"More" or less, misses the point again.
There is nothing to do to realize this. There is only this experiencing.
'You' and your 'experience(s)' of objects/events are but aspects of
this, arising and passing. Nothing could be simpler.
Some realize this some don't. Doesn't change this. How could it [rhet]?
I realize you may only see and/or express this otherwise. Such is the
nature of appearances. Suchness ("Just this" if you prefer).
KG
On 9/8/2012 12:11 AM, Bill! wrote:
Kris,
More important than whether or not either of these personages actually
existed or how accurate the [translated] 3rd-person accounts of what
they did and what they said is that YOU EXPERIENCE what they are said
to have experienced.
And you can do that. I'm confident 10's of thousands or many more than
that have.
...Bill!
--- In [email protected] <mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>,
Kristopher Grey <kris@...> wrote:
>
> On 9/7/2012 7:39 AM, mike brown wrote:
> > There is a *big* difference between these stories of Buddha and
> > Christ. With Buddha's story it makes no difference whether you
believe
> > Buddha was a real man or not...
>
> So one you accept more readily because you believe it to likely be
> allegorical, the other you reject because you believe it claims to be a
> factual historical account? Surely you can see the irony in this.
>
> Every consider both/neither? That it doesn't mater whether EITHER of
> these are stories of actual/factual others or not - as they only point
> to selfless realization, and reintegration/embodiment? That they're
only
> expressions of the way, and are not offering anyone else's
> stories/practices/promises as things to cling to or reject? People take
> that upon themselves.
>
> KG
>
