Hello Bill and all,
Thank you for responding. If I may share some perspectives....
Some of us grew up as cactus in the desert. Some of us grew up as
orchid in a pot. One can not truly experience the other. No one truly
qualify to judge another. Yet our ego still do.
The practice of Chan is to focus inward, utilizing external information,
so to enhance our spirit and liberate our lives. Chan always emphasize
the importance of not to judge externally the practice of others,
especially when comes to dharma, especially when they are forms in the
first place.
All Buddhists know the basic practice is to detach from ego and detach
from dharma. This suggestion from Buddha, is not for me to point out
who is who, but for each of us to reflect on.
This is the reasons why sutra are written in riddle like languages. So
that we would not pick sides, then we could sleep on it, reflect
inwardly and wake up from our dream.
The simplest suggestion I like to make is try to begin by seeing the
value of others, accept them with faith, then someday upon our
awakening, we will realize that all are valuable, all are similar and
all end up in the same place. We label that as oneness.
We argue, because we don't have the whole picture.
jm
On 9/5/2012 8:24 PM, Bill! wrote:
JMJM,
You sense correctly. I am trying to 'help' Merle by disagreeing with
Edgar. It's the same as if Edgar told Merle to run out into the street
without looking and I disagreed with his advice and told her so.
I am not a teacher though and I've given up trying to intervene.
Merle's a big girl and she's ultimately responsible for herself so she
along can decide what's best for her.
I'll still voice my disagreement with Edgar because I think his views
on zen are misleading at best and counterproductive or outright
detrimental at worst.
...Bill!
--- In [email protected] <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>,
覺妙精明 （JMJM） <chan.jmjm@...> wrote:
>
> I sense Bill's continual insistence of his disagreement. Bill! is
> attached to it. Especially when Bill! is trying so hard to "help" Merle
> by disagreeing with Edgar. LOL
>
> :-)
>
>
> On 9/5/2012 8:39 AM, Edgar Owen wrote:
> >
> > Kristopher,
> >
> >
> > You keep making excuses for Bill!'s delusions!
> >
> > Disagreement is not "a form of suffering" unless you are attached
to it...
> >
> > Edgar
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sep 5, 2012, at 10:36 AM, Kristopher Grey wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Comfortably stuck in cause and effect, you ignore the sledgehammer!
> >>
> >> It appears to me that Bill! is not denying food is required to
> >> maintain a body, that forms appear to maintain forms (no independent
> >> origination) - he is denying this assumption of "have to" - this
> >> neediness that goes with it. You don't need to live, and ultimately
> >> won't (impermanence). When hungry, eat if you are able. When this is
> >> perceived as need (AKA - lack), suffering will arise over your
> >> ability to do so, over thoughts of death. Your needs, your sense of
> >> lack, your suffering.
> >>
> >> Disagreement itself, a form of suffering. Misunderstanding, a
form of
> >> recognition. Same.
> >>
> >> KG
> >>
> >> On 9/5/2012 10:14 AM, Edgar Owen wrote:
> >>>
> >>> O, for God's sakes Bill!!!!!
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> You are certifiable! I've never heard such metaphysical New Age
> >>> nonsense and certainly never expected it to come from your
lips.....
> >>> Enlightened people don't need to eat! Sheesh!
> >>>
> >>> Edgar
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sep 5, 2012, at 8:38 AM, Bill! wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Edgar (no longer and Merle),
> >>>>
> >>>> After enlightenment you do not have to eat. You realize food is
not
> >>>> essential. You may choose to eat, but you don't have to.
> >>>>
> >>>> Illusions do vanish upon realization of Buddha Nature. You may
> >>>> choose to bring them back or they may reappear without your
choice.
> >>>> But after realizing Buddha Nature you know that all dualistic
> >>>> thought is fundamentally illusion (not real).
> >>>>
> >>>> ...Bill!
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
