And here you go Siska, both of us having the same misunderstanding of the words!. ;)
--- On Fri, 9/9/11, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle To: [email protected] Date: Friday, 9 September, 2011, 1:12 Hi Mayka, > I didn't say you have a problem of mis-interpretation. I wasn't saying that you did either ;-) I was sharing my feeling that english speaking people are generally better in understanding 'broken' english than myself, who find it a little hard to understand 'broken' indonesian. Siska From: Maria Lopez <[email protected]> Sender: [email protected] Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 14:57:12 +0100 (BST) To: <[email protected]> ReplyTo: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle Siska: I didn't say you have a problem of mis-interpretation. I said that as people who first language is not English we may make use of expressions or even funny grammar...(at the very least, I do at times) and as a result there is a misinterpretation etc. However, there are also misinterpretations or misunderstandings at times in one owns language communicated through internet, anyway. Mayka --- On Thu, 8/9/11, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle To: [email protected] Date: Thursday, 8 September, 2011, 12:06 Hello Mayka, I don't really have mis-interpretation problem. I find that english speaking people I've met have very good sense in guessing whatever we meant with our limited english. Unlike myself. Where I used to work, there were expatriates. When they speak our language, broken, I found it really hard to guess correctly what they were trying to say. Siska From: Maria Lopez <[email protected]> Sender: [email protected] Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 08:19:53 +0100 (BST) To: <[email protected]> ReplyTo: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle Hi Siska! I was unaware of English not been your first language. We're in the same boat here. It also happens to me to express things that native English speakers interpretation differs from what I meant to communicate. Mayka --- On Wed, 7/9/11, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle To: [email protected] Date: Wednesday, 7 September, 2011, 12:14 Bill, English being my second language, sometimes I'm not aware of connotation implied in the words. It reminds me of once when I said, "I believe we all get what we deserve". To me, it simply means we reap what we sow, be it good or bad. But I was corrected because 'deserve' implies punishment, of which I wasn't aware. This is a good reminder. Thank you. Siska From: "Bill!" <[email protected]> Sender: [email protected] Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 08:16:51 -0000 To: <[email protected]> ReplyTo: [email protected] Subject: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle Anthony, Mike and Siska, Well you all used or continued to repeat the word 'condemn' which implies it's a bad thing. You didn't say your were 'rewarded' with the life of a fox... But I of all people know how tricky the English language can be when talking about these types of things, so I'll take your word for it. ...Bill! --- In [email protected], siska_cen@... wrote: > > Bill, I never said it is a bad (or good) thing. I don't think Mike did either > ;-) > > Siska > -----Original Message----- > From: "Bill!" <BillSmart@...> > Sender: [email protected] > Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2011 04:22:41 > To: <[email protected]> > Reply-To: [email protected] > Subject: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle > > ...and what's so bad about living as a fox for 500 years? > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], siska_cen@ wrote: > > > > Hi Mike, > > > > Ah, got your point. > > > > > there is no self, yet.. > > There is no self, no yet ;-) > > > > Siska > > -----Original Message----- > > From: mike brown <uerusuboyo@> > > Sender: [email protected] > > Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 07:28:05 > > To: [email protected]<[email protected]> > > Reply-To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle > > > > Hi Siska, > >  > > Oh, I see. I thought you were asking if saying, "There is and isn't a > > diifference" condemns you to 500 years as a fox. Really, it's just a > > question of neither being absolute nor subjective. For example, there is no > > self, yet... > >  > > Mike > > > > From: "siska_cen@" <siska_cen@> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Tuesday, 6 September 2011, 11:28 > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle > > > > > >  > > Hi Mike, > > > > Don't really get it, if what were true? > > > > Siska > > From: mike brown <uerusuboyo@> > > Sender: [email protected] > > Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2011 03:17:07 +0100 (BST) > > To: [email protected]<[email protected]> > > ReplyTo: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle > >  > > Hi Siska, > >  > > If that were true, then what wouldn't condemn you to 500 years as a fox? > >  > > Mike > > > > From: "siska_cen@" <siska_cen@> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Monday, 5 September 2011, 18:48 > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle > > > > > >  > > Hi Mike, > > > > > In other words, there is and there isn't a difference. > > > > I like this. > > > > Would statements implying there is or isn't a difference condemn you to 500 > > years as a fox too? :-) > > > > Siska > > From: mike brown <uerusuboyo@> > > Sender: [email protected] > > Date: Mon, 5 Sep 2011 11:17:44 +0100 (BST) > > To: [email protected]<[email protected]> > > ReplyTo: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [Zen] Fwd: Re: [Zen Living] Supreme Vehicle > >  > > > > > > >In truth, Two and One are in support of one another. > > > > >>Here it seems that Rev Harvey makes distinction between Two and One. Are > > >>they really different at all? > > > > Siska, > > > > Just as Bill! is condemed to live 500 years as a fox for saying that an > > enlightened person isn't subject to karma (just as he would be if he > > said that an enlightened person is subject to karma), so with this > > question. There is no yes or no. In other words, there is and there isn't a > > difference. > > > > Mike  > > >
