I think ED may have asked about some of the differences between the zen and theravada paths. Below illustrates some of such
--- On Mon, 23/5/11, empty0grace <[email protected]> wrote: "...and if that's is so a practitioner of satipatthana will be forever filling their insatiable bowl and increasing the thickness of the layers occluding Buddha Mind." ---------------------------------------------------- MEL: It is unfortunate for many, but zen followers state it as it is, with no preservatives, or sweeteners. They don't teach the use of additives in zen. What you see is what you get. Same deal..what they see is what they get, and they can live with that. Too much choosing and discriminating leads to dualistic tendencies -------------------------------------------------------- Makes no exceptions, and is universal judgment and condemnation of all satipatthana practitioners. This is the English you used. Thereby it includes both me and my teachers. It is also a clear statement that their practice does not bear the fruit of awakening. ------------------------------------------------------ MEL: I can't help but be reminded of the way the local Thai community here DownUnder(Australia) reacted when their then most regarded monk was accused (with proof) of sexual liasons with quite a few young women. Interesting...I thought that being devout Buddhists, that they would be far too above all the mudslinging flying their way. Guess what? Death-threats were even made against people such as the media The above is a very strong indication of having taken offense. Daniel, a bit sensitive there, bud. In zen, we're taught to ride over things like this, dualistically-speaking. One breaths, and keeps posture straight..just like in zazen. Even if my own beloved mother was being called all sorts of names imaginable under the sun...I breath, and keep posture straight, keep a clear head, and observe. In zazen, things come..and things go. We let it pass, and know very well others will also come, and go When you take offense not only for yourself but for your teachers, who is hurt? You? Buddha? BigMind? Who? The original face/nature? Where did Buddha come from? What was there before Buddha? Is it hurt? -------------------------------------------------------- I could not imagine myself saying such a thing to you, regardless of how profoundly we seem to disagree, not just because I have not met your teachers, but because it would be disrespectful. There is no need to be quoting dictionaries. ------------------------------------------------------- MEL: Another difference between zen and the theravada paths. You put emphasis on words..we in zen don't. We just say it as it is. A wannabe-theravada follower told me once that real buddhist monks were...how do I put this?...study monks? He spoke to me of hundreds..thousands?..of printed material that monks have to study. Incredible. In zen, such a thing tend to be regarded as something of a joke. In my bag is a copy of a book called THE BUDDHA AND HIS TEACHINGS(published by Narada Co). In the back cover it says THIS IS A RELIGIOUS TEXT. PLEASE TREAT IT WITH RESPECT...or something like that, and this brings the points... - What is Buddha exactly? - Where is it(Buddha)? How does one pollute Buddha/Dharma? I can flush that book down the toilet the way MPs, spooks, and USMC guards did with koran copies at 'Gitmo', Abu Ghraib, and Bagram in the presence of the inmates..but how does that pollute or alter the Great All/BigMind? The teachers? Who are they? Do they not live, and die?...just as all else?.. To the nonZen and/or nonBuddhist members of the forum, please bear in mind that the catch-term 'emptiness' pops up every now and then ----------------------------------------------------- The problem, as I see it, is that you do not take responsibility for your words. You do not qualify with "in my opinion, or in my experience etc." That is, I think, a pretty good working definition for the difference between an opinion and a judgment, the first is respectful in the sense of polite, the second is disrespectful in the commonly understood sense of intentionally condemnatory. --------------------------------------------------------- MEL: Where there is pride, there exists dualistic notions...this and that, here and there, you and me..and so on... To a nonBuddhist or nonZen individual, the above would be seen as if you're defending something you might not even be sure of. Forget your pride, and strengthen your foundation. Which is important...Buddha, or your ego/pride/little self/small mind? It's admirable that there are those within both Theravada and even Mahayana who can quote scripture and use special terms or words of ancient significance....question is, how does all that translate into their daily lives? Mayka had recently reminded us about that in one of her latest postings...zazen, which translates into daily life.. Buddha be praised Mel
