JMJM, Thanks for your post. I also posted something recently that you probably had not read before you posted this. That post mirrors some of what you say, only refers to style rather than perspective.
Thanks...Bill! --- In [email protected], 覺å¦ç²¾æ ï¼JMJMï¼ <chan.jmjm@...> wrote: > > 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å¦â¢Ã§Â²Â¾Ã¦ËŽ ï¼ËJMJMï¼Ⱐ<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! > > > >>>> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ 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/
