Edgar,

Is this part of Stage 3?

--- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...> wrote:
>
> 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/>
> > >
> > 
> >
>




------------------------------------

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/

Reply via email to