What can be done to stop Buddhist Discussion turning to flame

[thelerner]

I'm always baffled when discussions within one of the most peaceful philosophies turn nasty. How can we change that here on the bums? I don't want this thread to devolve into name calling or finger pointing. Rather what can be done to end this strangeness.

 

I understand all sides are passionate and come here from different traditions. Still what can be done to end sniping, trolling and insults here.

 

1. Burying the hatchet. Don't carry old grievances into new discussions.

2. Be honest and polite before being offensive. ie Please don't ... or could you please discuss that in a new thread.

 

Buddhism is all about skillful means. What's the best way to cut these things off before they escalate?

[Ish]

IMO - for people to spend some time away from intellectual discussion and actually cultivate themselves.

 

It's not about all this blah blah and winning arguments - serves no one but an inflated sense of self.

 

I mean why do the masters who were considered great spend so much time in retreat or personal cultivation? It's because to actually achieve the essence you have to put some real sincere effort into it.

 

You wouldn't see these kind of "discussions" if some real cultivation had taken place - in my opinion

Edited March 20, 2014 by Ish

[Marblehead]

What you say is true and also very sad. But then, this happens within any dogmatic system where there are numerous schools of thoughts. Islam is a perfect example. The activists don't even have a problem with killing people of a different school.

 

At least our Buddhist friends haven't gone that far yet.

 

I doubt the disagreeing and arguing will ever end. But it can be insisted that they be respectful of the members with whom they are having a disagreement with.

 

Best wishes at finding a good solution.

[C T]

Instead of taking the teachings to heart, sometimes i think too much and too far, and try to put the teachings into others' hearts, thinking its the obvious thing to do, but usually, it falls flat. On the other hand, if i totally take the teachings to heart, i dont think i want to comment on anything at all since the heart has a dialect and a feel all its own, and cannot be translated accurately without resorting to conceptual overlays, no matter how subtle.

 

And the main reason for apparent conflicts here, i think, is due to the ongoing battle within the minds of individual buddhist practitioners here, and elsewhere... its the battle to replace worn, tiresome habits with newer, more vibrant and positive ones. Sometimes this internal feud needs to be expressed, and fearing open vulnerability, some resort to anonymous airings to avoid embarrassment and sheepishness.

 

I think a mature practitioner would not be overwhelmed by the occasional ruckus in the slightest. As the saying goes, if one cannot bear the heat, one should not even entertain the idea of becoming a chef.

 

im not at all sure for now, this is an instant thought and reflection on the OP. Maybe i will change views in due course. Depends. Whats for certain, as a self-reminder, is to constantly check if i am motivated by average concerns or by bodhicitta. This is the sweet spot of practice i think. If we recognise exactly when we are fumbling and losing balance away from this spot, then we should be okay. There is hope yet.

[idiot_stimpy]

All that is needed is humility

[Apech]

I agree about humility and also we could afford to be more generous to each other by assuming that the other person has a valid point of view.

 

Within Buddhism this is an open forum and so there is no one school or tradition which dominates here. So I think that all Buddhists have to embrace the idea that Buddhism here means the whole lot, not just Zen, not just Theraveda, not just Tibetan ... the whole thing. And that there are (we are told) 84,000 collections of dharmas which embrace the whole spectrum of human inclination and thought ... and that is a good thing.

[Simple_Jack]

The first rule of the Buddhist sub-forum is: you do not talk about Buddhism. The second rule of the Buddhist sub-forum is: you DO NOT talk about Buddhism...

 

[thelerner]

Stay Calm

And Ask

WWBD?

he'd kick you quarrelers in the balls

thats what he'd do.

he'd say, point to your true enemy,

then cut off your finger.

The Buddha

he didn't take shit from nobody.

You cross him,

you are Mu!

MU!

[doc benway]

Great topic!

I think that the nature of internet discussion is that it attracts intellectuals.

So while some (most? a few?) of us actually have a stable practice, there is clearly a part of us that drags us back here to talk about it. And it's hard to find people to talk to about this stuff in the real world. My best friend and spiritual confidant is moving in a few weeks (:sob:)

 

I think that one of the things we can do is to always read and re-read our posts multiple times before posting.

Read the post as if someone else had written the post to you and feel how that makes you feel.

Read the post as if you were going to send it to someone you respect, someone who's opinion of you is valued - your guru, teacher, parent, child, etc...

 

Most importantly, our priority in communication should not be whether or not we are correct but whether or not we are acting in a caring, civil, and supportive manner. Whether our method of communication is skillful and reflective of the Buddhist values we presumably respect. Whether our messages here would make our guru proud or embarrassed.

 

It takes a lot of work and effort and some would say that it will degrade the quality of debate, but I call bullshit on that.

If we really want high level Buddhist debate we should look for the real thing, not a Daoist internet chat room.

[asunthatneversets]

Do the discussions here really deteriorate into vitriol all that much? It doesn't seem as bad as this thread suggests.

[idiot_stimpy]

It has gotten better since a perpetrator recently got banned.

[BaguaKicksAss]

1. is it true?

2. is it kind?

3. is it necessary?

 

(OK so perhaps not quite Buddhist, but still good )

[Marblehead]

... not a Daoist internet chat room.

Hey! I like our chat room.

[Marblehead]

1. is it true?

2. is it kind?

3. is it necessary?

 

(OK so perhaps not quite Buddhist, but still good )

Yeah, but then my post count would be somewhere around 32.

[Apech]

Yeah, but then my post count would be somewhere around 32.

You're exaggerating surely. (not saying which way )

[rex]

Because Buddhadharma is said to be limitless with at least 84,000 different teachings directed at beings of different inclincations conditions and capacites it is all things to all people. No wonder it appears that there are people with PhDs in Wind Up posting here.

[Marblehead]

You're exaggerating surely. (not saying which way )

I often exaggerate.

[Stosh]

I figure ,The whole point of having the buddhist subsection is so those in there have a place to wrestle each other about their subject , they like the intellectual wrangling , Why change that ? Besides ,its not like the other subsections arent similar.

I havent made a precise count ,but at some number of back and forth posting something less than ten and probably closer to four ,any given dialogue starts to deteriorate unless an implied platform respecting boundaries is embraced. But the general process of talking about things ,as an art form , has been largely untaught for a long time.

I dont want to support a, 'goody two shoes' dictate which squashes the vigor of any discussion down to " I had a nice day , did you have a nice day? , maybe tomorrow will be a nice day. Heres a poem I wrote about nice days and puppies.." and so forth.

Just leave it up to the regular posters of the subforum to manage their own style,

On the other hand , you could add a subforum and label one as "The Argumentative Buddhist subforum" ,

and the other as the "Less Argumentative Buddhist subforum" with an appropriate mod for each.

[rex]

Besides ,its not like the other subsections arent similar.

Good point. People seem to expect more from Buddhists here.

[Stosh]

Good point. People seem to expect more from Buddhists here.

Yeah , theyre just people too , why do they need to be Buddhas incarnate?

[doc benway]

1. is it true?

2. is it kind?

3. is it necessary?

 

(OK so perhaps not quite Buddhist, but still good )

Socrates filters... words to live by. The variation I generally quote is true, kind, useful.

 

Yeah , theyre just people too , why do they need to be Buddhas incarnate?

Because that is the point of Buddhist cultivation.

The view and practices, the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, all of it means nothing whatsoever if we aren't actively attempting to express what they stand for in our daily lives.

 

It certainly is not necessary for anyone participating in the Buddhist forum to be Buddhists or even to practice Buddhism.

Folks are certainly welcome to simply discuss philosophy.

On the other hand, the forum does present an opportunity to practice and for those serious about the practice it is important to take advantage of every opportunity possible because of the fleeting nature of life.

This is the reason for expressing goodness, support, kindness, and acceptance - not simply because puppies are so adorable...

[yabyum24]

If we really want high level Buddhist debate we should look for the real thing, not a Daoist internet chat room.

That said, a Daoist internet chat room is one of the few places that non-sectarian Buddhists can air some diversity of thought without being shot down in flames by a resident pack of sectarian pandits. If you think that what happens here is bad, you should experience the restrictive, (tough love? aka "idiot-compassion-free" ethos) of some dedicated Buddhist boards. That's why I avoid them nowadays.

Edited March 21, 2014 by yabyum24

[yabyum24]

you could add a subforum and label one as "The Argumentative Buddhist subforum" ,

and the other as the "Less Argumentative Buddhist subforum" with an appropriate mod for each.

I think we could have an argument about that

 

In any case, for the sake of all Buddhists who post here, please never choose a Buddhist mod.

Edited March 21, 2014 by yabyum24

[Simple_Jack]

On the other hand , you could add a subforum and label one as "The Argumentative Buddhist subforum" ,

and the other as the "Less Argumentative Buddhist subforum" with an appropriate mod for each.

 

Buddhist tenets are a touchy subject on this forum so it's best to just not discuss them in depth. The shit show only begins, when people who are trained in non-Buddhist tenet systems or come from backgrounds other than in Buddhism, start to disagree with its tenets. Dogmatism has to be kept to a minimum from both parties in order to avoid the topic from devolving into a shit show.

[Simple_Jack]

Buddhist tenets are a touchy subject on this forum so it's best to just not discuss them in depth. The shit show only begins, when people who are trained in non-Buddhist tenet systems or come from backgrounds other than in Buddhism, start to disagree with its tenets. Dogmatism has to be kept to a minimum from both parties in order to avoid the topic from devolving into a shit show.

 

The same goes for people who identify themselves as practitioners of buddhadharma, but who nonetheless, may be unfamiliar with its tenets or who differ on the nature of its tenets.