Hi JM, Yes, my understanding is the same as your first and last sentences...
Thanks, Edgar On May 19, 2013, at 6:48 PM, 覺妙精明 （JMJM） wrote: > Hi Edgar, > > Yes, I only said half way. What I described earlier will take a person to > the level of Arahant, like Hinayana practice, which is to ferry oneself. > > After one awakens from his heart, then he needs to practice Six Perfections. > Begin with giving, not formed giving, but formless giving. Giving of wisdom. > This begins the Bodhisattva practice, or big vehicle to ferry more sentient > beings, as in Mahayana practice. > > Wisdom is the nature of ALL forms and formlessness. > > For your reference, > JM > > > On 5/19/2013 9:52 AM, Edgar Owen wrote: >> >> JM, >> >> >> This is correct but JM expresses only the first part. >> >> Initially realization involves stopping thinking. (As in sitting Buddha >> Nature is directly realized) >> >> But after that realization is brought BACK into thinking and thinking is >> realized as part of Buddha Nature. >> >> If that were not true Realized masters would be unable to think without >> losing their realization. >> >> And Realized masters clearly DO THINK without losing their realization.... >> >> Therefore thinking becomes part of realization..... >> >> Realization is the realization of everything without exception including >> thinking..... >> >> Realization is the realization of the true nature of ALL things. >> >> Realization is not just making the world of things and thoughts go away... >> >> >> Edgar >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On May 19, 2013, at 12:11 PM, Juemiao Jingming wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> Hi Bill, >>> >>> As I said, your definition of zen, is also part of Chan. Not different, >>> just incomplete. >>> >>> If we go back to the origin, Chan is "Not cast in words. Transmit beyond >>> teaching." >>> >>> In other words, Chan does not involve with any concept or logic. Chan is >>> pure transmission, meaning synchronization. >>> >>> All practices are part of Chan. Just different routes, some more direct. >>> >>> The key is not trying to understand it, but to feel and sense it. Begins >>> by completely drop our logic. >>> >>> For your reference. >>> Jm >>> >>> On May 19, 2013 7:06 AM, "Bill!" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> JMJM, >>> >>> I've never insisted that zen and Chan are different. I've only pointed out >>> that some of your descriptions of Chan are different from what I know as >>> zen. >>> >>> I don't think there are any fundamental difference, but then again I don't >>> know for sure. Like I said below zen is not everything. It is a practice. >>> There are human activities that are not part of that practice. >>> >>> If that's different for Chan then they are different. >>> >>> ...Bill! >>> >>> --- In [email protected], 覺妙精明 （JMJM） <chan.jmjm@...> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> > Hi Bill, >>> > >>> > You always insisted that there are differences in zen, Zen, Chan. I can >>> > accept all of that, because all of that is inclusive in Chan. They are >>> > all description of the same one fundamental thing, the universal life >>> > force and wisdom and all of its manifestations. >>> > >>> > JM >>> > >>> > >>> > On 5/19/2013 6:52 AM, Bill! wrote: >>> > > >>> > > JMJM and Edgar, >>> > > >>> > > I don't know about Chan, but zen is a human practice that assists in >>> > > balancing the interplay between Human Nature and Buddha Nature. I went >>> > > on to describe it in more detail in a recent post. >>> > > >>> > > It is not everything. It is a practice. There are human activities >>> > > that are not part of that practice. >>> > > >>> > > ...Bill! >>> > > >>> > > --- In [email protected] <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>, >>> > > Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > JMJM, >>> > > > >>> > > > That's my understanding too. That's how I use the word though I >>> > > usually refer to it as Zen. >>> > > > >>> > > > It's not something confined to any sect, temple or teacher though it >>> > > may be recognized and taught therein. >>> > > > >>> > > > Chan or Zen is just a name for the fundamental reality of the world. >>> > > But the name is not the reality, it just references the reality... >>> > > > >>> > > > Edgar >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > On May 19, 2013, at 9:08 AM, 覺妙精明 >>> > > > （JMJM） wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > > Hi Mike, >>> > > > > >>> > > > > Chan is the absolute and most fundamental dharma. Chan is the >>> > > essence of all and everything. >>> > > > > Chan can be expressed with any kind of word or no word at all. >>> > > > > >>> > > > > JM >>> > > > > >>> > > > > On 5/19/2013 1:00 AM, uerusuboyo@ wrote: >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> Would it be fair to say that Cha'n still retains more of its >>> > > original Indian Mahayana flavour than Japanese Zen? At least in it's >>> > > outward expression, if not in its stories. I can almost smell the >>> > > incense from here! ( meant respectfully). >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> With cheeks together, on a chair, >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> Mike >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPad >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> From: Joe <desert_woodworker@>; >>> > > > >> To: <[email protected] >>> > > <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>>; >>> > > > >> Subject: [Zen] Re: What is Enlightenment? >>> > > > >> Sent: Sun, May 19, 2013 5:26:17 AM >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> JMJM, >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> Well done. Well expressed. Be well. Please take good care. >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> Hands together, and with bow, >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> --Joe >>> > > > >> >>> > > > >> > <chan.jmjm@> wrote: >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > Everything we truly seek belongs to heart, i.e. peace, happiness, >>> > > > >> > etc. >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > Enhance the sensitivity of our heart. Accept all as is. Surpass >>> > > the realm of desire, form and formlessness. Sync with the universal >>> > > wisdom through our heart is the key to enlightenment. >>> > > > >> > >>> > > > >> > with palms together, >>> > > > >> > jm >>> > > > >> >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> > >>> >>> >> > > >
