Re: I am only as powerful as you make me (was Re: The stealth)
Tang Huyen
Evelyn Ruut wrote:
> "Tang Huyen" <tanghuyen{delete}@gmail.com[remove]> wrote in message
> news:12c5bfi...@news.supernews.com...
> >
> >
> > Noah Sombrero wrote:
> >
> >> Tang Huyen:
> >>
> >> >Did Pete/cupcake and I do evil things to Evelyn's mind?
> >> >
> >> >Time for me to strut my favourite quotes on the topic.
> >> >
> >> >"I only have the power you give me in your own
> >> >mind." -- Evelyn, 25 Jul 2001.
> >>
> >> Isn't it great how you can mock a person with their own words, and at
> >> the same time use those words to seem to excuse how you have treated
> >> them?
> >>
> >> I mean, aren't you glad that zen seems to provide a rationale for
> >> doing what you wanted to do anyway (mocking, taunting, misleading
> >> other people)?
> >
> > I respect Evelyn and take her to be an adult who is responsible
> > for herself and who knows how to express herself. She is born
> > and raised in the USA and speaks English as her first language.
> >
> > As she said to Pete/cupcake, 9 Jan 2004 (in the part snipped by
> > you):
> >
> > "Wow! You ascribe such power to me! LOL!
> > I am only as powerful as you make me, Cuppie."
> >
> > She also said about Stumper, 18 Sep 2005:
> >
> > <<So now we have sweet Stumper pissing off some. But I
> > tell you Stumper is a real honey. Stumper is a pussycat.
> > Stumper just happens to ask pointed questions that strike to
> > the heart.
> >
> > If you can't handle Stumper you had better get saved and go
> > find Jesus, cause Buddhism is going to twist you into a knot
> > and turn you inside out.
> >
> > It could be a real good thing.>>
> >
> > If you disagree with what she said, you should take up the
> > issue with her. What she said is a matter of public record.
> > I am unaware that she has subsequently withdrawn what
> > she said as quoted. She even replied to this thread, so she
> > is aware of being quoted and apparently offers no
> > objection. I therefore take what she said at face value and
> > as norm and standard for respectable behaviour on these
> > boards. I also take what she said to be good Buddha
> > Dharma and good measuring stick for one's practice of it.
> >
> > If you are trying to save her from herself, please let her
> > know.
> >
> > By the way, Noah, don't get too worked up over this issue.
> > It's all fluff. Just laugh and drop it. That way you show
> > your Zen.
> >
> > Tang Huyen
>
> Yes I did say that and I stand by it.
>
> I do think that we should not try to harm others with our speech, but if we
> ourselves take offense at those who try to offend us, and get all worked up
> it is definitely our problem to work with. There are always going to be
> people who will piss us off one way or another in life.
>
> If we take offense all the time about what people say, and agonize over it,
> it is our choice! I knew a wonderful Korean Zen Master who said "put it
> down.... put it all down" Not quite Tang's "fluff," but it takes a
> conscious action on our part to disengage from our own painful reaction to
> the offense, whether real or perceived as the case may be. We do have the
> power to let it go, put it down.... or not.
>
> But nobody said it would be easy........ And often it is one of the hardest
> things to possibly do. For an ordinary person it is probably not
> possible. Ordinary people will tend to just ratchet the offense up in
> their mind over and over till they torture themselves with it.
>
> About taking offense, it becomes easier to deal with if we can first just
> analyze the intention involved. Very often there is no real intent at all,
> just a difference of opinion. Why get offended at that? Then again
> there may be real intent to harm, but it is still our choice whether we give
> that person power over us and the state of mind we live in.
>
> Of course, if we are buddhists we should ask ourselves what or who is it
> that is really taking offense? If we have done our practice, that should
> settle it. Most buddhists understand that there is no essential self at the
> bottom of it all.
>
> And speaking of taking offense, how dare we have such expectations of
> others! They are not here to please us! They are here to please
> themselves.
>
> So, essentially, Tang is right..... we do control our own intention (not
> that of others) and hopefully operate under the "right speech" admonitions
> etc. but we also control how we react to the provocations of others. If
> we get into a knee jerk reaction, what is different about us from anyone
> else? What has our practice gotten us otherwise? What have we learned as
> buddhists if we just react to every provocation like any one else on the
> street?
>
> Over time, if we practice, and as we become less focused on the self and the
> things of self, it becomes rather natural to engender kindness towards
> others, wishing them well. I don't know if Tang agrees with me on that,
> but I think that Stumper does. Today someone asked that on the
> newsgroup.... what does one concern himself with after enlightenment? I
> said "the suffering of other living beings." Certainly not the self or
> the concerns of self.
>
> I read a lot of Stumper's posts, and I don't see what the fuss is about.
> He is not all that provocative, unless you are bursting with ego. If
> anyone here can't handle him, they ought to call their local christian
> church and go get saved or something, or else go and get back to the basics
> and study from scratch. We have had far more provocative posters here than
> stumper, and I am talking about people who have spewed real hatred at people
> and far worse. Stumper is a pussycat by any comparison! Look up the
> Rama-nutz conversations a few months back and you will see what I mean!
>
> I honestly don't see Stumper as Tang suggests, as a "nasty tester," but more
> as an honest seeker. I think his pointed comments and questions are the
> things he asks himself. I don't think he is deliberately trying to offend,
> but many people take offense at his pointed comments, because he asks
> questions that don't have easy answers, so they think they are being mocked
> or something like that.
>
> Let it go, put it down. Put it all down. Give Stumps a break. If you
> don't have an answer, say so honestly or just let it go and say nothing.
> Hell, it's no crime.
>
> Don't worry, be happy :-)
> (hee hee)
>
> --
>
> Best Regards,
>
> Evelyn
> (to reply to me personally, remove 'sox')
The above post was posted on 23 Jul 2006, and is here
reproduced unchanged. One paragraph that is
noticeacle to me is:
<<I read a lot of Stumper's posts, and I don't see what
the fuss is about. He is not all that provocative, unless
you are bursting with ego. If anyone here can't handle
him, they ought to call their local christian church and
go get saved or something, or else go and get back to
the basics and study from scratch. We have had far
more provocative posters here than stumper, and I am
talking about people who have spewed real hatred at
people and far worse. Stumper is a pussycat by any
comparison! Look up the Rama-nutz conversations a
few months back and you will see what I mean!>>
The Rama-nutz is back, Stumper is now oxtail, and if
anybody here can't handle the mere words on the
screen, he or she ought to call their local Christian
church and go get saved or something, or else go and
get back to the basics and study from scratch.
I repost her (excellent) post as she says just now:
<<So it continues, the usenet cannibalism, in which we
devour one another with criticism. Goodness, we just
never learn.... even you and I.... do we?>>
In the above post, she said:
<<Of course, if we are buddhists we should ask ourselves
what or who is it that is really taking offense? If we have
done our practice, that should settle it. Most buddhists
understand that there is no essential self at the bottom of it
all.
And speaking of taking offense, how dare we have such
expectations of others! They are not here to please us!
They are here to please themselves.>>
Tang Huyen
Déjà Flu
<nothing at all, surprisingly>
The Koan:
"You are in more dire need of a blowjob than any white man in history"
-- Adrian Cronauer (Robin Williams) in, "Good Morning Vietnam".
The Commentary:
[Once again, Garlick attempts to start the already started car]
Adrian: Staggers the imagination.
Garlick: Makes me unique, doesn't it?
Adrian: What a plus.