Jonathan Jennings
Ch'an Fu
> Wrong on both counts. "Jonathan Jennings" <grf...@lineone.net> a écrit dans le
> message de news:bglo9g$q1er4$4...@ID-103701.news.uni-berlin.de...>
> > "Gileht.com" <I.d...@want.spam.net> wrote
> > > I am not sure I can follow you here, but you are right about
> > > "ludicrous statements about trees not existing".
> > >
> > > That would be falling into the opposite extreme: jumping from naive
> > > realism to naive idealism or nihilism.
> > >
> > > The Middle Way is very subtle between existence and non-existence.
> >
> > That's because it's not "between" either existence or non-existence. It is
> > about going to the other end of an axis perpendicular to the axis existence
> > vs. non-existence - to 'experience'. The 'problem' and 'solution' (dukkha
> > and it's cessation) are both subjective / psychological / experiential and
> > liberation is held to be possible without ever settling 'ontological'
> > questions about whether one was, is, will be or not, and, if so, how and
> > what etc.
> >
> > > And most of the time when you try to point emptiness to naive
> > > realists they do indeed think you mean that everything is completely
> > > non-existent.
> >
> > The Buddha didn't care about the relationship between 'mind' and 'matter'
> > and naive realism, naive idealism or even nihilism in the sense you use it.
> > The teaching on 'emptiness' is all much more straightforward than you have
> > made it. The five aggregates are all purely subjective / psychological /
> > experiential e.g. if they weren't, it wouldn't be possible to bring about
> > their cessation before death (as the Buddha says can be done by applying the
>
> > schema of the four noble truths to each in turn). The aggregates are all
> > types of experience and on being scrutinized, each can be found to lack any
> > 'substance' (which is pretty much obvious anyway).
> >
> > Jonathan
awww...did Jonno cut down
your christmas tree, G? now
you'll have to hang all those
pretty ornaments on your nose.
Gileht.com
"Ch'an Fu" <cha...@metta.lk> a écrit dans le message de
news:3F2E7E55...@metta.lk...
"Gileht.com" wrote:
Chan Foo
==============
Nah. I prefer my balls just were they are right now.
By the way, no crossposting !!!! OK buster ! :-)
Merry X-mass to you too; is it already Xmass over there ?
Guluck
Gileht.com
>
> "Gileht.com" <I.d...@want.spam.net> wrote> > > "Gileht.com" <I.d...@want.spam.net> wrote
> > >
> > > I didn't expect you to like it but anyone who is interested in
> > verifying
> > > what I wrote can go and check out e.g. SN 7.15, SN 56.11, Ud
6.8
> > and SN
> > > 12.48 on the subject of the 'Middle' Way coupled with e.g. SN
> > 35.23 &24 on
> > > 'The All' and e.g. SN 22.95 and SN.22 100 on the subject of
> > 'Emptiness'.
> >
> > There is no relation between those sutras and your bull-shit !
> >
> > It is not the sutra that are wrong, it is your superficial
> > understanding of Buddhism.
>
> Your alleged objections are as vague and unsubstantiated as ever.
Maybe I
> should have pointed to suttas about waves and trees and French
philosophers
> falling in the forest make a sound when there's no-one there to
hear them.
>
> Jonathan
No non monsieur. It is your sutra references that are totally vague
and innapropriate as I pointed out !
You failed to justify your points as usual.
As I said: There is no relation between those sutras and your
bull-shit !
That was very precise.
As for your hate about French people it only show how supid,
pretencious and arrogant you are.
Shame on you.
Gileht
Gileht.com
Ud
> > 6.8
> > > > and SN
> > > > > 12.48 on the subject of the 'Middle' Way coupled with e.g.
SN
> > > > 35.23 &24 on
> > > > > 'The All' and e.g. SN 22.95 and SN.22 100 on the subject
of
> > > > 'Emptiness'.
> > > >
> > > > There is no relation between those sutras and your bull-shit
!
> > > >
> > > > It is not the sutra that are wrong, it is your superficial
> > > > understanding of Buddhism.
> > >
> > > Your alleged objections are as vague and unsubstantiated as
ever.
> > Maybe I
> > > should have pointed to suttas about waves and trees and French
> > philosophers
to
> > hear them.
> >
> > No non monsieur. It is your sutra references that are totally
vague
> > and innapropriate as I pointed out !
>
'Emptiness',
> which was what was in dispute, they can hardly have been either
'vague' or
> 'inappropriate'. So you obviously just don't understand what the
Buddha
> taught.
>
> (For instance - JJ:<<The Buddha didn't care about the relationship
between
> 'mind' and 'matter' and naive realism, naive idealism or even
nihilism in
and the
> cessation of dukkha".
Poor imbecile.
The only way to remove dukkha is to realise the inseparability of
name&form (including matter) and mind.
Look at any sutras about dependent origination.
And it is the same for all of the rest of your bull-shit.
You are way out of it man .. way out of it ... and so proud of this
... pffff ... it hurt me to realise how much stupidity you can show
in one post !
Gileht
> JJ<<The five aggregates are all purely subjective / psychological
/
> experiential e.g. if they weren't, it wouldn't be possible to
bring about
> their cessation before death (as the Buddha says can be done by
applying the
> schema of the four noble truths to each in turn>>
>
> "At S.III.58-61, the Buddha applies the schema of the Four Holy
Truths to
> each of the five personality-factors in turn, in terms of their
nature,
> origin, cessation, and the way of their going to their cessation
(the Holy
> Eightfold Path)...He then talks of two kinds of people who share
this
> understanding. The first are those practicing 'for the turning
away from'
> and 'for the cessation of' each personality factor, and the second
are those
> who 'from the turning away from' and 'from the cessation of' the
> personality-factors are 'liberated without grasping'." Peter
Harvey : The
> Selfless Mind : section 11.10
>
> JJ:<<The aggregates are all types of experience and on being
scrutinized,
> each can be found to lack any 'substance'>>
>
> SN.22.95 "...To him, seeing it, observing it, and appropriately
examining
> it - it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what
substance
> would there be in form?...feeling ?...perception ?...fabrications
?...
> consciousness ?")
>
> > You failed to justify your points as usual.
> >
> > As I said: There is no relation between those sutras and your
> > bull-shit !
> >
> > That was very precise.
>
> Well, if anyone with any comprehension complains, I'll walk them
through it.
>
> > As for your hate about French people it only show how supid,
> > pretencious and arrogant you are. Shame on you.
>
> They can't spell either.
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>