Buddhism and Aleviating Suffering/depression
Gileht.com
"frank" <odl...@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
eeb9b0bf.02090...@posting.google.com...
> OK, as we all know the prime aim of Buddhism is the cessation of all
> suffering.
>
> Now from my personal experience Buddhism has helped greatly in
> alleviating me of my main sources of suffering, namely depression,
> anxiety, obsessing, codependance and just general disillusionment. So
> it has basically helped me with a wide range of mental problems that I
> have suffered since childhood, by merely allowing me to see the world
> and myself the way they are meant to be seen as according to Buddhist
> truth.
>
> lol, in short I am being set free by the truth :-)
>
> Does anyone else have any experience with using Buddhism to help them
> with mental problems?
>
> Also, I'm very interested, as I'm sure many on these NG's are, of
> hearing how Buddhism has helped towards the cessation of your own
> suffering.
>
> All replies appreciated.
Suffering ? What suffering ? lol
How could you stop something that is not real ?
How coud something that is not real cause real suffering?
How could somebody that is not real suffer ?
How could one see others suffering while thinking he is different, two?
That is how you stop suffering!
Gileht
cup o' tea
> Suffering ? What suffering ? lol
Oh brilliant. Just the thing to say to a person with depression. I'll
have to give you the 'Clueless about upaya' award of the month for
that one.
Brian Holly
>
>
> How could you stop something that is not real ?
> How coud something that is not real cause real suffering?
> How could somebody that is not real suffer ?
> How could one see others suffering while thinking he is different, two?
>
> That is how you stop suffering!
>
What makes you think suffering is not real? Shakyamuni seems to have
thought it was. Bet Nagarjuna did, too. If silly word games were
enough to overcome suffering, then Buddhism is false from beginning to
end. - Brian
Gileht.com
"Brian Holly" <bhol...@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
be10efa2.0209...@posting.google.com...
> "Gileht.com" <gil...@hot-mail.com> wrote in message
news:<Jhyd9.24404$vl2.5...@wagner.videotron.net>...
>
> >
> >
> > How could you stop something that is not real ?
> > How coud something that is not real cause real suffering?
> > How could somebody that is not real suffer ?
> > How could one see others suffering while thinking he is different, two?
> >
> > That is how you stop suffering!
> >
> What makes you think suffering is not real? Shakyamuni seems to have
> thought it was.
Wrong!
> Bet Nagarjuna did, too.
Wrong!
> If silly word games were
> enough to overcome suffering, then Buddhism is false from beginning to
> end. - Brian
Obviously this is way above your little head.
Better luck the next time.
Gileht
Tang Huyen
style is too close for comfort.
Back off, please.
Tang Huyen
Gileht.com
"Tang Huyen" <tang_...@yahoo.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
3D77DD67...@yahoo.com...
lol
Sorry.
Must be because I admire your style and its efficiency.
Thanks again.
Gileht
Brian Holly
> "Brian Holly" <bhol...@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
> be10efa2.0209...@posting.google.com...
> > "Gileht.com" <gil...@hot-mail.com> wrote in message
> news:<Jhyd9.24404$vl2.5...@wagner.videotron.net>...
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > How could you stop something that is not real ?
> > > How coud something that is not real cause real suffering?
> > > How could somebody that is not real suffer ?
> > > How could one see others suffering while thinking he is different, two?
> > >
> > > That is how you stop suffering!
> > >
> > What makes you think suffering is not real? Shakyamuni seems to have
> > thought it was.
>
> Wrong!
How compelling! How cogent! How stupid!
>
> > Bet Nagarjuna did, too.
>
> Wrong!
>
And your botched lobotomy was when, exactly?
> > If silly word games were
> > enough to overcome suffering, then Buddhism is false from beginning to
> > end. - Brian
>
> Obviously this is way above your little head.
>
Ooooh! I just get chills when you talk to me like that. I guess I just
have a thing for arrogant morons like you. When your IQ hits room
temperature, sell. - Brian
Gileht.com
26. "Impermanent" and "suffering" and "empty":
Three designations purifying mind;
But what refines the mind unto its utmost
Is the teaching that nothing has any self-nature.
61. Enlightenment should not be thought far off
Nor should it be considered close at hand;
When objects, six in kind, do not appear,
The genuine is known just as it is.
97. The mighty yogis [and yoginis] living on this plane
Look with god-like eyes on worldly beings,
Inferior because of mental blindness,
Whom suffering can frighten and distract.
-- Nagarjuna, In Praise of the Dharmadhatu
Boris Fuller
oh look!
the four noble truths a la gileht!
1. suffering doesn't exist
2. you don't exist
3. deny everything
4. ignore everything
rather stick to the (other) buddha's version, gil
...but thanks anyhow ;-D
Boris
Tang Huyen
Vanya wrote:
> OK, the 4th noble truth is following the eight-fold path. It seems to
> me the eight-fold path is mostly a prescription for the "correct" way
> to live. So perhaps the goal of relieving suffering is merely an
> expedient means to get people to live correctly.
> There is a lot of emphasis in Buddhism (as presented in the West) on
> becoming happy. Yet if all phenomena are impermanent and empty (devoid
> of meaning), why strive for happiness at all? Isn't the desire for
> happiness a desire like any other, thus a source of suffering? This is
> a contradiction in Buddhism that I can't resolve; maybe you can shed
> some light on it. The Eightfold path is a bit too Puritanical for my
> taste, anyway.
> Happiness is an illusion, IMO. Life is hard, then you die, so whatever
> joy you can create or eke out of life is enough.
> - Vanya
The Buddhist path can easily get sidetracked by frivolities that are aimed at the non-serious crowd, especially
frivolities that are associated with the culture of India in antiquity, or with whatever countries Buddhism has
passed into, frivolities that may make Buddhism look puritanical.
As you say: 'It seems to me the eight-fold path is mostly a prescription for the "correct" way to live. So
perhaps the goal of relieving suffering is merely an expedient means to get people to live correctly.'
Much of traditional Buddhism is just that, a religious structure to make people behave, by means of religious
control.
For the serious inquirer, Buddhism asks: are you happy with your situation? Are you happy with yourself? If
you're happy with your situation and with yourself, Buddhism is superfluous.
If you're unhappy with your situation and yourself, Buddhism leads you to ask yourself: why? Where does the
unhappiness come from?
And heaven forbid, even if you're happy with your situation and yourself, you may still be interested in asking
yourself as to whether that can continue or not (paranoid, fear-based question, for sure), and if it can cease,
then what you will do to spare yourself suffering.
If I get Buddhism aright, one gets born, grows old and sick, and dies, but there is nothing wrong with those,
they are only wrong if one takes them to be wrong. If one relaxes, one can sit back and enjoy life. One will
suffer if one continues to force life to be what one wants it to be or thinks it to be, but if one simply lets
it be just the way it is, without imposing on it one's view of what it should be, then there is no problem.
Whatever life has to offer, one takes it, one takes what comes along, especially what one is and what one has,
but without clinging to any of it and instead letting go of all of it as swiftly as one experiences it. What is
negated is not life, but the grasping and clinging that make for suffering. What is experienced is experienced,
not blocked out or distorded (just think of the people on TRB who spend the greater part of their energy
blocking themselves from themselves and bending themselves strenuously to fit a certain framework, as if they
were contortionists), but it is experienced in the mode of letting go. One just lets it pass, like water under
bridges, and creates no problem thereby. Problems come from the resistance to what occurs, not in what occurs
itself in the raw.
One doesn't try to fit experience into any framework, but lets it come just the way it comes and one lets it go
just the way it goes. One doesn't try to bend it into any framework and doesn't try to freeze it into any
stability. One just experiences it the way it is (yatha-bhutam), not the way one wants it to be
(yatha-pranihitam) or the way one thinks it to be (yatha-cetayitam).
It is as if one pulled the rug from under one at every instant, without leaving any station long enough for any
thought or feeling to take a stand on, for or against. As the Buddha says: "In the seen there will be just the
seen".
All delusional activities are tautological and recursive, in that they stroke themselves to keep themselves
going; and dismantling them is the job of Buddhist wisdom, which it does simply by dropping them, lock, stock
and barrel, and that is how the knot is unravelled. In Buddhism, a problem is solved, not when one arrives at a
solution to it, in the positive, but quite simply when one drops the problem wholesale and no longer mentates
it, in the negative. Poof and it's gone, for good. As if by magic.
In this light, Buddhism teaches us to strive only for one thing, the letting go of the past and the future,
even the letting go of what happens right now, so that we do not identify with it, for or against, but just let
it flow on, and thus do not create problems for ourselves, regarding it or anything else. In that state, we can
amaze ourselves with the joy of the moment, yet not be carried away with it.
Yes, each moment can be joyous when lived in the mode of detachment and letting go, and no, we don't hang on to
it -- the moment, the joy experienced in it, or whatever else.
Sorry for my rambling, but that is how I would attempt to answer your approach as you give it above.
Tang Huyen
Gileht.com
"Tang Huyen" <tang_...@yahoo.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
3D7A607B...@yahoo.com...
Tang's answers are very good, I would like to add two points.
First there is a reason why almost all religions prescribe a "correct" way
to live based on "not hurting others and self", based on some kind of
morality, based on love and compassion. And this reason is linked to the
real nature of everything. But it is very hard to see this. It host it works
because it is more close to the real nature of everything, because it is
less contradictory. Karma, I think, is simply like "paying the consequences
of our mistakes that are done because we acre acting in ingonrance of the
real nature of everything which is "non-dual".
Second, all most everybody go through the stage when we think that emptiness
(or impermanence) and happiness are in opposition. But that is just a phase.
When one push the study of the real meaning of emptiness one comes to
understand that it doesn't contradict all the beauty of life, but embrase it
with real love.
I hope you will get to this point.
Gileht
Brian Holly
non-existent. You will write on the board 500 times, "the empty is not
the non-existent."
"Gileht.com" <gil...@hot-mail.com> wrote in message news:<7K7e9.17015$6W3.4...@weber.videotron.net>...
TomLy
> "Tang Huyen" <tang_...@yahoo.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
> 3D7A607B...@yahoo.com...
> >
> >
> > Vanya wrote:
> >
> > > OK, the 4th noble truth is following the eight-fold path. It seems to
> > > me the eight-fold path is mostly a prescription for the "correct" way
> > > to live. So perhaps the goal of relieving suffering is merely an
> > > expedient means to get people to live correctly.
> > > There is a lot of emphasis in Buddhism (as presented in the West) on
> > > becoming happy. Yet if all phenomena are impermanent and empty (devoid
> > > of meaning), why strive for happiness at all? Isn't the desire for
> > > happiness a desire like any other, thus a source of suffering? This is
> > > a contradiction in Buddhism that I can't resolve; maybe you can shed
> > > some light on it. The Eightfold path is a bit too Puritanical for my
> > > taste, anyway.
>
> at the non-serious crowd, especially
> > frivolities that are associated with the culture of India in antiquity, or
> with whatever countries Buddhism has
> > passed into, frivolities that may make Buddhism look puritanical.
> >
> > As you say: 'It seems to me the eight-fold path is mostly a prescription
> for the "correct" way to live. So
> > perhaps the goal of relieving suffering is merely an expedient means to
> get people to live correctly.'
> Tang's answers are very good, I would like to add two points.
>
> First there is a reason why almost all religions prescribe a "correct" way
> to live based on "not hurting others and self", based on some kind of
> morality, based on love and compassion. And this reason is linked to the
> real nature of everything. But it is very hard to see this. It host it works
> because it is more close to the real nature of everything, because it is
> less contradictory. Karma, I think, is simply like "paying the consequences
> of our mistakes that are done because we acre acting in ingonrance of the
> real nature of everything which is "non-dual".
>
I have had a thought for a while: The eightfold path is just a trick
to get people on the path, as the beautiful rituals of most religions
are a lure to get peoples attention.
Follow me here. When one is forced to abstain from something, say
"gossip" they are forced to see the attachement they have to gossip.
Bam! Awareness. At least at some level. They stuggle with abstaining
and they ask the monk for help. Into a softened mind, Buddha drops his
seeds. From outside control comes internal freedom.
You see what I mean?
Vanya
>
> I have had a thought for a while: The eightfold path is just a trick
> to get people on the path, as the beautiful rituals of most religions
> are a lure to get peoples attention.
>
> Follow me here. When one is forced to abstain from something, say
> "gossip" they are forced to see the attachement they have to gossip.
> Bam! Awareness. At least at some level. They stuggle with abstaining
> and they ask the monk for help. Into a softened mind, Buddha drops his
> seeds. From outside control comes internal freedom.
>
> You see what I mean?
I see exactly what you mean: Into a monk's outstretched hand you drop
your money and control over your life. The monk ceases to have any
compassion for you. From outside control comes... slavery.
- Vanya
Tang Huyen
Vanya wrote:
> ano...@hotmail.com (anonymous):
>
> > Suffering is only in your mind . Your mind can benefit you or hurt you
> > more than anyone else . Be happy . There are people much more unhappy
> > than you .
> >
> > It's like the placebo effect .
>
> It is not like the placebo effect, it IS the placebo effect. Buddhism
> is ineffective; it does nothing for you, but you think it does. Now if
> we can just find the group that was given the real Buddhism in this
> grand cosmic experiment.
> I don't think they are on this planet.
> - Vanya
It can be easily observed day in day out on these boards that some people after years and decades of studying
and practice under luminary teachers from exotic lands who look funny, talk funny and dress funny are actually
worse off, much worse off than the average sinners out in the street who have never heard of mental culture,
and of bowing and scraping to people and statues.
So if that is a placebo effect, it has worked badly for them, as they have been patently reduced to hung-up,
stuck-up, strung-up wretches, though they still work their darnedest to perpetuate that condition in
themselves and propagate it to others.
The real Buddhism that I know uses various methods for ending suffering, and it doesn't need any grand cosmic
scheme but just humble moment-to-moment awareness of what happens and the detachment from it and equanimity
with regard to it. Its methods boil down to just that, in other words the dropping of the past and future and
the absence of identification with what happens in the present, even as attention is paid to that ever-flowing
present but in the mode of letting go, letting pass, like unto water under bridges.
It discards all self-hypnosis, like visualisation, and teaches its practitioners to open themselves
unconditionally to what happens and not to put up any barrier to it, like language and thought.
The peace and tranquillity that are attained thereby are as far away from the placebo effect as heaven from
earth. And they are the direct contrary to the wretchedness of the folks who are hung-up, stuck-up, strung-up
as above, many of whom are so to speak walking powderkegs ready for spontaneous self-combustion at any moment.
Tang Huyen
Messer Xin
(in message <3D7D414D...@yahoo.com>):
>
>
> Vanya wrote:
>
>> ano...@hotmail.com (anonymous):
>>
>>> Suffering is only in your mind . Your mind can benefit you or hurt you
>>> more than anyone else . Be happy . There are people much more unhappy
>>> than you .
>>>
>>> It's like the placebo effect .
>>
>> It is not like the placebo effect, it IS the placebo effect. Buddhism
>> is ineffective; it does nothing for you, but you think it does. Now if
>> we can just find the group that was given the real Buddhism in this
>> grand cosmic experiment.
>> I don't think they are on this planet.
>> - Vanya
Tang Huyen:
Tang is way too pessimistic. He sees things through his own
difficulties, no doubt.
Vanya has part of the truth, I think, but it's inverted.
Buddhism is to know that suffering is in thoughts and
feelings, and that thoughts and feelings are effervescent,
meaningless in themselves, and powerless when no power is
given them.
At least, that's one way Buddhism can be expressed.
--
|Xin|
Dharma -- it's not just a good idea . . . it's the law.
============================================================
==
Posted with Hogwasher. Mac first, Mac only:
http://www.asar.com/cgi-bin/product.pl?58/hogwasher.htm
l
============================================================
==
Messer Xin
(in message
<f59a3b3e.02090...@posting.google.com>):
Buddhism in general is not so mercenary. I don't know what
experience you have with the Nichiren folks, but the monks
of other traditions seem to need the good will of the
laity. There are lots of mind games whereby clergy can get
stuff out of the laity, of course, but the paintbrush you
wield seems too broad to me.
--
|Xin|
It is too clear and so it is hard to see.
A dunce once searched for fire with a lighted lantern.
Had he known what fire was, he could have cooked his rice
much sooner.
-Mumon
Vanya
> Your homework is to distinguish carefully between empty and
> non-existent. You will write on the board 500 times, "the empty is not
> the non-existent."
Ya mean like when my gas tank is "empty," the gas is "non-existent"?
Or when my bank account is "empty," the money is "non-existent"? My
creditors don't seem to care that there is a difference!
- Vanya
Kimberly
(in message
<f59a3b3e.02090...@posting.google.com>):
> bhol...@hotmail.com (Brian Holly) wrote in message
More like when your lover fails his task -- your pleasure
is either empty, or non-existent.
Slight distinction, but not important.
A better discernment would be between what promises and
can't deliver, and what can.
--
|Xin|
Let's drink and make merry,
and when all is gone,
there'll be some more, eh!
---Tang Huyen
Vanya
> Vanya wrote:
>
> > ano...@hotmail.com (anonymous):
> >
> > > Suffering is only in your mind . Your mind can benefit you or hurt you
> > > more than anyone else . Be happy . There are people much more unhappy
> > > than you .
> > >
> > > It's like the placebo effect .
> >
> > It is not like the placebo effect, it IS the placebo effect. Buddhism
> > is ineffective; it does nothing for you, but you think it does. Now if
> > we can just find the group that was given the real Buddhism in this
> > grand cosmic experiment.
> > I don't think they are on this planet.
> > - Vanya
>
> The peace and tranquillity that are attained thereby are as far away from the placebo effect as heaven from
> earth.
Hey, I thought Buddhists did not believe in a Heaven "out there."
> And they are the direct contrary to the wretchedness of the folks who are hung-up, stuck-up, strung-up
> as above, many of whom are so to speak walking powderkegs ready for spontaneous self-combustion at any moment.
Such compassion! You must be a buddha.
- Vanya
Gileht.com
"Vanya" <vorot...@attbi.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
f59a3b3e.02090...@posting.google.com...
No no It is more like "when your gas tank is "empty," and your are stuck
on the highway, that means that your head is "non-existent" or is it the
other way around ? ;-)
Gileht
Gileht.com
"Brian Holly" <bhol...@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
be10efa2.02090...@posting.google.com...
> non-existent. You will write on the board 500 times, "the empty is not
> the non-existent."
>
Ok!
Tang Huyen
Messer Xin wrote:
> Tang is way too pessimistic. He sees things through his own
> difficulties, no doubt.
>
> Vanya has part of the truth, I think, but it's inverted.
> Buddhism is to know that suffering is in thoughts and
> feelings, and that thoughts and feelings are effervescent,
> meaningless in themselves, and powerless when no power is
> given them.
>
> At least, that's one way Buddhism can be expressed.
Sure, I agree that thoughts and feelings are powerless when no power is given
them, and have written often on that.
For example, many people (with years and decades of study and practice of mental
culture under their belt) blow up when somebody merely throws an insult or a joke
at them. This implies that they have surrendered power over themselves to others,
who then have control over them, for example by throwing insults or jokes at them
(and jokes can sway them to anger as strongly as insults).
This phenomenon also entails the "language realism" of these folks, who are in the
thick of tricks that language plays on them but are never wiser about them.
Conversely, one way to reduce suffering -- perhaps even to end it -- is to
cultivate equanimity and detachment, especially with regard to language, and to
see the tricks that language plays on one, to see through them, to see past them,
to deactivate them, to undo them, so that language becomes a transparent tool and
not an opaque and imperious master.
This method, of figuring out the tricks that language plays on one, of
deactivating them, of undoing them, is constantly mentioned in Buddhist texts,
from the early canon on, but seems not to be given any priority by many teachers,
who perhaps are as slave to language as their students.
The cognate method, of figuring out the tricks that thought plays on one, of
deactivating them, of undoing them, is also constantly mentioned in Buddhist
texts, from the early canon on, and is also given as little priority by many
teachers, who seem to rely heavily on shamanistic practices, like visualisation,
and who pay scant attention to penetrating the tricks that thought and language
play on them and their students.
But figuring out the tricks that thought and language play on one requires turning
the attention backward and inward, to chase the patterns of thought, language and
behaviour, and many people (both teachers and students) have no ability and
inclination in that direction, which also requires self-criticality in addition to
self-examination.
They would rather spend time playing mental games with themselves, like
visualition or a public case (gong-an, Japanese koan) which serves as an
internally generated TV show to keep them entertained, in all safety, away from
such danger as self-examination and self-criticality, dangerous, that is, to their
defence wall, itself fortified with armour plates of serious dimensions.
Tang Huyen
Brian Holly
Dear Vanya,
Buddhism 101: "All dhamras are empty" means they are empty of
substance and essence, not existence. When your gas tank is empty, it
is not therefore non-existent. You can start by reading this:
http://ccbs.ntu.edu.tw/FULLTEXT/JR-PHIL/garfild3.htm
Take care - Brian
Evelyn Ruut
"Vanya" <vorot...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:f59a3b3e.02090...@posting.google.com...
LOL! He is a legend in his own mind......:-)
Evelyn
Tang Huyen
Vanya wrote:
> Tang Huyen <tang_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<3D7D414D...@yahoo.com>...
> > Vanya wrote:
> >
> > > ano...@hotmail.com (anonymous):
> > >
> > > > Suffering is only in your mind . Your mind can benefit you or hurt you
> > > > more than anyone else . Be happy . There are people much more unhappy
> > > > than you .
> > > >
> > > > It's like the placebo effect .
> > >
> > > It is not like the placebo effect, it IS the placebo effect. Buddhism
> > > is ineffective; it does nothing for you, but you think it does. Now if
> > > we can just find the group that was given the real Buddhism in this
> > > grand cosmic experiment.
> > > I don't think they are on this planet.
> > > - Vanya
>
> >
> > The peace and tranquillity that are attained thereby are as far away from the placebo effect as heaven from
> > earth.
>
> Hey, I thought Buddhists did not believe in a Heaven "out there."
Hahahahahahahaha!!! Seriously, Vanya.
You're as much of a realist and literalist as so many presumably seasoned and grooved-in practitioners on these
boards, with presumably as much potential success in (presumably) Buddhist practice as they have.
> > And they are the direct contrary to the wretchedness of the folks who are hung-up, stuck-up, strung-up
> > as above, many of whom are so to speak walking powderkegs ready for spontaneous self-combustion at any moment.
>
> Such compassion! You must be a buddha.
> - Vanya
Buddhism is not into sugar-coating suffering, even less into creating suffering for oneself by wrong practice.
If there is suffering -- and I mean the self-created and self-inflicted type, which is the only type that can be
alleviated and even ended altogether -- then it should be pointed out. Their owners may or may not accept the
suggestion, and if they do, may or may not act on it, but it should nevertheless be pointed out.
It is not defamation, just description. People are free to take it or leave it. Nobody can force anything on anybody
on these boards. Nothing can be forced on anybody on these boards.
Tang Huyen
TomLy
I am not saying that the teacher should keep controling the student.
But is there something wrong with using someones conditioning to free
them from the conditioning?
If a teacher has true compassion, he will set you free, not desire
control. And yes, a teacher without compassion will keep you a slave.
Do you see that difference I am pointing out?
anon...@nowhere.you.know
Ch'an Phhhhhfffffff00000000000000000000 wrote:
> anonymous wrote:
>
>>
>> I WISH THAT NO-ONE OTHER THAN BRIAN ANSWER THIS MESSAGE
>>
>
>
> MY YOUR WISH BE GRANTED 10,000 TIMES
>
WHAT'A YU KNOW ABOUT THIS INFAMOUS EVENT WHERE THE
DALAI LAMA DENOUNCED "QUIETISM", ASSWIPE, HUH?
Vanya
If something is empty of substance and essence, as what does it exist?
"When your gas tank is empty, it is not therefore non-existent. "
...I should hope not, otherwise I would only be able to use it once.
Hey, you've just solved the energy crisis! Install Dharmic gas tanks
on all cars! One tank of gas, then they disappear!
All this theory of some hidden "true nature of reality" is a ruse to
get people to believe they will have some mystical understanding they
do not now have, when they attain Buddha hood. When they will attain
it is vague, but in the meantime people support the priesthood, a good
thing (for the priests, anyway).
This is the "Mystery" principle of Dostoyevsky's "Miracle, Mystery and
Authority," three principles any Church uses to control its flock.
- Vanya
Brian Holly
>
> If something is empty of substance and essence, as what does it exist?
> "When your gas tank is empty, it is not therefore non-existent. "
> ...I should hope not, otherwise I would only be able to use it once.
> Hey, you've just solved the energy crisis! Install Dharmic gas tanks
> on all cars! One tank of gas, then they disappear!
> All this theory of some hidden "true nature of reality" is a ruse to
> get people to believe they will have some mystical understanding they
> do not now have, when they attain Buddha hood. When they will attain
> it is vague, but in the meantime people support the priesthood, a good
> thing (for the priests, anyway).
> This is the "Mystery" principle of Dostoyevsky's "Miracle, Mystery and
> Authority," three principles any Church uses to control its flock.
> - Vanya
Guess you didn't read Garfield's article. There are many sources I
could point you to, but you have to be willing to rethink you view.
This is not a theory of a true, hidden nature of reality. Quite the
opposite. The point of the Two Truths, which is a foundation of
Mahayana thought, is that the true nature of things is that they have
no independent nature. That's all. Nagarjuna makes it very clear that
emptiness is itself empty -- it is not some primordial substance
hiding behind everyday phenomena. When things are empty of
self-nature, they exist in interdependence and through conceptual
imposition. This is called conventional truth (samvrti). There are not
two realities or two realms, there is only one, but there are two ways
of seeing it: as chopped into individual units by the imposition of
concepts, and as thusness, without concpetual imposition. Emptiness is
sometimes treated in some traditions as some mystical never-never
land. This is a mistake. It is actually fairly easy to grasp the
nature of emptiness, but of course actually experiencing the world in
that mode is another matter. In any case, here's a short piece I wrote
that may help:
QUICK GUIDE TO EMPTINESS
Here's a quick and dirty guide to this tricky concept. First of all,
emptiness (ku, shunyata) is not, as some suggest, a state of latency
or a condition that things are sometimes in and sometimes not.
According to Buddhism, all phenomena (all dharmas) are empty all the
time. Nor is it some mystic, transcendental reality lurking behind
everyday appearances. Rather, if we can learn to see the impernance of
things, to see how they are constantly arising and perishing in the
flux of dependent co-arising, then we see that emptiness is in all the
things of everyday life, and that all the things of everyday life are
empty.
So just what is that? What are they empty of? Well, saying all
things are empty just means that all things lack essence, inherent
nature, fixed identity, and independent existence (bhavana). The
nature or essence that things appear to have is the result of our
imposing concepts on the phenomena. But, and here is the point, we
might use other concepts insofar as they would work, and the
phenomenon itself does not dictate any particular concept, it does not
come with a pre-assigned essence.
An example may help make this clearer. Consider the wooden chair
in my study. Because I apply the concept "chair" to this phenomenon,I
can conceive a beginning to it - when the chair parts were assembled
to make the chair; and I can conceive end to it - when the chair
components go their separate ways and we say the chair is broken or
destroyed. I can spell out it's particular boundaries in space - it
begins here and ends there.
Now it is conventional in our culture to label a certain kind of
object "a chair." But we might have imposed other equally valid
concepts, for example, a fuel source - it's cold, but we can burn
this; or a shield (think of the lion tamer's use of a chair), or a
step stool (when I want to get a book from the top shelf), and so on
and so on. The phenomenon itself is wholly indifferent to which
concept we apply, or if we apply any at all. As the Tibetans like to
say, it has no particular identity "from its side."
So now imagine me broadly gesturing towards the chair and calling
it "that." (in Sanskrit, tattva, in Sino-Japanese, nyo: thus avoiding
concepts as far as possible.) If I then ask, when did THAT begin,
there is no particular answer, because we can trace its history and
its components' histories back as far as we'd like. (I have to use a
concept to make the question sensible: when did that wood begin, when
did those molecules begin, when did those atoms begin, etc., and there
is a different answer for each) The same is true for "When does it
end." Thus, when we consider phenomena as empty, we can say that there
is no arising, no perishing, and so on through the typical sets of
Buddhist negations.
Moreover, we cannot specify any physical boundary that is not
arbitrary, because every feature of the thing depends on otherthings.
That the chair is brown, for example, depends on there being a light
source (and we can trace this back to the formation of the sun), and
on their being biological organisms that evolved with certain
substances that reflect light in certain ways, and on their being
other biological entities that evolved with visual apparatus that
discriminates among light frequencies, and evolved culturally to make
certain distinciton in the spectrum and not others, and so on and so
forth, until we see that the entire universe is a complete
interdependent whole, and that separating parts of it out is a
somewhat arbitrary process based solely on what's practical.
To sum up, a brown chair is a brown chair only because of a myriad
of relationships, including its relationship to human beings having a
certain culture. And this applies to everything. Emptiness means that
phenomena do not have a pre-established identity or nature, but that
that emerges only through conceptual imposition.
Now in Buddhism, the truth of how things are when expressed in
concepts and language is called conventional truth. And the truth of
how things are when seen as empty is called ultimate truth. As we can
see, these are not separate, unrelated things. They are two ways of
apprehending one and the same reality. They are also both truths. And
they are interdependent. Without emptiness, there could be no change,
and without things, there would be nothing to be empty.
Brian
Pengoin Morph
>anon...@nowhere.you.know wrote in message news:<fJqf9.146$q9....@news.more.net>...
>he wrote an entire book on it dipshit
>he also denounces all tibetan and vajra ritual it in as well
>saying his own form of buddhism is unsuited to the west as well
>course he's such a whore he'll tell anyone what they want to hear
you're really messing things up for me
cant you just go meet the people
all you have is self
nothing more
useless
illiterate
lepper
--
Pengoin Morph
(remove .self from email to reply)
cupcake
KaBooM LaLa wrote:
> anon...@nowhere.you.know (aka cupcake) wrote:
>
>> Ch'an Phhhhhfffffff00000000000000000000 wrote:
>>
>> > anonymous wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> I WISH THAT NO-ONE OTHER THAN BRIAN ANSWER THIS MESSAGE
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> > MY YOUR WISH BE GRANTED 10,000 TIMES
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> WHAT'A YU KNOW ABOUT THIS INFAMOUS EVENT WHERE THE
>> DALAI LAMA DENOUNCED "QUIETISM", ASSWIPE, HUH?
>>
>
> he wrote an entire book on it dipshit
> he also denounces all tibetan and vajra ritual it in as well
> saying his own form of buddhism is unsuited to the west as well
> course he's such a whore he'll tell anyone what they want to hear
>
well, that's a good start... -- now, perhaps we
can get someone who is a little more lucid and articulate
to elaborate on what yu've said thusfar
C
>QUICK GUIDE TO EMPTINESS
Empty is what SGI is becoming due to all the hate rhetoric
their cult meister is stirring up
"Mr. Ikeda is referring to Nichiren Daishonin's admonition about
ignoring slanderers. That's why we are standing up to you whenever we
can. You are a great slanderer, Mr. Bratcher. And some day, the wild
dogs will be paying a visit to your stomach. Some day you will cry,
"why, oh why, oh why did I ever believe the priests and slander Mr.
Ikeda?? What is going to happen to me now??? Won't the Universe take
pity on poor Craig Bratcher....????"
Dick Hower, SGI member
December 1, 2000 Soka Gakkai World Tribune
"The Victorious Future of Mentor and Disciple"
By Daisaku Ikeda
>>
I can see
Those who are like demons
Milling around what,
Unbeknownst to them,
Is only an execution block.
They trample
The noble spirit
Of the Daishonin
And have become
Pitiful robbers of the Law.
Like a rapacious swarm of locusts,
Nikken and his cronies
Have exploited and persecuted
And even plotted to destroy
The Soka Gakkai,
An organization of the highest good
That has made unprecedented contributions
To spreading the Law
And worked so hard
To support and protect the priesthood.
Their evil deeds
Will go down forever in history
And they will be severely judged
According to the law of cause and effect.
This I believe
To be the unwavering position
Of the Daishonin.
It will be just as he states
In the writing "On Persecutions Befalling the Sage":
They "seem to be free from punishment at first,
But eventually they are all doomed to fall"
(The Writings of Nichiren Daishonin, p. 997).
The plots and schemes of High Priest Nikken Abe and his cohorts,
Spinning a web of the most base lies
And vicious slander,
Were designed to bring us down.
Yet
We shone on brightly
Like the morning sun!
We rose boldly to the challenge,
And began our battle!
The Daishonin, too,
Was slandered as an immoral priest,
And his struggles amid persecution
Were beyond description.
Our first president Tsunesaburo Makiguchi
Used to strictly remind us
That in comparison
The persecution we encounter
Is truly small and trivial.
With silent forbearance,
The firm resolve demonstrated by the Buddha
Engraved in our hearts,
We waged an arduous struggle
To overcome
Every imaginable
Haughty and arrogant utterance.
We will not be defeated.
We are fed up
With the clamoring and abusive foolishness
Of these spiritual paupers.
In fact, our mighty, passionate spirit
Only burns all the brighter.
They who are
At times frenzied,
At times coldly silent,
At times filled with excuses,
Will eventually depart this world,
Gasping and trembling in fear.
Backsliders in faith!
Are you satisfied
To lead a life
Trapped in a maze
Of hellish depths?
Slanderers of the Law!
Having corrupted the Daishonin's teachings
And veered from the eternal truth,
Are you prepared
To drift along forever in a state of life
Of agonized defeat?
Traitors!
Having turned your backs
On the Daishonin's golden words,
Are you ready
To be burned in the fires
Of the hell of incessant suffering?
To be imprisoned in a cavern
In the hell of extreme cold?
To be shut off in the darkness
Of misery and strife,
Forever deprived of the sun's light?
Gileht.com
Easier to read in this format:
http://www.geocities.com/gileht/nagarjuna/garfield.htm
Gileht
Gileht.com
"Vanya" <vorot...@attbi.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
f59a3b3e.0209...@posting.google.com...
Ho gosh you got us. Well I guess we just have to close the shop now ... and
go sell pencils downtown.
Pffffff .....
Gileht
Gileht.com
Check this one too:
http://sunflower.singnet.com.sg/~fpmtsing/d-lzr-e1.html
Gileht
Tang Huyen
"Gileht.com" wrote:
> "Vanya" <vorot...@attbi.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
> f59a3b3e.0209...@posting.google.com...
>
> > Hey, you've just solved the energy crisis! Install Dharmic gas tanks
> > on all cars! One tank of gas, then they disappear!
> > All this theory of some hidden "true nature of reality" is a ruse to
> > get people to believe they will have some mystical understanding they
> > do not now have, when they attain Buddha hood. When they will attain
> > it is vague, but in the meantime people support the priesthood, a good
> > thing (for the priests, anyway).
> > This is the "Mystery" principle of Dostoyevsky's "Miracle, Mystery and
> > Authority," three principles any Church uses to control its flock.
>
> Ho gosh you got us. Well I guess we just have to close the shop now ... and
> go sell pencils downtown.
>
> Pffffff .....
Vanya is right about the alleged mysticism in Buddhism.
There is none.
Surely there are the four form meditations and the four formless attainments,
which are above the desire realm, and various other meditative states, like the
Four Immeasurables aka the Four Divine Abodes (friendliness, compassion,
sympathetic joy, equanimity), which are totalisations wherein one imagines that
the entire universe is pervaded by one such Immeasurable or changed into some
element, like water or space or fire. But in these totalisations, nothing is
changed out there, and the only change happens inside: one *imagines* that the
entire universe is pervaded by, for example sympathetic joy, or changed into,
for example, water.
But those meditative states do not constitute awakening. They may help in
attaining awakening, or they may serve as sidetracks that lead away from
awakening.
The end-goal itself, Nirvana, is just like normal deluded consciousness, only
minus thought and language. In normal delusion, one chases the past and future
on the wings of thought and language, and in awakening, one stops such chase
and lives simply in the present, without benefit of thought and language.
That's the only difference.
Living simply in the present, without benefit of thought and language, is not
that different from normal delusion and doesn't deserve to be called mysticism.
Tang Huyen
cupcake
Derek N.P.F. Juhl
> Empty is what SGI is becoming due to all the hate rhetoric their cult meister
> is stirring up
"Never forgive the base enemies of the Buddha, never! Be unremitting
in your battle against them! Fight through to the end against the
scheming verbal violence that seeks to undermine the Kosen Rufu
movement, upholding in your hearts the slogan 'Adamantly Fight Back!'"
Daisaku Ikeda, Saitama Youth Division Cultural General Meeting,
Tokorozawa, Japan, September 12, 1999 (WT)
Whom does Mr Ikeda consider "evil" ? Take a wild guess:
"On the other hand, it is the members of the priesthood today that
have become 'devils' and 'those in league with devils' who seek to
halt the flow of kosen-rufu and who are destroying Buddhism. They are
enemies of kosen-rufu and enemies of Buddhism who seek to render the
Buddha's words meaningless. For this reason, we must resolutely crush
them. Between the Buddha and devilish functions, there is no middle
ground. If we fail to fight, or if our efforts are only half-hearted,
then we will become allies of these devilish functions." May 23, 1993
speech by Daisaku Ikeda, Kyushu Ikeda Auditorium, Fukuoka City, Japan,
World Tribune, June 28, 1993 (p. 4, 4th column)
Derek Juhl
Derek N.P.F. Juhl
> Empty is what SGI is becoming due to all the hate rhetoric their cult meister
> is stirring up
"Dear Derek,
A witness who was caught swinging around dead chickens with their
heads cut off is your best witness? The poison of slander has taken
your mind, be careful, it may soon take your life. Read the Gosho for
more details....Good luck, Chuck" SGI Denver senior leader Chuck
sr...@aol.com 8/9/98
"Derek,
You have become irrational. You support nikken blindly the same way
the brown shirts supported hitler. Have you lost your ability to
think for yourself? Chuck" 8/9/98
"Derek,
You know as much about the reality of Daisaku Ikeda's life as I know
about your mother's sexual preferences. Yet you persist in
speculating. Bad trend kid......" Ibid.
"Derek ... You and the nixter are very much like hitler. Don't be too
flatered. None of you are deserving of respect based on your
unhumanistic actions. Chuck" 8/10/98
"...Rubbish!!! Derek, you have revealed your true aspect....I pray
your stay in hell will be as short as possible....less than you
deserve...C." Ibid. 8/9/99
"...Derek, I have met Nikken....he is as small in appearance as he is
in character....the man NEVER encouraged me once!!! You are
supporting a man that is comprable to Stalin or Hitler....look at
you...you slander every person who is a member of the SGI....that is
nothing to be proud of....is this the best that a man who chants to a
nikken Gohonzon is capable of? Show me a high life condition....then
I might be able to listen to your rationale....until then...Chuck"
Ibid.
Subject: ...Nikken's urine in the jar......
Date: Sun, 12 September 1999 03:34 AM EDT
From: Sr cae
Message-id: <19990912033441...@ng-fp1.aol.com>
...nowdays, Nikken's jar dosn't smell so good....come to think of it,
Derek, since you have been drinking from it, you don't smell so good
either...Chuck<<<<<
"...of course we presribe antibiotics to destroy strep bacteria in a
human patient...Nikken's infection of Nichiren Shoshu is destroying
the life and faith of those who follow him....ie, derek...of course,
we prescribe Daimoku to subdue the nikken disease....Chuck" 9/18/99
Then he had the gall to write,
"Dear Derek,
Do you have anything to offer of an ecouraging nature? I for one, am
tired of disparaging remarks aimed at a man of the high caliber of
President Ikeda. Mudslinging is not the most becoming posture that we
as Buddhists can demonstrate as the benefit of our practice to the
rest of the world. Would you agree? Chuck" 4/25/00
With such blatant hypocrisy, it's no wonder he's an SGI senior leader.
Derek Juhl
jesson
"cupcake" <t...@r.slrup> wrote in message
news:TZRf9.153$q9....@news.more.net...
vajrayani weasel, bbb...pete... : )
jesson
"Derek N.P.F. Juhl" <dere...@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:35f999f2.02091...@posting.google.com...
fucking hell! blatant's the best sort you can get!
always complaints, complaints...
>
> Derek Juhl
Vanya
> >QUICK GUIDE TO EMPTINESS
>
> Empty is what SGI is becoming due to all the hate rhetoric
> their cult meister is stirring up
>
-Vanya
Vanya
> Guess you didn't read Garfield's article. There are many sources I
> could point you to, but you have to be willing to rethink you view.
> This is not a theory of a true, hidden nature of reality. Quite the
> opposite. The point of the Two Truths, which is a foundation of
> Mahayana thought, is that the true nature of things is that they have
> no independent nature. That's all.
A chair has many uses. This is profound? It is still a chair. A
wooden chair came from a tree, which came from the Earth, which came
from the Big Bang, or was created by God, or whatever your view of
creation. Not very profound either. Things are impermanent and always
changing? Anyone who has lived past the age of about 12 realizes this.
Simple stuff.
I read Garfield's article, I did not understand it. I did not
understand it because it is nonsense. I might as well try to make
sense of "Jabberwocky," or "On Beyond Zebra." You're talking in
circles. Some people are impressed by this. This is why Nagarjuna, et
al, came up with this stuff, so people will think they are profound,
and so they will give money to the priesthood so the priests can eat,
and determine how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, or visit
prostitutes, as the case may be.
"What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
So Romeo would, were he not Romeo call'd,
Retain that dear perfection which he owes
Without that title. Romeo, doff thy name,
And for that name which is no part of thee
Take all myself."
There is more wisdom in the works of Shakespeare than in the entire
Buddhist canon.
- Vanya
cupcake
da mi wrote:
>On Wed, 11 Sep 2002 16:32:00 +0100, Pengoin Morph
><msd13.no...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>
>>On 10 Sep 2002 21:13:55 -0700, KaB...@hush.com (LaLa) wrote:
>>
>>>anon...@nowhere.you.know wrote in message [12]news:<fJqf9.146$q9.2009@news.
>more.net>...
>>>> Ch'an Phhhhhfffffff00000000000000000000 wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > anonymous wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >>
>>>> >> I WISH THAT NO-ONE OTHER THAN BRIAN ANSWER THIS MESSAGE
>>>> >>
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > MY YOUR WISH BE GRANTED 10,000 TIMES
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> WHAT'A YU KNOW ABOUT THIS INFAMOUS EVENT WHERE THE
>>>> DALAI LAMA DENOUNCED "QUIETISM", ASSWIPE, HUH?
>>>
>>>he wrote an entire book on it dipshit
>>>he also denounces all tibetan and vajra ritual it in as well
>>>saying his own form of buddhism is unsuited to the west as well
>>>course he's such a whore he'll tell anyone what they want to hear
>>
>>you're really messing things up for me
>>cant you just go meet the people
>>all you have is self
>>nothing more
>>useless
>>illiterate
>>lepper
>>
>
> at least were honest enough to show it
> rather than stick it up ure ass and pretend its not there
>
yu mean yu actually understood enough ta know what
he wuz talking about, to actually be able to respond
to him?
i guess it really duz take one ta know one, huh?
Gileht.com
"Tang Huyen" <tang_...@yahoo.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
3D7FCC86...@yahoo.com...
I have to desagree on this one.
The Buddha still have thought and still uses language.
Nirvana is not that.
Sorry.
Better luck the next time.
> In normal delusion, one chases the past and future
> on the wings of thought and language, and in awakening, one stops such
chase
> and lives simply in the present,
Right
> without benefit of thought and language.
> That's the only difference.
Wrong.
I have to desagree on this one.
The Buddha still have thought and still uses language.
Nirvana is not that.
Sorry.
Better luck the next time.
> Living simply in the present, without benefit of thought and language, is
not
> that different from normal delusion and doesn't deserve to be called
mysticism.
>
> Tang Huyen
This kind of Nirvana is just anothr laguage delusion.
Gileht
Evelyn Ruut
Dear Vanya,
Have you read the entire buddhist canon? It might take several lifetimes
:-)
I love shakespeare too!
Regards,
Evelyn
cup o' tea
> The end-goal itself, Nirvana, is just like normal deluded consciousness, only
> minus thought and language.
Total trash.
What is missing is desire/aversion-driven thought and action, not
thought and language in themselves.
Brian Holly
punnadhammo
<tang_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> But in these totalisations, nothing is
> changed out there, and the only change happens inside: one *imagines* that the
> entire universe is pervaded by, for example sympathetic joy, or changed into,
> for example, water.
Are you sure about that? Some tibetan teachers claim the universe is
only held in being by yogis doing the brahma-viharas.
> The end-goal itself, Nirvana, is just like normal deluded consciousness, only
> minus thought and language. In normal delusion, one chases the past and future
> on the wings of thought and language, and in awakening, one stops such chase
> and lives simply in the present, without benefit of thought and language.
> That's the only difference.
As I have said before, the Nirvana of a monitor lizard.
Tang Huyen
punnadhammo wrote:
> In article <3D7FCC86...@yahoo.com>, Tang Huyen
> <tang_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > But in these totalisations, nothing is
> > changed out there, and the only change happens inside: one *imagines* that the
> > entire universe is pervaded by, for example sympathetic joy, or changed into,
> > for example, water.
>
> Are you sure about that? Some tibetan teachers claim the universe is
> only held in being by yogis doing the brahma-viharas.
Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!
The Tibetan religion, as I often say, reverts often to exactly what the Buddha
*fought against* all his teaching career!
To the Brahmanists, Brahma created the world by thought and language, and maintains
it in order by thought and language. The Brahmans pray to him daily so that he keeps
the world in order by thought and language. The day that the last Brahman dies, the
world will go poof and disperse into disorder, because Brahma no longer hears
prayers to keep it in order by thought and language.
The Buddha revolted against that -- the Brahmanic artificialism -- and taught that
Dependent Arisal was not made by him or anybody but that he had merely discovered
it, and that the world runs on its own, without intervention by anybody, even less
anybody using thought and language.
And here, according to Punnie, some Tibetan teachers claim the universe is only held
in being by yogis doing the brahma-viharas!
So the Tibetan religion reverts often to exactly what the Buddha fought against all
his teaching career, in this case artificialism!
Tang Huyen
Pyrrho
news:120920020900298130%arcc@CLIPTHIS_baynet.net...
> In article <3D7FCC86...@yahoo.com>, Tang Huyen
> <tang_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > But in these totalisations, nothing is
> > changed out there, and the only change happens inside: one
*imagines* that the
> > entire universe is pervaded by, for example sympathetic joy, or
changed into,
> > for example, water.
>
> Are you sure about that? Some tibetan teachers claim the universe is
> only held in being by yogis doing the brahma-viharas.
I am sure that for every such teacher, there are at least ten Westerners
with advanced degrees in astronomy who blindly accept such
pronouncements.
Shiva
Jerry Rolison
1) the big bang appears to be the beginning in your mind. is this the
beginning of time?
2) what was going on before the big bang?
3) when does it all end?
thanks
jerry
"Vanya" <vorot...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:f59a3b3e.02091...@posting.google.com...
William Tucker
----------
In article <3D7FCC86...@yahoo.com>, Tang Huyen <tang_...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>
>
You need a hug little buddy, now where are you?
Wm
William Tucker
----------
In article <3D7FCC86...@yahoo.com>, Tang Huyen <tang_...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>
>
this thread is too either/or for me
Wm
Brian Holly
> understand it
Obviously.
Brian
Jack
news:f59a3b3e.0209...@posting.google.com:
>
> If something is empty of substance and essence, as what does it exist?
>
"Essence", of course, being French for "gas".
> "When your gas tank is empty, it is not therefore non-existent. "
Jack.
William Tucker
----------
In article <3D7DFA25...@yahoo.com>, Tang Huyen <tang_...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>
>
> Vanya wrote:
>
>> Tang Huyen <tang_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:<3D7D414D...@yahoo.com>...
>> > Vanya wrote:
>> >
>> > > ano...@hotmail.com (anonymous):
>> > >
>> > > > Suffering is only in your mind . Your mind can benefit you or hurt you
>> > > > more than anyone else . Be happy . There are people much more unhappy
>> > > > than you .
>> > > >
>> > > > It's like the placebo effect .
>> > >
>> > > It is not like the placebo effect, it IS the placebo effect. Buddhism
>> > > is ineffective; it does nothing for you, but you think it does. Now if
>> > > we can just find the group that was given the real Buddhism in this
>> > > grand cosmic experiment.
>> > > I don't think they are on this planet.
>> > > - Vanya
>>
>> >
>> > The peace and tranquillity that are attained thereby are as far away
> from the placebo effect as heaven from
>> > earth.
>>
>> Hey, I thought Buddhists did not believe in a Heaven "out there."
>
> Hahahahahahahaha!!! Seriously, Vanya.
>
> You're as much of a realist and literalist as so many presumably seasoned
> and grooved-in practitioners on these
> boards, with presumably as much potential success in (presumably) Buddhist
> practice as they have.
>
>> > And they are the direct contrary to the wretchedness of the folks who
> are hung-up, stuck-up, strung-up
>> > as above, many of whom are so to speak walking powderkegs ready for
> spontaneous self-combustion at any moment.
>>
>> Such compassion! You must be a buddha.
>> - Vanya
>
> Buddhism is not into sugar-coating suffering, even less into creating
> suffering for oneself by wrong practice.
>
> If there is suffering -- and I mean the self-created and self-inflicted
> type, which is the only type that can be
> alleviated and even ended altogether -- then it should be pointed out.
> Their owners may or may not accept the
> suggestion, and if they do, may or may not act on it, but it should
> nevertheless be pointed out.
>
> It is not defamation, just description. People are free to take it or leave
> it. Nobody can force anything on anybody
> on these boards. Nothing can be forced on anybody on these boards.
right, that's like saying that peeing in a whisky bottle and leaving it by
the side of the road in a poor neighborhood is not inviting anyone to pick
up a bottle of pee...
when people are looking for relief from suffering, offering a painful
illusion is not the same thing as teaching a man to fish...
buddyip
Wm
>
> Tang Huyen
>
William Tucker
----------
In article <1f5efd82.02091...@posting.google.com>,
to...@eudoramail.com (TomLy) wrote:
> vorot...@attbi.com (Vanya) wrote in message
> news:<f59a3b3e.02090...@posting.google.com>...
>> to...@eudoramail.com (TomLy) wrote in message
> news:<1f5efd82.02090...@posting.google.com>...
>> >
>> > I have had a thought for a while: The eightfold path is just a trick
>> > to get people on the path, as the beautiful rituals of most religions
>> > are a lure to get peoples attention.
>> >
>> > Follow me here. When one is forced to abstain from something, say
>> > "gossip" they are forced to see the attachement they have to gossip.
>> > Bam! Awareness. At least at some level. They stuggle with abstaining
>> > and they ask the monk for help. Into a softened mind, Buddha drops his
>> > seeds. From outside control comes internal freedom.
>> >
>> > You see what I mean?
>>
>> I see exactly what you mean: Into a monk's outstretched hand you drop
>> your money and control over your life. The monk ceases to have any
>> compassion for you. From outside control comes... slavery.
>> - Vanya
>
> I am not saying that the teacher should keep controling the student.
> But is there something wrong with using someones conditioning to free
> them from the conditioning?
>
> If a teacher has true compassion, he will set you free, not desire
> control. And yes, a teacher without compassion will keep you a slave.
>
> Do you see that difference I am pointing out?
I do
and organization requires support
libraries require librarians
books are a good way of passing on knowledge
engineering is the result of studying past efforts and more trustworthy than
science, as it is built upon results and does not claim to understand the
reasons for things working, only that they do work
money is not the root of evil
evil attitude is the root of evil
and adherence to dogma left/or right is the result of fear of examination
both from outside and inside....appeal to authority when you don't trust
your own
Wm
Ch'an Fu
William Tucker wrote:
> right, that's like saying that peeing in a whisky bottle and leaving it by
> the side of the road in a poor neighborhood is not inviting anyone to pick
> up a bottle of pee...
>
> when people are looking for relief from suffering, offering a painful
> illusion is not the same thing as teaching a man to fish...
>
> buddyip
>
> Wm
anchovy pizza attracts a lot of sharks
Ch'an Fu
William Tucker wrote:
> money is not the root of evil
>
> evil attitude is the root of evil
bad pizza sauce is the root of all evil
William Tucker
----------
In article <fJqf9.146$q9....@news.more.net>, anon...@nowhere.you.know
wrote:
>
>
> Ch'an Phhhhhfffffff00000000000000000000 wrote:
>
>> anonymous wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I WISH THAT NO-ONE OTHER THAN BRIAN ANSWER THIS MESSAGE
>>>
>>
>>
>> MY YOUR WISH BE GRANTED 10,000 TIMES
>>
>
>
>
> WHAT'A YU KNOW ABOUT THIS INFAMOUS EVENT WHERE THE
> DALAI LAMA DENOUNCED "QUIETISM", ASSWIPE, HUH?
where you spikin to me fishant?
Wm
William Tucker
----------
In article <nmnunusmcvc94d1ij...@4ax.com>, Pengoin Morph
<msd13.no...@btopenworld.com> wrote:
> On 10 Sep 2002 21:13:55 -0700, KaB...@hush.com (LaLa) wrote:
>
>>anon...@nowhere.you.know wrote in message
> news:<fJqf9.146$q9....@news.more.net>...
>>> Ch'an Phhhhhfffffff00000000000000000000 wrote:
>>>
>>> > anonymous wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> I WISH THAT NO-ONE OTHER THAN BRIAN ANSWER THIS MESSAGE
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > MY YOUR WISH BE GRANTED 10,000 TIMES
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> WHAT'A YU KNOW ABOUT THIS INFAMOUS EVENT WHERE THE
>>> DALAI LAMA DENOUNCED "QUIETISM", ASSWIPE, HUH?
>>
>>he wrote an entire book on it dipshit
>>he also denounces all tibetan and vajra ritual it in as well
>>saying his own form of buddhism is unsuited to the west as well
>>course he's such a whore he'll tell anyone what they want to hear
>
> you're really messing things up for me
> cant you just go meet the people
> all you have is self
> nothing more
> useless
> illiterate
> lepper
>
> --
> Pengoin Morph
> (remove .self from email to reply)
most beauteous mon ami
Wm
Ch'an Fu
mi pizza est su pizza
William Tucker
----------
I had some yesterday...
sharks
Wm
William Tucker
----------
yes
Wm
although good cheese makes up for bad sauce
make mine eggplant spinach goat cheese parmesan olives heavy garlic and
artichoke hearts...
although what I really want is some greek spinachopita...spinach pie with
filo dough and feta
bulgarian feta...yow
Wm
Tang Huyen
cup o' tea wrote:
> Tang Huyen:
>
> > The end-goal itself, Nirvana, is just like normal deluded consciousness, only
> > minus thought and language.
>
> Total trash.
>
> What is missing is desire/aversion-driven thought and action, not
> thought and language in themselves.
Hehe, cup o' tea sweetie, cool down and reflect a little.
“Dependent on distinction, desire and lust [arise] (vinicchayam paticca chanda-rago ti). If
distinction were not to exist completely and absolutely, by any one or for anything, all
distinction not being, there would be cessation of distinction, could desire and lust be
made known (vinicchayo va nabhavissa sabbena sabbam sabbatha sabbam kassaci kimhici, sabbaso
vinicchaye asati vinicchaya-nirodha api nu kho chanda-rago paññayethati)?”
“No, Revered Sir.”
DN, II, 60 (15), MA, 97, 579a2 and b3-8.
Distinction (vinicchayo) is the generic name for thought and language, what in the Great
Vehicle is called discrimination (samkalpa, vikalpa).
As the Buddha says: “Dependent on distinction, desire and lust [arise]. If distinction were
not to exist completely and absolutely, by any one or for anything, all distinction not
being, there would be cessation of distinction, could desire and lust be made known?”
“No, Revered Sir.”
So the *direction* can go from language and thought (distincion) to desire. Desire *depends
on* language and thought to proceed.
Without thought and language (distinction), desire is powerless.
Desire on one side and language and thought on the other are co-extensive, in general. So
far as desire goes, language and thought go, and vice versa, in general.
The deluded is stuck with both, but (this is the exception to the "in general") the awakened
can reactivate thought and language without desire, use thought and language as mere tools,
transparent tools, and are not used by them as masters and imperious masters.
On these boards, we can see people who are slaves to words, they are thickly into language
realism. Write a few words and they jump. They can't tell that some words are in the serious
mode and some words are *not* in the serious mode. In their case, they are driven by
desire/aversion, and desire/aversion drives them into language realism, it lends substance
to words in such a way that they take words literally and are unable to distinguish between
serious words and non-serious words.
It's then an issue of chikens and eggs: does desire/aversion come first and drives language
and thought, or do language and thought come first and drive desire/aversion?
Whatever. The mutual relation between desire/aversion on one side and language and thought
on the other is clear: as desire/aversion gets stronger, so do language and thought, and
viice versa.
Buddhist training on the contrary teaches us to figure out the tricks that language and
thought play on us, and one of the most obvious tricks that they play on us is ... language
realism. As Buddhist training advances, one gets to identify the tricks that language and
thought play on us, deactive them, undo them. Thought and language recede in "thickness" and
opacity, and desire/aversion get weaker. The mutual relation between desire/aversion on one
side and language and thought on the other is clear: as desire/aversion gets weaker, so do
language and thought, and viice versa.
Progress (or regress) on the Buddhist path can be measured either way, with desire/aversion
or with language and thought. They as a block either become lighter and more transparent, or
heavier and more opaque.
Tang Huyen
Vanya
Vini, vidi, edi (I came, I saw, I ate).
-Vanya
Vanya
> Are you sure about that? Some tibetan teachers claim the universe is
> only held in being by yogis doing the brahma-viharas.
"There is a dream dreaming us."
- Kalahari Bushman creation myth (from "The Heart of the Hunter,"
Laurens van der Post)
- Vanya
Ch'an Fu
the Kalahari Bushmen are highly evolved
supernatural beings. ie: good examples
of the origins of mistaken identity.
there are many things to be learned
from our primitive ruts.
xt
> on the wings of thought and language, and in awakening, one stops such chase
> and lives simply in the present, without benefit of thought and language.
> That's the only difference.
>
> Living simply in the present, without benefit of thought and language, is not
> that different from normal delusion and doesn't deserve to be called mysticism.
>
> Tang Huyen
Of course the present includes the past and the future too..but
earthly desires are enlightenment as well. Without eliminating thought
and desire one can still attain Buddhahood by following the nBuddha's
prescription outlined in the Lotus Sutra about which he says "this is
my highest teaching".
xt
Vanya
> right, that's like saying that peeing in a whisky bottle and leaving it by
> the side of the road in a poor neighborhood is not inviting anyone to pick
> up a bottle of pee...
It would be better for them than whiskey, right?
>
> when people are looking for relief from suffering, offering a painful
> illusion is not the same thing as teaching a man to fish...
>
...when all they really want is Excedrin.
- Vanya
cup o' tea
[snip]
...then why can arahants still talk?
cup o' tea
> Distinction (vinicchayo) is the generic name for thought and language,
I don't think that's a good way of putting it. What you are describing
is more generally the activity of preferring the pleasurable and
rejecting the unpleasurable. This can take place with OR WITHOUT
language.
Vanya
>
> Living simply in the present, without benefit of thought and language, is not
> that different from normal delusion and doesn't deserve to be called mysticism.
>
> Tang Huyen
It is evident Tang is "living... without benefit of thought..."
- Vanya
Gileht.com
"cup o' tea" <red_te...@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
9faa2d55.02091...@posting.google.com...
Bingo !
Excellent !
Vanya
>
> Of course the present includes the past and the future too..but
> earthly desires are enlightenment as well. Without eliminating thought
> and desire one can still attain Buddhahood by following the nBuddha's
> prescription outlined in the Lotus Sutra about which he says "this is
> my highest teaching".
> xt
- Vanya
William Tucker
----------
In article <3D81F9FF...@yahoo.com>, Tang Huyen <tang_...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
>
>
Piaget would argue this
William Tucker
----------
In article <f59a3b3e.02091...@posting.google.com>,
vorot...@attbi.com (Vanya) wrote:
> "William Tucker" <wmft...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:<kQag9.2224$Le2.2...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
>
>> right, that's like saying that peeing in a whisky bottle and leaving it by
>> the side of the road in a poor neighborhood is not inviting anyone to pick
>> up a bottle of pee...
>
> It would be better for them than whiskey, right?
I thought about this....
what strikes me in general is that people aren't seeking to teach through
non punitive methods...it is necessary to some extent to have a strong
vessel to carry the healing...but I seek to heal the plane rather than the
discrete
insight is the healing that I would offer...a song rather than a note...an
intuitive direction(s)
a lead followed...not an event changed
a hand held, a moment shared a lifetime changed
>>
>> when people are looking for relief from suffering, offering a painful
>> illusion is not the same thing as teaching a man to fish...
>>
> ...when all they really want is Excedrin.
event driven solutions are bubbles in the ocean...give me a wave anytime
Wm
ps. been thinking about the fracturing of social structure caused by alpha
behaviour....interference with achieving Nash Equilibrium...like hail
applied to a drum head...no clear resonant beat....until a moment is reached
when the behaviour is recognized as fracticious and a new plane emerges/is
allowed to emerge by the insight of seeing the surface of the possibility
and resonanting it
ps2. I got your point, just thinking out loud, not a reflection on your work
or comments
> - Vanya
Messer Xin
(in message
<f59a3b3e.02091...@posting.google.com>):
Oh, I don't know. There's a lot more going on if you read
between the lines. A lot of it is even worse, granted, but
. . .
--
|Xin|
Dharma -- it's not just a good idea . . . it's the law.
============================================================
==
Posted with Hogwasher. Mac first, Mac only:
http://www.asar.com/cgi-bin/product.pl?58/hogwasher.htm
l
============================================================
==
Vanya
> > But you wouldn't know it by anyone here, would you?
> > - Vanya
>
> Oh, I don't know. There's a lot more going on if you read
> between the lines. A lot of it is even worse, granted, but
> . . .
>
> --
>
> |Xin|
>
lines is non-existent...
- Vanya
"Stop making sense."
- David Byrne
Messer Xin
(in message
<f59a3b3e.0209...@posting.google.com>):
> Messer Xin <x...@woc.org> wrote in message
> news:<01HW.B9A9730E0...@news.earthlink.net>...
>>> But you wouldn't know it by anyone here, would you?
>>> - Vanya
Xin:
>> Oh, I don't know. There's a lot more going on if you read
>> between the lines. A lot of it is even worse, granted, but
Vanya:
> But there is only emptiness between the lines...
This is supposed to be bad? Or true? Or what?
There is a lot of information to be had between the lines,
like, "Why didn't she rake him over the coals just then,
when he had him pinned to the pole?" "Why does he always
choose *that* kind of put-down?" See what I mean?
Like when some people interminably tweak others for no good
reason but that they can, and they enjoy that they can.
Like me, for example.
> and any sense in the
> lines is non-existent...
No, it just varies more than makes it easy.
> "Stop making sense."
> - David Byrne
Good advice, but the best part of it is the implication
that it is us that are "making" sense, that it is in our
power to shape it, and that we can choose better sense to
make of our lives than we have.
--
|Xin|
"Occasionally, go burn a bandage! Get your generally
receiving ointment behind my star." -- from spam on
<alt.zen>
============================================================
====
Hogwasher: You don't have to sacrifice friendliness for
power
http://www.asar.com/cgi-bin/product.pl?58/hogwasher.htm
l
============================================================
====
Tang Huyen
Messer Xin wrote:
> Vanya:
>
> > Messer Xin <x...@woc.org>
> >
> >>> But you wouldn't know it by anyone here, would you?
> >>> - Vanya
>
> Xin:
> >> Oh, I don't know. There's a lot more going on if you read
> >> between the lines. A lot of it is even worse, granted, but
>
> Vanya:
> > But there is only emptiness between the lines...
>
> This is supposed to be bad? Or true? Or what?
>
> There is a lot of information to be had between the lines,
> like, "Why didn't she rake him over the coals just then,
> when he had him pinned to the pole?" "Why does he always
> choose *that* kind of put-down?" See what I mean?
>
> Like when some people interminably tweak others for no good
> reason but that they can, and they enjoy that they can.
>
> Like me, for example.
You do a piss-poor job of it, son.
Now, if some people interminably tweak others for no good reason but
that they can, and they enjoy that they can, don't the people tweaked by
them volunteer day in day out, month in month out, year in year out to
cooperate unasked in getting tweaked?
And don't *they* enjoy it (namely being tweaked), too? Why else would
they keep on with it, long-term and unasked?
Isn't it give-and-take in full freedom, on both sides? Isn't it a case
of "One hand washes the other"?
Tang Huyen
o
No, they all fuck off somewhere else and leave the tweakers to tweak each
other.
You just havent noticed that they all went away.
Wake up Tang and know yourself.
Vanya
> > Vanya:
> > But there is only emptiness between the lines...
>
> This is supposed to be bad? Or true? Or what?
>
ha). Ya gotta admit there is only white space (a word processor's
version of emptiness, I guess) between the lines.
The complete sentence is, "When we get older, and stop making sense."
Hope I die before I get old.
- Vanya
Tang Huyen
Vanya wrote:
The semantics may be a bit different on the basis of the same syntax, but the awakened also stops making
sense, Vanya sweetie.
Tang Huyen
Messer Xin
(in message <3D87078B...@yahoo.com>):
>
>
> Messer Xin wrote:
>
>> Vanya:
>>
>>> Messer Xin <x...@woc.org>
>>>
>>>>> But you wouldn't know it by anyone here, would you?
>>>>> - Vanya
>>
>> Xin:
>>>> Oh, I don't know. There's a lot more going on if you read
>>>> between the lines. A lot of it is even worse, granted, but
>>
>> Vanya:
>>> But there is only emptiness between the lines...
>>
>> This is supposed to be bad? Or true? Or what?
>>
>> There is a lot of information to be had between the lines,
>> like, "Why didn't she rake him over the coals just then,
>> when he had him pinned to the pole?" "Why does he always
>> choose *that* kind of put-down?" See what I mean?
>>
>> Like when some people interminably tweak others for no good
>> reason but that they can, and they enjoy that they can.
>>
>> Like me, for example.
>
> You do a piss-poor job of it, son.
Just bait to get you to expose your poverty.
> Now, if some people interminably tweak others for no good reason but
> that they can, and they enjoy that they can, don't the people tweaked by
> them volunteer day in day out, month in month out, year in year out to
> cooperate unasked in getting tweaked?
>
> And don't *they* enjoy it (namely being tweaked), too? Why else would
> they keep on with it, long-term and unasked?
>
> Isn't it give-and-take in full freedom, on both sides? Isn't it a case
> of "One hand washes the other"?
Is this anything but another form of, "She wanted to be
raped, officer! Why else would she put herself in a
situation where I could do it?"
Your blind spot makes you unable to see how reprehensible
your behavior seems to many, probably the majority, of
people here. Even worse, you actively claim that you are
not responsible for your instigation of ill feeling.
Please don't get all gushy with gratitude for receiving an
honest impression. I'd do it for Vanier, too.
cupcake
Minkphhfffffffftttttttttttttt wrote:
we're not interested in your personal social agenda,
Minkphhhhfffftttttt, yu fucking sap
>--
>
> |Xin|
>
Tang Huyen
Messer Xin wrote:
What you say, whether an honest impression or not, should be regarded like all
phenomena. No reason to take it seriously, even less get gushy with it. I'd do
it for the Buddha's words, too.
Tang Huyen
************************************
From: Evelyn Ruut (mama...@ulster.net)
Subject: Re: question
Newsgroups: talk.religion.buddhism
Date: 2002-07-11 03:38:26 PST
"chopsmcp" <sith...@NOSPAMyahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1WZW8.2236$F%6.12...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
> just visiting, but I have a (genuine) question. is all the hatefulness in
> this group real, or a subtle joke?
Those of us who are genuine buddhists have no way of knowing whether it is
real or not, but instead regard it like all phenomena. No reason to take
it seriously.
We do seem to have a rather noisy component around here lately.....
Regards,
Evelyn
Kimberly
(in message <3D88630B...@yahoo.com>):
Tang:
> What you say, whether an honest impression or not, should be regarded like
> all
> phenomena. No reason to take it seriously, even less get gushy with it. I'd
> do
> it for the Buddha's words, too.
Ecellent!
But your compulsion still manifests in your choice to post
the following.
> ************************************
>
> From: Evelyn Ruut (mama...@ulster.net)
> Subject: Re: question
> Newsgroups: talk.religion.buddhism
> Date: 2002-07-11 03:38:26 PST
>
>
> "chopsmcp" <sith...@NOSPAMyahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1WZW8.2236$F%6.12...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
>> just visiting, but I have a (genuine) question. is all the hatefulness in
>> this group real, or a subtle joke?
>
>
> Those of us who are genuine buddhists have no way of knowing whether it is
> real or not, but instead regard it like all phenomena. No reason to take
> it seriously.
>
> We do seem to have a rather noisy component around here lately.....
>
> Regards,
> Evelyn
>
--
Tang Huyen
Kimberly wrote:
> Tang Huyen
> >
> > Messer Xin wrote:
> >
> >> Tang Huyen
In Buddhism, or at least the Buddhism that I know, Xin sweetie, one distinguishes
the Law (Dharma) and the person (pudgala). The former is abstract, impersonal and
universal and needs not entertain any necessary relationship with the latter. One
relies on the former and not on the latter.
If one encounters good Dharma -- and by good, I mean that it helps one decrease
suffering, even end it -- then one should follow it oneself and make it known to
others, regardless of its source. The two need not entertain any necessary
relationship whatsoever with each other.
Tang Huyen
Kimberly
(in message <3D888F7A...@yahoo.com>):
[quoted post rearranged for the sake of clarity]:
>
>>> ************************************
>>>
>>> From: Evelyn Ruut (mama...@ulster.net)
>>> Subject: Re: question
>>> Newsgroups: talk.religion.buddhism
>>> Date: 2002-07-11 03:38:26 PST
>>>
>>>
>>> "chopsmcp" <sith...@NOSPAMyahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>>> news:1WZW8.2236$F%6.12...@newsfep1-win.server.ntli.net...
>>>> just visiting, but I have a (genuine) question. is all the hatefulness in
>>>> this group real, or a subtle joke?
>>>
>>>
>>> Those of us who are genuine buddhists have no way of knowing whether it is
>>> real or not, but instead regard it like all phenomena. No reason to
>>> take
>>> it seriously.
>>>
>>> We do seem to have a rather noisy component around here lately.....
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Evelyn
>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Tang answers my comment before the quote:
> In Buddhism, or at least the Buddhism that I know, Xin sweetie, one
> distinguishes
> the Law (Dharma) and the person (pudgala). The former is abstract,
> impersonal and
> universal and needs not entertain any necessary relationship with the
> latter. One
> relies on the former and not on the latter.
>
> If one encounters good Dharma -- and by good, I mean that it helps one
> decrease
> suffering, even end it -- then one should follow it oneself and make it
> known to
> others, regardless of its source. The two need not entertain any necessary
> relationship whatsoever with each other.
I can think of lots of arguments to pursue here. However, I
will agree that good Dharma should not be ignored, whoever
bespeaks it.
Was good Dharma the *only* reason you chose a post of
Evelyn's to embellish your point? The thought that any
reference to her, bad OR good, might rouse suspicion and
rancor -- this never occurred to you?
If not, then perhaps things are improving.
--
适|Xin|
assistance is futile! prepare to be dissimulated!
--NoMatNoMnd
============================================================
==
Posted with Hogwasher. For a free Test Drive click on:
Tang Huyen
Kimberly wrote:
> Tang Huyen:
To rouse suspicion may be a good trick, Xin luv.
Tang Huyen
Messer Xin
(in message <3D89B1E2...@yahoo.com>):
>> I can think of lots of arguments to pursue here. However, I
>> will agree that good Dharma should not be ignored, whoever
>> bespeaks it.
>>
>> Was good Dharma the *only* reason you chose a post of
>> Evelyn's to embellish your point? The thought that any
>> reference to her, bad OR good, might rouse suspicion and
>> rancor -- this never occurred to you?
>>
>> If not, then perhaps things are improving.
>
> To rouse suspicion may be a good trick, Xin luv.
Which is why I added rancor.
Please explain the dynamics of the skillful rousing of
suspicion, so as to further the Dharma.
--
|Xin|
"So why speculate about such things?"
-- Lee Dillion
============================================================
==
Posted with Hogwasher. Mac first, Mac only:
Tang Huyen
Messer Xin wrote:
> Tang Huyen
>
> >> I can think of lots of arguments to pursue here. However, I
> >> will agree that good Dharma should not be ignored, whoever
> >> bespeaks it.
> >>
> >> Was good Dharma the *only* reason you chose a post of
> >> Evelyn's to embellish your point? The thought that any
> >> reference to her, bad OR good, might rouse suspicion and
> >> rancor -- this never occurred to you?
> >>
> >> If not, then perhaps things are improving.
> >
> > To rouse suspicion may be a good trick, Xin luv.
>
> Which is why I added rancor.
>
> Please explain the dynamics of the skillful rousing of
> suspicion, so as to further the Dharma.
Ooooooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!! Looooook at that!
When your friend Sphere claimed to have entered the stream earlier this
year, you didn't ask him the dynamics of the skilful proclamation of
entering the stream, so as to further the Dharma.
When your friend Tohsu Roshu Tohu Bohu recently dug up stories about
what happened (or did not happen) decades ago, you didn't ask him the
dynamics of the skilful bringing up of stories about what happened (or
did not happen) decades ago, so as to further the Dharma.
When you yourself committed blatant acts of hypocrisy (which I then
pointed out), you didn't ask yourself the dynamics of the skilful acts
of blatant hypocrisy, so as to further the Dharma.
And now you ask me the dynamics of the skilful rousing of suspicion, so
as to further the Dharma?
So you hold me to *higher* standards than you do your friends and
yourself?
How self-abnegating of you!
Wouldn't that rouse suspicion about your objectivity and fairness?
Tang Huyen
cupcake
Tang wrote:
yeh, Minkfhhhffffffftttttt! -- so how's come yer
such a little asshole? huh?
> Tang Huyen
>
cupcake
> Re: Mysticism? (was Re: For the one stuck)
>
> From: gyong khal <rokt...@hotmail.com>
> Reply to: [1]gyong khal
> Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 20:33:41 GMT
> Organization: MediaCom High Speed Internet
> Newsgroups:
> [2]talk.religion.buddhism,
> [3]alt.religion.buddhism.tibetan,
> [4]alt.zen,
> [5]alt.buddha.short.fat.guy
> Followup to: [6]newsgroups
> References:
> [7]<f59a3b3e.0209...@posting.google.com>
> [8]<01HW.B9AC20330...@news.earthlink.net>
> [9]<3D87078B...@yahoo.com>
> [10]<01HW.B9AD62B30...@news.earthlink.net>
> [11]<3D88630B...@yahoo.com>
> [12]<01HW.B9AE02EC0...@news.earthlink.net>
> [13]<3D888F7A...@yahoo.com>
> [14]<01HW.B9AEAFF20...@news.earthlink.net>
> [15]<3D89B1E2...@yahoo.com>
> [16]<01HW.B9AF78280...@news.earthlink.net>
> [17]<3D8A28B7...@yahoo.com>
>On Thu, 19 Sep 2002 15:42:47 -0400, Tang Huyen <tang_...@yahoo.com>
>wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>Messer Xin wrote:
>>
>>> Tang Huyen
>>>
>>> >> I can think of lots of arguments to pursue here. However, I
>>> >> will agree that good Dharma should not be ignored, whoever
>>> >> bespeaks it.
>>> >>
>>> >> Was good Dharma the *only* reason you chose a post of
>>> >> Evelyn's to embellish your point? The thought that any
>>> >> reference to her, bad OR good, might rouse suspicion and
>>> >> rancor -- this never occurred to you?
>>> >>
>>> >> If not, then perhaps things are improving.
>>> >
>>> > To rouse suspicion may be a good trick, Xin luv.
>>>
>>> Which is why I added rancor.
>>>
>>> Please explain the dynamics of the skillful rousing of
>>> suspicion, so as to further the Dharma.
>>
>>Ooooooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!! Looooook at that!
>>
>>When your friend Sphere claimed to have entered the stream earlier this
>>year, you didn't ask him the dynamics of the skilful proclamation of
>>entering the stream, so as to further the Dharma.
>>
>
>
>>When you yourself committed blatant acts of hypocrisy (which I then
>>pointed out), you didn't ask yourself the dynamics of the skilful acts
>>of blatant hypocrisy, so as to further the Dharma.
>>
>always some other guy
>people not even party to the thread
>and ure not even there
>
>
>>And now you ask me the dynamics of the skilful rousing of suspicion, so
>>as to further the Dharma?
>>
>
>
>>So you hold me to *higher* standards than you do your friends and
>>yourself?
>>
>
>so he's wrong because he's human and ure right because ure not?
>
>not much of an arguement
>
>
well, seein's how yu wur an asshole ta begin with --
who cares!
>
>>How self-abnegating of you!
>>
>>Wouldn't that rouse suspicion about your objectivity and fairness?
>>
>not as much as using slander and gossip in responce to a point
>
>
>ya wanna talk thots talk about thots
>ya wanna gossip why bother with points
>gossip kills the point if you care about the point
>and somehow i dont think ure the kinda guy
>that shits on themselve to not smell too sweet
>
cupcake
>
> Re: Mysticism? (was Re: For the one stuck)
>
> From: gyong khal <rokt...@hotmail.com>
> Reply to: [1]gyong khal
> Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2002 20:37:43 GMT
> Organization: MediaCom High Speed Internet
> Newsgroups:
> [2]talk.religion.buddhism,
> [3]alt.religion.buddhism.tibetan,
> [4]alt.zen,
> [5]alt.buddha.short.fat.guy
> Followup to: [6]newsgroups
> References:
> [8]<SQpi9.245$q9....@news.more.net>
>On Thu, 19 Sep 2002 19:46:58 GMT, cupcake <t...@r.slrup> wrote:
>
>> yeh, Minkfhhhffffffftttttt! -- so how's come yer
>> such a little asshole? huh?
>>
>
>
only an *asshole* accuses other people of
being a *bigger* asshole! :(
cupcake
cupcake wrote:
ASSHOLE!