home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   alt.religion.buddhism      Buddhism followers and admirers      11,893 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 10,638 of 11,893   
   Catawumpus to All   
   Re: The supremealooski teaching (was Re:   
   16 Sep 10 09:04:05   
   
   XPost: talk.religion.buddhism, alt.zen, alt.philosophy.zen   
   XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy   
   From: kimmerian@fastmail.fm   
      
   Nobody in Particular :   
      
   > That's right.  Our mistake is, though, that we assume that he   
      
        Collectively you've made many more mistakes than are worth   
   counting up.  Your errors, in particular, are easy to   
   summarize.  You wrongly argued I'd confused pain with suffering   
   Stupid of you, since my point is that the Sakalika Sutta   
   implies the Buddha's suffering by stating that he _endured_ his   
   pain rather than asserting he escaped or transcended it in   
   some way.  No suffering, nothing to endure, no reason to praise   
   him for doing it well.   
      
        You mistakenly claimed English doesn't distinguish between   
   pain and suffering, even though it's common to say that a   
   person who's been given anesthesia doesn't suffer from the pain   
   she receives.   
      
        You foolishly compared me to a fundy who tries to make the   
   original match the translation, even though I had said   
   explicitly that I _didn't_ want to place too much weight on the   
   English.   
      
        And you falsely claimed I insisted on misunderstanding the   
   meaing of the word "suffering" used in the English   
   translations.  I didn't insist on anything about its meaning in   
   them, because it isn't there.   
      
        Instead of correcting yourself and apologizing, you erased   
   the entire dialogue -- your words as well as mine -- from   
   your follow-up and pretended you'd been horribly misinterpreted.   
      
   > misunderstands.  However, i believe that he deliberately misrepresents in a   
      
        No use in saying you were deliberately misrepresented when   
   you haven't shown I distorted what you said at all.  I've   
   offered quotes with message-IDs showing what you argued, but by   
   contrast, you haven't provided any evidence for the   
   accusations you keep tossing around.  All that you've proved is   
   your idiocy.   
      
   -- Catawumpus   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca