641b7270   
   XPost: talk.religion.buddhism, alt.zen, alt.philosophy.zen   
   XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy   
   From: epsteinrob@yahoo.com   
      
   RaaN wrote:   
      
   > On Aug 10, 12:25 am, halfawake  wrote:   
   >   
   >>Catawumpus wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>halfawake :   
   >>   
   >>>>>>It's   
   >>>>>>part of the rejection of physical and sensory experience which is always   
   >>>>>>so popular with repressive puritans in every tradition.   
   >>   
   >>>Catawumpus :   
   >>   
   >>>>>    Repressive puritans like the Buddha, you mean?  This comes   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>from the Itivuttaka:   
   >>   
   >>>>>         Even if it's with pain,   
   >>>>>         you should abandon   
   >>>>>         sensual desires   
   >>   
   >>>[...]   
   >>   
   >>>>>    Only one example of many, but a decent illustration of the   
   >>>>>theme.   
   >>   
   >>>1/2:   
   >>   
   >>>>And totally off the point that Buddha used sensory experience as a major   
   >>   
   >>>     Shifting your position so soon?  You weren't satisfied with   
   >>>saying that the Buddha sometimes teaches to use "sensory   
   >>>experience" -- you were complaining about "rejection of physical   
   >>>and sensory experience," which you said is "popular with   
   >>>repressive puritans in every tradition."  But if you're ready to   
   >>>retreat, I won't stop you.   
   >>   
   >>>>mode of developing mindfulness.  Your quote is ignorant, as you   
   >>   
   >>>     Your armchair is uneducated and your pots are badly trained.   
   >>   
   >>>>apparently cannot tell the difference between *sensual desires* and   
   >>>>*sensory experience.*  If you think they are the same thing, that's a   
   >>   
   >>>     I think your dodging is ridiculous.  You referred to a very   
   >>>particular type of sensory experience, namely the kind   
   >>>rejected by "repressive puritans."  Puritans do not reject every   
   >>>and any kind of sensory experience.  Hard work, e.g., often   
   >>>meets their approval.  They object to sensual pleasures like sex.   
   >>   
   >>>-- Catawumpus   
   >>   
   >>By the way, asshole, stop cutting up my sentences.  Thanks!   
   >>   
   >>To the point:  you may disagree with my assertion, but not   
   >>mischaracterize it.  Contrary to your stupid misinterpretation of what I   
   >>said, I was indeed saying that puritans in every tradition reject   
   >>SENSORY AND PHYSICAL experience, NOT sensual or sexual.  I believe that   
   >>in Buddhism in particular, as in other traditions as well, they are   
   >>anti-physical, against the experience of the body as a whole.   
   >>"Sensual" is not what I said, and not what I meant.  If you think that's   
   >>stupid, that's fine, but don't tell me what I meant when my words were   
   >>plain.  Now fuck off.  I'm sick of your nasty mangling and manipulation   
   >>of my words and meanings,as well as others, aided by your disgusting   
   >>habit of cutting off sentences in the middle so you can more easily   
   >>mischaracterize them.   
   >>   
   >>Robert   
   >>   
   >>= = = = =   
   >   
   >   
   > Good golly Robert. Sorry to see this.  If you've gotten to the point   
   > in a discussion when you feel you have to actually call a person an   
   > asshole and tell them to fuck off, clearly the discussion is over.   
   > Try to pick your battles.  Or at least attain a calm state before you   
   > respond.  I sure needed this advice at one point as you may recall.   
   > --   
   > RaaN a!=a   
      
   I would basically agree with you.  This was a couple of weeks ago, and   
   things are a little calmer, but thanks for the reminder.   
      
   Robert   
      
   = = = = =   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)