Joe, Wrong as usual. God is a defined concept in the minds of men. There is nothing 'out there' in the real world that has a little paper label with god written on it. Thus it's best to define it as a name for something that actually really exists such as the universe rather than something which is a delusion like the Gods of the major religions....
Edgar On Jun 16, 2013, at 11:43 AM, Joe wrote: > Bill!, Edgar, > > Nobody's act of "defining" changes the fact that one is an experience and one > is an illusion. > > Christian Contemplative Mystics experience God, and they suppose that the > "Buddha Nature" they've heard about is some poor unsaved person's illusion; > > Zen Buddhists experience Buddha Nature and suppose that "God" must be > somebody elses' illusion who has not yet heard of Buddhadharma. > > But a distinction we can draw is that Buddha Nature is experienced only when > there is No-Mind. God is an experience of people who stop at One-Mind in > their practice. > > This is why a Zen teacher is absolutely necessary to guide a practitioner to > *keep going* in intensive practice, and not to stop at One-Mind. One cannot > do this oneself. If you stop at One-Mind (a quite wonderful state, itself), > you do not experience No-Mind, and you do not therefore know Zen, and > Zen-Mind, which is No-Mind. > > --Joe > > > "Bill!" <BillSmart@...> wrote: > > > > Edgar, > > > > Yes, I see that you define them as the same thing. That's fine. I don't > > however. I assume that's fine too... > > > > ...Bill! > >
