XPost: talk.religion.buddhism, alt.zen, alt.philosophy.zen
XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy
From: Julianlzb87@gmail.com
On 14/08/2010 11:53, possum wrote:
> "Julian" wrote in message
> news:i45nhs$kqe$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> On 14/08/2010 09:14, halfawake wrote:
>>> Julian wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/08/2010 18:21, DT wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Evelyn wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "DT" wrote in message
>>>>>> news:i418a202llk@news3.newsguy.com...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Evelyn wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> "Julian" wrote in message
>>>>>>>> news:i40qsf$hbn$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 12/08/2010 13:10, Jigme Dorje wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 12, 5:18 am, Julian
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 12/08/2010 08:18, halfawake wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Julian wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/08/2010 11:39, Catawumpus wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> halfawake:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The fake conversation is between you and your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ass. Hope
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you're having a
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The fake conversation is the one Evelyn openly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> admitted to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when she denied she was offering a real one.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Which makes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> perfect sense in light of all the fake
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> accusations she's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> tossed.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> They are not fake. They are real accusations
>>>>>>>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>>>>>>> unsubstantiated.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> You can't expect anything else after the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Occultists, and the so
>>>>>>>>>>>>> called
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Korean Zen" and Tibetanista teachers, have so
>>>>>>>>>>>>> profoundly
>>>>>>>>>>>>> twisted her
>>>>>>>>>>>>> melon,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> man.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> If you really want to get occult, try the
>>>>>>>>>>>> assertions of the
>>>>>>>>>>>> Lotus Sutra,
>>>>>>>>>>>> largely based on supernaturalism and magical
>>>>>>>>>>>> thinking
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> You are keen and verbose in seeking evidence with
>>>>>>>>>>> respect to
>>>>>>>>>>> Tibetan foetid rascalities before you'll cease to
>>>>>>>>>>> deny such
>>>
>>> Yes, proving a negative was never my strong suit, since
>>> it is
>>> impossible. One doesn't take assertions that have no
>>> evidence and find
>>> evidence to refute it. I challenge you to find evidence
>>> that there is n
>>> such thing as a unicorn. Prove it. You can't. If you
>>> assert that the
>>> Tibetan lamas have done something you have to provide the
>>> evidence, and
>>> it has to be real evidence or it is pure bullshit. That
>>> won't stop you
>>> from saying it is true over and over again will it?
>>> Asserting things to
>>> exist that have no evidence is a strength of yours and
>>> other
>>> anti-Tibetan ideologues. You find a book with
>>> unsubstantiated assertions
>>> and use it as a citation, or a picture that is supposedly
>>> of skin taken
>>> from living people with no evidence to support it and
>>> then go on about
>>> it as if it were proven. And that is the worst kind of
>>> propaganda. If
>>> you said that Romanians skinned their babies alive I'd
>>> have the same
>>> reaction. I don't care if it's about Tibetans or people
>>> from Chicago.
>>> I'm not a fan of malicious propaganda.
>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> so presumeably you must have copious evidence
>>>>>>>>>>> that the Lotus Sutra
>>>>>>>>>>> is "largely based on supernaturalism and magical
>>>>>>>>>>> thinking"
>>>>>>>>>>> and not on the assiduous practice and study of
>>>>>>>>>>> Buddhism.
>>>>>>>>>>> Please share it.
>>>
>>> When I get a chance I may do that. Meanwhile, if you
>>> think that the
>>> whole setup of the Lotus Sutra, asserting the unending
>>> lineage of
>>> Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, most of them never heard of in
>>> any other
>>> Theravadin or Mahayana record before or after, speaking
>>> of their occult,
>>> magical and supernatural doings, and how the sutra itself
>>> has myriad
>>> magical powers, shifting the emphasis from personal
>>> enlightenment
>>> through understanding to the magical thinking of being
>>> graced with
>>> enlightenment by the mystical power of the sutra itself,
>>> is not an
>>> exercise in magical thinking and supernaturalism of the
>>> highest order,
>>> then that's fine. If you literally accept all of that on
>>> faith, then you
>>> are a religious worshipper, which is also fine. And if
>>> you think the
>>> same magical thinking that the repeated chanting of the
>>> name of the
>>> lotus sutra, with or without any understanding of the
>>> kind that
>>> characterizes the meditative tradition of Buddhism, is
>>> not an exercise
>>> in occultism and magical thinking, then that is fine too,
>>> but it seems
>>> pretty obvious that it is ordinary mantra meditation of
>>> the kind
>>> believed in by Hindus more than Buddhists. Go ahead and
>>> say whatever you
>>> like about it. I'm not even saying it doesn't work. What
>>> I am saying is
>>> that it is rankly hypocritical to believe in that kind of
>>> magical
>>> thinking and accuse Tibetan Buddhism of being overly
>>> occult! What's the
>>> difference?
>>>
>>> If the Lotus Sutra has great content and teaching in it,
>>
>> If you could just spend a couple of hours reading it you
>> might then understand
>> why a host of great sages from, for instance, T'ient-t'ai
>> to Hakuin and beyond
>> hold it in such high esteem and why it is widely regarded
>> as one of the seminal
>> works of the Mahayana and even today Zen Temples across
>> the world have it
>> as a central part of their curriculum and daily practice.
>
> spoken like any ol' jehovah's witness. all of that may be
> so, but it still ignores robert's point.
I find Robert virtually unreadable so if you would do us
both a favour by summarising his point that would be nice.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
