XPost: talk.religion.buddhism, alt.zen, alt.philosophy.zen
XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy
From: kimmerian@fastmail.fm
Jigme Dorje :
> OK, you win. Everybody's an idiot except you.
Definitely idiotic of you to think that your little clique
is everybody.
> The means justify the ends, and if you have to twist the other
> person's words, throw around invalid arguments to confuse the
> issue and misrepresent the others' positions, that's ok, just as
> long as you get the last word in - it's a battle of attrition.
Heh. I just lately gave you the last word in a half-dozen
or so places and then returned to politely ignoring you.
Result: here you are back again, blathering away just as usual.
You're an attention whore.
Of course that wouldn't matter if you'd backed up what you
said. But instead you've made accusations w/out giving one
bit of evidence, proving only that you're having a fit of pique.
halfawake :
> If he does look that way, no doubt it is because he misrepresented key
> portions of the Lotus Sutra in a previous lifetime.
Heh. Rob can't show I misrepresented the Lotus Sutra here
in this discussion, so he babbles about what he imagines I
might have done in another life -- his alternative to admitting
that the sutra describes the Bodhisattva
Sarvasattvapriyadarsana immolating himself to honor the
Buddha, an act labeled "the most sublime worship of the law" by
the eight Buddhas who watch.
zenworm :
> Perhaps Catawumpus is a woman who has lost a child and suffers from
> the anger of grief.
Perhaps zenworm speculates about me because he's unable to
address what I've said. When last heard from he was busy
making excuses, stamping his feet, and referring to examples he
hadn't given.
Evelyn :
> There is something very angry about him/her that simply cancels out the
> possibility of rational discussion.
Excuses, excuses. Evelyn's attempt at rational discussion
was based on the obvious falsehood that I halted my
interpretation of the Four Noble Truths at the first one: same
lie she's recited during earlier conversations. But she
doesn't want to concede they take a highly critical perspective
on worldly existence, so all she can do is toss
always-unsupported accusations. Pathetic, of course, but there
she is.
Keynes :
> We'd like to help, but we haven't enough skill.
But you compensate for your lack of skill with a plenitude
of eel-wriggling. I hope that you know a really good
dry-cleaner, because you've been dragging your soul through the
mud.
Jigme Dorje :
> Yes, you are both very perceptive, and that is of course what I was
You claimed I insisted on having the last word even though
I had just given it to you in several different places.
Obviously what really bothers you is being ignored. To get the
attention you're desperate for you tossed some totally
unsupported accusations, same way you make laughable assertions
about religion and philosophy.
halfawake :
> It's not the anger that cancels it out for me. It is just that he
> will repeat his assertions and completely ignore anything you say to
A shame that Rob has to lie to himself that way. Truth be
told I've given more attention to what he said than he
appreciated and more than it deserved. He began by
constructing a stawman when he argued "There's nothing negative
about being liberated from delusion and attachment." I'd
never claimed differently. My point was that Buddhism includes
among other things teachings highly critical of worldly
existence (a shock and a scandal to certain worldlings in these
newsgroups).
Rob finished, several thousand words of bullshit later, by
falsely claiming that my interpretation of the First Noble
Truth included only "physical suffering." A plain lie.
Rather than insisting on the restriction Rob wrongly attributed
me, I explicitly listed mourning.
Hardly worth summarizing the rest of the dialogue, so I'll
let those examples be the alpha and omega of halfawake's
nattering unless he wants to go into detail on his other errors
and evasions.
Nobody in Particular :
> It's an ego thing. He must always be right. If you don't acknowledge his
If "it's an ego thing," then the personal attacks aimed in
my direction by Rob, Jigme, Nobody, Evelyn, et al. show who
the dented egos belong to, since none of their commentary comes
equipped with anything more than name-calling: nothing
demonstrating I was in the wrong on the stuff we discussed, and
nothing to excuse the crap that they've talked about the
Bible, the Buddhist scriptures, etc. They're merely throwing a
collective tantrum.
Evelyn :
> I think you have him figured out! LOL
LOL fits: Evelyn's head is lolling on her shoulders while
she waits for nurse to come.
Jigme Dorje :
> When a deeply disturbed man engages others' egos, this is not
When Jigme plays dime-store psychoanalyst it's a sure sign
he feels deeply disturbed, probably because something has
stopped him from fawning over himself in his usual way. In the
case here his self-admiration was rudely interrupted by my
comments about his misreadings of various scriptures, plus some
other observations on his nattering. He keeps referring to
"moving on" but he always comes back again: another indication
he can't let go.
Evelyn :
> Or if you don't have any more "ammo" than that..........
My point exactly: about half-a-dozen posts here attacking
me personally, none with any ammunition better than
name-calling, and all dodging the topics. You folks are firing
blanks.
-- Catawumpus
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
