Bill, Yes, that quote is the Judea/Christian/Muslim equivalent of Buddhist Karma...Bill!
--- In [email protected], William Rintala <brintala@...> wrote: > > What ye sow, that ye shall also reap. >  B > > > > > Find what makes your heart singâ¦and do it! > > > > > ________________________________ > From: Bill! <BillSmart@...> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Sat, October 13, 2012 4:42:44 AM > Subject: [Zen] Re: I need some practice advice > >  > Mike, > > Well for starters during my koan study the most troublesome koan for me was > HYAKUJO'S FOX. After my initial breakthrough koan I seemed to race through > the > next 10 or so until I got to that one. I finally passed it but it took me > almost > a month of intense effort. > > Notwithstanding my response to HYAKUJO'S FOX I'll just say this: > > You asked: "...what [do] you think about the Buddhist idea of cause and > effect?" > > I ASSUME by that you mean 'karma'. I believe karma like all other metal > constructs is illusory. What that means is I believe if you are attached to > your > dualistic illusions, especially that of self, you are subject to karma. > > If however you not attached to your illusions, or better yet are manifesting > Buddha Nature there is no self, so there is no karma. > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], mike brown <uerusuboyo@> wrote: > > > > Bill!, > > > > >I'm not the only one who has these doubts. > > > > > > You're certainly in good company! But if you're skeptical about cause and > >effect in science (as am I.. you're now in excellent company), I'd be > >interested > >as to what you think about the Buddhist idea of cause and effect? > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Saturday, 13 October 2012, 10:13 > > Subject: [Zen] Re: I need some practice advice > > > > > > à> > Mike, > > > > Thanks for the tip but I'm very aware of this. > > > > I've got Hume's COMPLETE WORKS which include his AN ENQUIRY INTO HUMAN > >UNDERSTANDING in which he records his thoughts about cause-and-effect, and > >Kant's A CRITIQUE OF PURE REASON on my Kindle they are both loaded with my > >yellow highlights. Also Plato's PARMENDIDES, Betrand Russel's THE PROBLEMS > >OF > >PHILOSOPHY and of course THE PARADOXES OF ZENO. > > > > I'm not the only one who has these doubts. > > > > ...Bill! > > > > --- In [email protected], mike brown <uerusuboyo@> wrote: > > > > > > Bill!, > > > > > > For me, David Hume does a great job of dispelling the idea of cause and > >effect. Although useful, cause and effect is nothing more than an assumption > >about the future based on observation of repeated phenomena. For example, is > >pushing on a light switch the cause of the light turning on? We observe that > >this happens 99 out of a hundred times, but is the pressing of the switch or > >the > >electricity travelling down the wires, the heating of the element? etc etc > >This > >could continued almost ad infinitum to the point where the finger pushing > >the > >switch seems like a different event entirely. So we just assume that pushing > >a > >light switch will turn on the light. Anyway, that's my (simplistic) > >understanding of Hume. > > > > > > In Buddhism, however, cause and effect can be taken somewhat differently. > > > In > >terms of suffering, the Buddha found that 'if this arises - so does that. If > >this doesn't arise - that doesn't arise'. We can observe within ourselves > >that > >if greed, hate, anger (this) etc. arises then suffering/dissatisfaction > >(that) > >arises, too. If love, compassion, peace arises then Happiness arises. If > >hate, > >anger etc don't arise then suffering doesn't arise. Compared to a scientific > >observation, this truth of Buddhist cause and effect can be observed by each > >and > >every one of us, until... ; ) > > > > > > Mike > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > > To: [email protected] > > > Sent: Saturday, 13 October 2012, 4:15 > > > Subject: [Zen] Re: I need some practice advice > > > > > > > > > Ãâà> > > Joe, > > > > > > Then I'll add to my sparse defintion: > > > > > > Science is a religion whose method is based on a faith in the concept of > >cause-and-effect and whose 'corpus' is based on the dualistic illusion of > >subject/object. > > > > > > Is that better? > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > --- In [email protected], "Joe" <desert_woodworker@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Bill!, > > > > > > > > Some of the body of Science -- the corpus, not the Method -- is pure > >categorization, based on stringent and accumulated, vetted, observation. > > > > > > > > Botany, for example. And some basics of Astronomy. Geology. > > > > > > > > What's formed and what accumulates are lists of entities and their > >properties, and how to tell them apart. No causality yet. > > > > > > > > I think, at that level, observational science is more an Art, or act of > >careful book-keeping, than it is yet Religion, or other endeavor dependent > >on > >Faith. It's a fun stage of the game!, and it takes a lot of work. > > > > > > > > --Joe > > > > > > > > > "Bill!" <BillSmart@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Edgar, > > > > > > > > > > Science is a religion based on faith in the concept of > > > > > cause-and-effect. > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ 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/
