Bill, If you think you are NOT bound by cause and effect why can't you fly?
Try stepping in front of a bus and see if you are bound by cause and effect or not! Jeeeez! Edgar On Apr 17, 2013, at 3:27 AM, Bill! wrote: > Mike, > > The zen saying "When hungry we (sic) eat" does imply cause and effect. So > does "When hungry we don't eat" and "When not hungry we eat". Implying > doesn't make it so. The saying is just meant to describe impromptu, > unconditioned action, not to illustrate cause-and-effect. > > Also (and IMO) you're reading a little too much into the koan to jump to the > conclusion that being cast into the body of a fox for 500 lifetimes is > NEGATIVE karma or being released from that was POSITIVE karma. Also you've > neglected to note that the 'effect' (500 lifetimes as a fox) was dismissed as > soon as the old man heard the turning words. These words broke the chain of > cause-and-effect. > > I don't know who every came up with the term 'moral causation' but it is > doubly problematic for me. One because the concept of causation (the chain of > cause-and-effect relationships) is illusory, and two because 'morality' is > just another one of those two-sided coins with 'moral' on one side and > 'immoral' on the other. In other words is a dualistic concept which makes it > illusory. Dogen didn't really use this term,did he? > > You do attribute to Dogen the statement in relationship to HYAKUJO AND THE > FOX that "cause-and-effect are immovable". That's obviously not so because > the turning word removed them. > > For me (and this is Bill! speaking) a person is only subject to > cause-and-effect if he fooled by them, and if he is fooled by them he is not > enlightened. > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], uerusuboyo@... wrote: > > > > Bill!,<br/><br/>As you say, we do need to live in the world of illusions > > and that is why we need to see things as "real" in terms of the relative > > (I've never claimed anything as not being illusory, just that to do so is > > not practical to live a human life). For example, in Zen the saying is > > 'When hungry we eat' (how's that for cause and effect!). It doesn't say > > 'When hungry - just dismiss hunger as illusion'. <br/><br/>My reading of > > the last part of the koan is just that karma is not fixed (determined) and > > can be changed. Even the negative karma of living as a fox for 500 > > lifetimes was eventually extinguished (it could even be argued that 500 > > lifetimes was necessary before the old man could become enlightened, > > therefore making it positive karma if that is what was required for his > > enlightenment). <br/><br/>I cut this from > > angelfire.com:<br/><br/>"Causation" in this passage refers to "moral > > causation." The Buddhist concept of Karma acknowledges that > > good/bad deeds, thoughts, and so forth result in good/bad effects. Thus the > > import of the question posed by the "fox" is whether or not the Enlightened > > person is subject to Karma. Hyakujo's answer, in effect, affirms that the > > Enlightened person is subject to moral causation. Katsuki Sekida offers a > > common Zen interpretation of this passage in his comment: "Thus to ignore > > causation only compounds one's malady. To recognize causation constitutes > > the remedy for it." See Karma and Free Will.<br/><br/>Dogen Zenji's > > employment of this story in the "Daishugyo" chapter of the Shobogenzo > > implies that, on one level, he thinks Hyakujo's answer indeed provides a > > "remedy" for the old man's predicament. Yet Dogen was rarely content with > > merely citing traditional Zen interpretations of passages; typically, he > > sought to push his students to a further understanding by a creative > > reinterpretation of a passage. Lest his disciple therefore think this > > not-ignoring/recognition of causation is de facto a release from it in an > > ultimate sense, Dogen answers that the passage means "cause and effect are > > immovable." In other words, moral causation, for Dogen, is an inexorable > > fact of human existence."<br/><br/>For me then (this is Mike speaking!), > > the enlightened person is still subject to cause and effect, but is not > > fooled by it. <br/><br/>Mike<br/><br/><br/> > > > >
