Bill, While I can see that your statement regarding Buddha Nature experience makes (zen) sense. You have to explain the cause and effect of a person jumping from a nine story building. Does it have a determinant effect? Is it 'raw'? Anthony
________________________________ From: Bill! <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Saturday, 29 October 2011 10:29 AM Subject: [Zen] Re: Zen and Buddhism Anthony, Quarks, dinosaurs, etc..., can only stand up to 'proof' if you have faith in the 'proof', have faith in the scientific method, have faith in logic and human concept of cause-and-effect. All belief systems are built on faith, and science is such a system. Only raw, un-filtered, un-censored, un-interpreted, un-categorized, un-valuated sensory experience (Buddha Nature) can be accpeted without faith. It is the only real thing you have. All else are concepts and beliefs - and are based on faith, not immediate, raw experience. ...Bill! --- In [email protected], Anthony Wu <wuasg@...> wrote: > > Bill, >  > The story of turtles cannot stand proof, but quarks, dinosaurs, supernova... > can. Science and history are as much a belief system as the knowledge that > jumping from a nine story building without your psychic guru will get killed. > They are less of that than Yehowa asking you to kill the people you > conquered, and Buddha presenting a flower at the Vulture Peak. >  > Anthony > > > ________________________________ > From: Bill! <BillSmart@...> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Saturday, 29 October 2011 9:27 AM > Subject: [Zen] Re: Zen and Buddhism > > >  > Anthony, > > ...and is the endless series of turtles any less of a belief system than our > theory of matter, molecules, atoms, atomic particles, hadrons, quarks, > etc..ad infinitum? > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], Anthony Wu <wuasg@> wrote: > > > > Historical facts and science are NOT based on a belief system. Many times > > they run counter each other. For instance, a scientist was lecturing on our > > solar system of the earth rotating around the sun. A woman rose from seat > > and declared it nonsense. She said, 'the earth is flat, supported by a huge > > turtle.' 'Who supports the turtle?', she was asked. 'Oh, you stupid. It is > > supported by another turtle. And still anothor turtle. It is turtles all > > the way down.' That is a belief system. > >  > > Grasshopper > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Friday, 28 October 2011 4:13 PM > > 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 [email protected], Anthony Wu <wuasg@> wrote: > > > > > > Bill, > > >  > > > 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'. > > >  > > > Anthony > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > > To: [email protected] > > > Sent: Thursday, 27 October 2011 4:56 PM > > > Subject: [Zen] Re: Zen and Buddhism > > > > > > > > >  > > > 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 [email protected], "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 [email protected], 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 > > > > > > > > > >
