Perhaps so, though I am not concerned with "right". What is, is -
however it appears. Remember too, 'bizarre' is a quality conceptually
applied to individual perception, not an inherent quality of what is
perceived.
K
On 6/2/2012 5:18 PM, Anthony Wu wrote:
K, you are right in the sense that those zen masters did not 'write'
themselves, but were quoted copiously by their comtemporaries as to
their remarks. That is how they 'produced' huge volumes of literature.
On the other hand, mahayana Buddhists did write lots and lots of
works, starting from Nagarjuna up to the bizarre vajrayana authors.
Anthony
*From:* Kristopher Grey <[email protected]>
*To:* [email protected]
*Sent:* Saturday, 2 June 2012, 22:00
*Subject:* Re: [Zen] Re: News: Stanford scholar tracks meditation's
migration from ancient monasteries to modern yoga
Not being able to read from those who have not written, this is your
understanding of 'zen masters'. Most do not write. With other forms of
Buddhism, same. Yet, there are more works than can easily be
cataloged. Also notice how much is written ABOUT such 'masters', and
about Buddha - and consider why this is so.
K
On 6/2/2012 8:42 AM, Anthony Wu wrote:
How come zen masters historically produced more words than any
Buddhist sects did?
Anthony
*From:* Joe <[email protected]>
<mailto:[email protected]>
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Saturday, 2 June 2012, 7:20
*Subject:* [Zen] Re: News: Stanford scholar tracks meditation's
migration from ancient monasteries to modern yoga
--- In [email protected]
<mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>, "ED" <seacrofter001@...>
<mailto:seacrofter001@...> wrote:
> Zen is nothing about which anything can be said?
Probably the less said the better. People get entangled or biased.
We can talk about zen PRACTICE, though, and the more said, and the
more practiced, the better.
--Joe / Tucson
