On Apr 23, 11:14=A0am, small tortoiseshell <_cl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Apr 23, 9:00=A0am, Hollywood Lee <hollywood...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Tang Huyen wrote:
>
> > > Robert Epstein wrote:
>
> > >> Good to see you in any case.
>
> > >> If sitting under a tree is the solution,
> > >> and people are not the problem,
> > >> where does that leave sangha?
> > >> where does that leave compassion?
>
> > >> I prefer the razor's edge of the Diamond Sutra
> > >> to an either/or solution:
>
> > >> a. =A0"The bodhisattva saves countless beings."
> > >> b. =A0"The boddhisattva does not allow the thought to arise
> > >> =A0 =A0 =A0 that he is saving countless beings."
> > >> c. =A0"Even though countless beings are saved, in truth there are
no
> > >> =A0 =A0 =A0 beings,they are just called such."
>
> > >> In other words, he acts without a sense of separate self, he acts
> > >> without a sense of a separate other, yet he still does act
> > >> compassionately and does not refrain from acting on behalf of
others.=
>
> > > The issue to me is not about self and others,
> > > separate or not, real or not, but it is how to
> > > know for sure that what I want to do to
> > > others is good or bad. Marx was
> > > unquestionably motivated by humanitarian
> > > motives, but look at the Communist
> > > movement that took inspiration from him.
> > > Pol Pot and Khien Sampan were sure that
> > > they did good and that they did not do evil.
> > > How can I be sure that I do good and don't
> > > do evil? What guarantees to me that my
> > > motivation is good and not evil and that my
> > > actions that derive from it are good and not
> > > evil? How can I set myself up as the model
> > > for all others to follow, especially if I force
> > > them to follow me? And if my sangha will
> > > correct me if I am wrong, why did the
> > > Japanese sangha not correct the Japanese
> > > Zen masters =A0who trained the Samurai-s at
> > > war skills right in the meditation halls and
> > > who vocally advocated the Japanese side
> > > of WW II without any hesitation? They
> > > also quoted Buddhist scriptures in the
> > > support of their nationatistic ideology. At
> > > least the Communists did not.
>
> > I never know with absolute certainty whether my actions or inactions
> > with respect to others are helpful or harmful. =A0And yet, it is an
> > empirical fact that I both act and don't act in each moment.
=A0Further,=
I
> > appear to be able to use my own sense and reflection to make tentative
> > judgments about the skillfulness or unskillfulness or my actions and
> > intentions. =A0And so, I move forward, making choices that sometimes
hel=
p,
> > sometimes not, but generally looking for the small ways I can help.
>
> > So far, the balance seems to favor the help column.
>
> sorry for slight digression, but since i know you have law as a
> profession i grab a chance and hope to hear what you think about this:
>
> i dont know how far '
> indirectly' responsible can be taken in legal terms
does dependent origination apply as a legal tool? lol...
>
> - Hide quoted text -
>
>
>
>
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
