XPost: talk.religion.buddhism, alt.zen, alt.philosophy.zen   
   XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy   
   From: epsteinrob@yahoo.com   
      
   Julian wrote:   
      
   > On 15/08/2010 03:14, halfawake wrote:   
   >   
   >> Julian wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> 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   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)