all scient ific observations and therefore the conclusions come from a highly filtered and conditioned mind
From: Bill! ific Sent: Friday, October 28, 2011 4:13 AM To: [email protected] Subject: [Zen] Re: Zen and Buddhism Anthony, And so, little grasshopper, are you saying that 'historical facts' and 'science' aren't based on a belief system? ...Bill! --- In mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com, Anthony Wu <wuasg@...> wrote: > > Bill, > Â > Belief systems and historical facts are different things. It is OK to deify > Buddha in sutras or any scriptures compiled in the name of Buddha, as long as > you bear that in mind. However, historical facts such as the real life of > Buddha and that of the sixth Patriarch had better be maintained in as close > to history as possible. I consider the latter a 'science'. > Â > Anthony > > > ________________________________ > From: Bill! <BillSmart@...> > To: mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com > Sent: Thursday, 27 October 2011 4:56 PM > Subject: [Zen] Re: Zen and Buddhism > > > Â > Anthony and ED, > > I don't take any of the Sutras or the story of the Flower Sermon as absolute > fact. I just assume they are mythic to a greater or lessor extent. Whether or > not any of these things written about in the Sutras, the Bible or any other > Holy Books actually happened is not important to me. > > I still believe the 'seeds' of Buddhism are containted in the Sutras; the > 'seed' of Zen is revealed in the Flower Sermon; and the 'seed' of zen (Buddha > Nature) already exists in every sentient being. > > ...Bill! > > --- In mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com, "ED" <seacrofter001@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Anthony, > > > > All teachings are continually evolving. See: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddha-nature > > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buddha-nature> > > > > I find the Flower Sutra to be magnificent. Anyway, what matter to me is > > that the Flower Sutra edifies and inspires me - and that's all that > > matters to me. > > > > --ED > > > > > > > > --- In mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com, Anthony Wu <wuasg@> wrote: > > > > > > ED, > > > > > > If the Flower Sermon appeared in the 14th century, while the Buddha > > lived in the 6th Century BC, what happened in the 2,000 year gap? Did > > the physical Buddha returned from the grave to transmit the dharma? Or > > the 'dharmakaya' of the Buddha showed up to spread the untold teaching? > > > > > > Anthony > > >
