Should we bring back "witch burning"?

Post Reply New Topic

And, of course, it's dangerous to be Christ. People may bake you into wafers and eat you.

Doesn't matter: Buddhism doesn't require you to believe that it was or wasn't written by Buddha. In fact, "if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him," meaning if someone tells you to they know "the way," ignore them.

And you delight in provocation. You are a troll, and you will suffer the fate of one, no matter how much you make out to be the innocent party.

It's been a while since I saw someone dumb enough to flame a mod. Lucky thing that Quater is so patient.

If patience is a virtue, then I ain't virtuous. I think it's closer to masochism. Used in the right context, it's the same thing.

Sardonically asserting that your views are obviously right and anyone who disagrees suffers from some sort of mental impairment is no way to win an argument. Neither is resorting to personal attacks such as name-calling. No one will agree with your argument if you treat them as inherently inferior.

If you present your argument in a civil manner, you will find that it is easier to hold a constructive debate than by simply trying to enrage your opponents. If you've presented your argument reasonably and your opponents still don't see reason in your side, then attempting more drastic means to convert them will not work - some people will never agree with your argument, and targeting them with aggression will not change their minds, nor will it make them think highly of your position.

You are verily missing the point.

I am glad the people ignored the Buddha when he was living. They must have considering how low the Buddhist population is in Nepal.

Why is that?


Disentangling all this twisted argumentation is really strange.

Buddhism went to a lot of places, including China. There's 300 million to a billion Chinese Buddhists depending on who's doing the counting. The influence is rife throughout Asia. I might as well argue "I'm glad the people ignored Christ when he was living. They must have considering how low the Christian population is in Madagascar."

There's so much bent reasoning in those 2 (original post) sentences; it's kind of amazing:

It begins with an ambiguous assertion that is non-sequitur (which is what makes it seem like flame-bait), and unknowable. Nonetheless, an answer is asserted and used to backwards/circularly "prove" the original statement by using another assertion which this time is true, but again non-sequitur to what it's trying to prove.

I.e. "I'm glad everybody likes rain. They must because lots of people in London have raincoats." Wha?

Or maybe it was just intended to inflame (thus explaining the lack of actual content).

Also, Gautamaji was born in Nepal. Hence Nepal's mentioning.


However,



So none is meant to be followed? How would one then be a Boddhisatva?

There is a difference between saying "I know the way" compared to "I know the ONLY way."

eh, banning him would only give him more justification and feeling both vindicated and as the victim/martyr he dreams of being.

I found the words of the flower sermon very instructive.

http://www.uweb.ucsb.edu/~cgherb/lotus.html

What did you get from it, if I may ask? By that I mean the instruction.

I can see why QM said about manipulation, about manipulating things, ideas and theories to fit to arguments you try to provide. It seems you are forcing what you consider "truth" into everybody here with threads similar like this.

You haven't noticed perhaps from your point of view, that the way you are approaching here with posts like this, on things what you believe to be " the truth" is an absurdity, for most members that frequent this forum.

And this is not only about Christianity, which you think you are defending and probably believe is being attacked, but it is more than that, ideas in which Christianity itself is divided, like your views about "liberals" and how bad they are, in your mind, and stuff like that. If you honestly believe that to be truth, then, well, again, it would fit more to Delusion.

Ah, ok. There's not a lot of Christians in Bethlehem, either. Or, if I were being smart ass: "I guess that Jesus thing didn't catch on too well considering how few Christians there are where he was born."



The idea is that others (i.e. a Boddhisatva) can guide or challenge you or give advice and such, but that no one can actually show you the way. You do the practice (meditation, mindfulness, and such) to get distractions/delusions like ego and selfishness out of the way to "find your inner compass" (for lack of a better way of putting it). The assumption is that that'll point you toward good. I suppose a Boddhisata would tell you if you thought you had it, but were just deluded.

I suppose it does require a sort of faith in human nature; that there is good in people; it just may be buried under a lot of cr*p. It's about the exact opposite of the view that people need external guidance because they're internally sinful. (Not a value judgment, there.)

If I recall the original point, it was that books, physically, and questions about who wrote them and such don't matter if the path is 'internal', as opposed to being in the book directly.

The point of the scriptures I was trying to make was that very few of these religious figures, if any, ever wrote their own scripture and thus had to have been transmitted orally for centuries, as was the way then. Books, scriptures, etc are second to the mind and memory.



In my opinion, it would be considered foolish to take the path completely alone. It must be under the guidance of a bona fide religious guide; this is to ensure that one doesn't become confused. It is very easy to misinterpret scripture and practice, especially if you haven't any previous experience.

From what I recall, that is how it was for people who took up the path. Some would devote themselves to their teacher completely, renouncing what they had before, the family, and even their own identity. You would be instructed on the scripture, made to remember the complete guides, and to put them in practice. The meditations were for you to perform, but under correct guidance. This was the path of the devotee.

How can one remove the veil of ignorance if one wasn't aware that they were blinded by ignorance?

It is hard to find a respectable teacher in the west, especially in America. However, one mustn't be lazy and just brush seeking guidance (whether material or personal) because of it. As you pointed out, one can "tell you if you thought you had it, but were just deluded." After all, wouldn't it be delusional to believe that one has been "Enlightened" just after reading a few passages? They would entertain themselves over a couple of words, but are forgetting what the words themselves implicate.

I'm not trying to be vain or insulting, just pointing out certain things. I'm no way trying to pass myself off as the final word, My path has yet to end. Certainly if it did I wouldn't be wasting my time online.

typical fundy