Is a buddha basically god?

[Stigweard]

The Tathagatagarbha is considered the womb of enlightened activity and is universal as interconnection and impermanence is permanent and universal.

Interesting how close this is to Taoists referring to Tao as the "Mother." And just so this reference is also figurative (which we have been trying to tell you).

 

Interesting also that you have designated Tathagatagarbha as "permanent and universal." Seeing that universal means "ONE turning around," you have officially declared Tathagatagarbha an "eternal monism".

What they realize is dependent origination, inter-connectivity and thus resulting in dharma activity for the benefit of all beings, since we are all connected. Not one, but connected.

Again it is interesting that you use the word "connected". The word actually comes from "Nexus," which means "core or center." Add the prefix of "con-" and you have the basic meaning of "sharing the same core." Hence, once again, you are establishing here that Buddhism subscribes to a monistic premise of reality.

 

So now I am officially confused because I am quite sure these things were everything you said Buddhism was not.

[Marblehead]

I don't see why everyone bashes VH. He's actually one of the more advanced practitioners here.

 

It's good to keep an open mind about things you have no clue about. Of course, if you choose not to, it'll only make it more surprising when you find out you were wrong. Some people enjoy surprises...so, to each their own.

 

Hi Scotty,

 

I want the whole world to know that I am not bashing V. I consider him a friend. He and I have different views. We are going to disagree - that is a given.

 

I am stating my understanding and he is stating his. Hopefully we both will gain as a result of out discussions and disagreements. Or, at the least, we will be caused to re-think different aspects of our beliefs just to see if we can logically support all aspects of our beliefs.

 

There is nothing wrong, in my opinion, with disagreement and even arguement as long as we try to keep it respectful.

 

No. I don't know absolutely if I am right or wrong. All I can go by is my understandings. The only way I can test my understandings is by being challenged.

 

So 'V. is just alright with me'. (Yeah, so is Jesus. Hehehe.) But if I disagree with something he has said then I feel obliged to disagree with him. I do the same thing with my best friend here in 'real life'. He is a non-denominational Christian. You should hear us sometimes.

 

Happy Trails!

[Pero]

Interesting how close this is to Taoists referring to Tao as the "Mother." And just so this reference is also figurative (which we have been trying to tell you).

 

Interesting also that you have designated Tathagatagarbha as "permanent and universal." Seeing that universal means "ONE turning around," you have officially declared Tathagatagarbha an "eternal monism".

 

Again it is interesting that you use the word "connected". The word actually comes from "Nexus," which means "core or center." Add the prefix of "con-" and you have the basic meaning of "sharing the same core." Hence, once again, you are establishing here that Buddhism subscribes to a monistic premise of reality.

 

So now I am officially confused because I am quite sure these things were everything you said Buddhism was not.

 

They're not. Hari is wrong here or hasn't worded it right. No such thing as universal tatagarbha. But then it depends what "universal" means to you.

[Marblehead]

 

No one knows precisely how Nature behaves, so saying that nothing is beyond Nature doesn't really say much. We can only speculate.

 

You are absolutely correct. No one knows and understands all the varying aspects of Nature. The best we can do is work with what we understand.

 

And that means observation, understanding the processes as well as we can based upon those observations, and try to apply those processes in our daily activities.

 

To go beyond the observable is only making thing up. Pretending. Creating delusions. Similar to taking LSD. Or becoming an alcoholic. All that is called escapism.

 

Happy Trails!

 

 

 

Having said that I do know VH has a kind heart. I just wish he would display it more openly and continuously at TB. I maintain hope that he will show everyone the kind heart I know he has.

 

 

And that is exactly why I consider him a friend. But there are times when I really, really wish I could reach out and bitch-slap him a time or two. Hehehe.

 

Happy Trails!

 

 

I should actually reply to the topic, too...

 

We shouldn't call someone God when we don't understand what their condition is, and also what God is. When we define the two things, then we can say...however our definitions might not match up with the reality of who they are and what God is...so what we say is probably wrong.

 

More practice is needed, which is the only means of discovery...

 

 

Hi Scotty,

 

I think I have made it abundantly clear that I am what most people would call an Atheist. So no one here should expect me to suggest that any person, living or dead, has been a god because, in my opinion, there is no such thing as god. The concept is man-made. The concept had been created by many different groups of people and their delusion of that said god varies greatly from one culture to another.

 

So regardless of who the person was that the statement was directed to, be it Buddha, Jesus, or Joseph Smith. If I enter the discussion I will speak from my own understanding and not present an Idea that I think is a falsehood.

 

May God be with you.

 

Happy Trails!

[Marblehead]

You have every right and reason to defend your character from defamation of character, as its the most spiritual thing you have. Its not your fault, and really you have a duty to yourself to stand up, if you think its valuable. Its getting your panties in a bunch over DO and those who don't believe that is button strange.

 

Hi Tao99,

 

What Serene said is exactly what a Taoist Sage would do. And bottom line, I think it would be the best thing to do. I'm not a Taoist Sage so you won't see me doing that very often. Hehehe.

 

But let's face it. If we are not arguementive no one can argue with us. If we are beyond externals no one can say anything, either positive or negative, about us that would cause us to be disturbed.

 

Happy Trails!

[Nanashi]

[Marblehead]

I would indeed like to speak the Buddhist side of things without people getting bent out of shape.

 

 

I would love to see that too. May I suggest that this is your 'big' challenge here? To find a way to voice your understanding and what you understand about Buddhism without causing others to feel that you are doing it in an offending manner.

 

Best Wishes and Happy Trails!

 

 

Dude, you have no idea what my reality is like...none. There you go again, making assumptions about people.

 

Hehehe. Actually he used that against me before he used it against you. It didn't work on me but I guess he thought it might work on you. We gotta' give him credit for trying. Hehehe.

 

Remember, he lives in a semi-delusional world so we really can't expect that everything he says will comply with logical thought.

 

Happy Trails!

 

 

Just out of curiosity, could we discuss this very difficult and interesting question?

 

 

Very nice post Zhuo! (Even though you did criticize my understanding a little bit. Hehehe.)

 

Happy Trails!

 

 

But... I'm a Sci Fi looooover!

 

Who wooda' knowed?

 

Happy Trails!

 

 

As in, there is no primal source to reality, no first cause?

 

I don't know. That's my Taoist answer.

 

My Atheist answer is "Everything that is, is, always has been, and always will be." No energy is ever lost.

 

I don't see a primal source in either of those understandings.

 

Happy Trails!

[Ninpo-me-this-ninjutsu-me-that]

my gods some of you people need to start watching Lost or some other show to get your drama fix

 

battlestar galactica is really good... srsly. check it out.

 

I have to agree with you on the battlestar gallactica thing, I liked the old show a lot but the new one is quite a different animal. I've only watched up to season 3....they've done 4 yet?

[Tao99]

Hi Tao99,

 

What Serene said is exactly what a Taoist Sage would do. And bottom line, I think it would be the best thing to do. I'm not a Taoist Sage so you won't see me doing that very often. Hehehe.

 

But let's face it. If we are not arguementive no one can argue with us. If we are beyond externals no one can say anything, either positive or negative, about us that would cause us to be disturbed.

 

Happy Trails!

 

Is it? Who ever said Taoists are meek sheep push overs? They don't invent martial arts for nothing silly! Point made, CASE CLOSED

 

You have missed the point of your TTC reference. It says if we don't compete - meaning START a competition then no one can compete against us. It does not say that if someone competes on us - physically or mentally by defaming our religion we won't respond - either with MA or with critical thinking. Maybe if it's about something secondary like DO then we won't bother. But when it comes to the critical core of our essence well then you can expect us to counter. We have a right, a duty, and a reason to do so. So, no you two are wrong about what Taoism means.

 

Serene said she doesn't own TTC and you say you only read TTC and Chuang Tzu. Perhaps you need to expand your knowledge of what Taoism is - as you have only seen the tip of the iceberg. Then you will learn just how central and critical it is in Taoism. A Taoist master once said "The Tao does not go beyond the twin cultivation of ^%&% and )*&(**&&" If you don't know at least what these are then you are really just a rank beginner.

 

PS actually I don't recall any Taoist types here STARTING a Buddhism defamation competition. Of course now with Vs starter fluid all bets are off. But I commend them for their Taoist reserve and uncompetitive openness.

Edited October 4, 2009 by Tao99

[Marblehead]

Is it? Who ever said Taoists are meek sheep push overs? They don't invent martial arts for nothing silly! Point made, CASE CLOSED

 

You have missed the point of your TTC reference. It says if we don't compete - meaning START a competition then no one can compete against us. It does not say that if someone competes on us - physically or mentally by defaming our religion we won't respond - either with MA or with critical thinking. Maybe if it's about something secondary like DO then we won't bother. But when it comes to the critical core of our essence well then you can expect us to counter. We have a right, a duty, and a reason to do so. So, no you two are wrong about what Taoism means.

 

Serene said she doesn't own TTC and you say you only read TTC and Chuang Tzu. Perhaps you need to expand your knowledge of what Taoism is - as you have only seen the tip of the iceberg. Then you will learn just how central and critical it is in Taoism. A Taoist master once said "Taoism does not go beyond the twin cultivation of ^%&% and )*&(**&&" If you don't know at least what these are then you are really just a rank beginner.

 

Hi Tao99,

 

You have misunderstood my post and placed it to the extreme side of pacifism and therefore any point you think you made is null and void. The case in never closed - the game is never over until I say it is over.

 

I never said that nothing matters. All I said was that if we do not contend no on can contend with us. Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu stated this numerous times.

 

Don't you be telling me how much I know about Taoism. You have no f*cking idea. Don't be judging others according to your ignorance and inablilty to see both side of an issue.

 

BTW I have also read the Art of War. I served 20 years in the military but I will not tell you how many people I have killed.

 

Don't be playing your silly ass games with me. And don't you even tell me what I need to expand my knowledge on. You have no idea what my knowledge level is. The only thing you know about me is what I have posted here on this forum. You have no idea of how much of how many thing I know that I have not mentioned on this forum.

 

So even though I normally agree with most of your posts you were way the f*ck out of line on this one. You should worry more about your own cultivation rather than worrying about mine and Serene's. Or maybe read some of Stig's work on Virtue.

 

And lastly, don't you even suggest what options you think I have in my life. You have no idea. You have never walked in my shoes and you will never be able to.

 

So. If you wish to close the case now I am willing to do so.

 

Happy Trails!

Edited October 4, 2009 by Marblehead

[Tao99]

Hi Tao99,

 

You have misunderstood my post and placed it to the extreme side of pacifism and therefore any point you think you made is null and void. The case in never closed - the game is never over until I say it is over.

 

I never said that nothing matters. All I said was that if we do not contend no on can contend with us. Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu stated this numerous times.

 

Don't you be telling me how much I know about Taoism. You have no f*cking idea. Don't be judging others according to your ignorance and inablilty to see both side of an issue.

 

BTW I have also read the Art of War. I served 20 years in the military but I will not tell you how many people I have killed.

 

Don't be playing your silly ass games with me. And don't you even tell me what I need to expand my knowledge on. You have no idea what my knowledge level is. The only thing you know about me is what I have posted here on this forum. You have no idea of how much of how many thing I know that I have not mentioned on this forum.

 

So even though I normally agree with most of your posts you were way the f*ck out of line on this one. You should worry more about your own cultivation rather than worrying about mine and Serene's. Or maybe read some of Stig's work on Virtue.

 

And lastly, don't you even suggest what options you think I have in my life. You have no idea. You have never walked in my shoes and you will never be able to.

 

So. If you wish to close the case now I am willing to do so.

 

Happy Trails!

 

Wow. You are really rambling. I based what I said COMPLETELY on your OWN self description of another post where you clearly said you only read TTC and CT. That isn't enough to make such sweeping statements about what a Taoist sage would do. That's all I said, and what I based it on. The Art war isn't going to help you understand Taoist mysticism and spirituality sorry. So you are really just going off on me, I guess for the fun of it.

 

PS if you don't know the answer to my question then you really should consider yourself a beginner in Taoism, as I imagine others here know too (not found in your above). But it's a famous Chinese Taoist quote for gods sake. seriously.

 

PSS only logic decides when the case is closed not you, not me. Logic 101 Rule: if the premises are true and the deductive structure is correct, then the case is closed - the conclusion is undeniable and to deny it is "being irrational."

Edited October 4, 2009 by Tao99

[Marblehead]

Wow. You are really rambling. I based what I said COMPLETELY on your OWN self description of another post where you clearly said you only read TTC and CT. That isn't enough to make such sweeping statements about what a Taoist sage would do. That's all I said, and what I based it on. The Art war isn't going to help you understand Taoist mysticism and spirituality sorry. So you are really just going off on me, I guess for the fun of it.

 

PS if you don't know the answer to my question then you really should consider yourself a beginner in Taoism, as I imagine others here know too. It's a famous Chinese quote for gods sake. seriously.

 

No. I wasn't rambling. I was telling you how it is.

 

Okay. So you know how I feel about anyone describing what I am according to their own understanding or misunderstanding.

 

So did you also remember in my couple of posts when I first joined this forum that when I started my search into Taoism I also read into the alchemy and religious aspects and refused to accept them? And I will say, in all honesty and with no intention of disrespect or criticizing anyone or their beliefs, I actually found it all very childish and rather silly because if you really read the TTC and Chuang Tzu with understanding you will see that both of them spoke against such silliness.

 

And as far as what you mentioned in the other post I have no idea what you are referring to. Those characters mean absolutely nothing to me. I speak English rather well. If you present the thought or idea to me in English I will be able to respond. So if you want to ask me a question go ahead on, but don't play games with me trying to prove how ignorant I am.

 

Now, I could tell you my entire life story so that you never have to assume anything about me again or we can keep this much shorter by you never assuming you know what I know.

 

But please, if you want to ask me a question, go ahead on. But don't assume I can read Chinese just because I consider myself a Taoist.

 

Happy Trails!

 

 

PSS only logic decides when the case is closed not you, not me. Logic 101 Rule: if the premises are true and the deductive structure is correct, then the case is closed - the conclusion is undeniable and to deny it is "being irrational."

 

Nope. That is according to someone else's rules. When you play with me you play by my rules. And I decide if something is logical or irrational. That's just the way it is in "MY" world.

 

Happy Trails!

[Tao99]

No. I wasn't rambling. I was telling you how it is.

 

Okay. So you know how I feel about anyone describing what I am according to their own understanding or misunderstanding.

 

Once again. It wasn't according to my understanding but based on what you yourself said as you admit. And I do remember you poo pooing the Taoist energy practice. That;'s was how I know you haven't got the meaning of the deep.

 

So did you also remember in my couple of posts when I first joined this forum that when I started my search into Taoism I also read into the alchemy and religious aspects and refused to accept them? And I will say, in all honesty and with no intention of disrespect or criticizing anyone or their beliefs, I actually found it all very childish and rather silly because if you really read the TTC and Chuang Tzu with understanding you will see that both of them spoke against such silliness.

Yes - I do remember you poo pooing the Taoist energy practice - their greatest claim to fame as I think even your Stig will tell you. What you say here is just completely wrong. By the time of TTC and CT the practice was well-known and accepted as gospel to the Taoist adepts. TTC was written mostly for them and it was therefore very obtuse and unwordy, but its clearly their for those who know. My opinion is completely opposite of yours - the Taoist energy practice is one of the most awesome and epic things ever invented. I can't imagine being a "Taoist" without it.

 

And as far as what you mentioned in the other post I have no idea what you are referring to. Those characters mean absolutely nothing to me. I speak English rather well. If you present the thought or idea to me in English I will be able to respond. So if you want to ask me a question go ahead on, but don't play games with me trying to prove how ignorant I am.

 

I'm not playing any games. You were supposed to fill in the ^(&^&%&% blanks lol. It wasn't Chinese. But if you threw out all that "childish and silly stuff" then you won't get it. Any Taoist priest will tell you all intermediate students know it sorry. I was actually trying to point you in the Taoist direction, and I believe Stig would totally understand what I'm saying. Sorry I tried.

 

Now, I could tell you my entire life story so that you never have to assume anything about me again or we can keep this much shorter by you never assuming you know what I know.

Once again, I didn't "assume" anything about you - I went by your OWN words as you admit. seriously. I'd prefer just to forget the whole thing. You have strong opinions obviously, as do others here.

 

Please remember it was you who started this with me by telling me how wrong I was in your first post to me. I'm merely responding to that - I didn't start anything with you by going after you. THINK ABOUT THAT.

 

But please, if you want to ask me a question, go ahead on. But don't assume I can read Chinese just because I consider myself a Taoist.

 

Happy Trails!

Have a good day and take care.

[xabir2005]

It is said that soon after his enlightenment the Buddha passed a man on the road who was struck by the Buddha's extraordinary radiance and peaceful presence. The man stopped and asked,

 

"My friend, what are you?

Are you a celestial being

or a god?"

 

"No,"

 

said the Buddha.

 

"Well, then, are you some kind of magician

or wizard?"

 

Again the Buddha answered,

 

"No."

 

"Are you a man?"

 

"No."

 

"Well, my friend, then what are you?"

 

The Buddha replied,

"I am awake."

[Marblehead]

Hi Tao99,

 

Please remember it was you who started this with me by telling me how wrong I was in your first post to me. I'm merely responding to that - I didn't start anything with you by going after you. THINK ABOUT THAT.

 

Okay. Check this flow of posts.

 

Serene Post #15

Tao99 #18

Serene #23

Tao99 #26

Tao99 #28

Marble #55

Tao99 #59

 

Therefore it was you who came after me because I told you that I agreed with what Serene said.

 

I will get to the rest of your post shortly.

 

Happy Trails!

[Tao99]

lol If it wasn't for YOUR post directed specifically and directly at ME, NONE of this would have happens. In science that makes you the sufficient and necessary cause of it all. You know what I mean?

 

But given your logic point above I will just say -

 

YOU WIN. Not because of the "truth" of your premises or the "validity" of your deductive structure but solely because in YOUR world you won. LOL

 

OK? I hope you are happy now. There is really no point in debating a person who accepts irrationality.

 

have a good day and take care.

 

PS here is the causal post FYI -

 

Hi Tao99,

 

What Serene said is exactly what a Taoist Sage would do. And bottom line, I think it would be the best thing to do. I'm not a Taoist Sage so you won't see me doing that very often. Hehehe.

 

But let's face it. If we are not arguementive no one can argue with us. If we are beyond externals no one can say anything, either positive or negative, about us that would cause us to be disturbed.

 

Happy Trails!

 

PSS what a "logical" post you made LOL. It's always funny when denyers of the rules of logic then try to use logic to convince you of a point.

Edited October 4, 2009 by Tao99

[Marblehead]

No. I wasn't rambling. I was telling you how it is.

 

Okay. So you know how I feel about anyone describing what I am according to their own understanding or misunderstanding.

 

 

Once again. It wasn't according to my understanding but based on what you yourself said as you admit. And I do remember you poo pooing the Taoist energy practice. That;'s was how I know you haven't got the meaning of the deep.

 

The meaning of the deep what? I have been in deep shit many times in my life. And I have never talked down about any of it. I just said back then that I did not accept it.

 

So did you also remember in my couple of posts when I first joined this forum that when I started my search into Taoism I also read into the alchemy and religious aspects and refused to accept them? And I will say, in all honesty and with no intention of disrespect or criticizing anyone or their beliefs, I actually found it all very childish and rather silly because if you really read the TTC and Chuang Tzu with understanding you will see that both of them spoke against such silliness.

 

Yes - I do remember you poo pooing the Taoist energy practice - their greatest claim to fame as I think even your Stig will tell you. What you say here is just completely wrong. By the time of TTC and CT the practice was well-known and accepted as gospel to the Taoist adepts. TTC was written mostly for them and it was therefore very obtuse and unwordy, but its clearly their for those who know. My opinion is completely opposite of yours - the Taoist energy practice is one of the most awesome and epic things ever invented. I can't imagine being a "Taoist" without it.

 

Once again you are telling a non-truth because I did not talk down about it. You can verify in the discussion that Stig and I had concerning it. And what I have said is not wrong. I said I don't accept it. I never said that MA did not exist prior to Lao Tzu. You are saying I said that and what you are saying is an non-truth.

 

Religious Taoism was established after Chuang Tzu's death. That is a fact. Yes, elements of what they (the Religious Taoists) incorporated into the religion existed prior to even Lao Tzu but it was not called religious Taoism.

 

The TTC was written mostly for the leaders of the people. That is a fact. It was not, in the most part, written for any other group of people but rather a general guide of conduct.

 

You are welcome to your opinion. I have mine. We disagree regarding this aspect of Taoism. And then, if you can't imagine someone being a Taoist without adhering to some off-the-wall dogma then you are no different from the Buddhists or the Christians in this regard.

 

And as far as what you mentioned in the other post I have no idea what you are referring to. Those characters mean absolutely nothing to me. I speak English rather well. If you present the thought or idea to me in English I will be able to respond. So if you want to ask me a question go ahead on, but don't play games with me trying to prove how ignorant I am.

 

I'm not playing any games. You were supposed to fill in the ^(&^&%&% blanks lol. It wasn't Chinese. But if you threw out all that "childish and silly stuff" then you won't get it. Any Taoist priest will tell you all intermediate students know it sorry. I was actually trying to point you in the Taoist direction, and I believe Stig would totally understand what I'm saying. Sorry I tried.

 

And you still haven't told me what it means. It is one of those super-duper secrets that only the selected individuals get to become aware of? I don't hold to the concept of Taoist priests because it is in direct contradiction of what Lao Tzu and Chuang Tzu taught.

 

Why in the world would I go to ask someone what nature looks like when I can look out the window and see for myself?

 

Now, I could tell you my entire life story so that you never have to assume anything about me again or we can keep this much shorter by you never assuming you know what I know.

 

Once again, I didn't "assume" anything about you - I went by your OWN words as you admit. seriously. I'd prefer just to forget the whole thing. You have strong opinions obviously, as do others here.

 

You went according to what I said and assumed that I was ignorant of any other aspect of life. You extended what I said into what I didn't say and presented it as if I had said it. What I did not say was totally unsaid. You don't even know how many times I have been married or what the nationality of those women were when I married them. How can you suppose to know what is in my deepest thoughts and beliefs?

 

Okay. I agree with you. We can forget the entire matter. Afterall, it started with a misunderstanding of a misunderstanding.

 

But I will say this. If you respond to this post I WILL respond to that post.

 

Happy Trails!

Edited October 4, 2009 by Marblehead

[TheSongsofDistantEarth]

 

Hehehe. Actually he used that against me before he used it against you. It didn't work on me but I guess he thought it might work on you. We gotta' give him credit for trying. Hehehe.

 

Remember, he lives in a semi-delusional world so we really can't expect that everything he says will comply with logical thought.

 

 

 

 

What are you talking about?

[Marblehead]

lol If it wasn't for YOUR post directed specifically and directly at ME, NONE of this would have happens. In science that makes you the sufficient and necessary cause of it all. You know what I mean?

 

But given your logic point above I will just say -

 

YOU WIN. Not because of the "truth" of your premises or the "validity" of your deductive structure but solely because in YOUR world you won. LOL

 

OK? I hope you are happy now. There is really no point in debating a person who accepts irrationality.

 

have a good day and take care.

 

PS here is the causal post FYI -

PSS what a "logical" post you made LOL. It's always funny when denyers of the rules of logic then try to use logic to convince you of a point.

 

So you said you wanted to call a truce but then you continue scratching the itch.

 

Where in that post of mine did I criticize you? Where in that post did I say you were wrong? All I did was tell you that I agreed with Serene. I even said that what she suggested was what a Taoist Sage would do. And if you have read Chuang Tzu this is exactly what he taught. But then I said that I am not a Taoist Sage and you probably would never see me doing that. I warned you that I would defend myself and my belief but you didn't see the hint.

 

In actually, it was you who started it by telling Serene she was wrong when in fact, I hold to that same understanding so you did in fact say that my understanding was wrong as well. And when I said I agreed with her it was you who became defiant. So, in fact, you started it.

 

It is not my desire to win anything. It is my wish that you understand that everyone does not think the same way you do, everyone does not hold the same opinions as you do, every Taoist is not a Religious Taoist.

 

I have been happy for many years now and my disagreement with you has not caused me to be unhappy not will anyone else in this entire world ever cause me to be unhappy. You, Sir, are not the center of my happiness.

 

So what was all that stupidity in the pss all about? It was you who was being illogical. You jumped on my case just because I told you that I agreed with Serene. How can you find any logic in that?

 

Happy Trails!

[Tao99]

QUOTE(Tao99 @ Oct 4 2009, 11:52 AM) *

only logic decides when the case is closed not you, not me. Logic 101 Rule: if the premises are true and the deductive structure is correct, then the case is closed - the conclusion is undeniable and to deny it is "being irrational."

 

Nope. That is according to someone else's rules. When you play with me you play by my rules. And I decide if something is logical or irrational. That's just the way it is in "MY" world.

 

Happy Trails!

 

sorry I can't play with a denyer of the rules of logic - it irrational and pointless:

 

inky dinky winky woo. I'm right! (in my world). See what I mean?

 

have a good day and take care

 

PS the funniest thing here is that you called my much beloved life-long practice "childish and silly stuff" and I didn't even respond to that remark LOL

Edited October 4, 2009 by Tao99

[Vajrahridaya]

Interesting how close this is to Taoists referring to Tao as the "Mother." And just so this reference is also figurative (which we have been trying to tell you).

 

Tathagatagarbha is not the beginning or source of 10,000 things. The realization of emptiness is considered the womb of enlightened activity as it's a realization of how things don't inherently exist and only exist relatively. So... it is different.

 

Interesting also that you have designated Tathagatagarbha as "permanent and universal." Seeing that universal means "ONE turning around," you have officially declared Tathagatagarbha an "eternal monism".

 

You didn't understand and your projecting your own understanding. What I said is impermanence is permanent and universal. Not that something is itself permanent. You really are trying though. So... Tathagatagarbha does not have inherent existence and is not the oneness of all things. It is a metaphor for seeing dependent origination.

 

Again it is interesting that you use the word "connected". The word actually comes from "Nexus," which means "core or center." Add the prefix of "con-" and you have the basic meaning of "sharing the same core." Hence, once again, you are establishing here that Buddhism subscribes to a monistic premise of reality.

 

I am not... because that's not how Buddhism is using the word. In this sense, everything shares the same core, which is not a reality in and of itself, but rather the core fact that all things are impermanent and arise due to each other's arisings. Not that all things have the same source of existence. This has been explained in Buddhism very deeply by Vasubhandu and Nagarjuna. So, what your reading into my post is just you reading into it. It's not what I'm saying.

 

So now I am officially confused because I am quite sure these things were everything you said Buddhism was not.

 

I hope your misunderstanding has been rectified now. Buddhist philosophy is very subtle and particular in it's usage of words. There is no ambiguity. What you are doing is seeing another meaning that I did not intend by taking things out of context.

Edited October 4, 2009 by Vajrahridaya

[Marblehead]

What are you talking about?

 

Post #32: So... to me... much of what you believe in, having to do with what you think is logical and limiting it to 5 sense detectable reality, is a bunch of B.S. But, that's your truth!

 

Happy Trails!

[Vajrahridaya]

 

So 'V. is just alright with me'. (Yeah, so is Jesus. Hehehe.) But if I disagree with something he has said then I feel obliged to disagree with him. I do the same thing with my best friend here in 'real life'. He is a non-denominational Christian. You should hear us sometimes.

 

Happy Trails!

 

Exactly... this is fine!

 

They're not. Hari is wrong here or hasn't worded it right. No such thing as universal tatagarbha. But then it depends what "universal" means to you.

 

What I meant by universal is that the realization is possible universally. As in all things are universally permanently impermanent. It's a play in words but it gives an idea of how realization is made permanent, not as a thing, but as a realization of how dependent origination is not established and that there is no abiding self anywhere to be found universally.

[Marblehead]

QUOTE(Tao99 @ Oct 4 2009, 11:52 AM) *

only logic decides when the case is closed not you, not me. Logic 101 Rule: if the premises are true and the deductive structure is correct, then the case is closed - the conclusion is undeniable and to deny it is "being irrational."

sorry I can't play with a denyer of the rules of logic - it irrational and pointless:

 

inky dinky winky woo. I'm right! (in my world). See what I mean?

 

have a good day and take care

 

PS the funniest thing here is that you called my much beloved life-long practice "child and silly stuff" and I didn't even respond to that remark LOL

 

Okay. Now we really getting serious. Hehehe. "My Rules" allow me to decide if something is logical or not. I don't need to accept your opinion. I don't have to stop talking just because you think I am being illogical. It just may be that in my mind what I say is completely logical. That is what I mean by 'my rules'.

 

Any discussion that has not achieved an agreement of some sort is never complete so there has never been a conclusion so the discussion is never closed.

 

However, if we were to agree to disagree then that would be a closing of the discussion because there would be nothing left to say.

 

The ball is in your court.

 

Happy Trails!

[Vajrahridaya]

I have to agree with you on the battlestar gallactica thing, I liked the old show a lot but the new one is quite a different animal. I've only watched up to season 3....they've done 4 yet?

 

They've finished it. I think season 4 is the last.