FreeSangha - Buddhist Forum

Schools of Buddhism => Theravada => Topic started by: VisuddhiRaptor on August 03, 2017, 05:29:35 pm

Title: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: VisuddhiRaptor on August 03, 2017, 05:29:35 pm
I recently learned that Mahayana Buddhists believe original Pali Buddhism is "Essentialist".  :teehee:  :lmfao:

Since this term is not found in Pali Buddhism, we must search in Wikipedia for a definition:
Quote
Essentialism is the view that every entity has a set of attributes that are necessary to its identity and function.

Wikipedia

Therefore, the impression gained here is Mahayana Buddhist believe all discrete phenomena, such as consciousness, feelings, eye balls, water, toe-nails, kidneys, clouds, grains of sand, trees, atoms, etc, are "entities". Of "entities", Wikipedia says:
Quote
An entity is something that exists as itself, as a subject or as an object, actually or potentially, concretely or abstractly, physically or not. It need not be of material existence. In particular, abstractions and legal fictions are usually regarded as entities. In general, there is also no presumption that an entity is animate, or present.

Wikipedia

Now Pali Buddhism does not use the word "identity" as a "label" or "name". Instead, in Pali Buddhism, "identity" refers to the belief ('ditthi') that the grouping ('kaya') of five aggregates is a "self" or "me/mine" ('sa'), namely, 'sakkaya-ditthi', as follows:
Quote
There are these five clung-to-aggregates, friend Visakha: form as a clung-to-aggregate, feeling as a clung-to-aggregate, perception as a clung-to-aggregate, fabrications as a clung-to-aggregate, consciousness as a clung-to-aggregate. These five clung-to-aggregates are the self-identification described by the Blessed One.

The craving that makes for further becoming — accompanied by passion & delight, relishing now here & now there — i.e., craving for sensual pleasure, craving for becoming, craving for non-becoming: This, friend Visakha, is the origination of self-identification described by the Blessed One.

[url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.044.than.html[/url] ([url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.044.than.html[/url])

However, Pali Buddhism does use "function" to define phenomena, as follows:
Quote
"And why do you call it 'form'? Because it is afflicted, thus it is called 'form.' Afflicted with what? With cold & heat & hunger & thirst, with the touch of flies, mosquitoes, wind, sun, & reptiles. Because it is afflicted, it is called form.

"And why do you call it 'feeling'? Because it feels, thus it is called 'feeling.' What does it feel? It feels pleasure, it feels pain, it feels neither-pleasure-nor-pain. Because it feels, it is called feeling.

"And why do you call it 'perception'? Because it perceives, thus it is called 'perception.' What does it perceive? It perceives blue, it perceives yellow, it perceives red, it perceives white. Because it perceives, it is called perception.

"And why do you call them 'fabrications'? Because they fabricate fabricated things, thus they are called 'fabrications.' What do they fabricate as a fabricated thing? For the sake of form-ness, they fabricate form as a fabricated thing. For the sake of feeling-ness, they fabricate feeling as a fabricated thing. For the sake of perception-hood... For the sake of fabrication-hood... For the sake of consciousness-hood, they fabricate consciousness as a fabricated thing. Because they fabricate fabricated things, they are called fabrications.

"And why do you call it 'consciousness'? Because it cognizes, thus it is called consciousness. What does it cognize? It cognizes what is sour, bitter, pungent, sweet, alkaline, non-alkaline, salty, & unsalty. Because it cognizes, it is called consciousness.

[url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.079.than.html[/url] ([url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.079.than.html[/url])

Further, Pali Buddhism refers to "elements" (dhatu), which sound like the mistaken or convoluted Mahayana idea of "entites", but these elements are said to not be a "self", in Pali:
Quote
And what is the earth property? The earth property can be either internal or external. What is the internal earth property?}[3] Anything internal, within oneself, that's hard, solid & sustained: head hairs, body hairs, nails, teeth, skin, flesh, tendons, bones, bone marrow, kidneys, heart, liver, membranes, spleen, lungs, large intestines, small intestines, contents of the stomach, feces, or anything else internal, within oneself, that's hard, solid, and sustained: This is called the internal earth property. Now both the internal earth property & the external earth property are simply earth property. And that should be seen as it actually is present with right discernment: 'This is not mine, this is not me, this is not my self.'

[url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.062.than.html[/url] ([url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.062.than.html[/url])

Therefore, it seems difficult, maybe impossible, to refer to Pali Buddhism as "Essentialism" because, contrary to "Essentialism", Pali Buddhism denies "identity", affirms "function" but has no notion "entities" that fall within the vague & broad definition found in both Western & Mahayana philosophy.

I hope beginners can start to discern how confusing this all is when imputing Western philosophy onto Buddhism!  :wacky:  :smack:


Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosophy onto Buddhism!
Post by: VisuddhiRaptor on August 03, 2017, 07:25:33 pm
Another Western philosophical notion popular in 'monkey-mind-Buddhism' is "Materialism".

A Pali equivalent of this Western word 'materialism' is not found in original Pali Buddhism despite its popularity both in the East & West by monkey-minded-Buddhists. Wikipedia says:
Quote
Materialism is a form of philosophical monism which holds that matter is the fundamental substance in nature, and that all things, including mental things and consciousness, are results of material interactions.

In original Pali Buddhism, there are many higher teachings that appear to state there can be no mentality without materiality, as follows:
Quote
Were someone to say, 'I will describe a coming, a going, a passing away, an arising, a growth, an increase, or a proliferation of consciousness apart from form (materiality), from feeling, from perception, from fabrications,' that would be impossible.

[url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.053.than.html[/url] ([url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.053.than.html[/url])

Mentality-and-materiality (name-and-form) is the cause & condition for the manifestation of the consciousness aggregate.

[url]https://suttacentral.net/en/sn22.82[/url] ([url]https://suttacentral.net/en/sn22.82[/url])

Apart from a requisite condition, there is no coming-into-play of consciousness. Consciousness, monks, is classified simply by the requisite condition in dependence on which it arises. Consciousness that arises in dependence on the eye & forms is classified simply as eye-consciousness. Consciousness that arises in dependence on the ear & sounds is classified simply as ear-consciousness. Consciousness that arises in dependence on the nose & aromas is classified simply as nose-consciousness. Consciousness that arises in dependence on the tongue & flavors is classified simply as tongue-consciousness. Consciousness that arises in dependence on the body & tactile sensations is classified simply as body-consciousness. Consciousness that arises in dependence on the intellect & ideas is classified simply as intellect-consciousness.

[url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.038.than.html[/url] ([url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/mn/mn.038.than.html[/url])

There are, Ānanda, these six elements: the earth element, the water element, the fire element, the air element, the space element, and the consciousness element. When he knows and sees these six elements, a bhikkhu can be called skilled in the elements.”

[url]http://www.yellowrobe.com/component/content/article/120-majjhima-nikaya/321-bahudhtuka-sutta-the-many-kinds-of-elements.html[/url] ([url]http://www.yellowrobe.com/component/content/article/120-majjhima-nikaya/321-bahudhtuka-sutta-the-many-kinds-of-elements.html[/url])

Therefore, it is silly & confusing to assert Buddhism does not include 'materialism'. Yet because the primary purpose of Buddhism is to understand & end suffering, obviously Buddhism is not 'materialism'.

In monkey-mind-Buddhism, some people use the word 'materialism' (similar to the words 'antisemitism', fascism or communism ) to attack & demonize others. 

:teehee: :lmfao:

Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: VisuddhiRaptor on August 03, 2017, 07:40:46 pm
Another is "phenomenology", which even famous translators, such as Bhikkhu Bodhi, claims represents Buddhism.  :lmfao:
Quote
Phenomenology (from Greek  :lmfao: phainómenon "that which appears" and lógos "study") is the philosophical study of the structures of experience and consciousness.

Wikipedia

Since the Buddha discovered 'truths' or 'natural laws' that inherently existed in nature but were previously unknown, obviously Buddhism is not "phenomenology" since these truths & laws inherently exist outside of conscious experience.

Quote
Monks, whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands—this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All processes are inconstant.

“The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All processes are inconstant.

“Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands—this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All processes are stressful.

“The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All processes are unsatisfactory.

“Whether or not there is the arising of Tathagatas, this property stands—this steadfastness of the Dhamma, this orderliness of the Dhamma: All phenomena are not-self.

“The Tathagata directly awakens to that, breaks through to that. Directly awakening & breaking through to that, he declares it, teaches it, describes it, sets it forth. He reveals it, explains it, & makes it plain: All phenomena are not-self.”

https://suttacentral.net/en/an3.136

Therefore, it is confusing & silly to call Buddhism phenomenology because that would assert there is no objective reality. In other words, it would assert each enlightenment experience of each fully enlightened mind is not the same but, instead, unique to each.

:teehee:
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: VisuddhiRaptor on August 03, 2017, 08:02:38 pm
Similar to 'materialism', another attack word used by 'monkey-mind-Buddhists' is 'ontology'.  :lmfao:
Quote
Ontology is the philosophical study of the nature of being, becoming, existence and/or reality, as well as the basic categories of being and their relations.

The compound word ontology combines onto-, from the Greek  :lmfao: ὄν, on (gen. ὄντος, ontos), i.e. "being; that which is", which is the present participle of the verb εἰμί, eimí, i.e. "to be, I am", and -λογία, -logia, i.e. "logical discourse", see classical compounds for this type of word formation.

Wikipedia

While to enlightened Buddhists (who have gone beyond phenomenological volition & discerned the non-volitional interplay & lawfulness of natural phenomena) Buddhism may appear to have 'ontological' aspects, the Western philosophical school of 'ontology', being unenlightened, appears to include assertions & theories about the nature of 'self' as something intrinsically real.

For example, René Descartes said: "I think, therefore I am".  :lmfao:

Therefore, Buddhism appears to not be an example of 'ontology', despite Buddhism definitely not being 'phenomenology'. 

I think only unenlightened mind would assert the Western hubris that Western philosophy is superior to Buddhism and its terms therefore should be used as a benchmark to assess, judge & define Buddhism.

 :teehee:  :smack:
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: ground on August 03, 2017, 08:05:46 pm
...despite Buddhism definitely not being 'phenomenology'.


Quote
The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All.

[url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html[/url] ([url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html[/url])
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: VisuddhiRaptor on August 03, 2017, 08:13:01 pm
Quote
The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All.

[url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html[/url] ([url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html[/url])


This is commonly mindlessly posted by the sheep at Dhamma Wheel.  :lmfao:  :teehee:
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: VisuddhiRaptor on August 03, 2017, 08:32:53 pm

Quote
The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All.

[url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html[/url] ([url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html[/url])


The above is a mistranslation because the word 'dhamme' does not only mean 'ideas'. If 'dhamme' means 'ideas' then impermanence, unsatisfactoriness, not-self, conditionality, Nibbana, etc, would be subjective 'ideas' or 'mental constructs' rather than objective realities. In other words, the Buddha would have mental constructed these ideas via thought function (rather than merely observed them).

Fortunately, the Pali suttas say Nibbana is asankhata, i..e, unconstructed & not dependent upon mind (apart from to experience it).

 :teehee:
Quote
Phenomenology (from Greek  :lmfao: phainómenon "that which appears" and lógos "study") is the philosophical study of the structures of experience and consciousness.

Wikipedia

The Pali explains there are material (rupa), immaterial/mental (arupa) & unconditioned (asankhata) elements. Thus not all things are mental. In other words, just because the mind passively phenomenologically observes certain objects does not mean those objects & their characteristics are related to phenomenology.


Quote
The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All.

[url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html[/url] ([url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html[/url])


Yes. Eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors are included in 'The All" but these are not the structures of experience and consciousness. They are the objects of experience and consciousness.

Quote
The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All.

[url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html[/url] ([url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html[/url])


This is commonly mindlessly posted by the sheep at Dhamma Wheel.  :lmfao:  :teehee:
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: ground on August 03, 2017, 08:33:42 pm
Quote
The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All.

[url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html[/url] ([url]http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn35/sn35.023.than.html[/url])


This is commonly mindlessly posted by the sheep at Dhamma Wheel.  :lmfao:  :teehee:


I appreciate if you are seeking seclusion from the herd of so called 'buddhists'. However why then are you promulgating your individual interpretation of the suttas 'for beginnners' if not for the sole purpose of building up just another herd with you being the herdsman having the power?
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: VisuddhiRaptor on August 03, 2017, 08:39:35 pm
However why then are you promulgating your individual interpretation of the suttas 'for beginnners' if not for the sole purpose of building up just another herd with you being the herdsman having the power?

I am not "interpreting". You continue to impute your own wrong methodology onto others. The Buddha did not generally teach to "interpret" his teachings. Please refrain. Thanks

As for the "herd", the only beginners I am targeting are named Ground & Spiny Norman.  :lmfao:  :teehee: :hapbd: =)) :cheer:
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: VisuddhiRaptor on August 03, 2017, 08:43:10 pm
I appreciate if you are seeking seclusion from the herd of so called 'buddhists'.

Wrong. I post on enough forums & answer many diverse questions to many diverse inquirers.

I came here to get Johanne on the right path & have now realised you are in a similar position requiring similar help.  :teehee:
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: Spiny Norman on August 05, 2017, 01:36:03 am
As for the "herd", the only beginners I am targeting are named Ground & Spiny Norman.  :lmfao:  :teehee: :hapbd: =)) :cheer:

More patronising twaddle from the Buddhist Borg.  The truth is that you have a fragile ego, you simply cannot cope when people challenge your idiosyncratic dogma and so your instinct is to insult.

You also think you are a teacher, which is just delusional arrogance.   Element, you are an obnoxious fraud and egomaniac, no wonder you have been banned from most Buddhist forums.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: IdleChater on August 05, 2017, 01:47:07 am

I came here to get Johanne on the right path <snip>

Cyber-stalking?
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: Samana Johann on August 05, 2017, 03:46:20 am
One could see the governing principles always as something negative (even stalking, so deep caught in private and personal hope and desire) but if smart and using it for one self, incl. such "silly" believes that there are many who do not only see by the outward seens, it's actually the best one can effort, if serious in gaining liberation.

Not so "negative", better remembering the Sangha and take good refuge all the time. One could easy beat it as long as not firm especially if running after others, one day beating this, one day beating that together, seeking friends and enemies...

Dhammadathu, Element, Visuddhiraptor... but also all others.

just saw this and thought for a while if it makes sense to write something, since it is for no one aside someone beyound easy to break a movie, especially if it has a kind of traumata as reason, and of course one would even not believe it. So first of all it's good that everybody keeps in mind that ones view is not for sure. Simply that would be enough. Easy spoken.

There are basics, basics that do not change as soon as one follows the path. Once they are not really gained, one can easily hurt one self in a real longtherm manner. So one is wise not to try to do the Zen teacher if not knowing mind really very good and not secure of breaking the basics.

One of the most effective means are the three governing principles, the self, the world (with it's Devas and Gods) and the friend on the path. If lacking all of them, that Mara really has every opening and just while thinking "I am so empty" one becomes so "drunken", as ones refuge, that one has no slightest idea whats going on.

It's good to hold firm on mundane right view and once so fare being able to really close the door from outside, then is the time and more urgend presents of the governing principles, that they are able to tame one in a way that really gets inwardly and binds one to stick on really wining a battle against oneself. Once one begann such, yet so much packed in his intellect but simply is not as able as one thought, like many here, it's really dangerous because one easy forgets what's goning on and not only that precious time runs out, wounds one has cut one self, might not hurt yet, still having some merits left, but they will burn and noboby (maybe) from near or far will give even slightes form for the most.

Remember Dhammakaras carriere for example, or many others. It's really nessesary. It takes an importand honest to one self to see that as long one has not entered the stream, one is still able to kill one on parents and you know what else.

So to make a point to the topics issue: keep in mind and train, deeper and deeper: "There is the case where a certain person is not covetous. He does not covet the belongings of others, thinking, 'O, that what belongs to others would be mine!' He bears no ill will and is not corrupt in the resolves of his heart. [He thinks,] 'May these beings be free from animosity, free from oppression, free from trouble, and may they look after themselves with ease!' He has right view and is not warped in the way he sees things: 'There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits & results of good & bad actions. There is this world & the next world. There is mother & father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are brahmans & contemplatives who, faring rightly & practicing rightly, proclaim this world & the next after having directly known & realized it for themselves.' This is how one is made pure in three ways by mental action."

The sooner Dhammadathu get's really aware of what will come for sure, reminding against his grain how many maybe innocent even holly people he could have intentional have harmed, the better. It's one thing to reject things for "real" but it's another to bear that what long taken with laughts.

So there are always choices: to run even deeper like into this days;, to stop, and look good and long before following further a way, while taking really care, or make a turn and really finish that one actually, deep in heart want. It's hard, but it's possible to really get freedom and no more need to entertain in this or that way the illusions and ideas.

So this Atmas tiny words for Dhammadhatu, be sure that there are people beyound any illwill, even some with compassion but be reminded, that best "help" can just be taken, as it was given in the past and right here where you are. So there are all ways open to either really "plopp", what ever comes after, or foolish "plopp", which will be really for a long, long time... don't forget the past: tendencies to not come out of nowere and are not easy burned, even short on the surface, touching a little bit sun for a while.

Atma leaves you all "alone" hear and remember all the time: there is no other real refuge in this world aside the tripple Gems, so never, ever play around and destroy you boot. Deeds are riping also for childs and you know, if one having the luck to have learned and is used to basics of protection, those "normal" things found in the Mangala-Sutta, every day around the world where there is still some refuge, those are protected and really lucky, so seek just after that and leave where such can not be found, especially your own habits.

May you all find always good support to the path and may those having luck find their way to real happiness with ease. Mau all other as well find all that joy and welbeing that they desire in best harmless ways, not hurting each other to much in the meaningless rounds of birth, oldage, sickness and death, just a little food and gone again... like the short pleasure of some laughter, the wounds are not seen.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: tj on August 05, 2017, 08:06:50 am
I am a product of western thought who explores many different ideologies, including Buddhism, for what wisdom I might gain. In a way that I think might be consistent with Buddhist teachings, I have to accept that my western upbringing is a fundamental ingredient of my life’s experience, an ingredient that can not be dismissed, ignored, or removed. (Anymore than one could ignore or remove the salt a scuffle.) It is something that simply must be accounted for in the pursuit of wisdom and compassion. So some degree I suspect every life, including one raised in one of the Buddhist traditions, faces obstacles in that pursuit.

I agree that the materialism of western thought has been a dead end in the pursuit of wisdom, often leading to nihilism, hubris, and an untenable selfishness. But that materialism is being challenged and, in my mind, utterly discredited by the discoveries of modern science, particularly in the field of quantum mechanics.  Matter isn’t the fundamental dynamic of the cosmos, it is a manifestation of energy. Everything that we tend to think of as real, of having substance and weight, taking up space and existing in time, is but energy. One is quite correct in thinking of matter as condensed light. Light has no weight, nor does it exist in space and time as we experience those phenomena. That knowledge is, to me, an extraordinarily challenging insight. Mystery and potential delight are all that remains when everything - every thing - is the flow of light (energy) interacting across the cosmos. At its very core “being” finds its foundations outside of time and space; not as a philosophical muse but as the actual way the universe evolves.

I’m not sure that any of our human ideologies, at this point in our own evolution, have fully integrated that knowledge.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: The Artis Magistra on August 05, 2017, 05:42:23 pm
One may have to not over-complicate things with difficult English terminology used in extremely complex and unusual ways.

Buddhism is extremely old, and the people and their language and ideas may not have been as complex as people are making them out to be right now or even among earlier intellectuals.

If one tries to understand the words in a very primitive way in an Ancient Indic context, it may give one a more authentic sense of how it might have been understood by the people of the period in their culture and language which was also inclusive of their cosmological notions and subtle and overt ideas regarding reality or the natural world or experience which was not likely the same as someone born a few years ago in modern Australia or modern North America. Ideas which are considered strange now were common back then, things rejected now were taken as granted and obviously true back then.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: francis on August 06, 2017, 07:32:19 am
One may have to not over-complicate things with difficult English terminology used in extremely complex and unusual ways.

Buddhism is extremely old, and the people and their language and ideas may not have been as complex as people are making them out to be right now or even among earlier intellectuals.

If one tries to understand the words in a very primitive way in an Ancient Indic context, it may give one a more authentic sense of how it might have been understood by the people of the period in their culture and language which was also inclusive of their cosmological notions and subtle and overt ideas regarding reality or the natural world or experience which was not likely the same as someone born a few years ago in modern Australia or modern North America. Ideas which are considered strange now were common back then, things rejected now were taken as granted and obviously true back then.

This is why beginners, like your good self, need a real (face to face) teacher to guide you along the path.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: The Artis Magistra on August 06, 2017, 01:19:40 pm
One may have to not over-complicate things with difficult English terminology used in extremely complex and unusual ways.

Buddhism is extremely old, and the people and their language and ideas may not have been as complex as people are making them out to be right now or even among earlier intellectuals.

If one tries to understand the words in a very primitive way in an Ancient Indic context, it may give one a more authentic sense of how it might have been understood by the people of the period in their culture and language which was also inclusive of their cosmological notions and subtle and overt ideas regarding reality or the natural world or experience which was not likely the same as someone born a few years ago in modern Australia or modern North America. Ideas which are considered strange now were common back then, things rejected now were taken as granted and obviously true back then.

This is why beginners, like your good self, need a real (face to face) teacher to guide you along the path.

I'm chicken, I don't want to be hit, which is why ghosts make for less frightening teachers.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: ground on August 06, 2017, 09:47:33 pm
A buddhism that isn't compatible with western thought isn't worth anything. Really, if you are born in the west, have been educated in the west and are living in the west it would be a great error to seek a buddhism that is incompatible with western thought.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: Samana Johann on August 06, 2017, 10:47:19 pm
A buddhism that isn't compatible with western thought isn't worth anything. Really, if you are born in the west, have been educated in the west and are living in the west it would be a great error to seek a buddhism that is incompatible with western thought.


So the thoughts are Grounds... well then, stick with them. Of course thinking is a matter of nissaya or paramis if you wish, and beings are not easy able to go beyound that what they grasp.

Its not a matter of birth, east or west that one is capable to grasp the fruits. Look, it's like mango picking. Ohh... you don't know mango trees and picing them. Try to imagine or maybe search for a youtube clip.

Quote
Picking Mangoes ([url]http://www.zugangzureinsicht.org/html/lib/thai/chah/insimpleterms_en.html[/url])

If a mango is five meters off the ground and we want it, we can't use a ten-meter picking pole to pick it, because it's too long. We can't use a two-meter picking pole either, because it's too short.

Don't go thinking that a person with a PhD. has an easy time practicing the Dhamma because he knows so much. Don't go thinking that way. Sometimes people with a PhD. are too long.



Don't think that eastern have an easy today... they also think their though are their's as well having TV and internet.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: francis on August 07, 2017, 04:38:19 am
One may have to not over-complicate things with difficult English terminology used in extremely complex and unusual ways.

Buddhism is extremely old, and the people and their language and ideas may not have been as complex as people are making them out to be right now or even among earlier intellectuals.

If one tries to understand the words in a very primitive way in an Ancient Indic context, it may give one a more authentic sense of how it might have been understood by the people of the period in their culture and language which was also inclusive of their cosmological notions and subtle and overt ideas regarding reality or the natural world or experience which was not likely the same as someone born a few years ago in modern Australia or modern North America. Ideas which are considered strange now were common back then, things rejected now were taken as granted and obviously true back then.

This is why beginners, like your good self, need a real (face to face) teacher to guide you along the path.

I'm chicken, I don't want to be hit, which is why ghosts make for less frightening teachers.

The Artis Magistra,

I have no idea what you are talking about.

What happened to -- one not over-complicating things with difficult English terminology used in extremely complex and unusual ways?

Did you come here to learn?
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: The Artis Magistra on August 07, 2017, 11:05:56 am
One may have to not over-complicate things with difficult English terminology used in extremely complex and unusual ways.

Buddhism is extremely old, and the people and their language and ideas may not have been as complex as people are making them out to be right now or even among earlier intellectuals.

If one tries to understand the words in a very primitive way in an Ancient Indic context, it may give one a more authentic sense of how it might have been understood by the people of the period in their culture and language which was also inclusive of their cosmological notions and subtle and overt ideas regarding reality or the natural world or experience which was not likely the same as someone born a few years ago in modern Australia or modern North America. Ideas which are considered strange now were common back then, things rejected now were taken as granted and obviously true back then.

This is why beginners, like your good self, need a real (face to face) teacher to guide you along the path.

I'm chicken, I don't want to be hit, which is why ghosts make for less frightening teachers.

The Artis Magistra,

I have no idea what you are talking about.

What happened to -- one not over-complicating things with difficult English terminology used in extremely complex and unusual ways?

Did you come here to learn?

I said I am chicken (I am scared), I do not want to be hit (I don't want some guy admonishing me), which is why ghosts (which is why people no longer alive but known through writing) make for less frightening (threatening or scary, anxiety inducing) teachers (normal human beings who are opinionated).

That is what I meant. Sorry for any confusion. I asked people to write clearly when teaching the Dharma, not boggling it with difficult terminology. My fear of putting myself under the torture of someone from the jungle telling me what my ancestors invented and developed is wrong and bad is not a roller-coaster I am interested in (not an anxiety inducing experience that I am interested in).

I have little real respect for illiterates steeped in traditions from jungles or Tibet, Western Modernist Buddhists, Militant Atheists, or practically anyone. That means the loss is mine, because I miss out on all that great admonishment and spittle (from furious fundamentalist corrections) on my face from people who do little else than beg others and support their little groups and cult organizations.

I wouldn't take a Christian teacher admonishing me either, a Jew, a Hindu, or a Muslim or Sikh. Why? Maybe because I am afraid, willfully ignorant, disdainful, and arrogant, deeming myself superior in knowledge and wisdom to them and anyone, and having different interests.

What will my consequences be for such? That I will meet my end without ever knowing or practicing some narrow brand of jungle Buddhism? I won't be reborn and ai won't be judged, right? So who cares? In the end, supposedly, they get the same as me. They cease to exist and I cease to exist, right? They get to die more smug than me? Is that the advantage?
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: francis on August 08, 2017, 01:00:07 am

The Artis Magistra

It seems to me there is one set of rules for The Artis Magistra, and another set for other members.

I said I am chicken (I am scared), I do not want to be hit (I don't want some guy admonishing me), which is why ghosts (which is why people no longer alive but known through writing) make for less frightening (threatening or scary, anxiety inducing) teachers (normal human beings who are opinionated).

So, why is it ok for you to be admonishing other members?

That is what I meant. Sorry for any confusion. I asked people to write clearly when teaching the Dharma, not boggling it with difficult terminology. My fear of putting myself under the torture of someone from the jungle telling me what my ancestors invented and developed is wrong and bad is not a roller-coaster I am interested in (not an anxiety inducing experience that I am interested in).

So why not write clearly in all your communication.  It would make it a lot easier for people to understand what you are trying to say?

I have little real respect for illiterates steeped in traditions from jungles or Tibet, Western Modernist Buddhists, Militant Atheists, or practically anyone. That means the loss is mine, because I miss out on all that great admonishment and spittle (from furious fundamentalist corrections) on my face from people who do little else than beg others and support their little groups and cult organizations.

I wouldn't take a Christian teacher admonishing me either, a Jew, a Hindu, or a Muslim or Sikh. Why? Maybe because I am afraid, willfully ignorant, disdainful, and arrogant, deeming myself superior in knowledge and wisdom to them and anyone, and having different interests.

What will my consequences be for such? That I will meet my end without ever knowing or practicing some narrow brand of jungle Buddhism? I won't be reborn and ai won't be judged, right? So who cares? In the end, supposedly, they get the same as me. They cease to exist and I cease to exist, right? They get to die more smug than me? Is that the advantage?

You seem to contradict yourself a lot, so I have no idea what you are talking about.

Please write clearly, as you have suggested to others.

Thanks

Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: The Artis Magistra on August 08, 2017, 02:41:19 am

The Artis Magistra

It seems to me there is one set of rules for The Artis Magistra, and another set for other members.

I said I am chicken (I am scared), I do not want to be hit (I don't want some guy admonishing me), which is why ghosts (which is why people no longer alive but known through writing) make for less frightening (threatening or scary, anxiety inducing) teachers (normal human beings who are opinionated).

So, why is it ok for you to be admonishing other members?

That is what I meant. Sorry for any confusion. I asked people to write clearly when teaching the Dharma, not boggling it with difficult terminology. My fear of putting myself under the torture of someone from the jungle telling me what my ancestors invented and developed is wrong and bad is not a roller-coaster I am interested in (not an anxiety inducing experience that I am interested in).

So why not write clearly in all your communication.  It would make it a lot easier for people to understand what you are trying to say?

I have little real respect for illiterates steeped in traditions from jungles or Tibet, Western Modernist Buddhists, Militant Atheists, or practically anyone. That means the loss is mine, because I miss out on all that great admonishment and spittle (from furious fundamentalist corrections) on my face from people who do little else than beg others and support their little groups and cult organizations.

I wouldn't take a Christian teacher admonishing me either, a Jew, a Hindu, or a Muslim or Sikh. Why? Maybe because I am afraid, willfully ignorant, disdainful, and arrogant, deeming myself superior in knowledge and wisdom to them and anyone, and having different interests.

What will my consequences be for such? That I will meet my end without ever knowing or practicing some narrow brand of jungle Buddhism? I won't be reborn and ai won't be judged, right? So who cares? In the end, supposedly, they get the same as me. They cease to exist and I cease to exist, right? They get to die more smug than me? Is that the advantage?

You seem to contradict yourself a lot, so I have no idea what you are talking about.

Please write clearly, as you have suggested to others.

Thanks

Francis, I will try harder, sorry that you have difficulty understanding what I am saying. Are you trying to be difficult and cause me some trouble and distress? What admonishment? Suggesting to people that it might not be the best to be extremely rude to people in the way that VisuddhiRaptor seems to be? Others have mentioned that about VisuddhiRaptor as well, the reason is that VisudhiRaptor seems to be rude to people. I said I am not interested in taking on a teacher to admonish me, that is different than you for example teaching me as you do or admonishing me for example on the forum, I was referring to going and meeting with a Theravada monk to hear them out, I'm literally afraid of such people, I would never even want such to see my face, I have an actual phobia.

If a Buddhist came up to me and said things about their religion, I might flee, as I would flee from monks in robes, they frighten me. This may be because I am some sort of demonic entity or something, or am otherwise a very cowardly person. If they asked me if I was a Buddhist, I'd deny it, just like I would deny it to a Muslim if they asked if I was a Muslim. I have a great deal of knowledge regarding each religion, and can appear in any of those disguises from the safety of my own home behind my computer rather anonymously, but when it comes to facing people who might admonish or correct me, I'd rather they be poisoned and killed than hear what they have to say.

As you can see, I'm a very honest person. I'd like to engage with you and talk to you. I'd even like to learn from you. What I'd be learning from you is your version of Buddhism, and what I'd do with this information is figure out the "secret language" of what to say and not to say in certain environments, but my interest is not in supporting these sects and cults, nor in generating another sect or cult, but instead to minimize their hold and influence over people and to make people bolder in fighting and resisting their domination over what people are allowed to say and think regarding certain religions.

So "meeting with a teacher" or "spending years learning" is not of my particular interest, nor fits with my agenda for "Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma" which basically introduces or opens up mystic religion to all sorts of people despite their interests or preferences.

Everything you say to me goes towards this end. I'm far too cowardly to personally show my face to any teacher or join any cult, sect, or organization, such things really freak me out, and I want a peaceful life devoid of cultists bothering me with their structures and strictures.

I have no respect for "teachers" really, nor do I believe people living in caves "hold the True Dharma". Furthermore, I care little for "who the Buddha was" as I do not worship that man or any man, nor do I know if he existed or not, for me such is only a tool, like Jesus, Muhammed, Krishna, or anyone else, who can be used in order to introduce certain mystic concepts which emerged in Buddhist schools as well as other places in the world.

How much more clear can I be? I am a Buddhist, but not what you may consider a "real Buddhist", since you maybe don't believe in a Mystic sort religion or Buddhism. I am very devout in my religion, it is not a game to me. I do not believe in the "disengaging" mentality.

Furthermore, you are correct, I apply different rules to myself than to other people, I want a world where I can do whatever I please and you should all assist me in doing whatever I wish, but if you won't, then I'll simply take what I can from our interaction of good, and eschew what I consider unhelpful. If you are troublesome, I'll use dialogue to make an example of you and showcase your behavior as unsavory, or use you to make me appear a martyr in the eyes of people, or any number of tactics.

What you're dealing with here is a person who will use all sorts of tactics towards helping people who seek me out or listen to these words to learn a different way of thinking and way of life.

Thus, I understand I may be a threat to any radical sensibilities in yourself, but what benefit is it to you if people do anything? Why not simply let me "have my way" and even if I'm "lying" to people (and I'm not, in my understanding), just let those who I am lying to and will believe me, fall for it.

You have no reward, you have no future, you have no savior, you have nothing, and your destiny is to die and cease to exist forever, is it not? So what are you concerned about? Let me "have my way" and leave me unobstructed, you gain nothing, I am the one who is delusional and believes in "gain", you have nothing at all to gain, you only lose and waste your precious limited life by these activities, you do not believe in rewards or punishments, so don't worry about me or who I take with me or convince of anything or delude with my Maya.

Or have I misunderstood something? You do have some reason to try to correct me? Then please teach the Dharma in response to the things I say, then we can all benefit perhaps, even from my folly generating your wise responses.

Anyway though, we can have a friendly interaction too. It seems quite clear you dislike me, you dislike my style, you dislike my agenda, and you may feel it is important to promote your particular brand of Buddhism.

Your particular brand of Buddhism is in my opinion, not particularly or necessarily beneficial to anyone really, nor is it fun, but overall boring and very possibly also misinterpreted by you and your teachers, and untrue, but nonetheless, I'd be happy for you to share it so that I can learn what your people are sensitive about for when I might interact with them in order to better manipulate them and seduce them towards my agenda and my particular sort of Buddhism.

Please understand, our people have been doing this since ages past as well, and your people in the forests won't in the end succeed in anything probably, since each generation of them ceases to exist, and their goals appear also to be "worthless" necessarily. Luckily, there is no importance related to you "winning" or "defaming" me in any sense, you gain nothing. Like I said before, I am the fool who believes in "gain" and "winning", so show that you're a strong person who holds to what it appears you are suggesting, and allow me to "win", and your task (however pointless it is, worthless, unnecessary, and whatever else) is simply to speak the "True Dharma" and speak honestly to me like I have spoken honestly to you. That sounds fair. Of course I don't believe in fairness though really, I believe I should be given everything good of course and all assistance and help, you should be given what you want, which is to Cease to Exist and thus never Suffer? So why shouldn't we both get what we want immediately? What is impeding you? I'm certainly not trying to.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: francis on August 09, 2017, 01:26:28 am
Francis, I will try harder, sorry that you have difficulty understanding what I am saying. Are you trying to be difficult and cause me some trouble and distress? What admonishment? Suggesting to people that it might not be the best to be extremely rude to people in the way that VisuddhiRaptor seems to be? Others have mentioned that about VisuddhiRaptor as well, the reason is that VisudhiRaptor seems to be rude to people. I said I am not interested in taking on ato admonish me, that is different than you for example teaching me as you do or admonishing me for example on the forum, I was referring to going and meeting with a Theravada monk to hear them out, I'm literally afraid of such people, I would never even want such to see my face, I have an actual phobia.

The Artis Magistra,

I think you are causing a lot of people distress with your erroneous fabrications about what you consider to be Buddhism.

Real Buddhists don’t bully other or gossip. Instead, they practice Right Speech (https://www.thoughtco.com/right-speech-450072). You should try it sometime.

I can see why you don’t want a teacher because they might shatter the illusion of what you call Buddhim.

If a Buddhist came up to me and said things about their religion, I might flee, as I would flee from monks in robes, they frighten me. This may be because I am some …………

So "meeting with a teacher" or "spending years learning" is not of my particular interest, nor fits with my agenda for "Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma" which basically introduces or opens up mystic religion to all sorts of people despite their interests or preferences.

Ok, this is the crux of the matter. You want to teach some mystical "Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma. Ok no problem, find another forum and preach away. Just don’t pretend what you are teaching it is somehow affiliated with Budhism, because it is not!

Everything you say to me goes towards this end. I'm far too cowardly to personally show my face to any teacher or join any cult, sect, or organization, such things really freak me out, and I want a peaceful life devoid of cultists bothering me with their structures and strictures.

I have no respect for "teachers" really, nor do I believe people living in caves "hold the True Dharma". Furthermore, I care little for "who the Buddha was" as I do not worship that man or any man, nor do I know if he existed or not, for me such is only a tool, like Jesus, Muhammed, Krishna, or anyone else, who can be used in order to introduce certain mystic concepts which emerged in Buddhist schools as well as other places in the world.

How much more clear can I be? I am a Buddhist, but not what you may consider a "real Buddhist", since you maybe don't believe in a Mystic sort religion or Buddhism. I am very devout in my religion, it is not a game to me. I do not believe in the "disengaging" mentality.

Furthermore, you are correct, I apply different rules to myself than to other people, I want a world where I can do whatever I please and you should all assist me in doing whatever I wish, but if you won't, then I'll simply take what I can from our interaction of good, and eschew what I consider unhelpful. If you are troublesome, I'll use dialogue to make an example of you and showcase your behavior as unsavory, or use you to make me appear a martyr in the eyes of people, or any number of tactics

What you're dealing with here is a person who will use all sorts of tactics towards helping people who seek me out or listen to these words to learn a different way of thinking and way of life.

Thus, I understand I may be a threat to any radical sensibilities in yourself, but what benefit is it to you if people do anything? Why not simply let me "have my way" and even if I'm "lying" to people (and I'm not, in my understanding), just let those who I am lying to and will believe me, fall for

You have no reward, you have no future, you have no savior, you have nothing, and your destiny is to die and cease to exist forever, is it not? So what are you concerned about? Let me "have my way" and leave me unobstructed, you gain nothing, I am the one who is delusional and believes in "gain", you have nothing at all to gain, you only lose and waste your precious limited life by these activities, you do not believe in rewards or punishments, so don't worry about me or who I take with me or convince of anything or delude with my Maya.

Or have I misunderstood something? You do have some reason to try to correct me? Then please teach the Dharma in response to the things I say, then we can all benefit perhaps, even from my folly generating your wise responses.

Anyway though, we can have a friendly interaction too. It seems quite clear you dislike me, you dislike my style, you dislike my agenda, and you may feel it is important to promote your particular brand of Buddhism.

Your particular brand of Buddhism is in my opinion, not particularly or necessarily beneficial to anyone really, nor is it fun, but overall boring and very possibly also misinterpreted by you and your teachers, and untrue, but nonetheless, I'd be happy for you to share it so that I can learn what your people are sensitive about for when I might interact with them in order to better manipulate them and seduce them towards my agenda and my particular sort of Buddhism.

Please understand, our people have been doing this since ages past as well, and your people in the forests won't in the end succeed in anything probably, since each generation of them ceases to exist, and their goals appear also to be "worthless" necessarily. Luckily, there is no importance related to you "winning" or "defaming" me in any sense, you gain nothing. Like I said before, I am the fool who believes in "gain" and "winning", so show that you're a strong person who holds to what it appears you are suggesting, and allow me to "win", and your task (however pointless it is, worthless, unnecessary, and whatever else) is simply to speak the "True Dharma" and speak honestly to me like I have spoken honestly to you. That sounds fair. Of course I don't believe in fairness though really, I believe I should be given everything good of course and all assistance and help, you should be given what you want, which is to Cease to Exist and thus never Suffer? So why shouldn't we both get what we want immediately? What is impeding you? I'm certainly not trying to.

This is a Buddhist forum. If you want to proselytize then you need to find a differen platform, because what you preach is not Buddhism, and it would be immoral to pretend it is. 
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: The Artis Magistra on August 09, 2017, 01:59:20 am
Francis, I will try harder, sorry that you have difficulty understanding what I am saying. Are you trying to be difficult and cause me some trouble and distress? What admonishment? Suggesting to people that it might not be the best to be extremely rude to people in the way that VisuddhiRaptor seems to be? Others have mentioned that about VisuddhiRaptor as well, the reason is that VisudhiRaptor seems to be rude to people. I said I am not interested in taking on ato admonish me, that is different than you for example teaching me as you do or admonishing me for example on the forum, I was referring to going and meeting with a Theravada monk to hear them out, I'm literally afraid of such people, I would never even want such to see my face, I have an actual phobia.

The Artis Magistra,

I think you are causing a lot of people distress with your erroneous fabrications about what you consider to be Buddhism.

Real Buddhists don’t bully other or gossip. Instead, they practice Right Speech (https://www.thoughtco.com/right-speech-450072). You should try it sometime.

I can see why you don’t want a teacher because they might shatter the illusion of what you call Buddhim.

If a Buddhist came up to me and said things about their religion, I might flee, as I would flee from monks in robes, they frighten me. This may be because I am some …………

So "meeting with a teacher" or "spending years learning" is not of my particular interest, nor fits with my agenda for "Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma" which basically introduces or opens up mystic religion to all sorts of people despite their interests or preferences.

Ok, this is the crux of the matter. You want to teach some mystical "Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma. Ok no problem, find another forum and preach away. Just don’t pretend what you are teaching it is somehow affiliated with Budhism, because it is not!

Everything you say to me goes towards this end. I'm far too cowardly to personally show my face to any teacher or join any cult, sect, or organization, such things really freak me out, and I want a peaceful life devoid of cultists bothering me with their structures and strictures.

I have no respect for "teachers" really, nor do I believe people living in caves "hold the True Dharma". Furthermore, I care little for "who the Buddha was" as I do not worship that man or any man, nor do I know if he existed or not, for me such is only a tool, like Jesus, Muhammed, Krishna, or anyone else, who can be used in order to introduce certain mystic concepts which emerged in Buddhist schools as well as other places in the world.

How much more clear can I be? I am a Buddhist, but not what you may consider a "real Buddhist", since you maybe don't believe in a Mystic sort religion or Buddhism. I am very devout in my religion, it is not a game to me. I do not believe in the "disengaging" mentality.

Furthermore, you are correct, I apply different rules to myself than to other people, I want a world where I can do whatever I please and you should all assist me in doing whatever I wish, but if you won't, then I'll simply take what I can from our interaction of good, and eschew what I consider unhelpful. If you are troublesome, I'll use dialogue to make an example of you and showcase your behavior as unsavory, or use you to make me appear a martyr in the eyes of people, or any number of tactics

What you're dealing with here is a person who will use all sorts of tactics towards helping people who seek me out or listen to these words to learn a different way of thinking and way of life.

Thus, I understand I may be a threat to any radical sensibilities in yourself, but what benefit is it to you if people do anything? Why not simply let me "have my way" and even if I'm "lying" to people (and I'm not, in my understanding), just let those who I am lying to and will believe me, fall for

You have no reward, you have no future, you have no savior, you have nothing, and your destiny is to die and cease to exist forever, is it not? So what are you concerned about? Let me "have my way" and leave me unobstructed, you gain nothing, I am the one who is delusional and believes in "gain", you have nothing at all to gain, you only lose and waste your precious limited life by these activities, you do not believe in rewards or punishments, so don't worry about me or who I take with me or convince of anything or delude with my Maya.

Or have I misunderstood something? You do have some reason to try to correct me? Then please teach the Dharma in response to the things I say, then we can all benefit perhaps, even from my folly generating your wise responses.

Anyway though, we can have a friendly interaction too. It seems quite clear you dislike me, you dislike my style, you dislike my agenda, and you may feel it is important to promote your particular brand of Buddhism.

Your particular brand of Buddhism is in my opinion, not particularly or necessarily beneficial to anyone really, nor is it fun, but overall boring and very possibly also misinterpreted by you and your teachers, and untrue, but nonetheless, I'd be happy for you to share it so that I can learn what your people are sensitive about for when I might interact with them in order to better manipulate them and seduce them towards my agenda and my particular sort of Buddhism.

Please understand, our people have been doing this since ages past as well, and your people in the forests won't in the end succeed in anything probably, since each generation of them ceases to exist, and their goals appear also to be "worthless" necessarily. Luckily, there is no importance related to you "winning" or "defaming" me in any sense, you gain nothing. Like I said before, I am the fool who believes in "gain" and "winning", so show that you're a strong person who holds to what it appears you are suggesting, and allow me to "win", and your task (however pointless it is, worthless, unnecessary, and whatever else) is simply to speak the "True Dharma" and speak honestly to me like I have spoken honestly to you. That sounds fair. Of course I don't believe in fairness though really, I believe I should be given everything good of course and all assistance and help, you should be given what you want, which is to Cease to Exist and thus never Suffer? So why shouldn't we both get what we want immediately? What is impeding you? I'm certainly not trying to.

This is a Buddhist forum. If you want to proselytize then you need to find a differen platform, because what you preach is not Buddhism, and it would be immoral to pretend it is.

Francis. What I'm talking about is or has been called Buddhism historically for more generations than this new Atheistic Buddhism which has been preached only by a select group and minority if at all in only recent history. You don't have the precedent, I do. Furthermore, if you people can preach your a-historical rubbish, I should be allowed to inform people of the opinion that this a-historical rubbish which you suggest is "Always the Real Buddhism" has not "Always" been considered Buddhism, no, but my "Mystical Crap" has been the majority of what has been called and considered Buddhism and Buddhist historically.

Yes. My stuff. Not your stuff, francis.

Your stuff is made Western re-invention of Buddhism and colonial orientalist destruction of historical Buddhism. Yes, even if your jungle buddies are affirming you and giving you back rubs and even if they are faithless themselves, that doesn't mean some 2500 years of Buddhist history is out the window just because francis doesn't like to read everything or look into it, or likes to imagine people in the past were not believing in what amounts to "mere superstitions" in your interpretation.

I'm the only one making a solid and repeated defense for real history. You and VisuddhiRaptor and other Western Militant Atheist fanatics and colonizers, who pretend to love Buddhism, but really just convert Buddhism to make it into Atheist Nihilism.

The ideas proposed by VisuddhiRaptor, his agenda, ultimately makes no sense, yours probably doesn't make sense either.

As a whackjob, let me tell you, at the very least, your internal logic should make some good sense, just as a human courtesy.

Mine does. This "Universal Dharma" crap I'm talking about, is a test to see who knows historic Buddhism, I mean the stuff that was called Buddhist by most people for the majority of those 2500 years or so of Buddhist history in India, China, Japan, and elsewhere.

What I'm seeing is that this website, and other websites, are full of "white folk" who don't know Buddhism from a paper bag, they don't know or even believe in any of the historical stuff, they would be utterly alien to the ancient Buddhists and Buddhist sympathizers in history, I would not be alien to them, they would know what the heck I'm talking about.

They would worship with me even, their religion and my religion are the same religion, we all believed in the Power, and not that "there is no justice really, everyone just dies forever, there is no watching force, there is no power" etc.

So I would've gotten along fine with the 2500 years of "frauds", I would've even been a dominant force back then, ancestrally, because of my background and my energy and enthusiasm for the teachings. Would've been "Big in Japan".

You on the other hand, might have gotten yourself killed for real heresy, along with VisuddhiRaptor. The tables have turned though, and now people like you are the dominant voice online, completely taking a nice hot piss over all of Buddhist history, and the urea or uric acid or whatever is bleaching it all of its original cumin color.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: francis on August 09, 2017, 03:01:11 am
Francis. What I'm talking about is or has been called Buddhism historically for more generations than this new Atheistic Buddhism which has been preached only by a select group and minority if at all in only recent history. You don't have the precedent, I do. Furthermore, if you people can preach your a-historical rubbish, I should be allowed to inform people of the opinion that this a-historical rubbish which you suggest is "Always the Real Buddhism" has not "Always" been considered Buddhism, no, but my "Mystical Crap" has been the majority of what has been called and considered Buddhism and Buddhist historically.

The Artis Magistra,

No, because you have already stated your agenda is for a mystic religion called "Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma", which has nothing to do with Buddhism. Sure, inform people of your "Mystical Crap", but on another platform, a non Buddhist one.

I see you are playing the precedent card, again. From what you have posted, I can only imagine you learnt Buddhism by osmosis, because you didn’t learn from a teacher, as you have stated numerous times. Remember, ego is not a good teacher, and you are not likely to see through the illusion of ego by protecting your ego.

Yes. My stuff. Not your stuff, francis.

Your stuff is made Western re-invention of Buddhism and colonial orientalist destruction of historical Buddhism. Yes, even if your jungle buddies are affirming you and giving you back rubs and even if they are faithless themselves, that doesn't mean some 2500 years of Buddhist history is out the window just because francis doesn't like to read everything or look into it, or likes to imagine people in the past were not believing in what amounts to "mere superstitions" in your interpretation.

Yet, we have the Pali Canon, records of the Buddha’s sermons to read and study.

I'm the only one making a solid and repeated defense for real history. You and VisuddhiRaptor and other Western Militant Atheist fanatics and colonizers, who pretend to love Buddhism, but really just convert Buddhism to make it into Atheist Nihilism.

Atheist nihilism, because the Buddha didn’t teach reincarnation? 

The ideas proposed by VisuddhiRaptor, his agenda, ultimately makes no sense, yours probably doesn't make sense either.

As a whackjob, let me tell you, at the very least, your internal logic should make some good sense, just as a human courtesy.

Mine does. This "Universal Dharma" crap I'm talking about, is a test to see who knows historic Buddhism, I mean the stuff that was called Buddhist by most people for the majority of those 2500 years or so of Buddhist history in India, China, Japan, and elsewhere

What I'm seeing is that this website, and other websites, are full of "white folk" who don't know Buddhism from a paper bag, they don't know or even believe in any of the historical stuff, they would be utterly alien to the ancient Buddhists and Buddhist sympathizers in history, I would not be alien to them, they would know what the heck I'm talking about.

They would worship with me even, their religion and my religion are the same religion, we all believed in the Power, and not that "there is no justice really, everyone just dies forever, there is no watching force, there is no power" etc.

So I would've gotten along fine with the 2500 years of "frauds", I would've even been a dominant force back then, ancestrally, because of my background and my energy and enthusiasm for the teachings. Would've been "Big in Japan"..

So far, I don’t think you have shown a source of the historical stuff you talk about, and from what you have said so far, I think you are confusing Buddhism with other Indian belief systems. It’s like you don’t know the distinctions between Buddhism (a sramanic tradition) and Brahmanism.

You on the other hand, might have gotten yourself killed for real heresy, along with VisuddhiRaptor. The tables have turned though, and now people like you are the dominant voice online, completely taking a nice hot piss over all of Buddhist history, and the urea or uric acid or whatever is bleaching it all of its original cumin color.

I think you missed the Buddha’s teachings on non-violence.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: Pixie on August 09, 2017, 03:11:02 am
 ......
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: The Artis Magistra on August 09, 2017, 08:14:46 am
Francis. What I'm talking about is or has been called Buddhism historically for more generations than this new Atheistic Buddhism which has been preached only by a select group and minority if at all in only recent history. You don't have the precedent, I do. Furthermore, if you people can preach your a-historical rubbish, I should be allowed to inform people of the opinion that this a-historical rubbish which you suggest is "Always the Real Buddhism" has not "Always" been considered Buddhism, no, but my "Mystical Crap" has been the majority of what has been called and considered Buddhism and Buddhist historically.

The Artis Magistra,

No, because you have already stated your agenda is for a mystic religion called "Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma", which has nothing to do with Buddhism. Sure, inform people of your "Mystical Crap", but on another platform, a non Buddhist one.

I see you are playing the precedent card, again. From what you have posted, I can only imagine you learnt Buddhism by osmosis, because you didn’t learn from a teacher, as you have stated numerous times. Remember, ego is not a good teacher, and you are not likely to see through the illusion of ego by protecting your ego.

Yes. My stuff. Not your stuff, francis.

Your stuff is made Western re-invention of Buddhism and colonial orientalist destruction of historical Buddhism. Yes, even if your jungle buddies are affirming you and giving you back rubs and even if they are faithless themselves, that doesn't mean some 2500 years of Buddhist history is out the window just because francis doesn't like to read everything or look into it, or likes to imagine people in the past were not believing in what amounts to "mere superstitions" in your interpretation.

Yet, we have the Pali Canon, records of the Buddha’s sermons to read and study.

I'm the only one making a solid and repeated defense for real history. You and VisuddhiRaptor and other Western Militant Atheist fanatics and colonizers, who pretend to love Buddhism, but really just convert Buddhism to make it into Atheist Nihilism.

Atheist nihilism, because the Buddha didn’t teach reincarnation? 

The ideas proposed by VisuddhiRaptor, his agenda, ultimately makes no sense, yours probably doesn't make sense either.

As a whackjob, let me tell you, at the very least, your internal logic should make some good sense, just as a human courtesy.

Mine does. This "Universal Dharma" crap I'm talking about, is a test to see who knows historic Buddhism, I mean the stuff that was called Buddhist by most people for the majority of those 2500 years or so of Buddhist history in India, China, Japan, and elsewhere

What I'm seeing is that this website, and other websites, are full of "white folk" who don't know Buddhism from a paper bag, they don't know or even believe in any of the historical stuff, they would be utterly alien to the ancient Buddhists and Buddhist sympathizers in history, I would not be alien to them, they would know what the heck I'm talking about.

They would worship with me even, their religion and my religion are the same religion, we all believed in the Power, and not that "there is no justice really, everyone just dies forever, there is no watching force, there is no power" etc.

So I would've gotten along fine with the 2500 years of "frauds", I would've even been a dominant force back then, ancestrally, because of my background and my energy and enthusiasm for the teachings. Would've been "Big in Japan"..

So far, I don’t think you have shown a source of the historical stuff you talk about, and from what you have said so far, I think you are confusing Buddhism with other Indian belief systems. It’s like you don’t know the distinctions between Buddhism (a sramanic tradition) and Brahmanism.

You on the other hand, might have gotten yourself killed for real heresy, along with VisuddhiRaptor. The tables have turned though, and now people like you are the dominant voice online, completely taking a nice hot piss over all of Buddhist history, and the urea or uric acid or whatever is bleaching it all of its original cumin color.

I think you missed the Buddha’s teachings on non-violence.

Hi francis. What I refer to as "Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma" is inclusive of the things called by academics "Buddhism" for the last 2500 years or so. It might sound more like Indian religion than Western Atheism does, because it is more related to Indian cosmology than to modern Western Atheistic Science.

You people are "violent" in your own ways, because you disparage all those develops that have traditionally understood to be Buddhist. Yes, they include the Suttas attributed to Buddha. Weirdly, from those, generations of people had the ideas of re-birth meaning something other than waking up one day and proclaiming "I'm re-born!". People who had these Suttas, spoke of things like Avalokitesvara, Amitabha, Vairocana, whatever else. People who had these Suttas had all sorts of ideas for some 2500 years that weren't sounding like your Western Atheism. So please stop trying to "run me off" the website. The moderators are surely on your side anyway, as are most of these people on the internet these days it seems. You don't have the historical precedent though.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: francis on August 09, 2017, 04:14:19 pm
Hi francis. What I refer to as "Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma" is inclusive of the things called by academics "Buddhism" for the last 2500 years or so. It might sound more like Indian religion than Western Atheism does, because it is more related to Indian cosmology than to modern Western Atheistic Science.

You people are "violent" in your own ways, because you disparage all those develops that have traditionally understood to be Buddhist. Yes, they include the Suttas attributed to Buddha. Weirdly, from those, generations of people had the ideas of re-birth meaning something other than waking up one day and proclaiming "I'm re-born!". People who had these Suttas, spoke of things like Avalokitesvara, Amitabha, Vairocana, whatever else. People who had these Suttas had all sorts of ideas for some 2500 years that weren't sounding like your Western Atheism. So please stop trying to "run me off" the website. The moderators are surely on your side anyway, as are most of these people on the internet these days it seems. You don't have the historical precedent though.

The Artis Magistra,

"Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma" is not the Buddha’s Dharma. They appear to be total fabricated by you. As you alluded to, it’s really Indian cosmology dressed up as Buddhism, and for the record -- the Buddha is not the ninth avatar of Vishnu.

The Five Dhyani Buddha’s and their bodhisattvas like Avalokitesvara were constructed by the Mahayana to fill the vacuum created following the Buddha’s parinirvana.   

So far, you are yet to produce any of the sutta’s you refer to for authority.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: The Artis Magistra on August 10, 2017, 12:02:51 am
Hi francis. What I refer to as "Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma" is inclusive of the things called by academics "Buddhism" for the last 2500 years or so. It might sound more like Indian religion than Western Atheism does, because it is more related to Indian cosmology than to modern Western Atheistic Science.

You people are "violent" in your own ways, because you disparage all those develops that have traditionally understood to be Buddhist. Yes, they include the Suttas attributed to Buddha. Weirdly, from those, generations of people had the ideas of re-birth meaning something other than waking up one day and proclaiming "I'm re-born!". People who had these Suttas, spoke of things like Avalokitesvara, Amitabha, Vairocana, whatever else. People who had these Suttas had all sorts of ideas for some 2500 years that weren't sounding like your Western Atheism. So please stop trying to "run me off" the website. The moderators are surely on your side anyway, as are most of these people on the internet these days it seems. You don't have the historical precedent though.

The Artis Magistra,

"Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma" is not the Buddha’s Dharma. They appear to be total fabricated by you. As you alluded to, it’s really Indian cosmology dressed up as Buddhism, and for the record -- the Buddha is not the ninth avatar of Vishnu.

The Five Dhyani Buddha’s and their bodhisattvas like Avalokitesvara were constructed by the Mahayana to fill the vacuum created following the Buddha’s parinirvana.   

So far, you are yet to produce any of the sutta’s you refer to for authority.

All I've been saying generally is that for the majority of Buddhist history, there appear to have been ideas circulating among people called or considered Buddhists which seem to differ from the things you and VisuddhiRaptor, Rahul, and others seem to believe in.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: francis on August 10, 2017, 01:12:34 am
Hi francis. What I refer to as "Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma" is inclusive of the things called by academics "Buddhism" for the last 2500 years or so. It might sound more like Indian religion than Western Atheism does, because it is more related to Indian cosmology than to modern Western Atheistic Science.

You people are "violent" in your own ways, because you disparage all those develops that have traditionally understood to be Buddhist. Yes, they include the Suttas attributed to Buddha. Weirdly, from those, generations of people had the ideas of re-birth meaning something other than waking up one day and proclaiming "I'm re-born!". People who had these Suttas, spoke of things like Avalokitesvara, Amitabha, Vairocana, whatever else. People who had these Suttas had all sorts of ideas for some 2500 years that weren't sounding like your Western Atheism. So please stop trying to "run me off" the website. The moderators are surely on your side anyway, as are most of these people on the internet these days it seems. You don't have the historical precedent though.

The Artis Magistra,

"Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma" is not the Buddha’s Dharma. They appear to be total fabricated by you. As you alluded to, it’s really Indian cosmology dressed up as Buddhism, and for the record -- the Buddha is not the ninth avatar of Vishnu.

The Five Dhyani Buddha’s and their bodhisattvas like Avalokitesvara were constructed by the Mahayana to fill the vacuum created following the Buddha’s parinirvana.   

So far, you are yet to produce any of the sutta’s you refer to for authority.

All I've been saying generally is that for the majority of Buddhist history, there appear to have been ideas circulating among people called or considered Buddhists which seem to differ from the things you and VisuddhiRaptor, Rahul, and others seem to believe in.

No, what I am saying is your ideas on "Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma “differ from what is considered the majority of Buddhist history. Then when challenged, because you have not been able to back up your claims, you start abusing people.

Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: Spiny Norman on August 10, 2017, 01:43:26 am
This is commonly mindlessly posted by the sheep at Dhamma Wheel.  :lmfao:  :teehee:

More arrogant twaddle from the Buddhist Borg.  It's not enough for you to insult members here who challenge your idiosyncratic dogma, now you have to insult the members of another forum.   Your ego is the size of a planet.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: The Artis Magistra on August 10, 2017, 02:16:05 pm
Hi francis. What I refer to as "Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma" is inclusive of the things called by academics "Buddhism" for the last 2500 years or so. It might sound more like Indian religion than Western Atheism does, because it is more related to Indian cosmology than to modern Western Atheistic Science.

You people are "violent" in your own ways, because you disparage all those develops that have traditionally understood to be Buddhist. Yes, they include the Suttas attributed to Buddha. Weirdly, from those, generations of people had the ideas of re-birth meaning something other than waking up one day and proclaiming "I'm re-born!". People who had these Suttas, spoke of things like Avalokitesvara, Amitabha, Vairocana, whatever else. People who had these Suttas had all sorts of ideas for some 2500 years that weren't sounding like your Western Atheism. So please stop trying to "run me off" the website. The moderators are surely on your side anyway, as are most of these people on the internet these days it seems. You don't have the historical precedent though.

The Artis Magistra,

"Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma" is not the Buddha’s Dharma. They appear to be total fabricated by you. As you alluded to, it’s really Indian cosmology dressed up as Buddhism, and for the record -- the Buddha is not the ninth avatar of Vishnu.

The Five Dhyani Buddha’s and their bodhisattvas like Avalokitesvara were constructed by the Mahayana to fill the vacuum created following the Buddha’s parinirvana.   

So far, you are yet to produce any of the sutta’s you refer to for authority.

All I've been saying generally is that for the majority of Buddhist history, there appear to have been ideas circulating among people called or considered Buddhists which seem to differ from the things you and VisuddhiRaptor, Rahul, and others seem to believe in.

No, what I am saying is your ideas on "Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma “differ from what is considered the majority of Buddhist history. Then when challenged, because you have not been able to back up your claims, you start abusing people.

I apologize for any abuse, I did not intend to abuse you by talking about what I understand as the well-known history of thought considered Buddhist and majority Buddhist.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: francis on August 10, 2017, 03:59:17 pm
I apologize for any abuse, I did not intend to abuse you by talking about what I understand as the well-known history of thought considered Buddhist and majority Buddhist.

The Artis Magistra,

Nice try there with your passive aggressive apology. How about reaching into the bag of “goodliness” you profess to possess, and practice what you preach for a change.  You quote the Five Dhyani Buddha’s, but don’t appear to know anything about them, or their history. I think it’s more than obvious that you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to Buddhism.  As said previously, what you call "Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma" is not the Buddha’s Dharma. Get a real (face to face) teacher to instruct you in the difference.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: The Artis Magistra on August 10, 2017, 04:57:24 pm
I apologize for any abuse, I did not intend to abuse you by talking about what I understand as the well-known history of thought considered Buddhist and majority Buddhist.

The Artis Magistra,

Nice try there with your passive aggressive apology. How about reaching into the bag of “goodliness” you profess to possess, and practice what you preach for a change.  You quote the Five Dhyani Buddha’s, but don’t appear to know anything about them, or their history. I think it’s more than obvious that you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to Buddhism.  As said previously, what you call "Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma" is not the Buddha’s Dharma. Get a real (face to face) teacher to instruct you in the difference.

Francis, I don't know what your hostility towards me if for. I am not interested in finding someone to suppress or correct me. If I find someone to say to me "no, you are wrong, there is no Primordial Buddha God Power thing" I will simply feel bad. It does not change what I am saying, what was said before me,how that material is being used by me, and the reality or non-reality of such a thing as I am referring to. All it does, is have a potentially unpleasant encounter between me and some fellow who agrees instead with you. So why would I need that, especially considering that I have you to tell me the same thing as this teacher would tell me? This is a far more comfortable arrangement. You can keep harshly admonishing me and attempting to suppress what I say and my freedom to do as I please, arbitrarily since according to your philosophy it appears you have no advantage over me, we both end up in the exact same experience or non-experience regardless of what I do, the only difference being that I live a life of happy delusions with my Supreme Buddha and imaginary miraclesvand worship and adoration and praise, you live your faithless and honest "realistic" and unpleasant life, and end up getting exactly the same end result as me, which youband VisuddhiRaptor and Rahul and others like ground suggest is simply being dead and gone forever. In fact, I gain by doing whatever I please, the exact same end results or final state that your most respected teachers or historical figures get or got, and I can do it all by laughing and misleading people all the way! Isn't it wonderful francis? So instead of being jealous of how I can freely indulge myself and end up not being as restricted as you (and cranky), why not simply live up to your philosophy and indulge yourself? My philosophy or religion is restrictive though, because I do not believe that we are certainly guaranteed to end up in the same final state, but rather, that I will have to face the results of my conduct, as will you. This puts you at somewhat of an advantage though, since in your philosophy there is no sorting or judgment of good and bad deeds, you can simply be entirelyva rotten and unpleasant person and are immune to repercussions if you escape via death.

I am not interested in anyone admonishing me and telling me that I am delusional and there is no such thing as the Supreme Buddha Power which is actively responsible for all that we contemplate, experience, or decide to do/conduct.

I am fully aware that there is material that can be used to try to say that I am wrong, and ancient material that can be used to try to say that people appeared to believe as I do. Yes, there is much metal to make bullets from, and many stones which can be thrown. I skip doing that because the nature of my philosophy and agenda is such. Your doing so also makes even less sense though, since you and your type of people seem to espouse permanent death and no further experience so no fear or bad results or experience after this life. My actions have a purpose and a cause, even if it is based in delusion, it has an internal logic which makes sense. Your attempts to suppress make little sense though, it should not matter to you what anyone does or says or thinks or what they lie about since they receive the same as you in the end. You have nothing to fight for.

I do want you to continue though, since it gets me to write stuff and furthermore you can continually teach me in detail and using copy pasted quotes or references how exactly I am wrong.

Let me also provide you with more ammunition or encouragement.

If a man came along and said to me "I am Shakyamuni Buddha, Siddhartha Gautama, here to teach you" and behind him were an army of monks "and this is my true Sangha" and he continues "I have heard from my top beloved monk, the one you call francis, that you have been saying that ignorant folk in the past have said that there is a Power which brings about experience, and there is no such Power and all things that you see are driven by nothing and don't even exist and no Power is generating experience, there is nothing experienced and nothing moving or existing or appearing to move and exist, and when you die there is no further experience which even now does not exist since there was and is no power generating experience and there is only Nothing now and forever after", I will say "Ok" backing off, escaping this man and his army, and saying then "phew, what a nutbag that was! There is experience and Nothing can not do anything, and so if there is anything appearing and changing there is Something generating it and making it appear to move and change, a Power, and thus that all this sorting and resolving of things has a a place and a cause, as it clearly appears now" and then, thinking of a name for it, I might think, "didn't that Atheistic senseless maniac who approached me earlier call himself Buddha? Haha, it would be funny to name the Power after such a one as claimed there was no cause to experience nor consequence to anything, alternatively, I could call the Power after the name of his chief monk, francis?"

If you are not amused by my story and are furthermore unable to grasp the truth of it, then again I am at an advantage, and you are at a loss, as I received the pleasure, you received nothing or the pain, and I did not even intend to deprive you or hurt you thereby, but according to you and your associates, and your supposed leader you imagine, you will have the same result in the end as me, which is why I am at the advantage while I enjoy and use, you are at the disadvantage while you waste your time and throw aside things like a baby. What Nation are you from culturally? Are you an Australian like VisuddhiRaptor?
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: francis on August 11, 2017, 01:17:13 am
I apologize for any abuse, I did not intend to abuse you by talking about what I understand as the well-known history of thought considered Buddhist and majority Buddhist.

The Artis Magistra,

Nice try there with your passive aggressive apology. How about reaching into the bag of “goodliness” you profess to possess, and practice what you preach for a change.  You quote the Five Dhyani Buddha’s, but don’t appear to know anything about them, or their history. I think it’s more than obvious that you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to Buddhism.  As said previously, what you call "Universal Dharma" or "Open Dharma" is not the Buddha’s Dharma. Get a real (face to face) teacher to instruct you in the difference.

Francis, I don't know what your hostility towards me if for. I am not interested in finding someone to suppress or correct me. If I find someone to say to me "no, you are wrong, there is no Primordial Buddha God Power thing" I will simply feel bad. It does not change what I am saying, what was said before me,how that material is being used by me, and the reality or non-reality of such a thing as I am referring to. All it does, is have a potentially unpleasant encounter between me and some fellow who agrees instead with you. So why would I need that, especially considering that I have you to tell me the same thing as this teacher would tell me? This is a far more comfortable arrangement. You can keep harshly admonishing me and attempting to suppress what I say and my freedom to do as I please, arbitrarily since according to your philosophy it appears you have no advantage over me, we both end up in the exact same experience or non-experience regardless of what I do, the only difference being that I live a life of happy delusions with my Supreme Buddha and imaginary miraclesvand worship and adoration and praise, you live your faithless and honest "realistic" and unpleasant life, and end up getting exactly the same end result as me, which youband VisuddhiRaptor and Rahul and others like ground suggest is simply being dead and gone forever. In fact, I gain by doing whatever I please, the exact same end results or final state that your most respected teachers or historical figures get or got, and I can do it all by laughing and misleading people all the way! Isn't it wonderful francis? So instead of being jealous of how I can freely indulge myself and end up not being as restricted as you (and cranky), why not simply live up to your philosophy and indulge yourself? My philosophy or religion is restrictive though, because I do not believe that we are certainly guaranteed to end up in the same final state, but rather, that I will have to face the results of my conduct, as will you. This puts you at somewhat of an advantage though, since in your philosophy there is no sorting or judgment of good and bad deeds, you can simply be entirelyva rotten and unpleasant person and are immune to repercussions if you escape via death.

I am not interested in anyone admonishing me and telling me that I am delusional and there is no such thing as the Supreme Buddha Power which is actively responsible for all that we contemplate, experience, or decide to do/conduct.

I am fully aware that there is material that can be used to try to say that I am wrong, and ancient material that can be used to try to say that people appeared to believe as I do. Yes, there is much metal to make bullets from, and many stones which can be thrown. I skip doing that because the nature of my philosophy and agenda is such. Your doing so also makes even less sense though, since you and your type of people seem to espouse permanent death and no further experience so no fear or bad results or experience after this life. My actions have a purpose and a cause, even if it is based in delusion, it has an internal logic which makes sense. Your attempts to suppress make little sense though, it should not matter to you what anyone does or says or thinks or what they lie about since they receive the same as you in the end. You have nothing to fight for.

I do want you to continue though, since it gets me to write stuff and furthermore you can continually teach me in detail and using copy pasted quotes or references how exactly I am wrong.

Let me also provide you with more ammunition or encouragement.

If a man came along and said to me "I am Shakyamuni Buddha, Siddhartha Gautama, here to teach you" and behind him were an army of monks "and this is my true Sangha" and he continues "I have heard from my top beloved monk, the one you call francis, that you have been saying that ignorant folk in the past have said that there is a Power which brings about experience, and there is no such Power and all things that you see are driven by nothing and don't even exist and no Power is generating experience, there is nothing experienced and nothing moving or existing or appearing to move and exist, and when you die there is no further experience which even now does not exist since there was and is no power generating experience and there is only Nothing now and forever after", I will say "Ok" backing off, escaping this man and his army, and saying then "phew, what a nutbag that was! There is experience and Nothing can not do anything, and so if there is anything appearing and changing there is Something generating it and making it appear to move and change, a Power, and thus that all this sorting and resolving of things has a a place and a cause, as it clearly appears now" and then, thinking of a name for it, I might think, "didn't that Atheistic senseless maniac who approached me earlier call himself Buddha? Haha, it would be funny to name the Power after such a one as claimed there was no cause to experience nor consequence to anything, alternatively, I could call the Power after the name of his chief monk, francis?"

If you are not amused by my story and are furthermore unable to grasp the truth of it, then again I am at an advantage, and you are at a loss, as I received the pleasure, you received nothing or the pain, and I did not even intend to deprive you or hurt you thereby, but according to you and your associates, and your supposed leader you imagine, you will have the same result in the end as me, which is why I am at the advantage while I enjoy and use, you are at the disadvantage while you waste your time and throw aside things like a baby. What Nation are you from culturally? Are you an Australian like VisuddhiRaptor?

Put simply, this is a Buddhist forum, not the The Artis Magistra forum.
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: Pixie on August 11, 2017, 02:12:11 am

Quote from: francis
Put simply, this is a Buddhist forum, not the The Artis Magistra forum.


 :goodpost:
Title: Re: For beginners: Avoid imputing Western philosphy onto Buddhism!
Post by: The Artis Magistra on August 11, 2017, 02:29:42 am

Quote from: francis
Put simply, this is a Buddhist forum, not the The Artis Magistra forum.


 :goodpost:

You have a problem with me Pixie? Here I am, lets talk it out. You've posted some things which make it appear you've become a little disenchanted with Buddhism but still attracted, you also take the opportunity to digitally kick me when you have a chance or take the opportunity to gang up when you can, not the most endearing of traits, but I want you to be tougher than that, less cowardly, and speak up about your issues with me.

Yes, this is a public forum about Buddhism, and all I post on here is public dialogue regarding Buddhism to the public. Meanwhile, people try to "shut me up" and suppress my writing, when instead they too can write just as much about whatever Buddhist topics interest them, so what is the problem? You don't like what someone is saying? Ignore them, or engage with them and state what your problems are.

It would help everyone to let it be known, instead of just taking swipes. Are you a female? I'm just wondering, your name kind of seemed effeminate to me, nothing wrong with that, I was just curious about the female experience with Buddhism.

I posted about some Female experiences with Buddhist Gurus, not all that pleasant for them, some experiencing years of disturbing troubles, as they tend to with any types of gurus and sects and cults. Maybe nothing has happened to you though, but if you're concealing something which may warn or benefit people, I don't think that is very good either.

So why don't you get a little bold and state your issues, state your philosophy, engage on a forum, state in what areas you disagree with what I propose and suggest, etc. Come on, this is a public forum, we are all rather anonymous here, so have a little fun and use it, talk, get it off your chest, you have a problem with me? Lets talk it out. You don't like me? You prefer VissudhiRaptor and francis instead? Tell me why. I'm curious about it all.

What I don't like though, is you coming along once in a while and taking a swipe, not explaining why, and acting like a wimpy person. There is nothing to be wimpy about.

Come on, all of you, give it a go! Lets talk it out, you have a problem with me, you have a problem with the Dharma I talk about? You have a problem with various developments in history that were or are called Buddhist? Lets discuss.

Tell me why you're a faithless person, I am interested in that too, or in what form your faithlessness arises, like you believe this and this and this, and this is why, but not this, because of this, discuss it. It may be of great benefit to whoever reads it.

This is a FORUM. Forums are for talking, discussing, no need to be a leech and just letting everyone do the talking while you suck off their content production and give very brief nothings.

Go ahead, give! Show your generosity, share your wisdom and knowledge!
SimplePortal 2.3.3 © 2008-2010, SimplePortal