Mike, I am a big David Hume fan. I usually say 'science is a belief system based on faith in the concept of cause-and-effect'. I also am a skeptic of the notion of time (which is necessary for cause-and-effect to function).
I've just given up arguing from that standpoint with Anthony. ...Bill! --- In [email protected], mike brown <uerusuboyo@...> wrote: > > Bill!, > > To be honest, I think you're addressing this issue from a slightly wrong > perspective. Jumping from a high-building doesn't necessarily 'cause' death > (you could use a parachute, land in water or fall onto an open top > pillow-truck etc). Even if you fell onto concrete and died, can we really say > it was jumping, or landing, that caused the death? Was death caused by the > jump; the fall; the impact; the heart stopping; the skull fracturing; the > brain being pierced by your jawbone etc.? There is in fact no real definitive > causal link to the initial jump and moment of death. IMO this is where cause > and effect are questioned, not just in Buddhism.but in Western philosophy, > too (see David Hume). > > Mike > > > > ________________________________ > From: Bill! <BillSmart@...> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Monday, 31 October 2011, 18:47 > Subject: [Zen] Re: Zen and Buddhism > > >  > Anthony, > > I DO believe that jumping from a high building will cause death. I'm not > arguing that. What I am arguing is that it is a belief and not an > experience, therefore it is not real. It's only a belief - a concept. > > Just THIS! is experience and only an experience, therefore it is real. The > term 'Just THIS!' which I use to communicate and the concept of 'Just THIS!' > which you might form as a result of my communication are just terms and > concepts. They are not real. You may believe in them if you wish but that > doesn't make them real. If you experience 'Just THIS!' (Buddha Nature) then > you will know it is real. > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], Anthony Wu <wuasg@> wrote: > > > > Bill, > > à> > If jumping from a high building will get oneself killed is not real, I > > don't know what is real. Do you want to try it to find whether it is real? > > à> > 'Only just this is real is another of your belief system. > > à> > Anthony > > > > > > ________________________________ > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > To: [email protected] > > Sent: Monday, 31 October 2011 9:00 AM > > Subject: [Zen] Re: Zen and Buddhism > > > > > > > > à> > > > Anthony, > > > > You're partially correct. > > > > That is part of my belief system, but it's not real - it's just a belief > > system. > > > > Only Just THIS! is real. > > > > ...Bill! > > > > --- In [email protected], Anthony Wu <wuasg@> wrote: > > > > > > Bill, > > > Ãâà> > > So that is your belief system, and it is real. > > > Ãâà> > > Anthony > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > > To: [email protected] > > > Sent: Sunday, 30 October 2011 4:52 PM > > > Subject: [Zen] Re: Zen and Buddhism > > > > > > > > > Ãâà> > > Anthony, > > > > > > If you're asking would I jump off a 9-story building, the answer is no, > > > and the reason is because I would be afraid of getting hurt or killed. > > > And yes, this is because of my belief in cause-and-effect. > > > > > > If you're asking about the raw experience of jumping off a 9-story > > > building I'd say the experience when you landed would be pretty severe > > > and your discriminating mind probably wouldn't have much of a chance to > > > create such determinations as 'gee, this hurts', or 'this is bad', or 'I > > > don't think I'll do that again!'. > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Anthony Wu <wuasg@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Bill, > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > 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'? > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > Anthony > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > > > To: Zen_Forum@ > > > > Sent: Saturday, 29 October 2011 10:29 AM > > > > Subject: [Zen] Re: Zen and Buddhism > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > 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, > > > > > ÃÆ'Ã'âââ¬à ¡ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > The story of turtles cannot stand proof, but quarks, dinosaurs, > > > > > supernova... can. Science and > > > > > historyÃÆ'Ã'âââ¬à ¡ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâàare 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. > > > > > ÃÆ'Ã'âââ¬à ¡ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > Anthony > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > Sent: Saturday, 29 October 2011 9:27 AM > > > > > Subject: [Zen] Re: Zen and Buddhism > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'Ã'âââ¬à ¡ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > 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. > > > > > > ÃÆ'Ã'Ãâ 'ÃÆ'ââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¦Ã¡ÃÆ'Ã'âââ¬à ¡ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > Grasshopper > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > > Sent: Friday, 28 October 2011 4:13 PM > > > > > > Subject: [Zen] Re: Zen and Buddhism > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'Ã'Ãâ 'ÃÆ'ââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¦Ã¡ÃÆ'Ã'âââ¬à ¡ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > > > > > > > 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, > > > > > > > ÃÆ'Ã'Ãâ 'ÃÆ'ââ¬Â 'ÃÆ'Ã'ÃââÃÆ'ââââ¬à ¡ÃâìÃÆ'ââ¬Â¦ÃâáÃÆ'Ã'Ãâ 'ÃÆ'ââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¦Ã¡ÃÆ'Ã'âââ¬à ¡ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > > 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'. > > > > > > > ÃÆ'Ã'Ãâ 'ÃÆ'ââ¬Â 'ÃÆ'Ã'ÃââÃÆ'ââââ¬à ¡ÃâìÃÆ'ââ¬Â¦ÃâáÃÆ'Ã'Ãâ 'ÃÆ'ââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¦Ã¡ÃÆ'Ã'âââ¬à ¡ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > > Anthony > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > > > > > From: Bill! <BillSmart@> > > > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, 27 October 2011 4:56 PM > > > > > > > Subject: [Zen] Re: Zen and Buddhism > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ÃÆ'Ã'Ãâ 'ÃÆ'ââ¬Â 'ÃÆ'Ã'ÃââÃÆ'ââââ¬à ¡ÃâìÃÆ'ââ¬Â¦ÃâáÃÆ'Ã'Ãâ 'ÃÆ'ââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ãâ¦Ã¡ÃÆ'Ã'âââ¬à ¡ÃÆ'ââ¬Å¡Ãâà> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
