This place is a cesspool
cup o' tea
maturity than the denizens, the sleazy slimeballs fancying themselves
buddhists who inhabit this group. It's one big chest thumping session.
There is more edification to be had watching sunset beach or glamour
than following 90% of the threads here. You'd be better off reading
alt.cute.puppies.
And on top of that you've got the jokes:
Joke #1: people who think Buddhism is all about paradoxes. They say
silly stuff like 'practice is about not practicing' etc etc ad nauseum
thinking that makes them seem mahayanist and profound. Pah! You do the
work, you get the results, period. Those anti-intellectual paradoxes
were invented for the sake of extremely knowledgeable practitioners,
who were very advanced, who were ALMOST THERE. And believe me, that
ain't you. You need to do the work from step #1, which is generosity.
Hand out bananas on the street and make yourself a doormat for about
400 years and then maybe you can move on to step two.
Joke #2: people who try to show they're enlightened by avoiding 'self
referencing'. This means they thump their chests without using the
word 'I'. 'Ook. there is great enlightenment happening here... woo
hoo'. Gimme a friggin break. This Happy Camper fellow, for all his
prolix, self referencing, group therapy babbling is a BREATH OF FRESH
AIR compared to the craps and turds regularly laid on this carpet by
the regulars. Happy Camper is at step two. Most of you self styled
Buddhist Space cadets would need about 4000 lifetimes of profound vow
to reach the level of HC. Why? Because he asks questions. But you are
so deluded as to think you have the answers.
I can tell you misfit scuzzballs right now that _I_ am more
enlightened, _I_ am more compassionate and _I_ am MORE HUMBLE than any
mother's friggin son of you (with the exception of any ordained sangha
members who might be here and who I am NOT referring to with this
post).
So get back to your gang rape of the latest poor sod who happened to
wander in here with a genuine personality and an inkling as to what
steps might need to be taken to get somewhere on the path hardly any
of you actually care about.
[/flame]
liaM
Fits perfectly the spirit of the alt.zen triba
Did HC hand you a briba ?
Or do you normally act like an amoeba ?!
liaM
cup o' tea wrote:
>
> I'm serious.
Ch'an Fu
zanchen wrote:
> "liaM" <lho...@email.com> wrote in message
> news:3C913430...@email.com...
> > Nice diatriba
> > Fits perfectly the spirit of the alt.zen triba
> > Did HC hand you a briba ?
> > Or do you normally act like an amoeba ?!
> >
> >
>
> Oh, so it's come to that now? Anyone who sees something good in camper is an
> honorary amoeba? So lets see how many amoebas we have here. Well, there's
> cup o tea, Tang, Daryl, ME, maybe Kathy and Tara, hmmm.
> Look, I really don't see what the kid has done wrong here other than some
> foul language to Evelyn, but she's heard worse from Dar and others. She knew
> the Ken Keyes subject would touch something off, but did it anyway for some
> reason.????
> But simply bringing up the names of a couple of individuals who are only
> partially associated with Buddhism doesn't call for a gangbang.
> Cupcake turned against him for some strange reason I haven't figured out
> yet - and I don't even think he actually believes Camper is DT. Hell, he
> even bonded with his old nemesis Ixnay in an effort to remove him. That is a
> miracle!
> This is a strange place.
> But like the kid said, "If my presense here does nothing else, at least it
> will bring people closer together by having a common enemy." Pretty damn
> good reasoning.
> I don't know how this all started with him and Sphere, and I wanted to stay
> out of it as much as possible, but was dragged directly into it by Chan who
> accuses me of being HT's "sock puppet" - and Evelyn agreed wholeheartedly
> with Chan when he said HC should be ignored along with his puppet! What did
> I ever do to you Evelyn? So now we have two more there who were at each
> others throats not long ago, suddenly bonding. Chan was even on her killfile
> for a few weeks!
> Fucking weird.
> I personally could give a shit less about this place and I may go and I may
> stay - but it will never be because someone is trying to force me to leave
> by ignoring or flaming me.
> I promise you that.
take the other sock with you.
Evelyn Ruut
"zanchen" <bvit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:_bbk8.75053$Nn6.3...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...
> > Fits perfectly the spirit of the alt.zen triba
> > Did HC hand you a briba ?
> > Or do you normally act like an amoeba ?!
> >
> >
>
Zanchen,
I had NO idea you were the one being referred to as a 'sock puppet'. I
have nothing against anyone here, and certainly not you.
I do choose not to read or reply to those who get too abusive, that's all.
Ignoring people who do that sort of thing is something I have done for a
long time and it is done in the interest of peace.
Sorry if there was any misunderstanding.
Regards,
Evelyn
Sphere
zanchen wrote:
>
> "liaM" <lho...@email.com> wrote in message
> news:3C913430...@email.com...
> > Nice diatriba
> > Fits perfectly the spirit of the alt.zen triba
> > Did HC hand you a briba ?
> > Or do you normally act like an amoeba ?!
> >
> >
>
> Oh, so it's come to that now? Anyone who sees something good in camper is an
> honorary amoeba? So lets see how many amoebas we have here. Well, there's
> cup o tea, Tang, Daryl, ME, maybe Kathy and Tara, hmmm.
> Look, I really don't see what the kid has done wrong here other than some
> foul language to Evelyn, but she's heard worse from Dar and others. She knew
> the Ken Keyes subject would touch something off, but did it anyway for some
> reason.????
> But simply bringing up the names of a couple of individuals who are only
> partially associated with Buddhism doesn't call for a gangbang.
> Cupcake turned against him for some strange reason I haven't figured out
> yet - and I don't even think he actually believes Camper is DT. Hell, he
> even bonded with his old nemesis Ixnay in an effort to remove him. That is a
> miracle!
> This is a strange place.
> But like the kid said, "If my presense here does nothing else, at least it
> will bring people closer together by having a common enemy." Pretty damn
> good reasoning.
> I don't know how this all started with him and Sphere, and I wanted to stay
I made a mistake which got HC interested in
our little gathering. HC came in here with
a chip on the shoulder, spouting off about
the existance of self, and despite a fairly
lenghty period of being ignored by me
continuously making references to me. At
some point HC brought up a guru with a name
I found odd, and which I checked out. It
seems that the only places which mentioned this
guy was connected to the Dark Zen creeps.
Since I was already fed up with HC's spouting
off about Atman I took advantage of this and
pointed out the connection to the people here.
By this time HC had already gotten on a few
people's nerves, so it isn't surprising that
they jumped on this connection.
At this point HC has gotten on a lot of people's
nerves, in large measure because HC has nothing
to say which doesn't boil down to "me! me!".
I'm of the opinion that HC has disrupted the Buddhist
newsgroups far longer than should have been allowed.
It is time to return to a discussion of the dhamma
and forget HC's ego.
Since it is quite clear that HC is not going to
do anything but discuss HC, I am quite willing to
be as unpleasant as necessary to get rid of HC.
If necessary, I shall be unpleasant to people
who provide HC comfort/shelter. I want the
asshole out of here. The asshole is not interested
in anything but itself.
--
Sphere.
Hey bozos! If you try to have a conversation
with an asshole all it does is stink up the place.
Ch'an Fu
zanchen wrote:
> "Ch'an Fu" <r...@operamail.com> wrote in message
> news:3C914273...@operamail.com...
> Which one would that be? I heard you say that today for the first time and
> I've been curious about it. Who is the "other" sock Charlie? It's easy to
> see why you don't like him you know. Here was an unlikely sort of guy named
> "happy camper" and you tore into him like you did to poor Bei-Yin, but this
> kid fooled you, huh? This kid turned out to be a pit-bull from HELL, huh?
> I loved it when he kicked your bully ass!
Actually, you haven't fooled me since the very first,
but i do tend to get annoyed quickly by p/a assholes.
No - she's you, little girl, just you - not even a proper bitch -
just another sorry bully and hardly a pot-bull.
Very common, very likely, very ordinary as things go.
If i've been a bully, i'm sure people here would have let me know it.
So you're Bei-YIn, too? that's funny. Maybe even Dan Tain?
Whatever. Your p/a game is worthless on all sides - as linda
has mentioned and as I posted from one of your DZ site links
to a supposed ch'an teacher. This, too, shall pass.
I'm simply exposing you as a troll, a sock puppet. One of HC's
persona. This is just general information for the groups.
That's the only reason i replied to this.
They too can take it or leave it.
So, in the immortal words of Sphere, "Fuck Off".
not that i care, but it is rather appropriate.
Evelyn Ruut
"Sphere" <spher...@attbi.com> wrote in message
news:3C9150C0...@attbi.com...
Sphere, may I kindly suggest what you told me?
Ignore him. Battling it out just adds to the stink.
Use your killfile and if you answer a post that says HC is being replied to,
just skip it unread.
Do yourself that favor.
Chill ~~~~~~~ :-)
Evelyn
Jazz
"cup o' tea" <red_te...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9faa2d55.02031...@posting.google.com...
How will you share this enlightenment?
*Gassho*
- Jazz
Sphere
Evelyn Ruut wrote:
...
> Sphere, may I kindly suggest what you told me?
> Ignore him. Battling it out just adds to the stink.
> Use your killfile and if you answer a post that says HC is being replied to,
> just skip it unread.
> Do yourself that favor.
> Chill ~~~~~~~ :-)
I emptied my flame thrower
about an hour ago. The
echos started coming in about
half an hour ago.
>
> Evelyn
Evelyn Ruut
>
>
> Evelyn Ruut wrote:
> ...
> > Sphere, may I kindly suggest what you told me?
> > Ignore him. Battling it out just adds to the stink.
> > Use your killfile and if you answer a post that says HC is being replied
to,
> > just skip it unread.
> > Do yourself that favor.
> > Chill ~~~~~~~ :-)
>
>
> I emptied my flame thrower
> about an hour ago. The
> echos started coming in about
> half an hour ago.
Good. I knew you would be OK.
Now go and read my post from 9:02 under the "enlightened my ass" thread.
We all need to remember some of that which I wrote.
Regards,
Evelyn
jesson
> Fits perfectly the spirit of the alt.zen triba
> Did HC hand you a briba ?
> Or do you normally act like an amoeba ?!
>
>
>
>
> liaM
>
not good enough liaM,
2 weeks of i counting for you!
Sphere
I'd rather remember the quaint exchange
I've been having with Mizar, since that's
the type of thing I come here for -- that
and whatever it is we do in absfg.
>
> Regards,
Sphere
zanchen wrote:
>
> "Sphere" <spher...@attbi.com> wrote in message
> news:3C9150C0...@attbi.com...
> Well there are lots of people, Sphere who think of atman as being the true
> self the Buddha was originally seeking because that was the key to bliss in
> his times - the end of suffering. That's not something to make HC into a
> troll. It's a very interesting topic for discussion. Very interesting! That
No it isn't. You may leave now.
Sphere
zanchen wrote:
>
> "Evelyn Ruut" <mama...@ulster.net> wrote in message
> news:OQbk8.2679$17.16...@newsfeed1.thebiz.net...
> Well Evelyn, I just tried to reason with Sphere and he hung-up on me. So I
> have to believe this is more his fault than it is HC's.
> He's being hardheaded and that's what's causing the proplem with HC and I
> wouldn't side with the guy if I were you because you could catch the disease
> he has - called foolish pride. Atman is a good topic for discussion, but he
> won't hear of it. It's sickening.
Take it to a Hindu newsgroup.
Sphere
zanchen wrote:
...
> You may think you run the entire universe, but I have news for you.
I missed who pointed out that you
were HC, but I see they were right.
Happy Camper
cup o' tea wrote:
> I'm serious. I mean the folks on alt.thrash.metallica show more
> maturity than the denizens, the sleazy slimeballs fancying themselves
> buddhists who inhabit this group. It's one big chest thumping session.
I wholeheartedly agree cup.
In fact I have proved it by luring people into expressing what is
really on their minds.
>
> There is more edification to be had watching sunset beach or glamour
> than following 90% of the threads here. You'd be better off reading
> alt.cute.puppies.
>
> And on top of that you've got the jokes:
>
> Joke #1: people who think Buddhism is all about paradoxes. They say
> silly stuff like 'practice is about not practicing' etc etc ad nauseum
> thinking that makes them seem mahayanist and profound. Pah!
Bingo!
> You do the
> work, you get the results, period. Those anti-intellectual paradoxes
> were invented for the sake of extremely knowledgeable practitioners,
> who were very advanced, who were ALMOST THERE.
I agree again.
It would simply make no sense at all to pull that kind of crap on
wide-eyed, eager, and sincere new seekers. That would be a terrible thing
to do to them. Simply terrible!
Who knows; that could put their practice so far back that they might
never recover in this lifetime.
You have been making a point that I have been trying to make for quite
a while.
> And believe me, that
> ain't you. You need to do the work from step #1, which is generosity.
> Hand out bananas on the street and make yourself a doormat for about
> 400 years and then maybe you can move on to step two.
<aplause>
>
>
> Joke #2: people who try to show they're enlightened by avoiding 'self
> referencing'. This means they thump their chests without using the
> word 'I'. 'Ook. there is great enlightenment happening here... woo
> hoo'. Gimme a friggin break. This Happy Camper fellow, for all his
> prolix, self referencing, group therapy babbling is a BREATH OF FRESH
> AIR compared to the craps and turds regularly laid on this carpet by
> the regulars. Happy Camper is at step two. Most of you self styled
> Buddhist Space cadets would need about 4000 lifetimes of profound vow
> to reach the level of HC. Why? Because he asks questions. But you are
> so deluded as to think you have the answers.
>
> I can tell you misfit scuzzballs right now that _I_ am more
> enlightened, _I_ am more compassionate and _I_ am MORE HUMBLE than any
> mother's friggin son of you (with the exception of any ordained sangha
> members who might be here and who I am NOT referring to with this
> post).
>
> So get back to your gang rape of the latest poor sod who happened to
> wander in here with a genuine personality and an inkling as to what
> steps might need to be taken to get somewhere on the path hardly any
> of you actually care about.
That's okay I've been toughened-up by usenet. I can take it. But it
does seem rather pointless at times.
>
>
> [/flame]
Evelyn Ruut
>
> "Evelyn Ruut" <mama...@ulster.net> wrote in message
> news:OQbk8.2679$17.16...@newsfeed1.thebiz.net...
> >
> have to believe this is more his fault than it is HC's.
> He's being hardheaded and that's what's causing the proplem with HC and I
> wouldn't side with the guy if I were you because you could catch the
disease
> he has - called foolish pride. Atman is a good topic for discussion, but
he
> won't hear of it. It's sickening.
Zanchen, I am sorry to say that a lot of people on these newsgroups are
"seriously" opinionated and have triumphalistic views and attitudes. I
don't personally have any solution for it, though I have talked about it a
lot. All I get for my trouble is more polarization and people harassing me
that I never even had a complaint with before..... some I never even had a
serious discussion with, who jump all over my case and I have had to
killfile them. That is getting really ridiculous.
It is my belief that there are a lot of great topics we all could discuss if
people would just stop hating other traditions than their own and be open
minded enough not to get angry with people who have a different view of
things. I have dear close friends who are Catholic, Jewish, Muslim,
Hindu.....you name it, but the bitterness I see on this newsgroup against my
kind of buddhism is terrible, and worst of all it is from other buddhists!
Not to get repetitive, but the systematic harassment of the tibetan groups
has totally put discussion of our own issues out of the question. I cannot
think of anything more juvenile or more un-buddhist than to do a thing like
that, but it has been ongoing for three years now and has fueled hatred from
people who might never have even thought that way. That is how wars get
started and holocausts happen. A little intolerance of a sect of your own
religion you don't understand and the next thing you know someone suggests
concentration camps.
A discussion on atman would be very interesting to me. Meanwhile I don't
have time to fool around reading all this silliness and I hate having to use
my killfile.
Anyone else around here interested in serious dharma discussion?
Speak up please..... now is the time to let it be known.
Regards,
Evelyn
cupcake
Evelyn the Vajra Nut in a Rut rote:
>"zanchen" <bvit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>[10]news:pKdk8.75783$Nn6.3...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...
>>
>> "Evelyn Ruut" <mama...@ulster.net> wrote in message
>> [11]news:OQbk8.2679$17.16...@newsfeed1.thebiz.net...
>> >
>> > "zanchen" <bvit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> > [12]news:_bbk8.75053$Nn6.3...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...
>> > >
>> > > "liaM" <lho...@email.com> wrote in message
>> > > [13]news:3C913430...@email.com...
no, evvie -- we're not interested in any of yer
so called "dharma discussions" with any vajrayanis;
why don't yu people just go away. 'kay? :)
>Regards,
>Evelyn
Happy Camper
zanchen wrote:
> "liaM" <lho...@email.com> wrote in message
> news:3C913430...@email.com...
> > Nice diatriba
> > Fits perfectly the spirit of the alt.zen triba
> > Did HC hand you a briba ?
> > Or do you normally act like an amoeba ?!
> >
> >
>
Man, when I read your post I start to wish I had never started pressing my
points. I don't want to see the group disintegrate.
(From this point on this message is directed to the whole group Zanchen, not
to you personally).
Geeze, all of this puts me in a very awkward position. I keep pressing my
points because I know some of them have value, and I know that eventually
something may break which would bring about a sigh of relief in the room after
everyone finally gets a new perspective of one another. But that is starting to
seem like a pipe dream at this point.
So what do I do?
Maybe I need to start backing off a little, or maybe I should just voluntarily
drop out of the group so that things can get back to the way they were before I
came. I never wanted anything like this to happen.
I just knew that my perspective might be useful in here. I want to learn more
about Buddhism, and I think my different background might shine a new light on
certain things.
I guess the thing I keep underestimating is usenet itself. The only thing
that never occured to me is what might happen if I was *too successful*.
I am not a troll. I am not trying to break up this group or make everyone
kiss my ass.
In fact I find it very hard to put into words exactly what I was trying to
do. But basically I was trying to get people to question their practice and see
if it was what they *thought* it was.
I know from expereince that practice is a bitch! And not because it is too
much effort. It is a bitch because it is so easy to fool yourself. And until you
get wise to the ways you might be fooling yourself, then you are spinning your
wheels. I know! I have been there.
So all I was trying to do is challenge people's asumptions about their own
practice a bit. I think what I was really expecting was that a few people would
say,"Oops, you got me there. I was off my practice for a moment. But back to
work."
I am not kidding. I thought that even people who might have resisted me
fairly strongly in the beginning might have eventually gotten and "Aha" moment
and said,"Oh wait a minute. Okay guy. I see what you are doing here. You really
had me going there for a minute."
Then I figured that after they saw what I was doing they would go back to
practice and I would leave them alone after that.
I was about to say that it was all a bit of a ruse on my part, but that is
not completely accurate because I have been making what I think are valid points
from the very beginning.
But I thought that as soon as I started reminding people of their practice,
they would see what I was talking about and just nod or something.
I honestly never expected all of this, because as I say, before my
experiences with the sangaha, I was expecting Buddhists in general to be way
ahead of people from other mystical schools of thought.
Now I am realizing that people in theses groups are at many different levels.
I would never want to play games on a novice that might confuse them. I would
never do that. But since most of the Buddhists I have met seem to all show-off
their knowledge to some degree, I bought into that somewhat. So I guess I was
assumning people were farther ahead then they were. So maybe my games were too
damn strong. I never really intended that. I thought that if they were *just
strong enough* that people might get some little flashes of insight. But I never
wanted to clobber newbie seekers. I saw you all as peers who could handle what I
was doing, and who would get hip to it pretty quick. And some of you did. Some
of you got hip right away, but it took a little longer with a few of you. That
could be for any number of reasons that have nothing to do with your level of
progress, such as personality, different ways of communicating, etc.
But the thing is that I know many of you *got it*, and I think that those of
you who did, know that I am not quite what my worst critics think I am.
Now I can see that things have made a turn for the worse. I no longer see any
point in continuing to press things.
So what do I do? Let people Sphere take over again? I *know* he is fooling
himself, and I *know* he is fooling other people. Nick is a perfect example of
someone he has fooled, whether intentionally or not.
So do I shut up and let people like Sphere go back to misleading people, or
do I keep going and contribute to group disintegration?
Until now I would have figured that this was all leading to a *beakthrough*
of some kind. Now I am not so sure. It may be leading to a *breakdown*, not a
breakthrough. And those are two very different things.
But what is clear to me is that there are some people in this group who have
a much better inkling about the dhamma than others.
So do all of those people start jumping on this bandwagon and push things a
little until the others finally start getting a little deeper undertsanding?
Maybe not.
Maybe a newsgroup is not the place to experience all of this. Maybe people
are just on too many different levels to expect any group progress like that.
And if that is the reality then maybe we all need to drop it right here.
I guess I will start looking for clues from those of you who have been around
for a while, and who are more hip to what this has all really been about.
So what is it? Push ahead and see if there is a breakthrough down the road?
Or stop right now to avoid a breakdown?
Happy Camper
Ch'an Fu wrote:
You've been a bully.
cupcake
>
> Re: This place is a cesspool
>
> From: Happy Camper <hpy...@playground.net>
> Reply to: [1]Happy Camper
> Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 04:38:43 GMT
> Organization: Shangrila
> Newsgroups:
> [2]talk.religion.buddhism,
> [3]alt.zen
> Followup to: [4]newsgroups
> References:
> [5]<9faa2d55.02031...@posting.google.com>
> [6]<3C913430...@email.com>
> [7]<_bbk8.75053$Nn6.3...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com>
>
>
>zanchen wrote:
>
>> "liaM" <lho...@email.com> wrote in message
>> [8]news:3C913430...@email.com...
well, whatever yu decide to do is entirely up to
yu -- because, this is a free and open newsgroup;
and you are perfectly free to say anything yu damn
well please ...and, don't ever let any of these
little idiot bozos, around here, ever try to tell
otherwise ...and, certainly, don't ever let
any of these screwed up vajrayanis ever try to
threaten or intimidate yu!
Happy Camper
Sphere wrote:
No. HC saw hypocrisy in you right from the start. But I never could have know
how deep it was. I thought that if I challeneged you a little that you would just
notice that some of your habits might have been a little non-productive.
> spouting off about
> the existance of self, and despite a fairly
> lenghty period of being ignored by me
Sphere, you tend to come up to people and throw a pot of boiling water on them,
then you ignore them for a while. That is not the way to ignore people.
>
> continuously making references to me.
You put my name in your sigfile. What are you talking about? And before that
you and Chan had created brand new threads with my name in them. I wasn't doing
any of that. I was just keeping up a debate with you.
I'll admit I got harsh with you a few times, but only after you tried to win
the debate by lying.
> At
> some point HC brought up a guru
You mean *author* right? I only know him as an author, not a guru.
> with a name
> I found odd, and which I checked out. It
> seems that the only places which mentioned this
> guy was connected to the Dark Zen creeps.
Jesus Sphere, is that the best you can do is keep spouting that Witch Hunt
Crap?
>
> Since I was already fed up with HC's spouting
> off about Atman I took advantage of this
Took advantage is right. Your word choices indicate that you are a manipulator,
just like I have been saying.
> and
> pointed out the connection to the people here.
> By this time HC had already gotten on a few
> people's nerves, so it isn't surprising that
> they jumped on this connection.
They jumped on it because you jumped on it.
>
>
> At this point HC has gotten on a lot of people's
> nerves, in large measure because HC has nothing
> to say which doesn't boil down to "me! me!".
That's only because you are clueless about what this is really all about.
>
> I'm of the opinion that HC has disrupted the Buddhist
> newsgroups far longer than should have been allowed.
Allowed? You encouraged it.
>
> It is time to return to a discussion of the dhamma
> and forget HC's ego.
You had that choice all along, yet you never took it. In fact you are the
single person in this group who is most responsible for where we are at right now,
except for me. But what you don't seem to realize yet is that I triggered your
dark side, then it cam streaming out like a bunch of demons who had been cooped up
to long. Then you started manipulating everyone in the group to shut me up.
That is not enlightened!
You reaveled yourself more than you know Sphere.
>
>
> Since it is quite clear that HC is not going to
> do anything but discuss HC,
You discuss me more than I discuss me.
> I am quite willing to
> be as unpleasant as necessary to get rid of HC.
Dream on dreamer. That has been the whole problem from the start, you are
trying to manipulate your environment rather than adapt to it. No-self my ass!
You aren't even aware of your own desires! You cannot posibly be where you
claim to be with non-identification. It is an impossibility!
You are fooling yourself Sphere. Wake up.
>
> If necessary, I shall be unpleasant to people
> who provide HC comfort/shelter.
Man, your true colors are really streaming out now aren't they? I knew that
eventually you would show yourself up for the fake you are.
> I want the
> asshole out of here.
Man you have desires as deep as the Marianas Trench.
> The asshole is not interested
> in anything but itself.
>
Bullshit! You only want me out of here because I showed you up for a fake!
poet boy!
Happy Camper
Sphere wrote:
> Evelyn Ruut wrote:
> ...
> > Sphere, may I kindly suggest what you told me?
> > Ignore him. Battling it out just adds to the stink.
> > Use your killfile and if you answer a post that says HC is being replied to,
> > just skip it unread.
> > Do yourself that favor.
> > Chill ~~~~~~~ :-)
>
> I emptied my flame thrower
> about an hour ago. The
> echos started coming in about
> half an hour ago.
"Hatred is blind, anger is foolhardy, and he who pours out vengeance risks
having to drink a bitter draft." -- Alexandre Dumas
>
>
> >
> > Evelyn
> --
>
> Sphere.
>
> Hey bozos! If you try to have a conversation
> with an asshole all it does is stink up the place.
"You know, I think we're all Bozos on this bus." -- The Firesign Theater
http://www.halcyon.com/weir/bozo1.html
Pema
> I'm serious. I mean the folks on alt.thrash.metallica show more
> maturity than the denizens, the sleazy slimeballs fancying themselves
> buddhists who inhabit this group. It's one big chest thumping session.
> than following 90% of the threads here. You'd be better off reading
> alt.cute.puppies.
>
> And on top of that you've got the jokes:
>
> Joke #1: people who think Buddhism is all about paradoxes. They say
> silly stuff like 'practice is about not practicing' etc etc ad nauseum
> work, you get the results, period. Those anti-intellectual paradoxes
> were invented for the sake of extremely knowledgeable practitioners,
> ain't you. You need to do the work from step #1, which is generosity.
> Hand out bananas on the street and make yourself a doormat for about
> 400 years and then maybe you can move on to step two.
>
> referencing'. This means they thump their chests without using the
> word 'I'. 'Ook. there is great enlightenment happening here... woo
> hoo'. Gimme a friggin break. This Happy Camper fellow, for all his
> prolix, self referencing, group therapy babbling is a BREATH OF FRESH
> AIR compared to the craps and turds regularly laid on this carpet by
> the regulars. Happy Camper is at step two. Most of you self styled
> Buddhist Space cadets would need about 4000 lifetimes of profound vow
> to reach the level of HC. Why? Because he asks questions. But you are
> so deluded as to think you have the answers.
>
> I can tell you misfit scuzzballs right now that _I_ am more
> enlightened, _I_ am more compassionate and _I_ am MORE HUMBLE than any
> mother's friggin son of you (with the exception of any ordained sangha
> members who might be here and who I am NOT referring to with this
> post).
>
> So get back to your gang rape of the latest poor sod who happened to
> wander in here with a genuine personality and an inkling as to what
> steps might need to be taken to get somewhere on the path hardly any
> of you actually care about.
>
Cup O',
Most people understand frustration, even if it is not the same
situation. All beings want happiness, people get caught in traps, it
doesn't mark one as bad or incompetent, it just takes a long time.
Patience is the antidote to anger.
Some people think anyone who dribbles should be gone, then it's
emotional ones,
and so forth. It's an open public form and those that piss you off
won't go away. I don't think it's the debate of issues as the way it
is handled. Though you behaved exactly like everything that you
complain about, and you barfed it all over the sidewalk. Welcome to
the ranks of the great unwashed! ;)
Your post was vivid and very clear about what is bugging you, and
what you feel is your position to it all. Such clarity is a gift, most
opportunities for reflection and understanding are not so clear and
immediate. I guess the Lotus is having a growth spurt!
I am only posting this because I do understand. I think most of us
have had a good rant and finger pointing session. I know your a good
dude. I wish you well in all your quests.
Pema
"all who wander are not lost"
Tolkien
Klaus schmetterling
9faa2d55.02031...@posting.google.com...
: I'm serious. I mean the folks on alt.thrash.metallica show more
: maturity than the denizens, the sleazy slimeballs fancying themselves
: buddhists who inhabit this group. It's one big chest thumping session.
: There is more edification to be had watching sunset beach or glamour
: than following 90% of the threads here. You'd be better off reading
: alt.cute.puppies.
:
: And on top of that you've got the jokes:
:
: Joke #1: people who think Buddhism is all about paradoxes. They say
: silly stuff like 'practice is about not practicing' etc etc ad nauseum
: thinking that makes them seem mahayanist and profound. Pah! You do the
: work, you get the results, period. Those anti-intellectual paradoxes
: were invented for the sake of extremely knowledgeable practitioners,
: who were very advanced, who were ALMOST THERE. And believe me, that
: ain't you. You need to do the work from step #1, which is generosity.
: Hand out bananas on the street and make yourself a doormat for about
: 400 years and then maybe you can move on to step two.
:
: Joke #2: people who try to show they're enlightened by avoiding 'self
: referencing'. This means they thump their chests without using the
: word 'I'. 'Ook. there is great enlightenment happening here... woo
: hoo'.
I think you have a good point here. I felt like tackling this self reference
thingy myself.
: Gimme a friggin break. This Happy Camper fellow, for all his
: prolix, self referencing, group therapy babbling is a BREATH OF FRESH
: AIR compared to the craps and turds regularly laid on this carpet by
: the regulars. Happy Camper is at step two. Most of you self styled
: Buddhist Space cadets would need about 4000 lifetimes of profound vow
: to reach the level of HC. Why? Because he asks questions. But you are
: so deluded as to think you have the answers.
: I can tell you misfit scuzzballs right now that _I_ am more
: enlightened, _I_ am more compassionate and _I_ am MORE HUMBLE than any
: mother's friggin son of you (with the exception of any ordained sangha
: members who might be here and who I am NOT referring to with this
: post).
:
: So get back to your gang rape of the latest poor sod who happened to
: wander in here with a genuine personality and an inkling as to what
: steps might need to be taken to get somewhere on the path hardly any
: of you actually care about.
:
: [/flame]
Good points Cup o' tea.
Klaus schmetterling
3C9150C0...@attbi.com...
: Since it is quite clear that HC is not going to
: do anything but discuss HC, I am quite willing to
: be as unpleasant as necessary to get rid of HC.
: If necessary, I shall be unpleasant to people
: who provide HC comfort/shelter. I want the
: asshole out of here. The asshole is not interested
: in anything but itself.
Oh my God. I didn't expect that the repercussions of 9/11 would stretch this
far. Or is this irony? Could I have a smiley please?
Sphere
:)
--
Sphere.
No essence. No permanence. No perfection.
Klaus schmetterling
KQnk8.64318$Yd.40...@e3500-atl1.usenetserver.com...
: To show I am being completely fair on this issue. I will trust the
judgment
: of Lee Dillon to decide whether this reasoning is right or wrong. If he
: points something out to me that I wasn't aware of or shows me where I
could
: be wrong, then I'll accept his judgment and give his thoughts careful
: consideration.
Lee has left the civilised world and now lives with his dog on a diet of
roots and berries in a cave with no radio, television and no access to the
Internet. He thoroughly enjoys the peaceful company of squirrels and
butterflies and will only come back when he needs to be reminded of exactly
how peaceful his current life is.
cup o' tea
> How will you share this enlightenment?
Oh it's not *that* kind of enlightenment.
cup o' tea
> "all who wander are not lost"
> Tolkien
Thanks Pema. And I love Tolkien's books..
cup o' tea
> Good points Cup o' tea.
Thanks Joy. (Can I call you Joy?) I woke up kicking myself for posting
drunk, expecting to have been summarily executed, but you guys have
been really nice about my outburst :-)
Richard
>> A discussion on atman would be very interesting to me.
You've probably heard this one before, but I think it's a good way to
find out how you feel about having/not having a Self.
Imagine the Star Trek teleportation device actually exists, but the
designers have made a terrible mistake. It doesn't put you back
together again at point B. Instead, the original You is destroyed at
point A, and at point B the machine makes an exact copy. Since an
exact copy amounts to a duplicate, no one who has so far used the
machine is any the wiser. But you know the awful truth. The question
is, would you use the machine anyway, knowing it'll kill you?
liaM
> > Fits perfectly the spirit of the alt.zen triba
> > Did HC hand you a briba ?
> > Or do you normally act like an amoeba ?!
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> amoeba?
>
> not good enough liaM,
> 2 weeks of i counting for you!
>
you're my best and sharpest reader, Jesson.
but you miss the point that amoeba
cause dysentery
which translates as logorrhea when applied to mouthes
Happy Camper
Evelyn Ruut wrote:
What would your practice tell you is the solution for it? What would the
Buddha tell you is the solution for it?
> though I have talked about it a
> lot.
Would the Buddha say that "talking about it a lot" would be the solution to
it?
> All I get for my trouble is more polarization and people harassing me
> that I never even had a complaint with before.....
And why would that suprise you? Couldn't the Buddha have told you that is
about what you could expect?
> some I never even had a
> serious discussion with, who jump all over my case and I have had to
> killfile them. That is getting really ridiculous.
But it gives you the oportuinty to filter it all through your practice
doesn't it? So there is an opportuinty for you there, isn't there?
>
>
> It is my belief that there are a lot of great topics we all could discuss if
> people would just stop hating other traditions than their own and be open
> minded enough not to get angry with people who have a different view of
> things. I have dear close friends who are Catholic, Jewish, Muslim,
> Hindu.....you name it, but the bitterness I see on this newsgroup against my
> kind of buddhism is terrible, and worst of all it is from other buddhists!
>
> Not to get repetitive, but the systematic harassment of the tibetan groups
> has totally put discussion of our own issues out of the question.
If you feel like what you have to say is important, then say it. If you don't
wan't to get into negative threads over that kind of stuff, then just respond to
the positive replies.
> I cannot
> think of anything more juvenile or more un-buddhist than to do a thing like
> that,
But very few Buddhists are practicing the Buddha's teachings in public
anyway, at least not routinely; so what does it matter? Many of the Buddhists I
see in here do not try to apply their practice to problems that arise during the
day. They seem to take the attitude that they will drop practice just long
enough to deal with a problem, then go back to practice after that problem is
dealt with. But if they do that with every problem, they are not practicing the
dhamma. They are avoiding practicing it. When problems arise is exactly the time
they *should* be practicing it. That's when they will be learning new things and
develop good habits.
> but it has been ongoing for three years now and has fueled hatred from
> people who might never have even thought that way. That is how wars get
> started and holocausts happen.
And what are you adding to it?
> A little intolerance of a sect of your own
> religion you don't understand and the next thing you know someone suggests
> concentration camps.
Then wouldn't you say that the best way you could represent your Tibetan
tradition in the best light is to practice the dhamma at all times?
>
>
> A discussion on atman would be very interesting to me.
Me too.
> Meanwhile I don't
> have time to fool around reading all this silliness and I hate having to use
> my killfile.
Then try a little self-control. I know it is hard. That's why it requires
practice.
>
>
> Anyone else around here interested in serious dharma discussion?
I would like to hear a discussion of how a Buddhist might apply the dhamma in
difficult situations.
Sphere
Just so long as they can make billions of
me, no problem.
liaM
Happy Camper wrote:
<snip>
>
> But very few Buddhists are practicing the Buddha's teachings...
<etc>
What an idiot thing to say about what you know so little about.. very
few
buddhists practice ? there are 650 millions of us who do practice, each
within his own space and culture.
Here's what I can assure you, the buddha's practice is my practice;
it's been with me so long that it is part of what I do each and every
conscious
moment of my daily life.
You are particularly unconscious the antidote for which is mindfulness
or a good headshrink.
liaM
Sphere
dar wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 03:10:53 GMT, Sphere <spher...@attbi.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >zanchen wrote:
> >>
> >> "Sphere" <spher...@attbi.com> wrote in message
> >> news:3C9150C0...@attbi.com...
> >> > I made a mistake which got HC interested in
> >> > our little gathering. HC came in here with
> >> > a chip on the shoulder, spouting off about
> >> > the existance of self, and despite a fairly
> >> > lenghty period of being ignored by me
> >> > continuously making references to me. At
> >> > some point HC brought up a guru with a name
> >> > I found odd, and which I checked out. It
> >> > seems that the only places which mentioned this
> >> > guy was connected to the Dark Zen creeps.
> >> > Since I was already fed up with HC's spouting
> >> > off about Atman I took advantage of this and
> >> > pointed out the connection to the people here.
> >> > By this time HC had already gotten on a few
> >> > people's nerves, so it isn't surprising that
> >> > they jumped on this connection.
> >>
> >> Well there are lots of people, Sphere who think of atman as being the true
> >> self the Buddha was originally seeking because that was the key to bliss in
> >> his times - the end of suffering. That's not something to make HC into a
> >> troll. It's a very interesting topic for discussion. Very interesting! That
> >
> >
> >No it isn't. You may leave now.
>
> come on sphere
> whats up?
> have a chill pill
They interfere with my cigs.
>
> memeless memes memely memeing memes memelessly
Happy Camper
liaM wrote:
> Happy Camper wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> >
> > But very few Buddhists are practicing the Buddha's teachings...
>
> <etc>
>
> What an idiot thing to say about what you know so little about..
I sould have said *certain aspects* of the Buddha's teachings.
> very
> few
> buddhists practice ?
I said *in public*.
> there are 650 millions of us who do practice, each
> within his own space and culture.
>
> Here's what I can assure you, the buddha's practice is my practice;
> it's been with me so long that it is part of what I do each and every
> conscious
> moment of my daily life.
And that is the way it is suppoese to be, in my opinion.
>
>
> You are particularly unconscious
How do you mean?
Happy Camper
Sphere wrote:
> zanchen wrote:
> >
> > "Evelyn Ruut" <mama...@ulster.net> wrote in message
> > news:OQbk8.2679$17.16...@newsfeed1.thebiz.net...
> > >
> > > "zanchen" <bvit...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:_bbk8.75053$Nn6.3...@e3500-atl2.usenetserver.com...
> > > >
> Take it to a Hindu newsgroup.
>
Which translates to: Sphere makes the final decisions about what can and cannot
be discussed in this group.
(And they call me arrogant).
>
> --
>
> Sphere.
>
> Hey bozos! If you try to have a conversation
> with an asshole all it does is stink up the place.
-----
"You know, I think we're all Bozos on this bus." -- The Firesign Theater
http://www.halcyon.com/weir/bozo1.html
-----
Happy Camper
dar wrote:
> serious?
> ure in pivate contact?
>
> wish him well from me,
> i had been meanin to comment
> how cool he's beocme
> glad he's happy
He's Happy? I thought Dharma Troll was Happy. :-P
Happy Camper
Sphere wrote:
> zanchen wrote:
> >
> > "Sphere" <spher...@attbi.com> wrote in message
> > news:3C9150C0...@attbi.com...
> > >
> > >
> > > zanchen wrote:
> > > >
> > > I made a mistake which got HC interested in
> > > our little gathering. HC came in here with
> > > a chip on the shoulder, spouting off about
> > > the existance of self, and despite a fairly
> > > lenghty period of being ignored by me
> > > continuously making references to me. At
> > > some point HC brought up a guru with a name
> > > I found odd, and which I checked out. It
> > > seems that the only places which mentioned this
> > > guy was connected to the Dark Zen creeps.
> > > Since I was already fed up with HC's spouting
> > > off about Atman I took advantage of this and
> > > pointed out the connection to the people here.
> > > By this time HC had already gotten on a few
> > > people's nerves, so it isn't surprising that
> > > they jumped on this connection.
> >
> > Well there are lots of people, Sphere who think of atman as being the true
> > self the Buddha was originally seeking because that was the key to bliss in
> > his times - the end of suffering. That's not something to make HC into a
> > troll. It's a very interesting topic for discussion. Very interesting! That
>
> No it isn't. You may leave now.
Spoken like a true totalitarian.
Happy Camper
Klaus schmetterling wrote:
What Sphere said above, is all the evidence anyone would ever need to show
that Sphere is trying to make the world conform to him, not vice versa.
A preference is a low-level desire. An addiction is a higher-level desire.
But a *demand* is a desire completely out of control. Sphere is making demands
right and left. So how could he have possibly transcended all desire? And if he
has not transcended all desire, that means he is still attatched. And if he is
still attatched, how could he have possibly gotten to the point of
non-identification, as he claims?
Sphere is an open fire hydrant of demands, yet he claims he is not thinking
"me me me" (meaning Sphere) when he is making those demands.
That bucket won't hold water.
Ch'an Fu
Happy Camper wrote:
sphere sphere sphere
me me me
i i i
aye yi yi ....
sounds like true love
Happy Camper
Ch'an Fu wrote:
Can I help it if Sphere is a perfect illustration of certain concepts?
It is his relentless demands which have put him on center stage. In usnet the
squeeky wheel gets the spotlight.
Ch'an Fu
Happy Camper wrote:
no.
you have put him on center stage.
you are the "squeeky wheel"
and you want that, you need it.
you need the spotlight,
you need the attention
and you need the "enemy".
no matter who it is.
if there is none,
you will make one.
it would matter no more
if this were a buddhist ng
than if it were a xian one.
you need to belittle people.
it is simply accidental
that they show their faults.
you do not know enough to
help them, or identify them.
it is enough to you that they
are publicly exposed, by
your enticing.
this is a lesson for all here,
but should be more a lesson to you.
that life is not about this,
that it is about understanding
and being and that only ego - "self"
encourages and enjoys
the suffering of others.
Happy Camper
Ch'an Fu wrote:
I you think that is true then why don't you simply deny it to me?
If attention is what you think I am after, then why give me exactly what I want? ;-)
Jazz
"cup o' tea" <red_te...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:9faa2d55.02031...@posting.google.com...
<Deep Bow>
cupcake
dar wrote:
>On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 04:38:43 GMT, Happy Camper
><hpy...@playground.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>zanchen wrote:
>>
>>> "liaM" <lho...@email.com> wrote in message
>>> [9]news:3C913430...@email.com...
>>> > Nice diatriba
>>> > Fits perfectly the spirit of the alt.zen triba
>>> > Did HC hand you a briba ?
>>> > Or do you normally act like an amoeba ?!
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> Oh, so it's come to that now? Anyone who sees something good in camper is an
>>> honorary amoeba? So lets see how many amoebas we have here. Well, there's
>>> cup o tea, Tang, Daryl, ME, maybe Kathy and Tara, hmmm.
>>> Look, I really don't see what the kid has done wrong here other than some
>>> foul language to Evelyn, but she's heard worse from Dar and others. She knew
>>> the Ken Keyes subject would touch something off, but did it anyway for some
>>> reason.????
>>> But simply bringing up the names of a couple of individuals who are only
>>> partially associated with Buddhism doesn't call for a gangbang.
>>> Cupcake turned against him for some strange reason I haven't figured out
>>> yet - and I don't even think he actually believes Camper is DT. Hell, he
>>> even bonded with his old nemesis Ixnay in an effort to remove him. That is a
>>> miracle!
>>> This is a strange place.
>>> But like the kid said, "If my presense here does nothing else, at least it
>>> will bring people closer together by having a common enemy." Pretty damn
>>> good reasoning.
>>> I don't know how this all started with him and Sphere, and I wanted to stay
>>> out of it as much as possible, but was dragged directly into it by Chan who
>>> accuses me of being HT's "sock puppet" - and Evelyn agreed wholeheartedly
>>> with Chan when he said HC should be ignored along with his puppet! What did
>>> I ever do to you Evelyn? So now we have two more there who were at each
>>> others throats not long ago, suddenly bonding. Chan was even on her killfile
>>> for a few weeks!
>>> Fucking weird.
>>> I personally could give a shit less about this place and I may go and I may
>>> stay - but it will never be because someone is trying to force me to leave
>>> by ignoring or flaming me.
>>> I promise you that.
>>
>> Man, when I read your post I start to wish I had never started pressing my
>>points. I don't want to see the group disintegrate.
>>
>> (From this point on this message is directed to the whole group Zanchen, no
>t
>>to you personally).
>>
>> Geeze, all of this puts me in a very awkward position. I keep pressing my
>>points because I know some of them have value, and I know that eventually
>>something may break which would bring about a sigh of relief in the room after
>>everyone finally gets a new perspective of one another. But that is starting t
>o
>>seem like a pipe dream at this point.
>>
>> So what do I do?
>>
>dont take it seriously, people will see what they will see
>
>ya know grant people the right to to react to whatever they want
>anyway they want, its not up to us to decide how others will react
>
>i mean damn it, its all take it or lump it
>
>everyhting is totally assertion here
>so assert and get on with it
>
>
>> Maybe I need to start backing off a little, or maybe I should just voluntari
>ly
>>drop out of the group so that things can get back to the way they were before
>I
>>came. I never wanted anything like this to happen.
>>
>> I just knew that my perspective might be useful in here. I want to learn mo
>re
>>about Buddhism, and I think my different background might shine a new light on
>>certain things.
>>
>ya un huh
>
>its the sort of thing i come here for
>
>[snip yada yada yada yada]
>
>brevity is a good thing to work on
>
>ya see i'm not pissed simply because i dont read what about me,
>what about you, what about them, spheres this, so and sos that
>
>what i don to save time is scan as fast zas possible for any points
>content not gossip and bull shit, ure posts so far take no more than
>5 seconds,,,no not even that, the only stuff worth reading of that
>sort is when I say evil lien's a bitch since its a digital signature
>for me these days
>
>so if you have some content now as i've decided you said
>
>ya know if you feel that sorta stuff fine feel it if you like
>but spare yourself the embarassment if nothing else
>by eliminating all reference to others and yourslef
>in relatiion to them or i think i'll look for a way to post
>my brain dribble non-stop in realtime
>
> did i say evelyns a bitch
>
was that "evelyn's a bitch" or "evelyn's a witch" ? --
just wondering :)
> ya i did so this masterpiece is done
>
yu can master my piece any time yu want dar
Klaus schmetterling
9faa2d55.02031...@posting.google.com...
: "Klaus schmetterling" <klaus.sch...@wanadoo.fr> wrote in message
Thank you for your generosity. Not everybody is capable of that.
Impatiently waiting for the day that Tang will be capable of it.
Klaus schmetterling
itv49ug9esd2313pa...@4ax.com...
: On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 16:11:24 +0100, "Klaus schmetterling"
: <klaus.sch...@wanadoo.fr> wrote:
:
: >"zanchen" <woodsd...@hotmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
: serious?
: ure in pivate contact?
:-)
From: Lee Dillion (leedi...@cableone.net)
Subject: The Difficulty of Peace
Date: 2002-03-12 11:16:59 PST
"This newsgroup is always such a good reminder of why peace, whether
internal
or external, is so hard to achieve in the world. I open the newspaper and
see
endless killings in the Middle East, Sri Lanka, large portions of Africa,
Northern Ireland and on and on - often wondering why people just can't put
their differences aside, if not for themselves then for their children or
family.
Then I log on to these newsgroups and am reminded once again that it doesn't
need to be historic injustices, or the taking of land, or the murder of
family
that causes these fights. Some people fight simply because they choose to.
Even when they have nothing to lose by walking away, many choose to stay and
continue fighting even though any outsider would look in and shake their
head. They waste their preciuos time in this life pretending to be
spiritual
and proper, all the while continuing a fight that they could stop for
themselves if they chose.
So, its been fun. Keep on swinging and fighting. Perhaps our paths will
cross in the future. And if life gets too peaceful for me, I may come back
for a refresher course."
: wish him well from me,
: i had been meanin to comment
: how cool he's beocme
: glad he's happy
:
:
:
: memeless memes memely memeing memes memelessly
cup o' tea
> In fact I have proved it by luring people into expressing what is
> really on their minds.
>
Is that your express goal? I mean, did you enter this forum hoping to
lure people into expressing anger and frustration?
I'm curious because you seem to be expressing a sort of satisfaction
over the fact that you have done so.
Klaus schmetterling
3C926D17...@playground.net...
: He's Happy? I thought Dharma Troll was Happy. :-P
Well you Happy and DT are inextricably bound in my mind. I communicate with
you like I did with him. Could you do anything to change that or do I have
to do all the work?
liaM
> > You are particularly unconscious
>
> How do you mean?
Reflect on Dean's words to you, he used to be like you.
And in many of my lifetimes, or by moment, I have been
just like you.
liaM
Tang Huyen
Klaus schmetterling wrote:
Happy Camper: <<He's Happy? I thought Dharma Troll was Happy. :-P>>
Klaus: <<Well you Happy and DT are inextricably bound in my mind. I communicate
with you like I did with him. Could you do anything to change that or do I have
to do all the work?>>
Pretty good basket and cage there, luv.
Tang Huyen
Tang Huyen
cup o' tea wrote:
Happy Camper: <<In fact I have proved it by luring people into expressing what is really on their
minds.>>
cup o' tea: <<Is that your express goal? I mean, did you enter this forum hoping to lure people into
expressing anger and frustration?
I'm curious because you seem to be expressing a sort of satisfaction over the fact that you have done
so.>>
It may be true that Happy Camper entered this forum hoping to lure people into expressing anger and
frustration, and that he enjoys doing so and especially being successful at it.
But whether that is true or not, let's look at it also as him performing a *Buddhist* service, in
that he unveils people to themselves, especially the people who have sainted themselves.
By entering this forum hoping to lure people into expressing anger and frustration, he offers a
safety valve for people who are hung-up, stuck-up and strung-up on themselves, and opens a window of
opportunity for them to get in touch with themselves after so many years and even decades of
strenuous self-hiding, self-blocking and self-alienation, that they masquerade as "practice" or
"realisation" or whatever.
Buddhist practice -- and I mean Buddhist practice, not shamanist or fantasmagorianist -- cannot even
*begin* until they start exploring themselves that way.
For by blocking themselves from themselves, they have also blocked the Buddhist path in toto for
themselves, too.
Tang Huyen
Klaus schmetterling
3C9342D3...@yahoo.com...
:
:
Jealous?
Tang Huyen
Happy Camper wrote:
Ch'an Fu: <<you have put him on center stage.
you are the "squeeky wheel"
and you want that, you need it.
you need the spotlight,
you need the attention>>
Happy: <<I you think that is true then why don't you simply deny it to me?
If attention is what you think I am after, then why give me exactly what I want? ;-)>>
Tang Huyen
Tang Huyen
Klaus schmetterling wrote:
Happy Camper: <<He's Happy? I thought Dharma Troll was Happy. :-P>>
Klaus: <<Well you Happy and DT are inextricably bound in my mind. I communicate
with you like I did with him. Could you do anything to change that or do I have
to do all the work?>>
Tang: <<Pretty good basket and cage there, luv.>>
Klaus: <<Jealous?>>
If it's an iron Buddha, I'll do my best to fit into it.
Tang Huyen
********************************
Subject: Re: Should I Call Myself a Buddhist
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002
From: dar <rokt...@hotmail.com>
Organization: dragon magic inc
Newsgroups: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy,talk.religion.buddhism,alt.zen
On Thu, 14 Mar 2002 20:16:21 GMT, Sphere <spher...@attbi.com> wrote:
>
>
>dar wrote:
>...
>> >
>> How one responds to the question 'wud two enlightened critters
>> necessarily respond identically to the same situation', a question
>> thats never taken up around here since it exposes the inherent
>> inconsistencies in the systems of beliefs and logic held here.
>>
>...
>
>
>Well gee dar, since there'll never be two
>enlightend critters with the same formative
>conditions (i.e. same situation) the question
>is rather a stupid waste of time, is it not?
yup
dont seem to stop anyone from trying
to hop into iron buddhas neither
Ch'an Fu
Tang Huyen wrote:
one never knows when lecturing a child.
sometimes they actually hear it....
Evelyn Ruut
"Ch'an Fu" <r...@operamail.com> wrote in message
news:3C934EEF...@operamail.com...
If they perceive it as a "lecture" it is a guarantee they won't.
If you let them ask you the chances are they will hear it.
Evelyn
Ch'an Fu
Evelyn Ruut wrote:
words -
bread crumbs
feeding ducks.
some eat.
some don't.
no matter.
Evelyn Ruut
When it is your kid, it matters.
Ev.
Happy Camper
cup o' tea wrote:
> Happy Camper <hpy...@playground.net> wrote in message news:<3C915059...@playground.net>...
>
> > In fact I have proved it by luring people into expressing what is
> > really on their minds.
> >
>
> Is that your express goal?
No, absolutely not.
I had been developing an interest in Buddhism prior to all of this, and I had been doing some
research. Then Sphere crossposted to the group I was in and I picked up the thread.
Then when Sphere and Chan started with their fortune cooky aphorisms, and over-use of paradoxes
and equivocation, I did what any good debater would do: I started challenging them to explain
themselves to see whether there was any wisdom behind their words or whether they were just blowing
hot air.
I am now convinced that what they blew was not hot air. What they blew was their their practice.
They blew it right from the start and never looked back because they never looked anywhere but to me
for the source of any probelms we might be having between us.
Then as I was reading more about the doctrine of not-self, I read something by a Therevadan
Buddhist named *Thanissaro Bhikkhu which made me think that Sphere's understanding was of not-self
was not-right, because he seemed to be claiming certainty that the self was non-existant. Not only
that, but he seemed to be claiming to have certainty that he himself had no existence. This naturally
intrigued me so I began a discussion with him which never quite ended.
He makes claims and comes to conclusions and I ask him to provide supporting evidece for those
claims and conclusions. Then if he employs a fallacy, I either challend it or try and force him to
follow his reasoning to it's natural conclusion. And if he eguivocates I try to keep him form
changing the subject.
But none of this sat well with Sphere, so he started getting angry and trying various manouvers to
get around my arguments. But the only manouver he never tried was to simply let it all drop. He will
not let anything drop, apparenlty, unless he delivers a low-blow first. Then when you react to that
low blow, he accuses you of not being willing to simply "let things drop".
His tactics are very obvious to me if to no one else.
Where we seem to find ourslves today is largely because I never stopped responding to Sphere's
tactics, and he never gave them up. So here we are today, still on the merry-go-round.
*Thanissaro Bhikkhu said:
"In fact, the one place where the Buddha was asked point-blank whether or not there was a self, he
refused to answer. When later asked why, he said that to hold either that there is a self or that
there is no self is to fall into extreme forms of wrong view that make the path of Buddhist practice
impossible. Thus the question should be put aside."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/modern/thanissaro/notself2.html
> I mean, did you enter this forum hoping to
> lure people into expressing anger and frustration?
Absolutley not.
I do what any good debater would do. I focus on inconsistencies and ask for clarifications. I
raise questions about motive. I point out informal fallacies. And if I think I see something in a
person that they might not see, I bring it up to see who's vision is more accurate.
In other words when I get into a discussion with someone I mean business. I want to use every
means at my disposal to determine which of us is seeing things more clearly. It is called learning.
Now I understand that some of the means I employ can make a person defensive, and I know that a
little tact is sometimes called for when using such means. But if a person starts resisting to the
point of lashing out at me, then I stop worrying so much about being tactful. And because of my
usenet experience, if I think a person is being obviously dishonest, then I tend to say what's on my
mind and let the chips fall where they may.
>
>
> I'm curious because you seem to be expressing a sort of satisfaction
> over the fact that you have done so.
Yes. But that is only because I feel people are being rather hypocritical for placing all the
blame on me. Most of that satisfaction though is directed at people like Sphere and Chan who have no
one to blame but themselves for their current dilemma.
Sphere in particular seems to be willing to use any dirty trick to try and control me, yes
control me! In fact that is what this has been about from the very begining, Sphere's attempt to
control me as well as control other things in his environment.
So I react to his attempts at control then he comes back with a new atrategy of control. Then I
react to that and he tries something else. In fact the only thing he has not tried is giving up on
the idea of controling me in the first place.
I find that very curious since he claims to have a deep and thorough knowledge of the dhamma. If
that were true, it should have occured to him by now that his attempts at control are revealing
things within himself that he needs to address and work on.
Attmempts to control people are *demands in action*. A demand is the stongest fomr of desire, but
the attatchment would exist whether a person acted on that demand or not.
But acting on it just makes problems mulitply. And if you try to deal with those problems by
futher attempts at control, then you will end up being like one of those guys used to appear on the
Ed Sullivan show. They have hole room full of virtical rods, atop which they put spinning dinner
plates. They try to get as many plates spinning at the same time, and if a plate begins to slow down,
they must run back and give them another spin to it to keep them going.
Eventually they will reach a limit of course, and plates begin to fall and crash to the floor.
That is what makes the futile exercise interesting to watch.
But there is a difference between Sphere and the guy who spins plates. The guy who spins plates
kows what he is doing and knows his limits. Sphere doesn't seem to know either of those things
because he has plates crashing all over the place and the only thing he hasn't figure out yet is how
to stop playing the game!
He's got what gamblers would call "the fever". His habitual demands for having absolute control
over all things at at all times, won't allow him to accept the idea that there might be one plate
which he cannot control, so he is stuck in a game that he can't win and can't walk away from.
He also reminds me of the character played by Christopher Walken in the movie the Deer Hunter. The
guy starts playing Russian roulette with live bullets for money. And he gets so addicted to the game
that he stays in Viet Nam even after his tour of duty is up so he can continue to play. He simply
cannot leave the game. So eventually his buddy (Robert De Nero) has to go back to Viet Nam and
physically drag him away from the game.
That is where I think Sphere is at right now.He is so involved with the game that he cannot pry
himself away. Correction, I think he has pried himself away, to a certain extent, but I don't think
he has walked away yet. I think he is still standing there tring to decide if he wants to try one
more time to beat the game.
But it is losing game. Trying to control things which are beyond your control is *always* a
losing game. Buddhists are not the only ones who know that, as is shown by this well-known prayer:
The Serenity Prayer
God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.
Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
Taking, as He did, this sinful world
as it is, not as I would have it;
Trusting that He will make all things right
if I surrender to His Will;
That I may be reasonably happy in this life
and supremely happy with Him
Forever in the next.
Amen.
--Reinhold Niebuhr
It is clear tom me that Sphere has not yet developed the serenity
to accept the things he cannot change, or the wisdom to know the difference between what he can and
cannot hope to change. In fact he seems to have completely forgotten the very Buddhist concept that
changing the world is impossible, and that the only thing we can do is change ourselves or stay stuck
in samsara.
Constantly trying to rearrange samsara to live up to your demands is a fools game which only pulls
you deeper into it. Shouldn't Sphere know that very simple fact after all his years of study?
The Second Noble Ttuth:
"What, now, is the Noble Truth of the Origin of Suffering? It is craving, which gives rise to
fresh rebirth, and, bound up with pleasure and lust, now here, now there, finds ever-fresh delight."
http://www.enabling.org/ia/vipassana/Archive/N/Nyanatiloka/WOB/wob4nt03.htm
Third Noble Truth:
"What, now, is the Noble Truth of the Extinction of Suffering? It is the complete fading away and
extinction of this craving, its forsaking and abandonment, liberation and detachment from it."
http://www.enabling.org/ia/vipassana/Archive/N/Nyanatiloka/WOB/wob4nt04.htm
Demands are full-blown desires. They are attatchments. And when a demand reaches out into the
world and actively attempts to alter the world to suit it, then you are really stuck. At that point
your tentacles of desire have literally wrapped around the object in an attempt to move it!
That is about as far away from practice as you can get.
:-)
Sphere
Go sit on your ass with this
one Tang, but next time don't
have a keyboard in front of
you.
--
Sphere.
No essence. No permanence. No perfection.
Happy Camper
Ch'an Fu wrote:
Even ducks won't gobble up just any old crap. Maybe the problem is in what
you are trying to feed them.
Happy Camper
Klaus schmetterling wrote:
Maybe you have identified the problem. Maybe the problem is that you are
using me to deal with lingering issues that you had with Dharma Troll. Maybe
the whole group is doing that a little bit.
Happy Camper
liaM wrote:
Well don't just drop it there. How were you like me? And were you
*just* like me or only like me in certain aspects? And is it possible
that our behaviors may have been similar yet out motives were different,
etc.?
If you don't want to draw this thread out anymore, I will understand,
but that statement was just too general for me to do much with.
I am not saying that you don't know what you mean, or that your
perspective is not valid. I am saying I can't really know because you
haven't given me much to work with.
>
>
> liaM
cup o' tea
> <Deep Bow>
I hope you weren't pointing that thing at me!
Klaus schmetterling
:
:
: Klaus schmetterling wrote:
:
: Happy Camper: <<He's Happy? I thought Dharma Troll was Happy. :-P>>
:
: Klaus: <<Well you Happy and DT are inextricably bound in my mind. I
communicate
: with you like I did with him. Could you do anything to change that or do I
have
: to do all the work?>>
:
: Tang: <<Pretty good basket and cage there, luv.>>
:
: Klaus: <<Jealous?>>
:
: If it's an iron Buddha, I'll do my best to fit into it.
I know what you mean. I hardly fit in my own trousers anymore. We will need
one of those pot bellied laughing Buddhas.
Klaus schmetterling
:
:
It is not so much the issues, because anything would do for DT. It is more
that your styles were so similar. Not only the wrestling style, but also
when you become more sincere. Perhaps it simply the fact that someone does
want to wrestle and puts quite a lot of energy in it. It is that energy that
I couldn't understand. Why do I want to understand that? That is something I
could look into.
Sphere
Poor Hotei. I think he'll explode.
Happy Camper
dar wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 04:38:43 GMT, Happy Camper
> <hpy...@playground.net> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >zanchen wrote:
> >
> >> "liaM" <lho...@email.com> wrote in message
Yes. I can already see that the group was not exactly headed where it looked like
it was headed to me at that point. That's good. I'm glad I was wrong about that.
>
>
> ya know grant people the right to to react to whatever they want
> anyway they want, its not up to us to decide how others will react
True.
>
>
> i mean damn it, its all take it or lump it
>
> everyhting is totally assertion here
> so assert and get on with it
>
> > Maybe I need to start backing off a little, or maybe I should just voluntarily
> >drop out of the group so that things can get back to the way they were before I
> >came. I never wanted anything like this to happen.
> >
> > I just knew that my perspective might be useful in here. I want to learn more
> >about Buddhism, and I think my different background might shine a new light on
> >certain things.
> >
> ya un huh
>
> its the sort of thing i come here for
>
> [snip yada yada yada yada]
>
> brevity is a good thing to work on
I haven't had time. Too many alligators keeping me busy.
>
>
> ya see i'm not pissed simply because i dont read what about me,
> what about you, what about them, spheres this, so and sos that
>
> what i don to save time is scan as fast zas possible for any points
> content not gossip and bull shit, ure posts so far take no more than
> 5 seconds,,,no not even that, the only stuff worth reading of that
> sort is
I know. Most of this stuff would be better off dropped. But I still think some
interesting things are getting illustrated in the process.
> when I say evil lien's a bitch since its a digital signature
> for me these days
>
> so if you have some content now as i've decided you said
>
> ya know if you feel that sorta stuff fine feel it if you like
> but spare yourself the embarassment if nothing else
> by eliminating all reference to others and yourslef
> in relatiion to them or i think i'll look for a way to post
> my brain dribble non-stop in realtime
>
> did i say evelyns a bitch
> ya i did so this masterpiece is done
>
cup o' tea
> Thanissaro Bhikkhu wrote:
> "In fact, the one place where the Buddha was asked point-blank
> whether or not there was a self, he refused to answer. When
> later asked why, he said that to hold either that there is
> a self or that there is no self is to fall into extreme forms
> of wrong view that make the path of Buddhist practice
> impossible. Thus the question should be put aside."
That's because Buddha understoond what sorts of preconceptions were
being attached to the word 'self' in that context. Saying that there
was a self would have amounted to saying that there is an eternal,
unchanging soul (which is identical with the highest real). Saying
that there was no self, in that context would have been like saying
that there are no consequences of evil deeds that reach beyond your
own little life (since nothing survives death). So if you can get away
with it, do it.
Faced with those two alternatives it's not so hard to see why he
refused to answer. The Buddha's solution was quite simply that the
future grows out of the present. Life is constantly changing, and yet
it is structured by causality. And ones deeds are powerful causes
which, if performed in ignorance, always lead to repercussions. This
is the sort of attitude which Buddha considered conducive to practice,
and which was undermined by a wrong idea of the notion of 'no self' in
the context described above.
Happy Camper
cup o' tea wrote:
> Happy Camper <hpy...@playground.net> wrote in message news:<3C934A19...@playground.net>...
>
> > Thanissaro Bhikkhu wrote:
> > "In fact, the one place where the Buddha was asked point-blank
> > whether or not there was a self, he refused to answer. When
> > later asked why, he said that to hold either that there is
> > a self or that there is no self is to fall into extreme forms
> > of wrong view that make the path of Buddhist practice
> > impossible. Thus the question should be put aside."
>
> That's because Buddha understoond what sorts of preconceptions were
> being attached to the word 'self' in that context. Saying that there
> was a self would have amounted to saying that there is an eternal,
> unchanging soul (which is identical with the highest real). Saying
> that there was no self, in that context would have been like saying
> that there are no consequences of evil deeds that reach beyond your
> own little life (since nothing survives death). So if you can get away
> with it, do it.
Good point.
Yes, the more I look at the concept on not-self, the more reasons I can we for that it is a good
idea.
He was a genius.
Ch'an Fu
cup o' tea wrote:
very nice answer.
anatta refers to "permanent" self - something
"beneath" the delusional construct in mentating
mind that always tries to arise, like a zombie,
and causes/fools the unawakened to "think"
that "self" (the construct) is "real/permanent".
one is oneself in the moment
that one is without that "self".
so many "selves"....so little time....
beyond that, i thought somewheretime
i said that without "self", "compassion",
"metta" - whatever - is clear, it just appears.
this is because
"love" generalizes beyond a particular "object"
(non-attachment), and that - without "self" -
there is no "other".
also "wisdom" is clear, it just appears,
it's clear thinking, without attachment.
so "ethics" are simply there.
(oh, by the way - there is no "future"
just as there is no "past" - it's a hoax.
the future "grows" itself from
possibilities arisen in the moment.
but karma's kool 'cause it
introduces new ones.)
nanoo nanoo
liaM
Sorry, HC. If I put a name on it, I'll lose the substance
of it.
You've got to go it alone. If you're not ready, not even
a true guru of the faith or of the intelligentsia can rub the
magic in that will make you see what you are presently blind to.
The antidote is "mindfulness". But that's just a word.
Or get psycho analysed.
Or stay the bubbly happily querying and querulously fishing
camper that you are and wait ... Only time will tell.
In the meanwhile.. see ya in hell :-)))
liaM
cup o' tea
You fail to consider that people here may get angry, express it, and
then simply understand that they have been angry and move on. Maybe
that's not very advanced practice, but so what? We do what we can.
What you are describing assumes that everyone has a huge stake in
falsely giving the appearance of being _beyond anger_ and lives in bad
faith about it. You seem to impute that attitude to others a bit too
freely. They actually seem like a pretty okay bunch to me, my cess
rant notwithstanding.
Ch'an Fu
cup o' tea wrote:
what big eyes you have, grandma
buddha got pissed and let the sangha go.
i'm sure he threw out his share of wierdos
and insistent hindus as well as philosophers.
'cause when you get it, you get it.
an' when u got it, u got it.
but whosoever doeth what he canth to
awaketh, he is wortheth teachingeth.
so thereth. thath wass upeth.
plenty here rest in beautitudinous
platitudities, floating on illusionous
lotus blossoms of delusitude.
loose lips sink ego trips.
the devil is in the tea kettle.
rolling moss gathers no thrones.
an' like that....
rely on your own understanding,
be where you are.
you have a head-start.
Happy Camper
liaM wrote:
> Sorry, HC. If I put a name on it, I'll lose the substance
> of it.
>
Then why bring it up to begin with?
>
> You've got to go it alone.
Then let me go it alone. You brought it up.
> If you're not ready, not even
> a true guru of the faith or of the intelligentsia can rub the
> magic in that will make you see what you are presently blind to.
That is not what I was asking. You were a being vague and I was
asking for a clarification.
>
>
> The antidote is "mindfulness". But that's just a word.
> Or get psycho analysed.
You obviously don't know what the term means, so why keep using it?
Klaus schmetterling
"Sphere" <spher...@attbi.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
3C939CA2...@attbi.com...
:
:
Not used to egos that size, eh?
liaM
Hell
Tang Huyen
Klaus schmetterling wrote:
Happy Camper: <<He's Happy? I thought Dharma Troll was Happy. :-P>>
Klaus: <<Well you Happy and DT are inextricably bound in my mind. I communicate
with you like I did with him. Could you do anything to change that or do I have
to do all the work?>>
Tang: <<Pretty good basket and cage there, luv.>>
Klaus: <<Jealous?>>
Tang: <<If it's an iron Buddha, I'll do my best to fit into it.>>
Klaus: <<I know what you mean. I hardly fit in my own trousers anymore. We will
need one of those pot bellied laughing Buddhas.>>
Sphere: <<Poor Hotei. I think he'll explode.>>
Klaus: <<Not used to egos that size, eh?>>
Sphere's ego is so big it cannot be fitted into any size. It is properly
transcendant, it is above and beyond size.
Tang Huyen
Klaus schmetterling
:
:
You think that is why is looking for support on this list? He needs some
more people to store away his ego, which is to big for one person?
Tang Huyen
Klaus schmetterling wrote:
Sphere: <<Poor Hotei. I think he'll explode.>>
Klaus: <<Not used to egos that size, eh?>>
Tang: <<Sphere's ego is so big it cannot be fitted into any size. It is properly
transcendant, it is above and beyond size.>>
Klaus: <<You think that is why is looking for support on this list? He needs
some more people to store away his ego, which is to big for one person?>>
He needs the quivalent of liposuction. In massive doses.
Tang Huyen
Klaus schmetterling
:
:
He doesn't seem to be bothered by the "fat" of his consciousness. He even
says it doesn't exist. But you seem to think he needs liposuction. I wonder
why Tang?
Sphere
I haven't said consciousness didn't exist,
nor ego. I have said I do not exist.
Sphere
Yep.
Klaus schmetterling
3C94AA82...@attbi.com...
: > : He needs the quivalent of liposuction. In massive doses.
: >
: > He doesn't seem to be bothered by the "fat" of his consciousness. He
even
: > says it doesn't exist. But you seem to think he needs liposuction. I
wonder
: > why Tang?
: I haven't said consciousness didn't exist,
: nor ego. I have said I do not exist.
I know. By "fat" of the consciousness, I meant "self".
In "D'un fragment l'autre" Jean Baudillard quotes Lichtenberg who answered
to someone who remarked that he had put on weight "Fat is neither the soul,
nor the body, nor the flesh, nor the mind. It is what a tired body
produces". And he adds to that: "We could say the same thing for thoughts:
fat thoughts are produced by a tired mind. It continues producing like a
tired body and never stops, but it merely produces fat!"
So perhaps a tired consciousness produces self...
Tang Huyen
Klaus schmetterling wrote:
Sphere: <<I haven't said consciousness didn't exist, nor ego. I have said I do
not exist.>>
Klaus: <<I know. By "fat" of the consciousness, I meant "self".
In "D'un fragment l'autre" Jean Baudillard quotes Lichtenberg who answered to
someone who remarked that he had put on weight "Fat is neither the soul, nor
the body, nor the flesh, nor the mind. It is what a tired body produces". And
he adds to that: "We could say the same thing for thoughts: fat thoughts are
produced by a tired mind. It continues producing like a tired body and never
stops, but it merely produces fat!"
So perhaps a tired consciousness produces self...>>
Perhaps a tired consciousness produces self ... and when that self gets too big
for its britches, it overbrims, and an overbrimming self produces streams and
streams of outflows ... especially when its owner doesn't exist ... actually is
too tired to notice that he exists, and exists big-time ...
Tang Huyen
Sphere
spot wrote:
>
> On Fri, 15 Mar 2002 20:08:02 GMT, Sphere <spher...@attbi.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >Richard wrote:
> >>
> >> "Evelyn Ruut" <mama...@ulster.net> wrote in message news:<g4ek8.2686$17.16...@newsfeed1.thebiz.net>...
> >>
> >> >> A discussion on atman would be very interesting to me.
> >>
> >> You've probably heard this one before, but I think it's a good way to
> >> find out how you feel about having/not having a Self.
> >>
> >> Imagine the Star Trek teleportation device actually exists, but the
> >> designers have made a terrible mistake. It doesn't put you back
> >> together again at point B. Instead, the original You is destroyed at
> >> point A, and at point B the machine makes an exact copy. Since an
> >> exact copy amounts to a duplicate, no one who has so far used the
> >> machine is any the wiser. But you know the awful truth. The question
> >> is, would you use the machine anyway, knowing it'll kill you?
> >
> >
> >Just so long as they can make billions of
> >me, no problem.
>
> isnt that a group from way back
> Adam and the Atmans
Might be. Must'a been from the zeros
though -- I kind'a lost track back then.
>
> ashes to ashes
> dust to dust
> life is short
> so party we must
Gilly
>
>
> Sphere's ego is so big it cannot be fitted into any size. It is properly
> transcendant, it is above and beyond size.
This is more like it, eh Tang Sweetie? Here's a thread with the word
"cesspool" in it. Glad you could find something to talk about--something
that engages your imagination--stimulates your mentational processes.