XPost: talk.religion.buddhism, alt.zen, alt.philosophy.zen   
   XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy   
   From: kimmerian@fastmail.fm   
      
   halfawake :   
      
   > I understand your point, but I don't think you understand Jigme's point.   
      
        That's your misunderstanding, then.  Jigme argued Buddhism   
   "does not comment negatively on life here" and similarly   
   denied it makes any critical judgments.  Of course he was wrong.   
   The Four Noble Truths are only the most obvious example   
   showing Buddhism includes exactly what Jigmes claims is missing   
   there.   
      
   >   He has acknowledged that you are literally correct that what you say   
      
        No, he has repeated his assertion and insisted that I'm in   
   the wrong.  But he didn't show anywhere I was mistaken, and   
   the evidence very clearly indicates that the mistake belongs to   
   him.   
      
   > is in the Buddha's 4 NT, but he has also pointed out that the 4 NT   
   > presented in that way is the truth of a certain part of the Buddhist   
   > spectrum.  He has proposed that there is a higher standpoint to look at   
   > the Buddha's teachings from, and that it is a different standpoint than   
   > the one that describes life as suffering to be escaped from.   
      
        Yes, Jigme likes to claim he's looking at things from some   
   higher level, which puts him at odds with his injunction   
   against vanity.  But that's neither here nor there.  The notion   
   life is "suffering to be escaped from" and related   
   world-rejecting ideas are clearly part of Buddhism, contrary to   
   Jigme's brain-dead assertions that it doesn't make any   
   negative comments about life or offer any critical judgments on   
   the world.   
      
        Of course Jigme is free to adopt a standpoint hiding those   
   elements of Buddhism from his view, but they won't go away   
   just because he refuses to see them, so his claims that they're   
   non-existent remain false.   
      
   > He proposes that this higher teaching is also present in Buddhist sutras,   
   > most clearly represented in Mahayana writings.  You have not   
   > acknowledged and addressed this thesis, just dismissed it as inaccurate   
      
        Wrong again.  I replied directly by noting Jigme failed to   
   support his claim with anything more than hand-waving, and   
   that it couldn't rescue his ridiculous assertion "Buddhism does   
   not comment negatively on life here," which is repeatedly   
   contradicted by the life-denying, world-rejecting commentary in   
   Buddhist scripture and tradition.   
      
   -- Catawumpus   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)