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] <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>,
覺妙精明 （JMJM） <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>
<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!
> > > >>>>
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
