Bill, No Bill it's you are incorrect here. While individual selves may ultimately be illusions, illusions exist and are part of reality and must be dealt with in the world of forms. Even Buddhas must deal with other selves and their self be it ultimately illusion or not.
Bill, I ask you, Does your wife serve you breakfast? Do you have a wife? If the answer to either of these questions is yes then you agree with me whether you are willing to admit it or not. Denying the reality of illusions is NOT Zen! Denying the reality of illusions blocks true Zen realization.... Edgar On Nov 28, 2012, at 8:48 PM, Bill! wrote: > Joe and Edgar, > > The obvious misconception you both seem to be implying is that the > Bodhisattva sees him-self and others from a dualistic perspective and > separate. A Bodhisattva has long since realized this division is illusory and > does not differentiate between helping him-self and others. It is all the > same. > > The English term we use to describe this self-less (non-dualistic/holistic) > action is 'compassion'. > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote: > > > > Joe, > > > > I disagree and your view is certainly at odds with Buddhist tradition. > > > > The traditional view is that the enlightened being sacrifices some of what > > he has attained to return to the world to help other beings reach > > enlightenment and thus transcend suffering. He does it FOR other beings, > > not FOR himself. > > > > However as I just said I do agree that the best way to help other beings is > > to manifest one's own realization as an example. > > > > But that should NOT selfishly be thought of as doing it FOR ONESELF. One > > manifests realization back into reality to bring realization TO reality. > > > > The process of realization can be thought of as the entire universe > > achieving realization of its inherent Buddha Nature piece by piece as being > > after being achieves realization and manifests it back to the rest of the > > universe. > > > > Edgar > > > > > > On Nov 28, 2012, at 2:40 AM, Joe wrote: > > > > > RAF, > > > > > > Howdy from Arizona. > > > > > > The Bodhisattva vows are for ONESELF, not for all beings. That's > > > important. > > > > > > One vows to oneself to save all beings, because, when we awaken, we > > > realize that this is already the case, already done. So, vow fulfilled. > > > > > > The vow is a skilful means that one puts on oneself, skilfully. It is > > > also a yoke. Thus, a Yoga. Really, it's very practical. Nothing to > > > eschew, because it is not a promise. It is something that is fulfilled > > > automatically when you wake up. But there I go spilling the beans. > > > > > > There's nothing wrong with the Bodhisattva vows; the only error is in > > > preconceptions. It's Mister Dubious who is dubious. The vows are yours, > > > not someone else's, and no one, nor anything else, holds you to them. > > > > > > But it helps to make them. I mean, to make them helps us to wake up. If > > > you begin this or have begun this, especially in a formal context with > > > teacher and sangha, in the midst of STRONG practice, you'll see. > > > > > > A pleasure to meet and talk, RAF! > > > > > > Best, > > > > > > --Joe > > > > > > > R A Fonda <rafonda@> wrote: > > > > > > > > "Work out your OWN salvation with diligence". > > > > Ironic you should mention that, as it is the very reference I recently > > > > cited to Edgar, as supporting my view that the Bodhisattva Vow is > > > > presumptuous and a dubious doctrine. At any rate, my choice to eschew > > > > that vow is why I don't call myself a Buddhist, in spite of my sincere > > > > gratitude for his elucidation of the Way. > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for an excellent response. > > > > > > > > RAF > > > > > > > > > >
