Debunking a Creator

[timelessness]

As expected, this discussion has become way too emotional. I hope God shows you the right path. Hahahs

[Simple_Jack]

As expected, this discussion has become way too emotional. I hope God shows you the right path. Hahahs

 

As expected this discussion is full of logical fallacies and double standards.

[chegg]

Atheist: overconfident

 

Agnostic: humble

 

Believer: pompous, controlling, self-righteous, murderous, small-minded, homophobic, judgmental, earth-destroying, overconfident, etc.

 

My apologies to the many believers out there who are none of those things. I'm a believer too so I get it. But if we're going to lump people together in silly categories and make generalizations, well then, these are mine. As a group, the faithful have a lot of misdeeds to answer for.

 

Liminal

 

In the spirit of not throwing off the thread, I'll offer this creator debunking theory: What kind of God would create a world in which so many of the people who believed in him were such jerks?

 

I think this sounds better as far as over-the-top generalizations go:

 

 

Atheist: overconfident

 

Agnostic: humble

 

Blind Believer: pompous, controlling, self-righteous, murderous, small-minded, homophobic, judgmental, earth-destroying, overconfident, etc.

 

Firm Believer - that reached understanding through direct experiences which will lead him/her to absolute truth: slightly crazy but happy and content.

 

 

 

 

Blessings, love and hugs to the Tao Bums

Edited December 6, 2013 by chegg

[timelessness]

When you mix certain amount of hydrogen and oxygen at proper temperature, you get water. You can prove this phenomena.

 

When a man tells a woman that he loves her with all his heart and will do everything he possibly can for the rest of his life to make her happy, there is no way he can prove that. There is no way she can find any concrete proof of his love. Both of them have to feel it and trust their feelings. No concrete evidence.

 

:-)

[gatito]

On Page 1 (post 13), I offered a two-sentence logical construct, - which demonstrates clearly that it is completely pointless to attempt to debunk a creator.

 

Sadly, nobody here understood it - did they?

 

So is there really any point in this thread going beyond 24 pages (and 385) posts?

 

Come on people, some of you are really bright and it's also possible tho figure this stuff out without relying on appeals to authority.

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

NB "Appeal to authority" (Argumentum ab auctoritate)

 

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority (://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority (://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority)

[Brian]

On Page 1 (post 13), I offered a two-sentence logical construct, - which demonstrates clearly that it is completely pointless to attempt to debunk a creator.

 

[/b]Sadly, nobody here understood it - did they?[/b]

 

So is there really any point in this thread going beyond 24 pages (and 385) posts?

 

Come on people, some of you are really bright and it's also possible tho figure this stuff out without relying on appeals to authority.

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NB "Appeal to authority" (Argumentum ab auctoritate)

 

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority]https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority[/url] (://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-authority)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority[/url] (://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority)

^^^I understood it. Before I even opened the thread, actually. I think a lot of people did, many of whom never bothered to post in this one... As Steward of this sub-forum, I'm afraid I have to at least skim through all these posts...

Edited December 6, 2013 by Brian

[gatito]

Comments withdrawn

Edited December 6, 2013 by gatito

[Brian]

Agreed and edited.

[gatito]

Agreed and edited.

 

I withdraw my "remarks" - and I shake your hand, buy you a beer and take my hat off

[Isimsiz Biri]

To understand everything is illusion, you only need Madhyamaka reasoning. Logic.

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=6185&sid=66bfdf5114f9a42b5804d855d6dac9e4&start=220#p74244

 

First, if an appearance is an existent, can it arise from another existent? Or does it arise from a non-existent? As for the first, an existent does not arise from another existent because the arising of something existent is a contradiction in terms; and the arising of an existent from a non-existent is impossible. To address this, Nāḡrjuna writes:

 

An existent does not arise from an existent;

an existent does not arise from a non-existent;

a non-existent does arise from an existent;

a non-existent does not arise from a non-existent —

where then can there be an instance of arising?

 

If the arising of existents is not established, the arising of appearances is not established. If arising is not established, remaining is not established, and likewise, perishing is not established. If the three, arising, remaining and perishing, are not established, then there is no reason to accept the charge of annihilationism since I never suggested that there was an existent entity that could perish.

 

All we are left with is empty appearances: they are not real because no existence, etc., can be ascertained regarding them; they are not unreal since they appear. All we can say about them is that they arise in dependence. - Loppon Namdrol

 

Bullshit. Making play with words. The existent rises from Yin and Yang, wet and dry.

 

Where does Yin and Yang or Wet and Dry arise?

 

From the nothingness and existence which is included in God Almighty.

 

For Wet and Dry or Yin and Yang in Holy Quran, refer to

 

Holy Quran Chapter (6) sūrat l-anʿām (The Cattle)

 

(6:59)

Sahih International: And with Him are the keys of the unseen; none knows them except Him. And He knows what is on the land and in the sea. Not a leaf falls but that He knows it. And no grain is there within the darknesses of the earth and no moist or dry [thing] but that it is [written] in a clear record.

Pickthall: And with Him are the keys of the Invisible. None but He knoweth them. And He knoweth what is in the land and the sea. Not a leaf falleth but He knoweth it, not a grain amid the darkness of the earth, naught of wet or dry but (it is noted) in a clear record.

Yusuf Ali: With Him are the keys of the unseen, the treasures that none knoweth but He. He knoweth whatever there is on the earth and in the sea. Not a leaf doth fall but with His knowledge: there is not a grain in the darkness (or depths) of the earth, nor anything fresh or dry (green or withered), but is (inscribed) in a record clear (to those who can read).

Shakir: And with Him are the keys of the unseen treasures-- none knows them but He; and He knows what is in the land and the sea, and there falls not a leaf but He knows it, nor a grain in the darkness of the earth, nor anything green nor dry but (it is all) in a clear book.

Muhammad Sarwar: He has with Him the keys to the unseen which no one knows besides Him. He knows all that is in the land and the sea. Not a single leaf falls which He would not know. No single seed exists even in the darkest places of the land, nor anything in the world either wet or dry, that is not kept recorded in the self-evident Book (the tablet preserved in the heavens).

Mohsin Khan: And with Him are the keys of the Ghaib (all that is hidden), none knows them but He. And He knows whatever there is in (or on) the earth and in the sea; not a leaf falls, but he knows it. There is not a grain in the darkness of the earth nor anything fresh or dry, but is written in a Clear Record.

Arberry: With Him are the keys of the Unseen; none knows them but He. He knows what is in land and sea; not a leaf falls, but He knows it. Not a grain in the earth's shadows, not a thing, fresh or withered, but it is in a Book Manifest.

Edited December 6, 2013 by Isimsiz Biri

[Isimsiz Biri]

Does anyone know what this guy is talking about?

 

 

Everybody knows that what you talk belongs to Mara, not Buddha

[Isimsiz Biri]

I'm sorry you feel that way. Even South Asian scholars treat these subjects quite seriously:

 

http://www.thlib.org/collections/texts/jiats/#!jiats=/01/germano/b8/

 

Not every South Asian Scholar.

 

Read your fucking link:

 

It is David Germano, not every South Asian Scholars.

 

The Funerary Transformation of the Great Perfection

David Germano, University of Virginia

JIATS, no. 1 (October 2005), THL #T1219, 54 pp

Section 8 of 9 (pp. 24-27)

© 2005 by David Germano, IATS, and THL

The Ultra Pith (yangti)

The Ultra Pith canon of forty-two texts is, in contrast to the Crown Pith literature, internally heterogeneous, and closer to the Four Cycles texts in overall content. As regards the influence of funerary Buddhism, I believe that originally it inhabited an intermediate position between the Crown Pith and Four Cycles. In short, there are two principal strands of the Ultra Pith: a fifteen-text “Brahmin Tradition” linked to Vimalamitra that I suspect was originally an eleventh to twelfth century contemporary of the Seminal Heart; and a nine-text Padmasambhava-based tradition linked again to Nyangrel Nyima Özer and his descendants from the twelfth century onwards.56 This problematizes the contemporary Tibetan categorization of the Crown Pith and Ultra Pith as both Padmasambhava treasure traditions, which one often hears in oral teachings. There are also at least two other independent constellations of texts under the Ultra Pith rubric: six texts linked to Śrīsiṁha and Vairocana (bairo tsana, eighth-ninth century) that have more affinity to the Mind Series canon, and five texts with the sub-rubric Black Ultra Pith.57

The Vimalamitra texts have at least three other rubrics associated with them: the Brahmin Tradition, the “Cycle of the Yellow Volumes with Dark Blue Pages” [page 25] (poti seru tingshokchengyi kor),58 and the “One with the Golden/Silver Bell and Staff” (ser/ ngülgyi drilshingchen).59 The first and third rubrics appear to refer to Vimalamitra himself, who is of the brahmin caste and evidently was associated with carrying a bell and staff of gold or silver; the second rubric likely refers to the special physical form of the manuscripts used by Vimalamitra to form his treasure cache in this case. Finally, the colophons reveal a distinctive treasure narrative, which most typically involves Vimalamitra, Drenpa Yeshé (eighth-ninth century), and Nyang Tingdzin Zangpo (c. eighth-ninth century) involved with the dynastic period translation and concealment, and then Drom Yeshé [Lamé] Nyingpo, Shangpa Chechung[wa] Yeshé Gyeltsen, and others involved in their re-excavation and subsequent transmission.60 This contrasts to the Crown Pith and other Ultra Pith texts with their narratives of concealment by Padmasambhava and excavation by Nyangrel Nyima Özer and Guru Chökyi Wangchuk.

These excavation accounts of the Brahmin Tradition involve figures and time periods similar to those of the accounts of the revelation of the Four Cycles. In short, it appears that the Four Cycles literature mostly predates the twelfth century, and was partially contemporaneous to the earliest use of the Ultra Pith rubric, namely Vimalamitra’s “Brahmin Tradition.” Together they formed the matrix of the later Crown Pith and Ultra Pith Padmasambhava-based movements, which [page 26] were in the former case probably reacting against them, and in the latter case appropriating them without acknowledgment.

The term intermediate process is scattered throughout the Vimalamitra Ultra Pith materials (which are largely absent in The Collected Tantras of Vairocana), but on the whole it seems to be a less innovative reiteration of intermediate process of rebirth discourse. They mostly consist of chapters entitled along the lines of “wandering into saṃsāra in the intermediate process of rebirth.” The most systematic presentation is in The Identical Sky of Primordial Gnosis Tantra,61 which has a sequence of four chapters dealing with the intermediate processes based on a fivefold typology:62 (i) intermediate process of cyclic existence and transcendence – the primordial ground before saṃsāra and nirvāṇa, (ii) intermediate process of birth and death (kyeshi bardo) – the actual phases of dying and rebirth, rather than this life itself, or the postmortem state, (iii) intermediate process of objects and minds (yülsem bardo) – a contemplative context revealing the expanse of reality (chöying) between object and mind, (iv) intermediate process of contemplation – more classic meditation, and (v) intermediate process of rebirth – significantly this is not discussed further, but presumably signifies the postmortem intermediate process. There is a much later chapter on “not taking birth in the intermediate process” which tersely discusses primordial gnosis in the body, and refers to the Six Able Ones (i.e., Six Buddhas; tuppa druk) and two types of Form Body automatically manifesting.63 However, it is in verse, and not very explicit.

The Tantra of Primordial Gnosis Perfectly Complete from Its Depths64 devotes a chapter to the intermediate process of rebirth, which describes the process of dying in detail.65 It culminates in the standard phases of appearance, intensification, and attainment, using standard images like mirage, fireflies, and so forth. Then it discusses latent karmic propensities (bakchak) causing one to think one has one’s previous body, and makes other references to a psychic body (yikyi lü) and so forth as is standard in Indian postmortem presentations. There is no trace of any intermediate process of reality-style discussion. It thus appears that the Vimalamitra Ultra Pith tradition incorporates older style intermediate process discourse only to a limited extent.

[page 27]

When we turn to the slimmer volume of Padmasambhava-based Ultra Pith literature, we find one text actually attributed to Nyangrel Nyima Özer – The Tantra of the Pure Vastness of the Sky Blazing with the Solar and Lunar Light – and four texts attributed to his reincarnation, Guru Chökyi Wangchuk, including the massive The Great Illumination of the Non-Discursive Dimension Tantra.66 In addition, Nyangrel Nyima Özer’s secondary supplement to the central Crown Pith text entitled The Tantra of the Ambrosial Union of Appearances and Life-Worlds, does refer to Ultra Pith, and explicitly indicates its superiority to Crown Pith (see above). It thus may be that Nyangrel Nyima Özer’s later works began to employ the Ultra Pith rubric, which was then picked up by his successors. The central The Great Illumination of the Non-Discursive Dimension Tantra has significant discussions of death-related materials, but its one hundred and twelfth chapter on the four intermediate process is in fact lifted directly from chapter eighty-four of the key Secret Cycle Tantra, The Totally Radiant Seminal Nucleus (as is much of the rest of the text as well).67 This suggests that the Ultra Pith discourse on intermediate process is lifted from presumably earlier Four Cycles discourses, though further research is necessary on this point.

I would suggest the Crown Pith’s reactionary orientation failed ultimately because the incorporation of Tantra into Great Perfection was too popular and powerful, even for the potent Padmasambhava cult to overcome. Its proponents thus shifted over into a linked Ultra Pith movement which carried a similar rubric as well as the Padmasambhava associations, and continued to speak of the Crown Pith, albeit now in a subordinated role. In this sense, it is similar to my hypothesized historical relationship between the materials now classified as Outer, Inner, Secret, and Unsurpassed Secret Cycles. However, the Ultra Pith adopted a more sympathetic attitude towards the new developments and continued to evolve, while the Crown Pith became a closed canon with no future. The point at which this Ultra Pith tradition was linked via the common rubric of Ultra Pith to the older Vimalamitra traditions is as yet unknown.

Read more: http://www.thlib.org/collections/texts/jiats/#!jiats=/01/germano/b8/#ixzz2miELMvlE

[Isimsiz Biri]

You are assuming I am out to prove the divinity of primordial terma, when I'm not.

 

Its called faith.

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/32153-mystical-buddhist-readings/

 

You demon, do you have faith? What kind of a creature are you insulting everybody's faith?

[Isimsiz Biri]

Then someone should justify a Creator is even possible

 

 

You first justify your own "FAITH" What is your faith? Attacking everybody's faith?

[Isimsiz Biri]

The methods of transmission are not "thought out."

 

They are not man made.

 

http://thetaobums.com/topic/32153-mystical-buddhist-readings/

 

 

They are all man made. Read your own link.

 

Somebody wrote down biographies. So What?

[ralis]

To understand everything is illusion, you only need Madhyamaka reasoning. Logic.

 

http://www.dharmawheel.net/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=6185&sid=66bfdf5114f9a42b5804d855d6dac9e4&start=220#p74244

 

First, if an appearance is an existent, can it arise from another existent? Or does it arise from a non-existent? As for the first, an existent does not arise from another existent because the arising of something existent is a contradiction in terms; and the arising of an existent from a non-existent is impossible. To address this, Nāḡrjuna writes:

 

An existent does not arise from an existent;

an existent does not arise from a non-existent;

a non-existent does arise from an existent;

a non-existent does not arise from a non-existent —

where then can there be an instance of arising?

 

If the arising of existents is not established, the arising of appearances is not established. If arising is not established, remaining is not established, and likewise, perishing is not established. If the three, arising, remaining and perishing, are not established, then there is no reason to accept the charge of annihilationism since I never suggested that there was an existent entity that could perish.

 

All we are left with is empty appearances: they are not real because no existence, etc., can be ascertained regarding them; they are not unreal since they appear. All we can say about them is that they arise in dependence. - Loppon Namdrol

 

Paradoxical reasoning.

[Isimsiz Biri]

Unfortunately, the methods of transmission that you always complain of, are from the primordial termas.

 

Since the rules are divine, noone can change them.

 

Where did you understand your rules are divine? They are not divine. Prove that they are divine.

[Isimsiz Biri]

The Buddhist 969 movement is supporting of killing innocent women and children.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/969_Movement

 

This is RongzomFan's "Faith"

[Rara]

RF vs IB round 2!

[Rara]

^^^I understood it. Before I even opened the thread, actually. I think a lot of people did, many of whom never bothered to post in this one... As Steward of this sub-forum, I'm afraid I have to at least skim through all these posts...

With such endurance training, you could become a top spy. And if captured, interrogation would be a walk in the park for you!

[Isimsiz Biri]

RF vs IB round 2!

 

As in Street Fighter "Fight!"

 

I love Hadouken http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadouken_(Street_Fighter)#Hadouken

Edited December 6, 2013 by Isimsiz Biri

[Jetsun]

The Buddhist 969 movement is supporting of killing innocent women and children.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/969_Movement

 

This is RongzomFan's "Faith"

 

Please stay on topic or this will have to go in the pit

[Isimsiz Biri]

Please stay on topic or this will have to go in the pit

 

Dear Jetsun,

 

Does this stay on the topic too?

 

Even Muhammed's scribe, Abdullah ibn Sa‘ad, thought Muhammed was a fraud.

 

Abdullah ibn Sa‘ad actually wrote some of the verses of the Koran.

 

If it does, please send this thread immediately to The Pit.

Edited December 6, 2013 by Isimsiz Biri

[Jetsun]

Dear Jetsun,

 

Does this stay on the topic too?

 

 

If it does, please send this thread immediately to The Pit.

 

If you two want your own thread to debate these issues we can sort that out, otherwise it would be helpful if you both stay on topic otherwise it is inevitably going to quickly turn into pointless trading of insults

[Isimsiz Biri]

If you two want your own thread to debate these issues we can sort that out, otherwise it would be helpful if you both stay on topic otherwise it is inevitably going to quickly turn into pointless trading of insults

 

 

It has already been a pointless trading of insults. I can not think of a bigger insult. Take it to "The Pit", this second, I will not stop.