Debunking a Creator

[RongzomFan]

You should have made this comment for every insult of RongzomFan

 

I'll try to keep my insults to fictional characters like Allah, Count Chocula etc. than real persons.

[Jetsun]

Higher intellectual learning is correlated to faster realization.

 

I don't think that is true, an illiterate who is completely devoted and willing to surrender to their Lama will progress faster than an intellectual obsessed with wordplay

[Jeff]

That is arriving at the conclusion. Please, don't ask me to elaborate further on the MMK, because I lack the extensive reading and re-reading of Nagarjuna's MMK in order to confidently present it accurately. Leave that to RongzomFan, since he's more educated in this area than me.

 

No problem. I had assumed that since you had started responding to my questions to RongzomFan, that meant that you were interested in the discussion or had a position on the topic.

 

Also, my question was based on the "logic" of the reasoning and not the underlying theory/perspective.

[Jeff]

I'll try to keep my insults to fictional characters like Allah, Count Chocula etc. than real persons.

 

Hi SJ,

 

Plus, given the above types of statements, I am not optimistic regarding discussing the logic of a statement.

Edited December 9, 2013 by Jeff

[RongzomFan]

I don't think that is true, an illiterate who is completely devoted and willing to surrender to their Lama will progress faster than an intellectual obsessed with wordplay

 

But illiterate doesn't mean uneducated.

[RongzomFan]

Namkhai Norbu's root guru was illiterate, but he was able to reveal sophisticated termas.

[RongzomFan]

I don't think that is true, an illiterate who is completely devoted and willing to surrender to their Lama will progress faster than an intellectual obsessed with wordplay

 

I agree that some intellectuals like Tsongkhapa are completely devoid of realization.

[adept]

Higher intellectual learning is correlated to faster realization.

 

Throughout history it is often the poor, impoverished and illiterate folk who 'get it'

Intellectualism can create a barrier to wisdom.

[RongzomFan]

Throughout history it is often the poor, impoverished and illiterate folk who 'get it'

Intellectualism can create a barrier to wisdom.

 

Reference?

[Simple_Jack]

He was also a sorcerer and a murderer of innocent people. How very compassionate and Buddhist.

 

Well the number of people he may have killed, if he had killed anyone at all, may be an embellishment to this story; including other areas of his story. Obviously, if you knew anything about tantric Buddhist hagiography: you would find a lot of similar questionable behavior from mahasiddha's, that are antithetical to both mainstream Brahmanic culture and Sravakayana.

 

I don't think that is true, an illiterate who is completely devoted and willing to surrender to their Lama will progress faster than an intellectual obsessed with wordplay

 

We can't accurately determine if this is true or not, we can only say that Tibetan Buddhism produced 'realized masters', who were educated and uneducated in Buddhist tenet systems. These are variables which are dependent on the conditions of each individual.

Edited December 9, 2013 by Simple_Jack

[RongzomFan]

All the samyaksambuddhas I know were highly educated

 

Dudjom Rinpoche

Khenpo Ngawang Palzang

Kunzang Dechen Lingpa

 

But you are all now derailing my thread

[Simple_Jack]

Throughout history it is often the poor, impoverished and illiterate folk who 'get it'

Intellectualism can create a barrier to wisdom.

 

If it weren't for these 'intellectuals' these traditions wouldn't have survived into modern times. Anyways, you can't conclusively prove this, since this is just more of the same anti-intellectualism that TTB's is notorious for.

[Aetherous]

There is actual intelligence, and then there is pseudo-intelligence. The latter appeals to authority, for instance.

[Simple_Jack]

There is actual intelligence, and then there is pseudo-intelligence. The latter appeals to authority, for instance.

 

Yes, just like appealing to the Vedas, the Torah, the Bible, the Koran.

[RongzomFan]

There is actual intelligence, and then there is pseudo-intelligence. The latter appeals to authority, for instance.

 

There is actual intelligence

 

And then there is pseudo-intelligence like believing in Santa Claus or a Creator.

[Aetherous]

There is actual intelligence

 

And then there is pseudo-intelligence like believing in Santa Claus or a Creator.

 

We still haven't been able to debunk a Creator, so this isn't entirely certain. I personally stand behind my first post in this thread, which said to be honest with ourselves above all, and that agnosticism is very understandable.

[RongzomFan]

We still haven't been able to debunk a Creator, so this isn't entirely certain. I personally stand behind my first post in this thread, which said to be honest with ourselves above all, and that agnosticism is very understandable.

 

Yes I am agnostic about gnomes, elves, fairies and unicorns.

 

They are more possible than a Creator.

[RongzomFan]

One has to show a Creator is possible:

 

[Aetherous]

Yes I am agnostic about gnomes, elves, fairies and unicorns.

 

They are more possible than a Creator.

 

I asked you before for the reasoning behind how they're "more possible". If you said equally possible, sure.

[Simple_Jack]

We still haven't been able to debunk a Creator, so this isn't entirely certain. I personally stand behind my first post in this thread, which said to be honest with ourselves above all, and that agnosticism is very understandable.

 

I personally stand by my post to you that this is irrelevant and meaningless to Dharmic traditions:

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/32820-debunking-a-creator/?p=502017

 

This may not be necessary considering that a creator god is not a determining factor for Samkhya, Jainism, Mimamsa, Vaishnavism, etc. I would also put forth the idea that monotheism didn't enter the cultural sphere of Chinese thought until Zoroastrianism, Nestorian Christianity and Islam were introduced into China through the Silk Road.

[RongzomFan]

I asked you before for the reasoning behind how they're "more possible". If you said equally possible, sure.

 

 

Why the hell would they be "equally possible"?

 

Watch the video I posted.

[Aetherous]

I personally stand by my post to you that this is irrelevant and meaningless to Dharmic traditions:

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/32820-debunking-a-creator/?p=502017

 

This may not be necessary considering that a creator god is not a determining factor for Samkhya, Jainism, Mimamsa, Vaishnavism, etc. I would also put forth the idea that monotheism didn't enter the cultural sphere of Chinese thought until Zoroastrianism, Nestorian Christianity and Islam were introduced into China through the Silk Road.

 

Okay, got it. To practice Buddhism you don't need belief in a creator. But this thread is about debunking a creator...

[RongzomFan]

I asked you before for the reasoning behind how they're "more possible". If you said equally possible, sure.

 

Because a Creator has been rebutted a million times.

 

Look at the rebuttals for Kalam cosmology.

[Aetherous]

Because a Creator has been rebutted a million times.

 

Look at the rebuttals for Kalam cosmology.

 

Post it here, don't just reference it with absolutely no proof! I'm not going to go look. This is a discussion.

 

Time to go watch that video...

[RongzomFan]

 

Post it here, don't just reference it with absolutely no proof! I'm not going to go look. This is a discussion.

 

Time to go watch that video...

 

Google "kalam rebuttal"