[QUOTE=LFJ;1124921]Why are you trying to get me to “demonstrate independent thought or insight” to “argue against your point”? [/quote]
Not trying to “make” you do anything, just noting.
[QUOTE=LFJ;1124921]I’m clarifying that my statement implies what you are dragging out. Argue with yourself if you like that but can’t find an opponent. :rolleyes:[/quote]
A marginally coherent statement with undertones of ridicule requires greater explanation by its very nature. If your comments of agreement were formulated with a more grammatically positive tone, your agreement would be more apparent to others and not require further explanation.
When one is formulating a rational argument there is no opponent just a contrasting view! Bickering is when one contends with an opponent!
[QUOTE=LFJ;1124921]As for bawang’s statement, it was implying that Yogcra is convoluted philosophy and that the point of Chan is to reject such philosophy. I couldn’t disagree more on both accounts.[/QUOTE]
Have your already forgotten your comment?
[QUOTE=bawang;1124865]the whole point of chan is rejecting convoluted philosophy[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=LFJ;1124869]That’s a pretty selfish form of Chan.[/QUOTE]
Your response does not imply agreement in any way, but ridicule of his opinion.
Once again, a more grammatically positive response would more accurately represent your opinion, if agreement is what you intended to communicate.
Addendum: Ahhh! I see I misread your comment. You meant to disagree!
Most Buddhist philosophy is way to convoluted. It was born out of the intellectual/objective environment of early Buddhism and is NOT necessary as is demonstrated by Hui-Neng!
While many Chan men were intellectuals and did read the Sutras, they are un-necessary to realization and may actually inhibit realization when one becomes too pre-occupied with the sutra rather than practicing what it is meant to lead one towards.
[QUOTE=Scott R. Brown;1124922]Not trying to “make” you do anything, just noting.[/quote]
You did say my comments “do not demonstrate any independent thought or insight apart from the Sutras” and that I have “not argued against your point”.
Sounds like you are choosing my position for me (against you) and suggesting how I argue it (by demonstrating independent thought or insight).
That’s why I suggested you argue with yourself, if you invent your own opponent.
…your agreement would be more apparent to others and not require further explanation.
Perhaps if you didn’t start with an assumption that I am not somehow aware of your same insights…
I quoted the Diamond Sutra to show that one can have such an aspiration without the notion of a self or being. That is after all Bodhicitta, the starting point of Mahyna practice.
[QUOTE=Scott R. Brown;1124925]At any rate, I agree with bawang,
Most Buddhist philosophy is way to convoluted. It was born out of the intellectual/objective environment of early Buddhism and is NOT necessary as is demonstrated by Hui-Neng!
While many Chan men were intellectuals and did read the Sutras, they are un-necessary to realization and may actually inhibit realization when one becomes too pre-occupied with the sutra rather than practicing what it is meant to lead one towards.[/QUOTE]
My issue with his statement is not that, but more the “the whole point of Chan” part. Hopefully it was just some sort of hyperbole.
I got it! Everyone make presumptions about you, but all you do is repeat what sutras say making no determination of your own what others are saying!
That is what conversations are all about. You make a statement I interpret what you have said and respond. You interpret what I have said and respond. All conversations are is people drawing conclusions/making presumption about what they think others are saying.
If you disagree with that form of communication the only thing you can do is not converse at all, or just get used to people not understanding everything you have said!
For example: How is someone to figure out you are using hyperbole when there is no indication of it in your post? It seems you are being critical when myself and/or others presume to understand you based upon the simple grammatical meaning of your sentences, yet also note that we do not recognize your hyperbolic intent when it is not evident in your derisive comments!
[QUOTE=Scott R. Brown;1124955]I got it! Everyone make presumptions about you, but all you do is repeat what sutras say making no determination of your own what others are saying![/quote]
Of my now 64 posts on 23 pages in this thread, 1 quoted a stra and 1 quoted a sstra, which happened over the last couple pages only.
You don’t even know what’s going on in this thread, because you came here for one reason:
No matter the thread and no matter the specific topic or the individuals involved, as long as it has something to do with Buddhism you pop up and repeat your favorite sayings and derail the thread.
It’s always the same admonition about “expedient means”, “direct experience”, “non-attachment to teachings”, and some “all is an illusion” type of talk. The thing is you say it as if you’re the only one with such insights and argue against conventional use of language.
Since this happens repeatedly no matter the topic, it seems your favorite phrases have become your own tar pit, and using them to admonish others has become an attachment of your own.
I wonder if you’ve considered that… or will consider that before arguing back at me.
[QUOTE=LFJ;1125373]
Since this happens repeatedly no matter the topic, it seems your favorite phrases have become your own tar pit, and using them to admonish others has become an attachment of your own.
[/QUOTE]
I just gotta chime in here. I also get the impression that Scott would benefit from a zen teacher who, seeing this pattern, made him study theory.
Basic category sets from the Pali Canon (like the four this and the twelve that or whatever) are actually very practical and useful.
Thank you gentlemen for you sincere concern for me, however perhaps your attention would be more useful attuned to your own attachments.
While you perceive a pattern to my posts, something I am well aware of, attention to your own patterns would benefit you more than haranguing me about my own.
We all have patterns of interest and patterns of speach and patterns of thought. These are our natural inclincations.
Attention to your own patterns will yield your greater benefit than attention to mine.
Those we interact with in life are EVERYONE our “GOOD FRIENDS” who reflect our own areas that require attention. Life/Tao in all its interactions with us reveal to us through our own attitudes our strengths and our weaknesses. Reflect on yourselves and correct your own attitudes and behaviors before you presume to correct others.
But I do appreciate that you both felt comfortable and cared enough to provide me with your own insights into my personality.
I was vegetarian for a few years and vegan even longer. I’m an omnivore now. At the end of my veganism i felt week and tired. I would consider going back to being vegetarian if I could find a reliable way to restore my jing. I doubt I would go back to being vegan again but i possible would consider going ovo-vegetarian if I though it would benefit my health and had a way to maintain my vital essence without most animal foods.
[QUOTE=DangerousPerson;1129988]I was vegetarian for a few years and vegan even longer. I’m an omnivore now. At the end of my veganism i felt week and tired. I would consider going back to being vegetarian if I could find a reliable way to restore my jing. I doubt I would go back to being vegan again but i possible would consider going ovo-vegetarian if I though it would benefit my health and had a way to maintain my vital essence without most animal foods.[/QUOTE]
It’s called a balanced diet and an active lifestyle.
Honestly, I’ve been vegan for 13 years and the only times I’ve felt particularly weak or tired is when I’m not active. If you’re not getting a good sweat on a few times a week, you’re going to feel a bit weak, but I reckon that’s pretty much the same deal for most folks. The only other factor is an imbalanced diet. I had a horrible diet earlier in my vegan transition with lots of veggie burgers and garbage food. I actually dropped a ton of weight and muscle that way, and ended up around 150 lbs. After a getting married I packed on muscle when I was active by way of getting a balanced diet because my wife is an excellent cook. I’ve gotten a bit of a gut now because I found myself indulging in vegan junk foods like vegan cheesesteaks and pizza and what not. I’m working to get rid of that, but like all belly fat it’s stubborn. Soon as I got active again though, my energy levels shot through the roof.
[QUOTE=Zenshiite;1129997]It’s called a balanced diet and an active lifestyle.
Honestly, I’ve been vegan for 13 years and the only times I’ve felt particularly weak or tired is when I’m not active. If you’re not getting a good sweat on a few times a week, you’re going to feel a bit weak, but I reckon that’s pretty much the same deal for most folks. The only other factor is an imbalanced diet. I had a horrible diet earlier in my vegan transition with lots of veggie burgers and garbage food. I actually dropped a ton of weight and muscle that way, and ended up around 150 lbs. After a getting married I packed on muscle when I was active by way of getting a balanced diet because my wife is an excellent cook. I’ve gotten a bit of a gut now because I found myself indulging in vegan junk foods like vegan cheesesteaks and pizza and what not. I’m working to get rid of that, but like all belly fat it’s stubborn. Soon as I got active again though, my energy levels shot through the roof.[/QUOTE]
After 10 years vegan, and a few years before being vegetarian, I lacked overall energy and had kidney energy issues that weren’t being resolved with just chinese herbs. I was consistently active and had a good to excellent diet the whole time I was vegan. I’ve come to believe there are other factors.
