we are the everyman...merle
 
Merle
www.wix.com/merlewiitpom/1

________________________________
 From: Anthony Wu <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> 
Sent: Friday, 7 September 2012 8:27 AM
Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: clarification of the bowl
 

  
JMJM,
 
Bill! (not Bill) is always somebody. You are also somebody by claiming you are 
nobody. Good argument.
 
Anthony

From: 覺妙精明 (JMJM) <[email protected]>
To: [email protected] 
Sent: Thursday, 6 September 2012, 22:46
Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: clarification of the bowl


  
Hi Bill,

You are still trying to show me that you are somebody.  Sorry.

I have come to realized that only when we realized that we are truly nobody, 
then we could be everybody.  Then we see the wisdom in everything.

jm


On 9/5/2012 11:31 PM, Bill! wrote:

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



 

Reply via email to