Is this really what they profess, or simply how most choose to interpret
them?
I am unconcerned with their source, or even if people see this, but it
is curious how this hinders believers and nonbelievers equally.
K
On 6/3/2012 9:57 AM, Anthony Wu wrote:
K, I have to agree with you again that though the sutras profess to be
from the words of the historcal Buddha, they are actually not.
Anthony
*From:* Kristopher Grey <[email protected]>
*To:* [email protected]
*Sent:* Sunday, 3 June 2012, 21:37
*Subject:* Re: [Zen] Re: News: Stanford scholar tracks meditation's
migration from ancient monasteries to modern yoga
Also a matter of what is meant by 'Buddha'. While not the words of THE
[historical] Buddha, they are words of Buddha.
Buddha, is not a name. Buddha Dharma is not a teaching. Buddha Nature
is not a state or quality...
K
On 6/3/2012 8:43 AM, Anthony Wu wrote:
Heart and Diamond Sutras are supposed to be about Buddha's own words,
but actually they were written collectively by anonymous authors
hudreds of years after Buddha's death. They are mahayanas classics.
Anthony
*From:* Edgar Owen <[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected]>
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Sent:* Sunday, 3 June 2012, 19:46
*Subject:* Re: [Zen] Re: News: Stanford scholar tracks meditation's
migration from ancient monasteries to modern yoga
What about the Heart and Diamond Sutras though?
Edgar
On Jun 2, 2012, at 8:21 PM, Bill! wrote:
This is true in my experience. Most texts are written ABOUT zen
masters, no BY zen masters. There are some notable exceptions, but
for example Buddha himself left no writings (we know of). Neither
did important zen masters like Joshu. And of course Jesus left no
personal written teachings.
...Bill!
--- In [email protected]
<mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>, Kristopher Grey <kris@...>
<mailto:kris@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> 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 <desert_woodworker@...> <mailto:desert_woodworker@...>
> > *To:* [email protected] <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>
> > *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>
<mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>,
> > "ED" <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
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
