Nine out of ten times, if you ask someone if they are feeling something, or if
you put them in the position of expecting something (such as perfroming an
elaborate excersize) they WILL feel it (or at least something that will be
interpreted as it)
aaannndd ZEN!
--- On Wed,
Hi Edgar,
Thanks for the reply and insight. I'm just finding it really hard to intergrate
my understanding and experience of Zen with the importance some people here are
placing on chi. I can appreciate that chi exists and may even be the source of
form and emptiness, but at the end of the day
Jeni Jeni,
One can be enlightened at any moment, in fact there is always
enlightenment, its just a matter of realizing it, of admitting it. As
I indicated in my previous response to you sexual energy is certainly
chi and sex can certainly intensify one's chi. While orgasms are
certainly
Hi Mike, and Bill too,
I think the problem you and Bill are having is in thinking of chi as
something in particular rather than of the very stuff or substance of
everything which is what it is in the sense I (and at least to some
extent JM) are using it. Chi is not something that martial
Edgar,
I'm in the process of reading your paper on time. It written with
meticulous care to follow the scientific process. Why then would you
be drawn into this kind of psuedo-science?
For just one example, the first fatal flaw in this experiment is the
assumption that Matthieu Ricard is
Edgar,
I wholeheartedly agree with your comments about sex and zen, and in
fact think that applies to lots of other areas.
This is why I differentiate between Zen Buddhism (a religion) and zen
(what you have referred to as 'True Zen').
...Bill!
--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Edgar Owen
Edgar,
Thanks for trying to clargy this.
I accept your explanation of how you use the word 'chi' or 'OE', and
have never disagreed with it. I have first encountered it as being
called Buddha Nature and now refer to it as Just THIS! becasue I
don't want it to be tied to tightly to Buddhism.
Bill,
Yes, I agree completely with your distinction. Interesting though
that you use the capitalization in exactly the opposite way as I tend
to. I'll have to re-evaluate the way I use my capitalization.
Generally I distinguish by using the terms true Zen vs zen sects.
Maybe I use the
Edgar,
Yes, I use lower case 'z' to indicate that 'zen' is nothing special
and not specifically associated with anything else (like Buddhism).
I use 'Zen' with an upper case 'Z' to stand for Zen Buddhism which is
a proper noun and does stand for something very specific and
therefore bounded
I agree, I agree, I agree.
My point in my last 10 posts or so was that we should be very careful
not to mix these two modes in such a cavalier fashion that our
attempts at communication are more open to misinterpretation than
they already are.
...Bill!
--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Edgar
Bill,
Yes I agree, it's very easy to get hung up in the forms one deals
with and forget they are only forms.
Edgar
On Sep 11, 2008, at 2:20 PM, Bill Smart wrote:
I agree, I agree, I agree.
My point in my last 10 posts or so was that we should be very careful
not to mix these two modes
Did you write an article about this too? Let's get all the goodies.
- Original Message -
From: Edgar Owen
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 10, 2008 8:20 AM
Subject: Re: [Zen] Sex Chi
Jeni Jeni,
Historically there is a long history of
Al,
Exactly!
IF (and that's a big IF) you realize something is an illusion and
identify it as such, you can qualify it as much as you'd like.
BUT (and that's a bodacious booty) if you're saying something is not
an illusion you shouldn't use qualifiers. For example, you wouldn't
talk about
We've missed your big yellow bunch of insight nanner! I agree, I did
this exercise and thought I felt something, but I sort-of felt like I
was visualizing it happen rather than it actually happening. But then
again, I have not sat for awhile. I do believe it is there though.
Later,
Good Post Mike!
--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, mike brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Edgar,
Thanks for the reply and insight. I'm just finding it really hard
to intergrate my understanding and experience of Zen with the
importance some people here are placing on chi. I can appreciate
Good Bill. I can always count on you bring back to the path of True
Zen. Although I do believe in this Universal Life Force and the chi
that flows throughout, it is my belief in zen that has gotten me
here. Here! Now! Everything else is just an illusion.
Sorry I have been joking with you
I think Buddha Nature is a bigger illusion than CHI. I never talk about it at
all, because I do not think that there is Buddha Nature. Buddha was not God, he
was just some fat prince that could afford to sit in a cave for nine years
without starving to death because there was some other unknown
17 matches
Mail list logo
