Edgar.. let me get it straight.. i am not feeling sorry..i feel compassion..
jesus christ..i can't be everywhere in the world where help is needed..for christ sake..and yes i do have empathy..compassion for suffering.. you just don't get it.. i do not exist..so hence no ego i am part of the greater self.. do you understand that concept...? i help where i can and when i can... (i was a teacher of art after all for 30 years where compassion and nurturing others was my everyday experience) as for jesus christ ..well is he not the flip side of buddha don't tell me jesus did not have buddha nature? buddha is jesus and jesus is buddha..that's how i perceive it don't tell me otherwise and fill my heart with a great sadness and my eyes with tears because you fail to understand the meaning of universal love peace be with you merle Merle, You have what is called a Christ complex, you are empathetic to the suffering of the world. I know as I had a severe Christ complex myself when younger. I now understand that the very DESIGN of the world by necessity INCLUDES suffering as an essential part. This is because life cannot live without the death of other beings so there is by necessity vast and interminable suffering built into the design of the natural world. Enormous suffering is is unavoidable and leads by its very nature to the life and thus the health and happiness of other beings. As horrible as it is it's the way things are. Think of the Zen masters sitting around laughing out loud as the world goes down the drain... That being said there is certainly a place for compassion in the form of helping individual suffering beings and certainly avoiding adding to suffering as much as possible. But as I told you before, feeling righteously sorry for suffering beings in Boston or anywhere else does NOT help. It only adds YOUR suffering to the total. True compassion is actually helping alleviate the suffering of individual beings that you can help, not feeling righteously sorry for the victims of the enormous number of abuses in the world... If you can help do help, but feeling sorry is not compassion and does not help. It's just another form of ego attachment.... Edgar On May 3, 2013, at 7:46 PM, Merle Lester wrote: > > >mike:..my pain is the pain of the world..the sadness is the human condition... > > >my own individual pain is totally irrelevant..if that was all it was then it >would be easy.. > > >i do not dwell on self but the greater self..the self of all selves > > >the sadness is the sadness for the whole of existence > > >i and the world are one and the same creature.. > > >i am the great white pointer shark as i am the waves upon the great oceans > > >get my drift? > > >merle > > > >Bill, Merle, > >Now this is the kind of situation that I find Vipassana works better for me. >It's easy to say not to attach to the pain, but it doesn't really say much >(although it is true) about how to go about doing that. > >If I'm experiencing something like the sadness Merle says, then go into it. >Connect with the physicality of it. Let's say there is a pain/heaviness in the >heart. What kind of pain? Dull? Does it feel like a solid block of pain? Does >it change? Move? Go away only to come back elsewhere? Does the pain affect >your mood? Do you feel 'lighter' when the pain momentarily disappears etc? In >other words, go really deep into it. Notice the effect it has on our body and >mind - how they are connected. > >Obviously I don't do it at the speed above. And also it is mostly done >intuitively rather than thru a discourse with yourself. I find that by the time I have say thru a session like this it is impossible to be attached or consumed by the emotion as well as learning important insights into impermanence etc. > >Mike > > > > > > >Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPhone > > > >________________________________ > From: Bill! <[email protected]>; >To: <[email protected]>; >Subject: [Zen] Re: open mind? >Sent: Wed, May 1, 2013 8:56:15 AM > > > >Merle, > >I agree with you on the former 'emptiness' and the current clutter. > >Just sit through the sadness knowing that it is not real. It's illusory. >Don't let yourself 'attach' to it - that is buy into it and let the feeling of >sadness define who you are. It is your illusory self that is creating the >sadness. The sadness is not you. > >...Bill! > >--- In [email protected], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@...> wrote: >> >> >> >>  when i was a kid i always had an "empty" mind and i enjoyed this >> experience and even as a kid sort of understood what it meant..believe it or >> not >> >> now it is crammed full of "crap" and very hard  to practise the "empty" >> mind.. >> >>  at the moment i am experience a very deep sadness..in the meditation..a >> sadness that is engulfing me totally... >> >> merle >> >> >>  >> It even looks like one of the founders of Chan fell for it too! >> >> "Nothing is left behind, >> Nothing stays with us. >> Bright and empty, >> The mind shines by itself." >> >> â€" Seng Can, third patriarch of Chan >> >> --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote: >> > >> > William, >> > >> > Obviously some of this group's members HAVE fallen for the same Zen scam >> > over and over and still do! >> > :-) >> > >> > Edgar >> > >> > >> > >> > On Apr 30, 2013, at 10:28 AM, William Rintala wrote: >> > >> > > >> > > Empty Mind/Cup does not equal Empty Headed. Correct? Open Mind does not >> > > mean absolute naivety does it. Would someone whose mind had the >> > > qualities of Open and Empty Mindedness fall for the same scams >> > > repeatedly? Would such a person be incapable of learning, of retaining >> > > knowledge, of doing productive work? Aren't there stories of Zen Idiots? >> > > >> > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> >> > > To: [email protected] >> > > Sent: Mon, April 29, 2013 3:45:23 AM >> > > Subject: [Zen] Re: open mind? >> > > >> > > >> > > Merle and Edgar, >> > > >> > > I'm going to jump in here again to better explain what I mean by an >> > > 'empty mind'. To do that I'll use the teacup analogy. I know Edgar >> > > already knows the story but just in case Merle or anyone else reading >> > > this does not I'll repeat it here: >> > > >> > > "A university professor went to visit a famous Zen master. While the >> > > master quietly served tea, the professor talked about Zen. The master >> > > poured the visitor's cup to the brim, and then kept pouring. The >> > > professor watched the overflowing cup until he could no longer restrain >> > > himself. "It's overfull! No more will go in!" the professor blurted. >> > > "You are like this cup," the master replied, "How can I show you Zen >> > > unless you first empty your cup." - Traditional Zen Story >> > > >> > > Using that analogy your mind (intellect) is like the cup. The tea >> > > represents all the knowledge, concepts, prejudices, valuations, >> > > associations, etc..., that you carry around with you. >> > > >> > > When I say 'empty mind' I mean a mind (intellect) that is free of >> > > attachments to all the knowledge, concepts, prejudices, valuations, >> > > associations, etc..., which you have previously formed. It doesn't >> > > you've forgotten them permanently, but it means at this time of 'empty >> > > mind' you are not attached to or bound by any of them. >> > > >> > > Using the teacup analogy it would mean each time you have a new >> > > experience you do so with an empty cup. >> > > >> > > ...Bill! >> > > >> > > --- In [email protected], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >  bill...yes edgar..what is your interpretation of an open mind? can >> > > > you clarify?..merle >> > > >  >> > > > Merle, >> > > > >> > > > Edgar and I cannot agree because we have a completely different idea >> > > > of what Buddha Nature is, and therefore what zen is. Just why Edgar >> > > > holds the opinions he does I don't know. I hold mine because first and >> > > > foremost they are formed from my experience. Secondly they conform >> > > > with what I've been taught - not everything I've been taught, but most >> > > > of it. Lastly they correspond with what I've read - not everything >> > > > I've read, but most of it. >> > > > >> > > > Edgar's suggestion of 'opening the mind' is fine. I don't think anyone >> > > > would argue that having a closed mind is better. >> > > > >> > > > You'll have to ask Edgar to explain his idea of 'opening the mind' a >> > > > little more. I don't want to speak for him, but I SUSPECT his idea of >> > > > opening the mind is so you can start filling it up with knowledge, but >> > > > that IMO is not the way to experience Buddha Nature. >> > > > >> > > > I could also use that phrase but if I did my idea of 'opening the >> > > > mind' would be to start emptying it of illusions and prejudices so you >> > > > can experience Buddha Nature. >> > > > >> > > > These are two diametrically opposed approaches. >> > > > >> > > > ...Bill! >> > > > >> > > > --- In [email protected], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >  >> > > > >  bill!..maybe emptying the cup and opening the mind are both >> > > > > the same thing..check with edgar...you 2 seem to be at loggerheads >> > > > > over this..why? >> > > > >  can you not agree to disagree?..merle >> > > > > >> > > > > No, I can't say I do. At least not entirely. >> > > > > >> > > > > Edgar's teacup is about 3/4 full. He wants to keep filling it up. >> > > > > I'm advising him to empty it out. >> > > > > >> > > > > I'm not sure what he means by 'opening the mind'. That sounds nice >> > > > > an new-agey, but what does it mean? Does it mean emptying his cup? >> > > > > Or does it mean breaking his cup? >> > > > > >> > > > > I think he should just empty his cup and go from there. >> > > > > >> > > > > ...Bill! >> > > > > >> > > > > --- In [email protected], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > ÃÆ'‚ >> > > > > > ÃÆ'‚ bill!..you agree with this surely?...opening >> > > > > > the mind?..merle >> > > > > > ÃÆ'‚ >> > > > > > Bill, >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Zen neither empties or fills your mind. The very concept of this >> > > > > > dualism is incorrect. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Zen is simply opening mind to what is. It is pure consciousness of >> > > > > > either the forms or the formless.. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > And btw it is NOT "your mind". It is simply consciousness >> > > > > > antecedent to any distinction of self and not-self... >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Edgar >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Apr 27, 2013, at 7:52 AM, Bill! wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > > ÃÆ'‚ >> > > > > > >Edgar, >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >Yes. I'm afraid we have a fundamental disagreement here. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >I think zen practice empties out your mind, and you think it >> > > > > > >fills it up. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >Do you want to Rock/Paper/Scissors for it? >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >..Bill! >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >--- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote: >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> Bill, >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> As usual you contradict the Zen teachings which I support.... >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> Edgar >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> On Apr 26, 2013, at 9:38 PM, Bill! wrote: >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> > Edgar, >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > I see your problem now. >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > You think progress in zen is measured in ADDING ON things - >> > > > > > >> > like knowledge. It's not. You progress in zen by TAKING AWAY >> > > > > > >> > things until you get down to Just THIS! >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > You don't progress from Level 2 to Level 3. You progress from >> > > > > > >> > Level 2 to Level 1 and then to Level 0 which is actually >> > > > > > >> > no-level - Buddha Nature. >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > You're trying to fill you cup up instead of emptying >> > > > > > >> > it...Bill! >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> >> > > > > > >> > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > Bill, >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > That's Niels, not Neal. >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > Go back to stage one and get it right. Do NOT pass go! >> > > > > > >> > > :-) >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > Edgar >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > On Apr 26, 2013, at 10:27 AM, Bill! wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Edgar, >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > *** Sorry, I misread your post below and Replied >> > > > > > >> > > > incorrectly. I erased that but if you get the posts by >> > > > > > >> > > > email you might have received it. If you did please >> > > > > > >> > > > disregard. My corrected post is *** >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > What do you mean Stage Three? Neal and I are done with >> > > > > > >> > > > Stage Two and and now ready for Stage One! >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > ...Bill! >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> >> > > > > > >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Bill, >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Thanks for the quote in which Bohr correctly expresses >> > > > > > >> > > > > stage two "mountains are no longer mountains". >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Stage three is when those unreal illusory things are >> > > > > > >> > > > > realized to be the true reality. Then mountains become >> > > > > > >> > > > > mountains again.. >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Both Bill and Bohr haven't reached that stage yet... >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Edgar >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Apr 26, 2013, at 5:38 AM, Bill! wrote: >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Maybe Edgar will listen to him... >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > ...Bill! >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > >
