same > reactions from the people you knew when you were first learning about > buddhism?> > > > >> > > >> > >> >> > ------------------------------------ Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
