gatito

If you both promise to behave nicely

No double standard because it's not a belief system on which I'm reliant You've said that your system is faith-based I might

I know what I'm talking about

I reiterate that I can only discuss what I know about - no double standard - it's not reliant on any belief

Are you serious abo I'm talking about what I know about and what you can verify independently for yourselves if you're open enough to the possibility to actually investigate it

I wasn't around when he was around so I cannot verify the truth of that statement Not relevant

Bet you I didn't Single standard - verifiable by you in your lifetime - if you're serious

Incorrect Vedanta is verifiable

You can find this though - if you look properly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmananda_Krishna_Menon (://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmananda_Krishna_Menon)

What do you mean by that?

If your system is based on belief and not on verifiable facts it is useless to me nad possibly to others

The Direct Path is very rare I'm not interested in making a Wiki article

This whole discussion is therefore totally pointless because you have no factual basis for your system

No I said that you falsely labelled me a neoadvaitan

Attempt to divert attention away from the whole point

What it comes down to is that you are a missionary reliant on belief and not on fact

Just noticed this attempted misrepresentation There was much more to it than that, as you know You relied on Wikipedia

So you're reliant on faith!!! I can't believe that

You actually said: - And I posted in answer to your question (and to refute your quote)

No you asked for information

That's got to be better than here or the Buddhist sub-forum though

You prove my point and refute your own Nice one

I think that I was rather more circumspect and subtle than that

As I've said, I've never tried to propogate neoadvaita on the Buddhist sub-forum

I'll summarise this whole thread in two sentences if you like - but I bet you anything that you don't understand them