ralis
-
Content count
13,819 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
55
Everything posted by ralis
-
What I meant was that the polarization is conceptual.
-
You have on many occasions stated your preference of the positive over the negative. Ultimately, that polarization does not exist.
-
How have you determined that? You might be wrong!
-
Who determines the correct information? If this information feels and looks right does that mean their is any validity to said information? I assume you are talking about lineage and religious doctrine.
-
My very first concert in 1971 was King Crimson. Will never forget it! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uim2jZHZ3YU
-
I don't know what et all means. What I wrote was et al, which is Latin for et aliae which is gender neutral. I grouped you with other defenders of various Buddhist lineages given that you believe that no one outside your lineage has any wisdom or even realization. In that case, then all the so called wisdom imparted by any Buddhist monks who are known pedophiles, is null and void. Further, they should not be allowed in this country to teach. There are several journalists who have investigated this egregious problem. You can't have it both ways Vajraji! You would deny and criticize me for thinking independently and yet you allow that privilege for yourself.
-
What Osho did is separate from the wisdom he imparted. Won't you acknowledge that? Vmarco quoted Trungpa and I never said you quoted Trungpa or implied that you quoted him. Your need to self reference when a part of what I posted is not directed at you, is amazing. My point is, that anyone with common sense and intelligence should give credit to whomever imparts wisdom and not engage in ad hominem attacks. Argumentum ad hominem is the logical fallacy of attempting to undermine a speaker's argument by attacking the speaker instead of addressing the argument. That happens far too often on this forum! What is incorrect in your point of view about individual thinking? Should I engage in politically or spiritual correct thinking according to rules proclaimed by religions and lineages? No Way!
-
I would like to add, that there is a double standard when it comes to Buddhist teachers as opposed to who are deemed outsiders. Outsiders such as Osho are called fools by Vajraji et al, based how many cars he was given and that has something to do with the wisdom he imparted? Why would anyone of intelligence believe that? Moreover, confuse the two separate issues? When Trungpa is quoted, his abuses and alcoholism are not mentioned by Vajraji et al, as if his behavior is beyond reproach in their view? Does that have everything to do with how lineage and religious advocates view others outside of their own social group, in this case lineages? Yes!
-
Santana!
-
Listening to a lot of Hendrix. Words can't describe how great he was! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WoAXW30mMAg&feature=related
-
This is great! Fusion sitar rock.
-
Robert Anton Wilson has always been one of my favorite writers. Here he discusses in the first part of the interview, why communication can be problematic. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-7gZkPoeMY&feature=related
-
What are your criteria for judging a Mahasidda? Names please? I will not accept any arguments based on belief systems or doctrine.
-
I need more transmissions? I only have about 100. LOL! My reason for critiquing what you write would be that your posts contain much hyperbole and platitudes. Further, you take the liberty of doctrinal belief systems and create either/or fallacies. If you want to live in an Aristotelian universe with only two possible outcomes that is your business. However, either/or reasoning, imposes limits to any real communication, therefor creating a barrier to the total experience of life.
-
You are claiming there are contemporary Mahasiddhas?
-
You are treating these teachers as if they are infallible. When I first met Norbu in 1989, he had just started teaching in English. There were definitely some problems with his diction. That in and of itself can lead to great misunderstanding. Speaking a language and understanding it are vastly different. Even on this forum there are many problems with communicating well, even though most here are native English speakers. Many times your writing style comes across as stilted and biased. If native English speakers have difficulty communicating with each other, then foreign speakers with rudimentary English skills have greater difficulty in communicating outside of their native language. Even with a translator. If as you say, Tibetan Lama's can read one's mind, and in this case I assume you mean thoughts, then there is the problem of a language barrier.
-
I guess you understand correctly and others don't?
-
Lama Ken McLeod addressed this at a weekend teaching I attended 22 years ago. He said something to the effect of; that the idea of any teacher reading one's mind and telling one what practice to engage in or not would be ludicrous. Ken is well qualified to make such a statement in that, he was one of the first Westerners to participate in a six year retreat in France, under the direct guidance of Kalu Rinpoche. Why do you continually bring in ChNNR into these debates? I know you have admitted that you see him as your spiritual father projection. However, I have never said a disparaging word about him! Kindly refrain from injecting and attributing false statements into these threads.
-
If lineages gave away the teachings without limit, then I would not have an issue. However, that does not happen. There are always various levels, initiations and secret teachings that are rarely available to the public. Excuses abound as to why certain teachings are not available. It should be at the individuals discretion whether or not to request a teaching and that teaching should be given without limit if the student requests it. No authoritarian system has the right to determine if an individual deserves a certain teaching or not.
-
You don't have an ego?
-
That has nothing to do with pride. In fact, the real problem would be of identifying with religious biases. Lineages will stand firm and accuse anyone not following their doctrines, prideful. Just another way of maintaining power and subverting an individuals personal authority.
-
Are you referring to yourself?
-
I have attempted to have conversations with the same and to no avail. I might add that the same would apply to advocates of lineages and doctrine based religions. I have previously mentioned Robert Anton Wilson and this book was written in e-prime, which eliminates the word "is". http://www.amazon.co...12303011&sr=1-2
-
I think you need to explain your argument. Further, have you done any reading on transcendental idealism? Kant's 'Critique of Pure Reason' has chapters on Transcendental Logic and Transcendental Aesthetic. I read it in college years ago. Vmarco addressed some of this a few posts ago. http://www.thetaobum...post__p__279413
-
Korzybski's writings are useful for understanding the limitations of language and how language does not accurately describe any phenomenon. Aristotle claimed that the essence of the object is contained in the definition of what is being defined. The most egregious use of Aristotelian logic would be in the creation of absolute religious belief systems that are authoritarian rule based. http://www.generalsemantics.org/store/
