Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Sign In Register
Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
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.

It's as simple as this..change your life..

2»

Comments

  • TheJourneyTheJourney
    What does that mean? You said there were other options. List them.
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    edited January 2011
    The other option is precisely "none of the above". How could truth be within you or without you when there is ultimately nothing that could be called "you" to begin with? It can't be either.
  • TheJourneyTheJourney
    edited January 2011
    So in other words you are just saying that there are other options, but have no idea what those other options are??? ok then. You're free to your opinion. I don't see why you jumped in here to tell me I used a fallacy, but ok. When I'm talking to someone, I'm talking to that person. I don't care to convert you, so there is no need to jump in on a conversation I'm having with someone else unless you feel it can benefit you in some way. Obviously you don't feel you have anything to benefit, so why comment? Not that I care you commented, because it doesn't matter, i'm just saying...you don't see me going around trying to make people look like what they're saying is wrong. Because I don't care to convert people or change them at all. Obviously you do. It's just a difference of opinion I guess.

    When I ask questions, I don't care if they reach the same conclusion as me. In fact, I will still ask questions even if I agree with what was said. The purpose is for them to benefit, not to make them see it my way. If my questions strengthen their conviction in their beliefs which are different than mine, then great! There is a purpose to what I say, and it is not to convert.
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    >So in other words you are just saying that there are other options, but have no idea what those other options are??? ok then.

    No, I'm not saying I have no idea what the other options are. I just told you what the other option is. What I'm saying is that THE other option IS a non-declaration of where truth is. The question "where is truth" is simply not applicable because it's not anywhere, it just is. It's not within you, it's not without you. It's "none of the above". You tried to make the assertion that it is in one of these two places when it is, in fact, in neither. Sorry if my comments offended you. I thought you enjoyed discussing these things...
  • TheJourneyTheJourney
    edited January 2011
    You can say that about ANYTHING. NO words accurately describe it. We have to use LANGUAGE to communicate. Just saying that everything is false isn't going to work with most people. If that works for you, great. Like I said, my comment was not directed towards you. I talk to different people in different ways. I will talk to a christian as if Jesus is the son of God and died for our sins and there is an all-loving creator in heaven. Because they believe that so they need to hear something from within that framework. I said what I said to him for a specific reason. If anyone else feels they can benefit from it, then great, but I personalize my comments for specific people, I don't just go around ranting and raving about what I believe.
  • seeker242seeker242 Zen Florida, USA Veteran
    You can say that about ANYTHING. NO words accurately describe it. We have to use LANGUAGE to communicate. Just saying that everything is false isn't going to work with most people.
    Not making a declaration and saying it's false, are not the same thing. Saying it's false IS making a declaration.

    >I talk to different people in different ways

    So do I. So my question to you is: If there is nothing that could be called "you", then how can the truth be either within you or without you? I don't think it's unreasonable to discuss Buddhist beliefs on a Buddhist forum. This "nothing that could be called you" concept, is one of the primary, arguably one of the most important, teachings of Buddhism. This is a Buddhist forum.
  • TheJourneyTheJourney
    edited January 2011
    There is also nothing which could be called "not you," for there is no separation. If there is such a thing as "not you" then by definition there has to be a you, or else there would be no basis in making a claim of "not you." There is no self or other. Therefore I choose to look at it in terms of how there is no other. You choose to look at it in terms of how there is no self. It's just different ways of looking at it.
  • robotrobot Veteran
    TheJourney-The question of whether there is a self or not or whether there is a self or other than self can't be answered with out taking an extreme view to either position. The Middle Way is described in terms of non affirming negation in order to avoid the pitfall of extreme views. Existence of self has been refuted with unarguable logic. So has non existence of self. The remaining option is no position. If you are going to talk to different folks using their own terms, as you have said is what you do, on a Buddhist forum it would benefit you to bone up on the Madhyamaka. Sometimes people jump in not because they feel that they can benefit but because they feel that others can benefit. You might even benefit. :)
  • dorjedorje
    The truth is within you - extreme view
    The truth is without of you - extreme view
    The truth is both within you and without of you -extreme view
    The truth is neither within you and without of you - extreme view
Sign In or Register to comment.