Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Trying to Explain the Three Foundations/Marks/Seals of all existent things.
I have a male ego. I don't think women Buddist women reliase this - the ego is a bad thing, the male ego much worse.
This "attack" sense must arise from the pride of your "one thing to beer" questioneer.
If you really are sincere and really are without ego then my sense of your "attack" must come from me missreading your words and my frustration at you not seeming to try to understand mine.
>>>When I read it, it sounded icky. A mash up between 3d metaphysical reality exposition and archetypes. They don't represent the three marks in a way that is helpful in the buddhist sense.
All I can think is that you don't understand it.
This point is not helped by the fact that your dont answer my questions. You probably didn't notice but I stopped discussing with you many months ago for this reason.
>>>Which, in my opinion, is about comprehension and renunciation of what we sense. That you punctuated the list with beer is irony.
Oh get over yourself Matt, the beer line was meant to be lighthearted, homersimpsonesque to end what was a pretty stark list of questions and answers.
The fact the only real issue you have commented on that was actually in my OP was the quip at the end says much to me.
>>>I say, with utmost love and metta for you,
Now that's icky;) You know nothing about me apart from what you assume. Do you have utmost love and metta for every internet stranger.... d
>>>I find that list clumsy and unhelpful, and almost certainly another stone that will set up more suffering for you. I could be wrong, I'm not enlightened, and I spoke up only to help.
Please do not tell people what will bring suffering to them, especially when you dont understand what they are saying.
I don't want your help with anything. If you truely think you can add to my understanding that would be good (others here have done this) but to do that first show you understand, then bring on the constructive critism without personal issue.
>>>If you do not claim this thing as yours, why does my distaste for it "attack" you?
Oh you haven't attacked me. As said, I'm just words in on a screen. You have attacked the words - words you don't understand - and then refused to try to understand them.
It's very common for people to do this here (especially we male egos), I don't get involved any more, but in this case it was an OP I started and a topic I am very interested in.
If you want to discuss this any more lets do in PM please.
Oh you haven't attacked me. As said, I'm just words in on a screen. You have attacked the words - words you don't understand - and then refused to try to understand them.
Lol, there is no attack. Why do you project aggression into my words?
I called your words clumsy because you say for example: if a thing and a thing with another thing does a thing that makes a new thing, that thing is only an interdependent thing, and has no thing. Its like a weird stoner joke or something.
I called your words unhelpful because when I read and hear dharma, my mind rings like a gong, like it has been struck with a well crafted hammer. When I read yours, it felt like thick-ego philosophy that underpins continued importance of self, so I said as much, and why. I am totally fine with you disagreeing.
You think I don't uderstand? Just because I see something different in your words? I took the time to read them before responding, and responded to your OP words, about your OP words, then about you defending your words.
I answer questions when it seems to be skillful to do so, not just because they are asked to me.
I do love strangers.
I work with alert fastidiousness to get over myself.
if a thing and a thing with another thing does a thing that makes a new thing, that thing is only an interdependent thing, and has no thing.
Where did I say that? Not in my OP for sure. BTW I have ADD coupled with being very typo-prone, if you find something meaningless then ask to have it explained/translated.
Im not a stoner at all, though if I said the above I can see why you would think that:)
I called your words unhelpful because when I read and hear dharma, my mind rings like a gong, like it has been struck with a well crafted hammer. When I read yours, it felt like thick-ego philosophy that underpins continued importance of self, so I said as much, and why. I am totally fine with you disagreeing.
That's great for you. It's very clear you think you have the answers, and maybe you do, but they are your answers. Put them down, start new posts and have a go at explaining things as you see them. Be constructive with your understanding, rather than destructive.
You think I don't uderstand? Just because I see something different in your words? I took the time to read them before responding, and responded to your OP words, about your OP words, then about you defending your words.
yes, I think you don't understand. This is based on what you say (which is not about my words, or if it is I don't see how) and your repeated ignoring of answering questions, which, as said, you have been like since I've seen you on here. Nobody is perfect, but its a waste of my time, and yours, if you are not interested in a dialogue, more in a preaching.
I am profoundly disinterested in opinions, I hope people are in disinterested in mine. My OP was not opinion, it was statements that could be refuted, counter exampled, shown to be senseless etc, you did none of that. See?
I answer questions when it seems to be skillful to do so, not just because they are asked to me.
Yea, but that begs the question.
I work with alert fastidiousness to get over myself.
Good, keep trying, we all must. As said, its especially hard for us men to get over ourselves. I feel I have sunk beneath myself in some of these recent chats with you and dhammadhatu. Dukka Dukka Everywhere!:)
....for example, you decide to buy a certain motor car but a trusted friend tells you that the engines for that motor car do not last very long and must be replaced every year
so you decide that motor will "not be yours" (anatta). why? because it is unsatisfactory (dukkha) due to the impermanence (anicca) of it engine
Thanks DD, a very useful analogy which I think captures the meaning of the relevant suttas very well. I suppose the Buddha would have talked about a chariot with a dodgy axle. ;-)
Anicca = Everything has a shadow hanging over its head. Dukkha = A cycle of repeated incompleteness and unsatisfactoriness. Anatta = Conventions and reality are synonymous.
Comments
If you really are sincere and really are without ego then my sense of your "attack" must come from me missreading your words and my frustration at you not seeming to try to understand mine.
>>>When I read it, it sounded icky. A mash up between 3d metaphysical reality exposition and archetypes. They don't represent the three marks in a way that is helpful in the buddhist sense.
All I can think is that you don't understand it.
This point is not helped by the fact that your dont answer my questions. You probably didn't notice but I stopped discussing with you many months ago for this reason.
>>>Which, in my opinion, is about comprehension and renunciation of what we sense. That you punctuated the list with beer is irony.
Oh get over yourself Matt, the beer line was meant to be lighthearted, homersimpsonesque to end what was a pretty stark list of questions and answers.
The fact the only real issue you have commented on that was actually in my OP was the quip at the end says much to me.
>>>I say, with utmost love and metta for you,
Now that's icky;) You know nothing about me apart from what you assume. Do you have utmost love and metta for every internet stranger.... d
>>>I find that list clumsy and unhelpful, and almost certainly another stone that will set up more suffering for you. I could be wrong, I'm not enlightened, and I spoke up only to help.
Please do not tell people what will bring suffering to them, especially when you dont understand what they are saying.
I don't want your help with anything. If you truely think you can add to my understanding that would be good (others here have done this) but to do that first show you understand, then bring on the constructive critism without personal issue.
>>>If you do not claim this thing as yours, why does my distaste for it "attack" you?
Oh you haven't attacked me. As said, I'm just words in on a screen. You have attacked the words - words you don't understand - and then refused to try to understand them.
It's very common for people to do this here (especially we male egos), I don't get involved any more, but in this case it was an OP I started and a topic I am very interested in.
If you want to discuss this any more lets do in PM please.
I called your words clumsy because you say for example: if a thing and a thing with another thing does a thing that makes a new thing, that thing is only an interdependent thing, and has no thing. Its like a weird stoner joke or something.
I called your words unhelpful because when I read and hear dharma, my mind rings like a gong, like it has been struck with a well crafted hammer. When I read yours, it felt like thick-ego philosophy that underpins continued importance of self, so I said as much, and why. I am totally fine with you disagreeing.
You think I don't uderstand? Just because I see something different in your words? I took the time to read them before responding, and responded to your OP words, about your OP words, then about you defending your words.
I answer questions when it seems to be skillful to do so, not just because they are asked to me.
I do love strangers.
I work with alert fastidiousness to get over myself.
Now beer?
With love,
Matt
Im not a stoner at all, though if I said the above I can see why you would think that:)
That's great for you. It's very clear you think you have the answers, and maybe you do, but they are your answers. Put them down, start new posts and have a go at explaining things as you see them. Be constructive with your understanding, rather than destructive.
yes, I think you don't understand. This is based on what you say (which is not about my words, or if it is I don't see how) and your repeated ignoring of answering questions, which, as said, you have been like since I've seen you on here. Nobody is perfect, but its a waste of my time, and yours, if you are not interested in a dialogue, more in a preaching.
I am profoundly disinterested in opinions, I hope people are in disinterested in mine. My OP was not opinion, it was statements that could be refuted, counter exampled, shown to be senseless etc, you did none of that. See?
Yea, but that begs the question.
Good, keep trying, we all must. As said, its especially hard for us men to get over ourselves. I feel I have sunk beneath myself in some of these recent chats with you and dhammadhatu. Dukka Dukka Everywhere!:)
Spiny
Dukkha = A cycle of repeated incompleteness and unsatisfactoriness.
Anatta = Conventions and reality are synonymous.