[Buddha-l] Re: Jesus is Buddha?

[Gad Horowitz]

thanx, I agree, but I dont see the difference between emptiness of
self-nature and changing manifestations of a set of conditions which are
themselves empty of self nature....



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Benito Carral" <bcarral at kungzhi.org>
To: "Buddhist discussion forum" <buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2006 10:04 AM
Subject: [Buddha-l] Re: Jesus is Buddha?


> On Tuesday, January 24, 2006, Gad Horowitz wrote:
>
> > what  can you mean by "relativism is relative, just a
> > tool"?  I  understand  that there is no such thing as
> > Emptiness  in  itself,  that  it  is  emptiness which
> > allows  things  to sort of exist...do you mean to say
> > more?
>
>    Emptiness is a property of "things." For example, we
> can say that a piece of paper is empty. What is a piece
> of  paper  empty  of?  It  is  empty of self-nature. So
> emptiness  is a tool that help us to make away with the
> idea of self-nature. But when we stop thinking in terms
> of  things endowed with self-natures and start thinking
> in  a  piece  of paper as a changing manifestation of a
> set of conditions, emptiness is not useful anymore.
>
>    Some  years  ago,  when  I directed a Chan center in
> Barcelona,  a  young  man  came  who  wanted to see the
> emptiness. I said him, "That's easy. All you are seeing
> is  emptiness. Form is emptiness." He was looking for a
> more  "mystical"  thing,  so  he didn't come back for a
> second lesson. :-)
>
>    Best wishes,
>
>    Beni
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> buddha-l mailing list
> buddha-l at mailman.swcp.com
> http://mailman.swcp.com/mailman/listinfo/buddha-l