Wirathu: The Face Of Buddhist Terrorism

[silas]

If you wanted to know if other religions had any absolute truth in them, instead of relying on pandits and intellectual scholars, on conceptual arguments and books (that should probably be burned), why do you not find out for yourself? Why don't you simply access the fourth jhana or beyond and make the trip yourself?

 

You know why? Because you are a fraud. You need to instigate and incite holy derision, you need to poke your intellectual stick in the fire and then into other beings' eyes in order to get your satisfaction and prop yourself up.

 

Want to know if Jesus Christ exists? Go see for yourself. Just raise your right hand and sincerely invite him into your heart. He will appear to you. He is always there.

....

So prove it to us that you are qualified to look down your nose at the rest of the world and decide what is true and right for them. Show us a miracle or two. Go heal some lepers. Perhaps materialize a fish or two.. Tell us about your previous lives, or perhaps you could transport your body to go give Alwaysoff a good kick in the ass..

 

If all one does is raise a right hand and sincerely invite him into one's heart, one will have nagging doubts all their life, because who knows what's been invited in.

 

As to healing lepers, materializing a fish or two, although uncommon in Jesus' day, curing leprosy and materializing fish are nothing special today. What would have been really helpful is if Jesus had given the cure to doctors of that time (so they could help other lepers) or figured out a cure for poverty or cured wo/men's minds of war and violence.

 

Edited July 3, 2013 by silas

[konchog uma]

Since its nothing special, do you have a link or some reference for people who can cure leprosy and materialize fish? thanks. Also if a healer is healing people by the power of their own life force, as in a laying on of hands, how is that healer going to give doctors a cure to do the same thing?

[silas]

Since its nothing special, do you have a link or some reference for people who can cure leprosy and materialize fish? thanks. Also if a healer is healing people by the power of their own life force, as in a laying on of hands, how is that healer going to give doctors a cure to do the same thing?

 

Today, it's easy to materialize fish. They sell kits. In this kit, simply mix magic soil and water, and presto! instant fish!!!!

 

Leprosy can be treated with antibiotics. Since Jesus can turn water to wine, he can turn water into an antibiotic. Then he could have given doctors the gift of liquid antibiotics for future patients. If He can only Heal with energy, he could have Stored the energy in a crystal and given it to doctors.

 

 

 

 

 

Hence:

 

[三江源]

.

Edited July 25, 2014 by cat

[Simple_Jack]

If you wanted to know if other religions had any absolute truth in them, instead of relying on pandits and intellectual scholars, on conceptual arguments and books (that should probably be burned), why do you not find out for yourself? Why don't you simply access the fourth jhana or beyond and make the trip yourself?

 

TI, you're an idiot. If it weren't for the pandits of India, Tibet or South East Asia: you wouldn't have all those books or articles to read and quote from when trying to make misinformed corrections nor would you have anything to talk shit against when someone provides information to counter your opinionative arguments.

 

It might be that he made alcohol completely unneccessary.

 

Woahhh there, it was a wedding and there wasn't any wine left for him and his crew to get wasted off of, so it was completely necessary for him make wine from water. Would you rather him or someone else go and make a wine run? That would've taken too long.

[Tibetan_Ice]

TI, you're an idiot. If it weren't for the pandits of India, Tibet or South East Asia: you wouldn't have all those books or articles to read and quote from when trying to make misinformed corrections nor would you have anything to talk shit against when someone provides information to counter your opinionative arguments.

 

What! You mean those scholars aren't accurate?

 

You mean it takes years of schooling and edumacation to be able to discern true scholars from fakes?

 

And here I thought you were going to tell me to lick your balls again.

 

What's the matter, couldn't find any authoritative posts to copy and paste in rebuttal?

 

I try to stay away from pandits and scholarly writings because the experience, the emprical realization part is missing. Most scholars banty about big words and big concepts without actually truly knowing what they are saying.

 

You don't have to be a scholar or a historian to write a book or publish some text.

 

Nisargadatta wasn't a scholar but I read his book twice and got great benefit from it. Was Padmasambhava a scholar? I regard their words with more value than most of the crap you quote from DW. The most revered saint in Tibet, mass-murderer, Milerepa wasn't a scholar.

 

If you want to examine your own scholarship, why don't you look at the sad response you posted in this thread here:

 

You said:

http://thetaobums.com/topic/30000-wirathu-the-face-of-buddhist-terrorism/?p=448196

 

Dude, shut up, that article you posted was crap anyways.

 

Your scholarship is lacking here. At that point in the thread I had posted more than one article.

The first one was here:

http://thetaobums.com/topic/30000-wirathu-the-face-of-buddhist-terrorism/?p=447993

 

The second batch was here:

http://thetaobums.com/topic/30000-wirathu-the-face-of-buddhist-terrorism/?p=448077

 

So which article specifically was crap? You failed to identify which source you were referring to.

 

I know the first article contained some strange interpretation of the middle way, but who cares? It served to support my argument.

The second batch of quotes served to show that emptiness is a better explanation of non-existence than just anatta.

And I guess Tsongkhapa, a premier scholar, just didn't cut it either, eh?

 

What bothers me about you is that instead of focusing on my argument, you sought to invalidate the sources and ignore my argument. But that is what scholars do, don't they? If the source isn't the ultimate absolute best, then all of truth that the article contains must be thrown away. Time and time again I've heard you and Alwaysoff dismiss concepts/writings/books because they came from the wiki, or even, because of the fact that they were interpreted by a "westerner". You guys can never agree on anything and seem to have this thing about only the ultimate true source is valid. Well, there is no 'ultimate true source' when it comes to scholasticism. The only source of ultimate truth is practice, experience and practical knowledge. It is not found by regurgitating what others have said or demonstrating what you've memorized..

 

The funny thing about scholarship is that the tenets are true until the next best thing comes along, then the ideas/understanding changes and what was once held as the absolute truth becomes invalid and thrown out. That doesn't happen with experiential knowledge, now, does it?

 

 

 

 

 

[Simple_Jack]

What! You mean those scholars aren't accurate?

 

You mean it takes years of schooling and edumacation to be able to discern true scholars from fakes?

 

And here I thought you were going to tell me to lick your balls again.

 

What's the matter, couldn't find any authoritative posts to copy and paste in rebuttal?

 

I try to stay away from pandits and scholarly writings because the experience, the emprical realization part is missing. Most scholars banty about big words and big concepts without actually truly knowing what they are saying.

 

You don't have to be a scholar or a historian to write a book or publish some text.

 

Nisargadatta wasn't a scholar but I read his book twice and got great benefit from it. Was Padmasambhava a scholar? I regard their words with more value than most of the crap you quote from DW. The most revered saint in Tibet, mass-murderer, Milerepa wasn't a scholar.

 

If you want to examine your own scholarship, why don't you look at the sad response you posted in this thread here:

 

You said:

http://thetaobums.com/topic/30000-wirathu-the-face-of-buddhist-terrorism/?p=448196

 

 

 

Your scholarship is lacking here. At that point in the thread I had posted more than one article.

The first one was here:

http://thetaobums.com/topic/30000-wirathu-the-face-of-buddhist-terrorism/?p=447993

 

The second batch was here:

http://thetaobums.com/topic/30000-wirathu-the-face-of-buddhist-terrorism/?p=448077

 

So which article specifically was crap? You failed to identify which source you were referring to.

 

I know the first article contained some strange interpretation of the middle way, but who cares? It served to support my argument.

The second batch of quotes served to show that emptiness is a better explanation of non-existence than just anatta.

And I guess Tsongkhapa, a premier scholar, just didn't cut it either, eh?

 

What bothers me about you is that instead of focusing on my argument, you sought to invalidate the sources and ignore my argument. But that is what scholars do, don't they? If the source isn't the ultimate absolute best, then all of truth that the article contains must be thrown away. Time and time again I've heard you and Alwaysoff dismiss concepts/writings/books because they came from the wiki, or even, because of the fact that they were interpreted by a "westerner". You guys can never agree on anything and seem to have this thing about only the ultimate true source is valid. Well, there is no 'ultimate true source' when it comes to scholasticism. The only source of ultimate truth is practice, experience and practical knowledge. It is not found by regurgitating what others have said or demonstrating what you've memorized..

 

The funny thing about scholarship is that the tenets are true until the next best thing comes along, then the ideas/understanding changes and what was once held as the absolute truth becomes invalid and thrown out. That doesn't happen with experiential knowledge, now, does it?

 

TI, you're a scumbag.

[Apech]

TI, you're a scumbag.

 

 

Not very Buddhists to do the name calling thing .... and against TB rules also.

[hydrogen]

 

Simple_Jack, on 05 Jul 2013 - 11:40, said:

TI, you're a scumbag.

 

 

Not very Buddhists to do the name calling thing .... and against TB rules also.

 

I kind of like Simple_Jack's acceptance speach of being defeated: simple, short, and to the point with true emotion.

Edited July 5, 2013 by hydrogen

[RongzomFan]

Milarepa was a highly educated Buddhist.

 

He studied with multiple teachers even before his intensive studying with Marpa.

 

Brunnholzl notes:

"His familiarity with advanced Buddhist terminology and
concepts can be seen in many of his vajra songs."

Edited July 5, 2013 by alwayson

[Apech]

I kind of like Simple_Jack's acceptance speach of being defeated: simple, short, and to the point with true emotion.

 

Well maybe but my point is made.

[Simple_Jack]

Not very Buddhists to do the name calling thing .... and against TB rules also.

 

I already called him an idiot in a previous post, so it's a little late to be pointing this out.

 

I kind of like Simple_Jack's acceptance speach of being defeated: simple, short, and to the point with true emotion.

 

It's not about showing "true emotion". This isn't understood by the uninitiated: but there's tantric samaya reminding people not to feud between those who have received initiations from the same teacher. Go look at my post history: this has happened almost like clockwork when there's disagreement with what he posted. It's just frustrating because this should be about clarifying the teachings in order to help others become empowered , so that they can help themselves; not this disease of internet forums where people are arrogantly trying to be victorious in an internet debate just for the sake of selfishly one-upping the individual. This is not healthy for fostering an environment for learning. Honestly, I could expect this a over a year or more ago when there was still a level of overt animosity towards Buddhism (thanks to Vajrarhidaya) on this forum; where it was somewhat necessary to respond in such a way as to wade through all the misinformed BS that was being posted. Alas, this still happens every so often on the Buddhist sub-forum, almost as if these dickheads are replicating like agent Smith from the matrix movies.

 

I know that I'm a hypocrite, because I'm just as much of a piece of shit for doing the same things. The irony of this is that it's spilling out into thread dealing with feuding between groups of people in Myanmar.

Edited July 5, 2013 by Simple_Jack

[RongzomFan]

Padmasambhava is not a historical character.

 

He is a terma character and/or manifestation of a tertons' own wisdom.

[silent thunder]

I'm surprised by the venemous, contentious and fundamentalist nature of the buddhist discussions I've read here.

I just stopped reading the buddhist topics as a result. Problem solved, for me anyway.

 

But I do wonder, where is the compassion and curiosity?

My ignorance is blissful in this matter.

[Simple_Jack]

I'm surprised by the venemous, contentious and fundamentalist nature of the buddhist discussions I've read here.

I just stopped reading the buddhist topics as a result. Problem solved, for me anyway.

 

But I do wonder, where is the compassion and curiosity?

My ignorance is blissful in this matter.

 

Welcome to the world of online Buddhist discussion. Blame people like me who are unable to follow the basic tenets of their doctrine. In actuality, this isn't unique to just Buddhist discussions, you can find this anywhere on the internet.

 

There is very little opportunity for constructive discussion on this forum.

[Apech]

I'm surprised by the venemous, contentious and fundamentalist nature of the buddhist discussions I've read here.

I just stopped reading the buddhist topics as a result. Problem solved, for me anyway.

 

But I do wonder, where is the compassion and curiosity?

My ignorance is blissful in this matter.

 

 

Yes I agree ... it's disturbing and an odd thing that the Buddhist threads are sometimes the most bad natured. For those who have taken vajrayana vows and are bound by samaya I am posting the 14 root down falls and highlighting some of them ... just as a reminder ....

 

 

 

 

 

1. disrespecting the vajra master
2. transgressing the words of the buddhas
3. insulting one’s vajra brothers and sisters
4. abandoning love for sentient beings
5. abandoning the bodhichitta in aspiration or application
6. criticizing the teachings of the sutras and tantras
7. revealing secrets to those who are unworthy
8. mistreating one’s body
9. abandoning emptiness
10. keeping bad company
11. failing to reflect on emptiness
12. upsetting those who have faith in the teachings
13. failing to observe the samaya commitments
14. denigrating women

[Simple_Jack]

Yes I agree ... it's disturbing and an odd thing that the Buddhist threads are sometimes the most bad natured. For those who have taken vajrayana vows and are bound by samaya I am posting the 14 root down falls and highlighting some of them ... just as a reminder ....

 

See, the thing is there is still room for debate. In Buddhist traditions this plays a role in accurately understanding the teachings. Even when it's criticizing other teachings within Buddhism. The problem is when discussions are fueled by hostility between the criticizer and the one being criticized. Also, it doesn't help that everyone who usually posts in the Buddhist sub-forum, thinks they're hot shit when it comes to Buddhism.

Edited July 5, 2013 by Simple_Jack

[hydrogen]

Yes I agree ... it's disturbing and an odd thing that the Buddhist threads are sometimes the most bad natured. For those who have taken vajrayana vows and are bound by samaya I am posting the 14 root down falls and highlighting some of them ... just as a reminder ....

 

I guess we can blame the whole thing on buddha himself since he didn't practice compassion himself.

 

"Gautama Siddārtha blamed Devadatta saying that he was doomed to the Niraya Hell for his deeds, and it is reported that shortly thereafter he did in fact fall into Hell."

[silas]

But I do wonder, where is the compassion and curiosity?

 

My ignorance is blissful in this matter.

 

I guess we can blame the whole thing on buddha himself since he didn't practice compassion himself.

 

Buddhism treats reality as illusion - and so, compassion is an illusion too.

[thelerner]

I guess we can blame the whole thing on buddha himself since he didn't practice compassion himself.

 

"Gautama Siddārtha blamed Devadatta saying that he was doomed to the Niraya Hell for his deeds, and it is reported that shortly thereafter he did in fact fall into Hell."

Can't say I'm familiar with that episode, but from what I've read and been told, Guatama seemed pretty compassionate. There's sutras, stories, smears and various add ons based on 'my god/religious leader is better then yours'. Some sources are more accurate and less 'mythological' then others. Did the author of this tale have such power that he really knew what was going on in Hell?

 

silas, on 05 Jul 2013 - 15:46, said:

"Buddhism treats reality as illusion - and so, compassion is an illusion too."

 

Not the Buddhism I've studied. It takes reality seriously, compassion even more so.

Edited July 5, 2013 by thelerner

[Simple_Jack]

I guess we can blame the whole thing on buddha himself since he didn't practice compassion himself.

 

"Gautama Siddārtha blamed Devadatta saying that he was doomed to the Niraya Hell for his deeds, and it is reported that shortly thereafter he did in fact fall into Hell."

 

 

Buddhism treats reality as illusion - and so, compassion is an illusion too.

 

Ahhh, reminiscent of such inane BS from around the period I first signed up on TTB's.

[RongzomFan]

Noone can damn anyone to hell in Buddhism.

 

If you wind up in hell, that's your own karma (action).

[silas]

>Buddhism treats reality as illusion - and so, compassion is an illusion too.

Ahhh, reminiscent of such inane BS from around the period I first signed up on TTB's.

 

I wish it were true, but experience tells me otherwise. Yes, there are Buddhists who follow the way of compassion, but you'd be shocked how easy it is to sway them in another direction. I know of Buddhists who traveled outside the country to study with big-name monks and at famous temples, but deliberately ignored suffering going on around them. They cared only about their training lineage. I have known such people even in San Francisco, home to the famous San Francisco Zen Center.

Edited July 5, 2013 by silas

[Tibetan_Ice]

Milarepa was a highly educated Buddhist.

 

He studied with multiple teachers even before his intensive studying with Marpa.

 

Brunnholzl notes:

"His familiarity with advanced Buddhist terminology and

concepts can be seen in many of his vajra songs."

 

Let me guess, Brunnholzl must be a scholar, and you took his word for it.

 

Perhaps you should find out for yourself. I did. Not too hard, just read the goddamn songs yourself!

 

Milerepa's songs make short work of scholars and he even denies being a scholar himself...

 

http://www.bps.lk/olib/wh/wh095.pdf

 

In the time of Milarepa, as is evident from these songs, many bhikkhus spent long years in

study but never gave much heed to practice. Thus is the divorce of pa>ipatti-dhamma or sīla

(moral precepts) and samādhi (meditation), from pariyatti-dhamma or simply learning. Scholarbhikkhus

of Tibet were evidently, at that time, very able in arguing the finer points of Buddhist

philosophy and well-equipped with logic to worst outsiders as well as fellow Buddhists in

debates. Somehow, in the welter of this study (and the Tibetan Canon and its Commentaries are

considerably more extensive than their lengthy Pāli counterparts), the urge to practise

meditation, many of its foremost exponents were masters not possessing the monk’s robes. This

was true of the spiritual forebears of Milarepa (his immediate Guru, Marpa and of the Indian

yogis, Naropa and Tilopa). In several places he criticizes those bhikkhus, and indeed anyone,

who studies the Dhamma just for intellectual satisfaction or even for worldly advantage. Many

sincere bhikkhus did approach him for meditation instructions and, thereafter, practised with

him as their Teacher. He was, therefore, a source for the spiritual regeneration of the Sangha in

Tibet.

 

...

 

They live many kalpas in a second.

What a pity that they know it not!

Alas, these heavenly births

Have neither sense nor value.

When they think vicious thoughts

They start to fall again.

As to the reason for their fall

(Scholars), with empty words,

Have dried their mouths in explanations.

 

...

 

Shiwa Aui said, “Now please tell us about the sufferings of human beings.” In answer, Milarepa

sang:

We human beings are endowed with power

To do good, or evil deeds;

This is because our body (personality)

Is made of all Six Elements.

You junior Repas who desire to be great scholars

Should know the ’Kernel and shell’ of Buddhism.

Lest learning lead you only to confusion.

Knowing not the root of mind,

Useless is it to meditate for years.

Without sincerity and willingness,

Rich offerings have no real meaning.

Without giving impartial aid to all,

Patronage of one’s favourite is wrong.

Knowing not the right counsel for each man,

Blunt talk will only bring trouble and discord.

He who knows the appropriate way

To help men of diverse dispositions,

Can use expedient words

for kind and fruitful purposes.

He who knows but little of himself

Can harm many by his ignorance.

When good-will arises in one’s mind,

Stones, trees and earth all become seeds of virtue.

Again, an over-punctilious person

Knows not how to relax;

A gluttonous dog knows not what is hunger;

A brazen Guru knows not what is fear.

Rich men are wretched creatures with their money,

Poor men are wretched creatures without money.

Alas, with, or without money, both are miserable!

Happiness will come, dear children,

If you can practise the Dharma.

Remember then, my words, and practise with perseverance.

 

...

 

“I hope to practise (more) Dharma when death draws near,” said Shindormo. “Now please

preach for me the suffering of death. “ In answer, Milarepa sang:

Listen, my disheartened patroness:

Like the pain of repaying compound debts,

One must undergo the suffering of death,

Yama’s guards catch and carry one

When the time of death arrives.

The rich man cannot buy it off with money,

With his sword the hero cannot conquer it,

Nor can the clever woman outwit it by a trick.

Even the learned scholar cannot

Postpone it with his eloquence.

Here, the unlucky cannot make appeal,

Nor can a brave man here display his valour.

When all the Nadis converge in the body,

One is crushed as if between two mountains—

All vision and sensation become dim.

 

When Bon priests and diviners become useless,

The trusted physician yields to his despair.

None can communicate with the dying man,

Protecting guards and devas vanish into nought.

Though the breath has not completely stopped,

One can all but smell the stale odour of dead flesh.

Like a lump of coal in chilly ashes

One approaches to the brink of death.

When dying, some still count the dates and stars;

Others cry and shout and groan;

Some think of worldly goods;

Some, that their hard-earned wealth

Will be enjoyed by others.

However deep one’s love, or great one’s sympathy,

He can but depart and journey on alone.

His good friend and consort

Can only leave him there;

In a bundle his beloved body

Will be folded and carried off,

Then thrown in water, burned in fire,

Or simply cast off in a desolate land.

Faithful patrons, what in the end can we retain?

Must we sit idly by and let all things go?

When your breath stops tomorrow

No wealth on earth can help you.

Why, then, should one be mean?

Kind kinsmen circle round

The bed of the dying,i

But none can help him for a moment.

Knowing that all must be left behind,

One realizes that all great love

And attachment must be futile

When that final moment comes,

Only Holy Dharma helps.

You should strive, dear patroness,

For a readiness to die!

Be certain and ready and when the time comes,

You will have no fear and no regret.

 

...

 

Two scholar-bhikkhus came to argue about the Dharma with Milarepa but the discussion

(which was a demonstration of his mastery of meditation) turned against them. Upon which,

one of them asked for his instruction in the Six Pāramitās. In answer, Milarepa sang:

If from parsimony one cannot free oneself,

What is the use of discussing charity? (dāna)

If one does not forswear hypocrisy and pretence,

What is the use of keeping discipline? (sīla)

If one abjures not malicious revilings,

What is the use of exercising

pretentious “patience”? (khanti)

If one abandons not indifference and inertness,

What is the use of swearing to be Moral? (viriya)

If one conquers not the errant thoughts within,

What is the use of toiling in meditation? (samādhi)

If one does not see all forms as helpful,

What is the use of practising the Wisdom (paā)

If one knows not the profound teaching

Of forbidding and allowing,

What is the use of learning?

If one knows not the art of taking and rejecting,

What is the use of speaking on Karma-causation?

If one’s mind does not accord with the Dharma,

What is the use of joining the Order?

If the poisonous snake of Klesa is not killed,

The yearning for wisdom only leads to fallacy.

If venomous jealousy is not overcome,

One’s yearning for the Bodhi-mind will be an illusion.

If one refrains not from hurting people,

One’s longing for respect and honour

Is merely wishful thinking.

If one cannot conquer ego-clinging and prejudice,

One’s craving for the Equality of Dharma

Only brings wrong views.

If one cannot subdue the demon, clinging-ego,

One’s Klesas will be great and his Yoga bound to fail.

If one’s actions conform not with the Dharma.

One will always hinder the good deeds of others.

If one has not yet absorbed one’s mind in Dharma,

One’s babbling and prattling will only disturb others’ minds.

Therefore, do not waste your life in words and chatter

But try to gain the assurance of no-regret

And the confidence of facing death!

 

...

 

One of the scholar-bhikkhus who had previously been Opposed to the Jetsun, gradually

acquired faith in him and eventually came to him for the Dharma, requesting, “Now please be

kind enough to instruct me in the essence of the Six Pāramitās.” In response, the Jetsun sang:

I am not well-versed in words

Being no scholar-preacher,

Yet this petitioner is sincere and good.

 

...

 

A monk-disciple of Milarepa, Ligor Sharu, wanted the Jetsun to adapt himself somewhat to

worldly conventions, so as to win the interest and following of great scholars. Milarepa refused

this idea saying that he would ever follow his Guru’s instructions to live remotely, and he sang

to Ligor Sharu:

I bow down to Marpa, the Translator.

Realizing that fame is as unreal as an echo,

I abandon not the ascetic way of life,

Throwing away all cares and preparations.

Whatever reputation I may have,

I shall always be happy and contented.

Realizing that all things are illusion,

I cast away possessions;

For wealth obtained by strife I have not the least desire!

Whatever my means and prestige,

I shall always be happy and contented.

Realizing that all followers are phantoms,

I have no concern for human relationship

And travel where I please,

Unlike those artificial scholar-priests

Who act with discretion and restraint.

Whatever the status I may have

I shall always be happy and contented.

Realizing that desires and sufferings

Are themselves the Great Equality,

I cut the rope of passion and of hatred.

With or without associates,

I shall always be happy and contented.

 

 

So, if Milarepa himself denies being a scholar and he says that he is "not well-versed in words", that is good enough for me.

 

If Brunnholzl is trying to prove that Milarepa was a scholar (which I strongly doubt), then Brunnholzl's erudition wasn't efficacious, as he did not understand the content of the songs nor believe Milarepa's attitude towards scholasticism, nor did he accept Milarepa's denial of being a scholar.

 

Milarepa had good instruction followed with lots of practice and experience. He was no pandit.

 

[Apech]

See, the thing is there is still room for debate. In Buddhist traditions this plays a role in accurately understanding the teachings. Even when it's criticizing other teachings within Buddhism. The problem is when discussions are fueled by hostility between the criticizer and the one being criticized. Also, it doesn't help that everyone who usually posts in the Buddhist sub-forum, thinks they're hot shit when it comes to Buddhism.

 

Exactly .... debate is good but bad natured name calling is not ok.

 

Maybe people have to be a bit bigger than thinking about how they are 'hot shit' because they've read a book or two.