Hey Joe,You've got a good point. Since I'm doing all this on my own, because
I'm living in China, I am certain to be all screwed up. Its a real mess trying
to mesh together personal experience, stuff I've read, and suprisingly as you
said, science. Could be that I need to discard everything, and just get back to
basics, and stop post-analyzing. I guess at the moment, thats all I can
do.Thanks again,Bummy-chan
--- On Sat, 2/2/13, Joe <desert_woodwor...@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Joe <desert_woodwor...@yahoo.com>
Subject: [Zen] Acting against seeming inevitability -- WAS: Re: war criminals
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Received: Saturday, 2 February, 2013, 2:02 AM
Scott,
The numbered points you make are all metaphysical statements, and of course a
Philosopher will rightly raise epistemological questions about each and every
one. That is, how do you KNOW?
For example, vis-a-vis your point number 1.), how do you know "Matter does not
exist"?
Then, I would raise other, even more practical questions. For example, "So
WHAT if matter does not exist?"
Your list is probably fraught with all sorts of problems.
There are also the several points of view that you may be making your
assertions from:
1.) The Point of View of Enlightenment; and,
2.) The Point of View of Delusion.
You don't specify which point of view you're taking. I suspect that it is
neither "pure" point of view, but that it is well mixed and polluted with all
sorts of threads and streams of thought, including Science. I'd say that's
inevitable, and you have lots of company.
In Buddhism, there are two major philosophical schools which the Zen tradition
has good reason to thank. Madhyamika takes the point of view from
Enlightenment. Yogacara takes the point of view of Delusion. Both make very
important observations. Zen does not depend on these schools (Yogacara and
Madhyamika), but NOTE that Yogacara and Madhyamika are not just "philosophical"
schools in our Western sense as we have come to know Philosophy and practice
Philosophy. Madhyamika and Yogacara are in fact schools of Practice. What
they write down is informed by their practice, not just by their thought.
Note, above all, that the "good or bad" you mention is not judged by some
impersonal force of the Universe. It's not as if there is some Absolute Judge,
somewhere. Good and bad is judged by you. And clearly, it is demonstrably
judged by Society, every day. These are the kinds of realities that MATTER.
Take it from me, an ex-Philosopher.
> "Bummy McNeedy" wrote:
>
> Hi Joe,
> My idea is this, and probably a mess in everyones' eyes I'm sure:
> 1. Matter does not exist.
> 2. We, as individuals, don't exist.
> 3. Nothing actually exists except a stream of conciousness
> 4. A chunk of concrete, my dog, or my wife,myself, are all only illusions of
> the all pervading consciousness, attempting to wake and realise itself.
> 5. Because of the above, there can be no judgement of right or wrong
> 6. War crimes are impossible- how can you commit a crime against yourself?
> Can't rape or steal from yourself. Can't kill yourself if all is one.
> 7. Karma must be bullshit
> Cheers,
> Scott (Bummy)
>
> --- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, "Joe" wrote:
> >
> > Scott,
> >
> > That raises the natural question even despite, as you say, "the way in
> > which everything comes into being", of: how is it possible to violate
> > (break) the Precepts?
> >
> > There are ten Grave precepts which all practitioners accept (who choose to
> > do so when given the opportunity to study them and uphold them), and many
> > more precepts than that (numbering over one hundred) which monastics of
> > both sexes take (women take more). The Grave Precepts is/are the list that
> > begins with "No Killing".
> >
> > To re-phrase the question, then -- if you or anyone will take it up -- or
> > to phrase a new one, half in your words, and half in mine:
> >
> > "Considering the way in which everything comes into being, how is it
> > possible to violate (break) the Precepts?"
> >
> > --Joe
> >
> > PS (I have a two- or three-word answer I'll share, afterwards; Not to
> > worry, the words are multi-syllabic).
> >
> >
> > > Scott Williams wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Bill,Actually my writing was a little screwed up. I didn't actually
> > > mean that it has no place in a zen discussion, but I meant that because
> > > of the way in which everything thing comes into being, can there actually
> > > be anything considered good/bad? That's just feeding into duality. Didnt
> > > mean there's anything wrong with any discussion.Cheers.Scott
> >
>
