Anthony, To paraphrase a bastard Jew...'Before Siddhartha was born, I am.'
...Bill! --- In [email protected], Anthony Wu <wuasg@...> wrote: > > Bill!, >  > For once I agree with you. It is Siddharta himself who claims that zen > existed before him, as he often said he taught an ancient way. Now it is your > job to prove who practiced zzzzzen before Siddharta. Which sage or saint did > it? >  > Anthony > > > ________________________________ > From: Bill! <BillSmart@...> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Saturday, 28 July 2012, 10:58 > Subject: [Zen] Re: Chan and zen > > >  > Anthony, > > I've addressed most of your questions a post just prior to this - my 'going > out on a limb' post. But there is one thing you wrote I want to clarify - > remind you of actually... > > As you know I draw a distinction between 'Zen' and what I call 'zen'. 'Zen' > is 'Zen Buddhism' and 'zen' is what I practice and is the 'awareness of > Buddha Nature'. > > So, you certainly could say 'Zen' (Zen Buddhism) did not exist before > Siddhartha Buddha, but I maintain 'zen' (awareness of Buddha Nature) did > exist long before Siddhartha Buddha and I've climbed out on a limb to > convince you of that. > > ...Bill! > > --- In mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com, Anthony Wu <wuasg@> wrote: > > > > Bill, > > à> > Siddharta did not invent Buddha Nature. Like you say, he discovered an > > awereness of Buddha Nature. that is what he means by stressing that he > > teaches an ancient way. Zen is not equal to Buddha Nature. It is the way to > > be aware of Buddha Nature, like you mean. If you agree to that, are you > > sure zen predates Buddhism? then who practiced zen before Buddhism? What > > was it like before Buddhism was born? > > à> > Anthony > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > To: mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Friday, 27 July 2012, 18:23 > > Subject: [Zen] Re: Chan and zen > > > > > > à> > Anthony, > > > > When I say 'zen' I usually use that term to mean 'an awareness of Buddha > > Nature'. So when I say 'zen existed before Buddha or Buddhism' what I mean > > is Buddha Nature existed before Buddha and Buddhism. What else do you > > think? Do you think Buddha (Siddhartha) INVENTED Buddha Nature? Or did he > > just 'discover' it? And if you think he discovered it do you think he was > > the first one to discover it? I don't. > > > > ...Bill! > > > > --- In mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com, Anthony Wu <wuasg@> wrote: > > > > > > Bill, > > > Ãâà> > > Something zen-like may predate Buddhism. It may have been practised by > > > people of the Indus Valley before the 'Arians' came to India. However, > > > Sakymuni started Buddhism, followed by many modifications up to mahayana. > > > Eventually your techer Mr Frontcorner took it up and taught you. That is > > > what I call zen developed from Buddhism, not from Christianity or Islam. > > > It does not contradict your statement that zen predates Buddhism and me > > > and your good self. Still, how do you prove that something called zen > > > existed well before the Buddha? > > > Ãâà> > > Anthony > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > > To: mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com > > > Sent: Wednesday, 25 July 2012, 18:06 > > > Subject: [Zen] Re: Chan and zen > > > > > > > > > Ãâà> > > Anthony, > > > > > > No, zen predates Buddhism, Siddhartha Buddha and all the other Buddhas. > > > Zen predates everything except perhaps 'sentient-ness'. So maybe the > > > first sentient being (Adam?) could be called the first Buddha, but after > > > that all sentient beings possessed Buddha Nature. > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > --- In mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com, Anthony Wu <wuasg@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Bill, > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > Your 'zen' also developed from mahayana Buddhism. Otherwise, where did > > > > it come from? If you say from Christianity, the devil and angel will > > > > both be after you. > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > anthony > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > > > To: mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com > > > > Sent: Monday, 23 July 2012, 9:32 > > > > Subject: [Zen] Re: Chan and zen > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > ED, > > > > > > > > My response below assumes by 'chan' and 'zen' you mean 'Chinese Chan > > > > Buddhism' and 'Japanese Zen Buddhism'. Anyway, my response below is > > > > limited to my knowledge of those... > > > > > > > > I only know of Chan from what I've read and the excellent information > > > > JMJM has given us through his posts. From these I do think there is a > > > > little difference between Chinese Chan Buddhism and Japanese Zen > > > > Buddhism, but most of that I see are due to the different cultural > > > > wrappings of each. There are many more parallels and similarities than > > > > differences. They are both from the school of Mahayana Buddhism. If I > > > > were to grab any one difference to emphasize I would say Chan Buddhism > > > > is a little more mystical than Japanese Zen Buddhism but that's about > > > > all. > > > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > > > --- In mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com, "ED" <seacrofter001@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill and JM, > > > > > > > > > > Do either of you perceive any substantive difference between chan and > > > > > zen? > > > > > > > > > > --ED > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ 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/
