Re: A thought for today...
zenworm
> On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:00:16 -0800 (PST), zenworm <zensp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Dec 31, 12:27 pm, Keynes <Key...@earthlinkspam.net> wrote:
>
> >> >> I doubt the discernment of the observer.
> >> >> So sometimes it needs to be spelled out.
> >> >> Even so, one ought to walk the talk.
>
> >> >> There is no rule that fits all cases.
>
> >> >put it all down
>
> >> Does that rule fit all cases?
>
> >What 'cases' are left?
> >put it all down
>
> >K "Logically, release would remove all obligations.
>
> >yes
>
> >K "But release also removes all logic."
>
> >perfect
>
> >K "'What to do' is out of the question."
>
> >absolutely
>
> >no questions
> >no answers
>
> >this Momenting...
>
> We may agree about that.
>
> But what is this 'put it all down'?
> After 'putting down' there is still the 'putting' left over.
> Is it possible to do nothing by means of doing?
>
> Is it really a question of means and purposeful effort?
> Can one grasp and let go simultaneously?
>
> There is the buddhist path of doing right,
> a pretty conventional prescription of action.
> But concealed within that is indirection that
> can lead to liberation from fruitless questing.
> Meditation and mindfulness approach the borders
> of intuition and unintentional action in a way that
> one may 'get' without formulas of understanding.
>
> But the revelation (if it occurs) is just clearing away
> the clouds and smoke from what was so from the
> beginning. This is implicit in therevada, and explicit
> in chan.
>
> Buddhism as a cure for bad hair and warts is a waste of effort.
> On Thu, 31 Dec 2009 10:00:16 -0800 (PST), zenworm <zensp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Dec 31, 12:27 pm, Keynes <Key...@earthlinkspam.net> wrote:
> >> >> I doubt the discernment of the observer.
> >> >> So sometimes it needs to be spelled out.
> >> >> Even so, one ought to walk the talk.
> >> >> There is no rule that fits all cases.
> >> >put it all down
> >> Does that rule fit all cases?
> >What 'cases' are left?
> >put it all down
> >K "Logically, release would remove all obligations.
> >yes
> >K "But release also removes all logic."
> >perfect
> >K "'What to do' is out of the question."
> >absolutely
> >no questions
> >no answers
> >this Momenting...
> We may agree about that.
> But what is this 'put it all down'?
> After 'putting down' there is still the 'putting' left over.
> Is it possible to do nothing by means of doing?
> Is it really a question of means and purposeful effort?
> Can one grasp and let go simultaneously?
> There is the buddhist path of doing right,
> a pretty conventional prescription of action.
> But concealed within that is indirection that
> can lead to liberation from fruitless questing.
> Meditation and mindfulness approach the borders
> of intuition and unintentional action in a way that
> one may 'get' without formulas of understanding.
> But the revelation (if it occurs) is just clearing away
> the clouds and smoke from what was so from the
> beginning. This is implicit in therevada, and explicit
> in chan.
> Buddhism as a cure for bad hair and warts is a waste of effort.
without an 'it' there is no 'put'
without a 'put' there is no 'down'
'all' now undefined
is Now
Momenting...
discoursing...
PUT-acting on 'objects' until action is seen futile
(comming to rest in non-action without effort)
[neither being]
DOWN-without acting on them objects become transparent
[nor not-being]
IT-when objects become transparent their context becomes undefined
[nor an absense of being]
ALL-when the context of objects becomes undefined their separateness
dissappears
[nor an absense of not-being]
when separateness disappears there is not two
Momenting...(what is here is here apparent)
no stickyness (possesion without ownership)
speaking of not two is confusing as the duality of
language trips over itself and the empirical mind
sees at best the first two levels []
Does this help?
ZN :D _/|\_
absolute permanent perfection overflowing without effort
Tang Huyen
Kitty P wrote:
> My thought for the day is to consider the intention
> to be authentic when expressing our beliefs - not
> to teach others, but to communicate at the deepest
> connection with other people while also not relying
> solely on our own sometimes faulty internal
> dialogue. I'm talking about the self-delusions that
> are inevitable for most of us. I have changed several
> deep rooted beliefs reading absfg for
> example - because I have stated a belief based on
> my own life experiences and education - and was
> given additional information to chew over by people
> I respect. Sometimes I incorporate that information,
> and sometimes don't- but in all cases learn
> something new. When our beliefs become
> crystallized - we lose the ability for our wisdom to
> evolve. IMO
There is the pesky issue of definition: if you have
changed your opinions about absfg, probably they
are not that deep-rooted in the first place methinks.
I would take religious attitudes in most people who
are seriously (not casually) brought up in a certain
religion to qualify as deep-rooted. Surely the
Christian (Catholic?) beliefs of Fu and DharmaTroll
easily qualify as deep-rooted. It seems that Brian M.
and you have dropped Catholicism rather peacefully,
so either the Catholic beliefs in you and him were
never deep-rooted in the first place, or they were
but you and he did not revolt and practiced calm
and gradual distancing instead, and successfully
dissolved the connection without major hangups.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/community/
groups/index.html?plckForumPage=ForumDiscussion&
plckDiscussionId=Cat%3aa70e3396-6663-4a8d-ba19-
e44939d3c44fForum%3a7cceb09e-a8ae-44b4-b7af-
92605cbce240Discussion%3adf2109e3-7237-42f6-
b484-acd425b82369&hpid=talkbox1
The Washington Post "Secularist's Corner" says:
<<In April, the Pew Forum on Religion and Public
Life reported that those with no religious affiliation�the
unchurched--were the fastest-growing group in the
American religious landscape. More than 16 percent
said they belonged to no church and identified with no
religious group. Fewer than half of those �Nones� had
been raised without a religious affiliation. One of the
more startling findings of the survey was that 25 percent
of native-born Americans raised as Catholics had left
the church. Among this group of ex-Catholics, 39
percent had not converted to another faith but were
unaffiliated. I consider this an extremely positive
development, because those who identify with no
religion�whatever their beliefs or non-beliefs about
the existence of a supreme being�are least likely to
support religious intrusion on government and are least
vulnerable to appeals from right-wing religion.
Furthermore, the main reason cited for decline in
religious affiliation was loss of belief in a particular
religion�s teachings or in any religious teachings.>>
I previously mentioned that the former Christians
on these boards who rebel against Christianity (Fu,
DharmaTroll, Sphere) seem dead set in their realism,
literalism and absolutism. They concede to the
Church all the claims of the Church, especially the
claims of monopoly and exclusivity, and then fight
the Church from what is left, so in effect they fight
the Church from the point of view of the Church and
by the rules of the Church rather than from their
own point of view and by their own rules. The more
ardently they fight the Church, the more they play
into the Church's hand, and the more they drive the
Church's teaching deeply into their consciousness.
All three are walking relicts of Jewish mythology.
There is one contributor to these boards who seem
to think very much along the same line, even if he
does not fight the Church. It is Bodhidumba, who
previously posted a Dork of Delusion. He claims to
be a Zennist, a Zen practitioner of long standing, but
is to me as dead set in his realism, literalism and
absolutism as Fu, DharmaTroll, Sphere. Like them,
he has converted to Buddhism and Zen in content
(Fu however denies that he is a Buddhist), but the
structure of his thinking is deeply Christian. When I
read his posts, I have the distinct feeling of reading
a Christian who happens to mouth Zennish stuff.
To me, the Church thinks him, through and through.
Tang Huyen
zenworm
Lee Rudolph
>On Jan 1, 12:05=A0pm, Tang Huyen <tanghuyen{dele...@gmail.com[remove]>
>wrote:
>> Kitty P wrote:
...
>> > When our beliefs become
>> > crystallized - we lose the ability for our wisdom to
>> > evolve. =A0IMO
...
>what crashes?
The hard drive.
Lee Rudolph
Kitty P
"Tang Huyen" <tanghuyen{delete}@gmail.com[remove]> wrote in message
news:oc6dnaj3W-vrtqPW...@supernews.com...
> unchurched--were the fastest-growing group in the
> American religious landscape. More than 16 percent
> said they belonged to no church and identified with no
> religious group. Fewer than half of those "Nones" had
> been raised without a religious affiliation. One of the
> more startling findings of the survey was that 25 percent
> of native-born Americans raised as Catholics had left
> the church. Among this group of ex-Catholics, 39
> percent had not converted to another faith but were
> unaffiliated. I consider this an extremely positive
> development, because those who identify with no
> the existence of a supreme being-are least likely to
I feel a kind of happiness about the decline in Catholicism too, but am a
little unhappy with myself that I get any enjoyment out of it at all to be
honest. Even that much reminds me that it is probably impossible to not be
influenced in ways I might not know because of that upbringing. Which
leads me to believe that if someone has been given a disciplined education
in a religion throughout their childhood, that it is probably impossible to
leave all vestiges behind. It becomes like trying purposely to forget how to
tie your shoe. Although it's always in the brain, a person can only opt for
only wearing slip-on shoes instead. I guess I have a lot of empathy for
people who are struggling to consciously rid themselves of those kinds of
chains.
An Ayn Rand Quote: "Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be
conquered by it. Do not count on them. Leave them alone." The irony about
the quote is that maybe it applies to those trying to use reason in the form
of realism and literalism to try to explain everything too.
Kitty
zenworm
> "Tang Huyen" <tanghuyen{dele...@gmail.com[remove]> wrote in message
gravity works?
^worm
zenworm
Q: How do you know that was supposed to happen?
A: Because it did. Gravity works.
Why does hardware fail?
^worm
Charles E Hardwidge
news:7mr%m.259$Sh7...@newsfe25.iad...
>
> An Ayn Rand Quote: "Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be
> conquered by it. Do not count on them. Leave them alone." The irony about
> the quote is that maybe it applies to those trying to use reason in the
> form of realism and literalism to try to explain everything too.
Ayn Rand is an asshole.
--
Charles E Hardwidge
Kitty P
"Charles E Hardwidge" <bo...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:w0s%m.20965$Ym4....@text.news.virginmedia.com...
Well yeah - but it doesn't mean the quote isn't true.
Kitty
Lee
"zenworm" <zens...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:8338e42e-cdda-4ce6...@e20g2000vbb.googlegroups.com...
>Why does hardware fail?
gravity's rainbow ?
Tang Huyen
zenworm wrote:
> "Kitty P":
>
> > I feel a kind of happiness about the decline in Catholicism too, but am a
> > little unhappy with myself that I get any enjoyment out of it at all to be
> > honest. Even that much reminds me that it is probably impossible to not be
> > influenced in ways I might not know because of that upbringing. Which
> > leads me to believe that if someone has been given a disciplined education
> > in a religion throughout their childhood, that it is probably impossible to
> > leave all vestiges behind. It becomes like trying purposely to forget how to
> > tie your shoe. Although it's always in the brain, a person can only opt for
> > only wearing slip-on shoes instead. I guess I have a lot of empathy for
> > people who are struggling to consciously rid themselves of those kinds of
> > chains.
> >
> > An Ayn Rand Quote: "Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be
> > conquered by it. Do not count on them. Leave them alone." The irony about
> > the quote is that maybe it applies to those trying to use reason in the form
> > of realism and literalism to try to explain everything too.
>
> gravity works?
>
> ^worm
In mental culture, levity works, idiot.
Tang Huyen
Lee
"Charles E Hardwidge" <bo...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:w0s%m.20965$Ym4....@text.news.virginmedia.com...
ayn rand shrugged
Tang Huyen
Kitty P wrote:
> I feel a kind of happiness about the decline in Catholicism
> too, but am a little unhappy with myself that I get any
> enjoyment out of it at all to be honest. Even that much
> reminds me that it is probably impossible to not be
> influenced in ways I might not know because of that
> upbringing. Which leads me to believe that if someone
> has been given a disciplined education in a religion
> throughout their childhood, that it is probably impossible
> to leave all vestiges behind. It becomes like trying purposely
> to forget how to tie your shoe. Although it's always in the
> brain, a person can only opt for only wearing slip-on shoes
> instead. I guess I have a lot of empathy for people who are
> struggling to consciously rid themselves of those kinds of
> chains.
>
> An Ayn Rand Quote: "Reason is not automatic. Those who
> deny it cannot be conquered by it. Do not count on them.
> Leave them alone." The irony about the quote is that maybe
> it applies to those trying to use reason in the form of realism
> and literalism to try to explain everything too.
I also have a lot of empathy for people who are
struggling to consciously rid themselves of those
kinds of chains brought on by religious training in
their childood. The religious training that they went
through in their childhood is not up to them, what
is up to them is that, now that they are adults, how
they deal with it. (Strictly speaking, any Buddhist
training, in childhood or adulthood, is also
something to let go of during ... Buddhist training,
otherwise Buddhist training will fail).
It seems to me that hard-core rebels like Fu and
DharmaTroll do not fit into that category. They
are not struggling to consciously rid themselves of
those kinds of chains brought on by their religious
training in their childhood. They hang on to such
training (or their memory of it) as hard as they can,
so that they can play victims in front of it. They
have the rare benefit of extensive exposure to
Buddhist influence, and both have access to
high-calibre masters. Yet they scarcely put such
benefit to work for them in real-life practice, and
use it mostly as an intellectual club to beat their
Christianity (that they carry in their head) with. To
them (or so it seems to me) Buddhism is mostly a
head-trip, and they have scarcely let themselves get
soaked with it. What is of prime interest to them is
their personal holy war-to-death with Christianity,
conducted in Christianity's terms, and that is their
overarching design, into which Buddhism fits in
merely as a cog, or a weapon, in a very superficial
manner. They refuse to immerse themselves in it,
because to do so would get them ... away from their
declared enemy, Christianity, and that is just too
serious. Fu preached much about mindfulness, but
did not practice it, and rather practiced its contrary,
namely to block himself from himself to hide
himself from himself and protect himself from
himself, and the object of such protection seems to
be some kind of extracurricular activity (or
passivity) that occurred alongside his inculcation
into Christianity (Catholicism?), activity (or
passivity) that set him off permenenently against
Christianity (Catholicism?) and from which he only
wants to play victim and never to recover.
Any Rand fits in with such a pattern (meme), in that
she spent a wretched childhood under Stalin and
wanted revenge, and devoted the duration of her life
(in the West, away from Stalin's domination) to
fighting Stalinism, very much in Stalin's terms. Her
political-economic views are very Stalinist in
structure, though the content is anti-Stalinist. With
her as with Fu and DharmaTroll, the structure of
thinking has been imprinted on them, and is
inviolable, though they can afford to mess with its
content, usually by reversing it, tit for tat, but they
cannot walk away in freedom from their childhood
oppressor. Their childhood oppressor has seen to it
that *if* they rebel against it, they have only such an
option, and not the freedom to walk away from it
and live in independence from it, without regard to
it. And they play right into the hand of their
oppressor in their lifelong war-to-death against it. It
seems that that is their destiny. It is fated.
Tang Huyen
zenworm
> "zenworm" <zensp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
trouting off at the mouth again?
^worm
zenworm
wrote:
"Hurt me." said the masochist.
"No." said the sadist.
^worm
zenworm
wrote:
Tang wrote:
"...high-calibre masters."
How do you 'calibrate' masters?
^worm
Charles E Hardwidge
>
> "Charles E Hardwidge" <bo...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
> news:w0s%m.20965$Ym4....@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> "Kitty P" <pain...@charter.net> wrote in message
>> news:7mr%m.259$Sh7...@newsfe25.iad...
>>>
>>> An Ayn Rand Quote: "Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be
>>> conquered by it. Do not count on them. Leave them alone." The irony
>>> about
>>> the quote is that maybe it applies to those trying to use reason in the
>>> form of realism and literalism to try to explain everything too.
>>
>> Ayn Rand is an asshole.
>
There's issues with Ayan Rand's reasoning but the more worrying thing is
asshole right wing libertarian types who seize on Ayan Rand to give them
intellectual legitimacy. Dumb wankers. They're the same jerks who still
cling to monetarism and think Black Swan is the last word in genius.
--
Charles E Hardwidge
Tang Huyen
zenworm wrote:
> Tang wrote:
> "...high-calibre masters."
>
> How do you 'calibrate' masters?
>
> ^worm
In the twentieth century, Xu-yun "Empty
Cloud" in China, Buddhadasa and Achan
Chah in Thailand are really tops. Fu claims
to have been close to Achan Chah and that
the latter gave that name (Ch'an Fu,
something like Sir Chan/Zen) to him, but I
think that Fu made that up.
However, if you can just relax and be
serene, the matter of masters (and who is
master and who is not) pales in significance.
It is not easy to just relax and be serene,
but if you can, nothing else matters much.
Tang Huyen
Lee Rudolph
>zenworm wrote:
>
>> "Kitty P":
>> >
>> > An Ayn Rand Quote: "Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be
>> > conquered by it. Do not count on them. Leave them alone." The irony about
>> > the quote is that maybe it applies to those trying to use reason in the form
>> > of realism and literalism to try to explain everything too.
>>
>> gravity works?
If you call making rainbows "work".
Oops! wrong author-of-unreadably-long-books.
>In mental culture, levity works, idiot.
There ain't no levity in _Leviticus_.
Lee Rudolph (trying to remember who said that reason is like fire,
a good servant but a bad master...was it Tang Huyen? perhaps)
Kitty P
"Charles E Hardwidge" <bo...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
I liked Gore Vidal's description - "...(the) philosophy is nearly perfect in
its immorality."
Lee Rudolph
>Kitty P wrote:
...
>> Which leads me to believe that if someone
>> has been given a disciplined education in a religion
>> throughout their childhood, that it is probably impossible
>> to leave all vestiges behind. It becomes like trying purposely
>> to forget how to tie your shoe.
...
>They
>are not struggling to consciously rid themselves of
>those kinds of chains brought on by their religious
>training in their childhood. They hang on to such
>training (or their memory of it) as hard as they can,
>so that they can play victims in front of it.
...
As we are reminded regularly by news stories from the drunk
tanks of county jails, it may be difficult to hang yourself
with your shoelaces, but it can be done.
Lee Rudolph
Tang Huyen
Lee Rudolph wrote:
> As we are reminded regularly by news stories from the drunk
> tanks of county jails, it may be difficult to hang yourself
> with your shoelaces, but it can be done.
It is the reverse of bootstrapping (raising
oneself by one's boot straps), and yes, it
can be done.
Tang Huyen
zenworm
wrote:
put it all down...
to fluff
^worm
Kitty P
You believe in fate?
Wally Chapman
All that strives, fails.
Wally
Wally Chapman
I got my Vietnam Veterans of America calender this week. January has a
picture of a slick and is captioned by Bob Dylan's first verse of
"Masters of War" - "O ye masters of war, you who build the big guns..."
I don't know if that's fate or irony....
Wally
AdvocatusDiablo
gravity works?
^worm
-------------------
zenwormfood....what a studid question...!
it's obvious that gravity doesn't work....or your shit wouldn't stick to the
walls!
zenworm
yes, but why?
^worm
zenworm
wrote:
> "zenworm" <zensp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
opinion flies...
until it falls
gravity works
^worm
Tang Huyen
Wally Chapman wrote:
> All that strives, fails.
I knew that you were a stooge all along.
All efforts are misguided and misdirected,
better just relax and be serene.
Insignia will be flown to you post haste.
Tang Huyen
brian mitchell
>I feel a kind of happiness about the decline in Catholicism too, but am a
>little unhappy with myself that I get any enjoyment out of it at all to be
>honest...
But why not enjoy one's mind? It is surely full of acquired riches,
ideas, associations, experiences and imaginations. I think religions
have, and have evoked, some of the most beautiful ideas, of the
greatest scope, the greatest psychic heft. It seems to me that as an
artist, of whatever kind, one needs to have picked up pretty much all
of the world's dross and gold fairly indiscriminately, because out of
that comes the creative response. A totally unmarked psyche would have
very little to say, I think; or very little of the kind of response
which can push culture onward. We're all massively influenced because
that's what society and culture are.
The trick, I suppose, is not to be driven by ideas, but it's quite a
balancing act because unless you entertain things seriously and in
depth the mind stays shallow. So, how to be full in response without
actually getting trapped? But even if one is trapped by certain
experiences and indoctrinations, one might wryly enjoy and be
entertained by one's own absurdities and disfigurements.
Tang Huyen
brian mitchell wrote:
> But why not enjoy one's mind? It is surely full of
> acquired riches, ideas, associations, experiences
> and imaginations. I think religions have, and have
> evoked, some of the most beautiful ideas, of the
> greatest scope, the greatest psychic heft. It seems
> to me that as an artist, of whatever kind, one needs
> to have picked up pretty much all of the world's
> dross and gold fairly indiscriminately, because out
> of that comes the creative response. A totally
> unmarked psyche would have very little to say, I
> think; or very little of the kind of response which
> can push culture onward. We're all massively
> influenced because that's what society and culture
> are.
>
> The trick, I suppose, is not to be driven by ideas,
> but it's quite a balancing act because unless you
> entertain things seriously and in depth the mind
> stays shallow. So, how to be full in response
> without actually getting trapped? But even if one
> is trapped by certain experiences and indoctrinations,
> one might wryly enjoy and be entertained by one's
> own absurdities and disfigurements.
One can always laugh at oneself, and here one is
both the subject and object of the laugh. One can
thus roll oneself into a laugh, and if one does it
right, heaven and earth can well turn along, in
unison.
Tang Huyen
Keynes
She impressed me as more of a shirker.
Kitty P
"Wally Chapman" <shel...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9_-dnUAUnvz_56PW...@bright.net...
That might be one of those two things at the same time kinda thing?
Kitty P
"brian mitchell" <brai...@fishing.net> wrote in message
news:ia1tj5d4pe0edhb0a...@4ax.com...
That was well said. Laughing at oneself doesn't coexist very well with
neurotic self-obsession. I think it's time to dust off my Sister Ignatius
imitation.
Kitty
Nobody in Particular
Allen Barker
Masters of War
by Bob Dylan
Come you masters of war
You that build the big guns
You that build the death planes
You that build all the bombs
You that hide behind walls
You that hide behind desks
I just want you to know
I can see through your masks
You that never done nothin'
But build to destroy
You play with my world
Like it's your little toy
You put a gun in my hand
And you hide from my eyes
And you turn and run farther
When the fast bullets fly
Well like a Judas of old
You lie and deceive
A world war can be won
You want me to believe
But I see through your eyes
And I see through your brain
Like I see through the water
That runs down my drain
You fasten all the triggers
For the others to fire
And then you sit back and watch
When the death count gets higher
And you hide in your mansion
All the young people's blood
Flows out of their bodies
And is buried in the mud
You've thrown the worst fear
That can ever be hurled
Fear to bring children
Into the world
Oh for threatening my baby
Unborn and unnamed
You ain't worth the blood
That runs in your veins
How much do I know?
Oh to talk out of turn
You might say that I'm young
You might say I'm unlearned
But there's a one thing I know
Though I'm younger than you
That even Jesus would never
Forgive what you do
Well let me ask you one question
Is your money that good?
Oh will it buy you forgiveness
Do you think that it could?
I think you will find
When your death takes its toll
All the money you made
Will never buy back your soul
And I hope that you die
And your death will come soon
I'll follow your casket
By the pale afternoon
And I'll watch while you're lowered
Down to your deathbed
And I'll stand over your grave
Till I'm sure that you're dead
Kitty P
"Nobody in Particular" <nob...@invalid.com> wrote in message
news:hhmloo$uvd$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
Exactly Bill! Lisa Buscani rules.
Kitty
AdvocatusDiablo
gravity works
^worm
-------------
zenwormfood, you need a little fiber in your diet!
AdvocatusDiablo
"No." said the sadist.
--------------------
"i'll hurt myself while others watch!", says zenwormfood.
AdvocatusDiablo
"Tang Huyen" <tanghuyen{delete}@gmail.com[remove]> wrote in message
news:A6CdnW28RNz8zaPW...@supernews.com...
tangy, why do you insist on talking reason...to idiots?
zenworm
Wally Chapman
Y'know, the first time I read this as "avocado".
Wally
AdvocatusDiablo
which goes to show, wally, that you aren't very perceptive!
Tang Huyen
AdvocatusDiablo wrote:
> tangy, why do you insist on talking reason...to idiots?
You are Master Baiter, right?
Tang Huyen
AdvocatusDiablo
tangy, are you asking me to web cam?
Nobody in Particular
Nah, he's just playing with words, a cunning linguist.
Tang Huyen
AdvocatusDiablo wrote:
> "Tang Huyen:
>
> > AdvocatusDiablo:
>
> >> tangy, why do you insist on talking reason...to idiots?
>
> > You are Master Baiter, right?
>
> tangy, are you asking me to web cam?
Nah, you are so elusive that web cams
can't grab you.
Tang Huyen
Wally Chapman
Hey, I caught my error. How many others didn't even bother to look, and
just thought "Well, I'm not really interested in talking avocados, or
ones that post, either."
Wally
zenworm
> AdvocatusDiablo wrote:
> > "Wally Chapman" <shelsh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:vdKdneCzgoU_M93W...@bright.net...
> >> AdvocatusDiablo wrote:
> >>> "zenworm" <zensp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
holy guacamole
^worm
AdvocatusDiablo
wallE, does imagining other's misperceptions make you feel better about your
own misperceptions?
AdvocatusDiablo
holy guacamole
^worm
-----------------
Zworm, i can't determine your head from your ass!
AdvocatusDiablo
NiP, do you always speak for others...when you don't understand what they're
talking about?
AdvocatusDiablo
^worm :P
--------------------
Zworm, are you one of the worms...who ate john wayne?
Wilson
"AdvocatusDiablo" <instant...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2cWdnRpUPa8OztzW...@insightbb.com...
What the hell does that have to do with avocados?
--
Wilson
http://puddinheadwilson.tumblr.com/
zenworm
zenworm
> "AdvocatusDiablo" <instantkarma...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2cWdnRpUPa8OztzW...@insightbb.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Wally Chapman" <shelsh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:womdne_kF-2_rtzW...@bright.net...
> >> AdvocatusDiablo wrote:
> >>> "Wally Chapman" <shelsh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:vdKdneCzgoU_M93W...@bright.net...
> >>>> AdvocatusDiablo wrote:
> >>>>> "zenworm" <zensp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
misperceptious evocados?
^worm
zenworm
Bodhidumba
[...]
> There is one contributor to these boards who seem
> to think very much along the same line, even if he
> does not fight the Church. It is Bodhidumba, who
> previously posted a Dork of Delusion. He claims to
> be a Zennist, a Zen practitioner of long standing, but
> is to me as dead set in his realism, literalism and
> absolutism as Fu, DharmaTroll, Sphere. Like them,
> he has converted to Buddhism and Zen in content
> (Fu however denies that he is a Buddhist), but the
> structure of his thinking is deeply Christian. When I
> read his posts, I have the distinct feeling of reading
> a Christian who happens to mouth Zennish stuff.
> To me, the Church thinks him, through and through.
==============================================
Tang you've done it -- proven (at least to yourself) that rebirth is true!
(if you believe yourself.) Let me explain.... You say above that I have
"converted to Buddhism and Zen in content" but "the structure of his
thinking is deeply Christian" and that when reading my posts you "have the
distinct feeling of reading a Christian who happens to mouth Zennish stuff.
To me, the Church thinks him, through and through." If you actually believe
these conclusions of yours, IMO that can only mean one thing -- that you
have just proven, at least to yourself, that rebirth really occurs! How so?
First let me give some background info, since it's relevant here and because
you seem to eat this stuff up :-):
I've been to church ONCE in my life, when I was 12 years old, just to "see
what it's like". I wasn't interested in it and never went back (except for
the occasional obligatory funeral service, but that's a different matter, of
course). I went to public school, was not raised or trained under any
religion, and went to Buddhism on my own as a teenager in high school. Up
until then I was always an atheist / non-religious. My parents were always
(and still are) totally non-religious and think Christianity is somewhat of
a joke. I've tried reading the bible a few times in my life but could never
get any further than a few verses before losing interest and giving up on
it. You're right when you say that I do not "fight the Church" - and that's
because I really have no interest in it, have very little experience with
it, and am really not very knowledgeable about it beyond the very basics,
just enough to know it's not for me.
So Tang, in light of that, when you contend that the structure of my
thinking is "deeply Christian", and that to you the Church thinks me
"through and through", just how could that be when I've had so little
experience with and knowledge of the Church / Christianity in my life,
because I really don't care about it? The only possible explanation I can
come up with (just for you), is that I must have been a devoted Christian in
a previous life, and those earlier Christian traits / 'thinking structure'
tendencies were reborn into my current life and are now, unbeknownst to me,
coming up from my subconscious mind and influencing my current behaviour in
a different religion! (heh, heh) And Tang, through your acute skills of
observation and interpretation you have picked up on that, and, unbeknownst
to you, confirmed to yourself that rebirth must indeed be true and that I
was a devoted Christian in a previous life! (And who knows, maybe even a
previous Pope... hee hee.) Of course I don't believe any of that, but again
it's the only way I can see that what you say could be true, Tang....
So now let's see just how much you actually believe what you say. I'll make
a deal with you: You can go right ahead and put me into your "Previously a
Christian" category along with Fu, DharmaTroll and Sphere (except of course
I would go into the "Previously a Christian, in a past life" subcategory).
And I'll put you into my "Believer in Rebirth" category, because the only
way that I can see what you're saying could be true is through rebirth. So
what do you say, Tang...... Deal or No Deal?
:-)
Sincerely,
Your pal,
Howiedumba
Lee Rudolph
>"zenworm" <zens...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:627df528-ced1-4079...@e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>
>
>worms live on 'true gritt'
>
>
>^worm :P
>
>--------------------
>
>Zworm, are you one of the worms...who ate john wayne?
Who ate Liberty Valence?
Lee Rudolph
Wally Chapman
That's a great name for a rock band!
Wally
Wally Chapman
Another great name for a rock band!
Wally
Wally Chapman
Nah. I'm not really attached to the suffering of others. Right now,
I'm working on embracing death as a natural part of life instead of
imagining it as an inevitability to be feared.
Wally
Lee Rudolph
>AdvocatusDiablo wrote:
>>
>> wallE, does imagining other's misperceptions make you feel better about your
>> own misperceptions?
>
>Nah. I'm not really attached to the suffering of others. Right now,
>I'm working on embracing death as a natural part of life instead of
>imagining it as an inevitability to be feared.
Life, rather, is a part of death.
Imagining life as to be feared is optional (though amazingly popular).
Imagining it as an inevitability is just silly.
Lee Rudolph (not that there's anything wrong with being silly)
zenworm
> "AdvocatusDiablo" <instantkarma...@gmail.com> writes:
> >"zenworm" <zensp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:627df528-ced1-4079...@e27g2000yqd.googlegroups.com...
>
> >worms live on 'true gritt'
>
> >^worm :P
>
> >--------------------
>
> >Zworm, are you one of the worms...who ate john wayne?
>
> Who ate Liberty Valence?
>
> Lee Rudolph
she was the greatest wurm of all
^worm
zenworm
asteroid belt?
^worm
zenworm
orbital debris field?
^worm
zenworm
> >news:womdne_kF-2_rtzW...@bright.net...
> >> AdvocatusDiablo wrote:
> >>> "Wally Chapman" <shelsh...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:vdKdneCzgoU_M93W...@bright.net...
> >>>> AdvocatusDiablo wrote:
> >>>>> "zenworm" <zensp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
fahllenfelahfel:
(spoken in English with a thick German accent)
the conundrum of the irrational fear of the inevitable
speaking to the impermanence of the empirical
through the projection of death as something else.
^worm
Lee
"Lee Rudolph" <lrud...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:hht2gn$nhk$1...@reader1.panix.com...
and in this corner weighing in at a
kazillion pounds the undefeated
heavyweight champion "death wish".
and in that corner the bantam weight
contender "life wish". gentlemen i want
to see a clean fight with no below the
belt punches.
Lee
what do worms eat when they want
to eat vegetarian?
linda mccartney.
Déjà Flu
>
> AdvocatusDiablo wrote:
>
>> tangy, why do you insist on talking reason...to idiots?
>
> You are Master Baiter, right?
Don't tell him, Marky Sparky. Let him...wiggle...a bit.
Wally Chapman
Phooey. I guessed Hitler.
Wally
halfawake
same worms. they don't even watch The Movie Channel.
Come back Shane!
Robert
= = = = = =
AdvocatusDiablo
;
^worm
----------------
bird's gotta eat too...Zworm...!
AdvocatusDiablo
hah! mythdirection!
^worm
---------------
Zworm...what direction does your shit flow...?
AdvocatusDiablo
"Wilson" <Wil...@nowhere.net> wrote in message
news:VKOdnUU1k4SGw9zW...@supernews.com...
I don't know...WaLLe...you 're the one seeing avacados where there are
none...!
>
> --
> Wilson
> http://puddinheadwilson.tumblr.com/
>
> k
>
AdvocatusDiablo
there's no such thing as Death just like there is no such thing as
nothing...you are scared because you look at this matter of Death in the
wrong way...because of this incorrect thinking...waLLe...you allow
unnecessary
fears to be produced in your mind...!
AdvocatusDiablo
On Jan 1, 5:37 pm, Wally Chapman <shelsh...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> zenworm wrote:
> > On Jan 1, 1:31 pm, Lee Rudolph <lrudo...@panix.com> wrote:
> >> zenworm <zensp...@gmail.com> writes:
> >>> On Jan 1, 12:05=A0pm, Tang Huyen <tanghuyen{dele...@gmail.com[remove]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>> Kitty P wrote:
> >> ...
> >>>>> When our beliefs become
> >>>>> crystallized - we lose the ability for our wisdom to
> >> ...
> >>> what crashes?
> >> The hard drive.
>
> >> Lee Rudolph
>
> > Q: How do you know that was supposed to happen?
> > A: Because it did. Gravity works.
>
> > Why does hardware fail?
>
> All that strives, fails.
>
> Wally
yes, but why?
------------------
Zworm...since you insist on asking stupid questions...here is a stupid
answer for you...!
you fail because...you're making half-assed efforts...!
zenworm
wrote:
> "zenworm" <zensp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Belief in failure and belief in effort?
belief in stupidity? (superiority/inferiority)
In seeming ignorance you have exemplified the answer,
to the question, the subject of your scoffing:
"yes, but why?" (does "All that strives, fails.")
All these beliefs you seem to own.
If you do not think these things (beliefs) are you,
there is no "fail", no "stupid", no "effort".
this Moment
speaking for yourself...
are you
Lamenting at your fantasies loss?
Raging at the appearance of your ignorance?
or 'Putting it all down', sublimely saying:...
"ah so."?
^~
AdvocatusDiablo
this Moment
^~
-----------------------
there is no 'now moment'...Zworm...!
since everything is a memory...Zworm...then it's all lies because all
memories are created from deleted information and then distorted according
to one's
views and then generalized to get the meaning across...so...
it's all lies...everything is permissble...!
zenworm
Ali
<shel...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>zenworm wrote:
>> On Jan 1, 1:31 pm, Lee Rudolph <lrudo...@panix.com> wrote:
>>> zenworm <zensp...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>> On Jan 1, 12:05=A0pm, Tang Huyen <tanghuyen{dele...@gmail.com[remove]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Kitty P wrote:
>>> ...
>>>>>> When our beliefs become
>>>>>> crystallized - we lose the ability for our wisdom to
>>>>>> evolve. =A0IMO
>>> ...
>>>> what crashes?
>>> The hard drive.
>>>
>>> Lee Rudolph
>>
>> Q: How do you know that was supposed to happen?
>> A: Because it did. Gravity works.
>>
>> Why does hardware fail?
>
>All that strives, fails.
>
>Wally
I...I am striving to understand this.
Ali
<shel...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>AdvocatusDiablo wrote:
>
>
>Y'know, the first time I read this as "avocado".
>
>Wally
El diablo's avocado. It is a cruel game the Fat One devised in his
salad days.
Wally Chapman
Hmmm.... dos it involve cards and nekkid wimmen?
Wally (if so, deal me in)