Hello Anthony,
I don't know. My interest is to translate from Chinese into English.
So that the original teaching in Chinese is correctly communicated and
not the other way around.
My teacher taught that there are two kinds of "xin". One is our
original "xin", or "beng xin", which I translate into heart, because it
feels, connects, inspires, loves without memory or analysis. Heart is
pure and treat everything as is in real time, which is our guiding
light. When we "kensho", it does emit white light.
The other "xin" is "yi shi xin" or perhaps "conscious mind", which has a
meomory and utilizes logic, words, experiences, knowledge to
discriminate, analyze, etc., which we need to quiet and use it only as a
tool.
Since Chinese is a composite language, the singular word of "xin" in the
sutras meant differently in different context. Sometimes, it means the
"yi shi xin", sometimes it means the "beng xin".
Just use a singular Chinese of "xin" can be very confusing. That's what
I am trying to communicate.
Thank you for the question.
jm
On 4/8/2012 7:39 AM, Anthony Wu wrote:
JM
Your use of the English word 'heart' is influenced by your Chinese
meaning of 'xin'. What is the Chinese word for 'mind'?
Anthony
*From:* 覺妙精明 <[email protected]>
*To:* [email protected]
*Sent:* Sunday, 8 April 2012, 22:11
*Subject:* Re: [Zen] Maybe
Hi Kris,
Your good intentions terminated this thread from developing with your
usual "nonsense". Let me add my "nonsense".
I was on the verge to drive at the indescribable "causation", which is
the original definition of karma, while Edgar had a moralistic
interpretation of the word, because the concept of "karma" was
hijacked by people who intended to control.
Either way, it does not matter. All discussions are form. The key is
not to have a position. Once we have a position, we are
discriminating in form. Our pure heart is clouded by our thinking
mind. Yet without a position, it is difficult to communicate. Sigh...
Recently I shared another "nonsense", I wonder what does this forum
say about that -- we intuitively seek peace, happiness and love. They
all arise from our heart and not our mind. Our mind is nothing but a
logic processor.
My question is, "is the way I use the "mind" and the "heart" here
correct English?" If not, then please correct me.
Thanks,
jm
On 4/7/2012 9:11 AM, Kristopher Grey wrote:
On 4/7/2012 11:05 AM, 覺妙精明 wrote:
Is/Are there cause(s) for the actualization? From the Big Bang to
this and to that?
Conception of from and to, this and that... is actualization.
Conception of space and time, matter and energy... same.
If there was no time/space "before" the "Big Bang", what makes it
appears so "after"? What conceives of "before" and "after" - "time
and space" - matter and energy? What actualizes these reciprocal
functions? The mechanism of causation seems quite clear.
It's not whatever we may think it is, rather it's that we think at
all. The singularity is never not so. The
expansion/contraction/point/differentiation - same. Apparent aspects
of timeless dimensionless unity. Can't really work with that, use
that, identify with that, so we to see it otherwise. Not a choice,
this "Choiceless Awareness". Amazing.
Apologies in advance to Edgar, for sharing more "nonsense", which
surely this is. ;)
K
