XPost: talk.religion.buddhism, alt.zen, alt.philosophy.zen   
   XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy   
   From: Julianlzb87@gmail.com   
      
   On 14/08/2010 13:47, possum wrote:   
   > "Julian"  wrote in message   
   > news:i45tgh$787$1@news.eternal-september.org...   
   >> On 14/08/2010 11:53, possum wrote:   
   >>> "Julian"   wrote in message   
   >>> news:i45nhs$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.   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)