... wrote: Hi all, ... GOOD MORNING KEN H., I love it, applause, applause, applause. GREAT APPLICATION! I mean, the cement of the BUDDHIST FOUNDATION couldMessage 1 of 483 , May 9View Source--- In email@example.com, "Ken H" <kenhowardau@...>
wrote:> Hi all,
>GOOD MORNING KEN H.,
> I'd like to point out that some DSG conversations have become farcical. An outside observer would think we are a bunch of idiots.
> The reason they are farcical is that the participants in the conversations are talking about completely different things! Alex, for example, is saying that the Buddha did not teach no self. He is saying that there clearly is a self and the Buddha simply pointed out that thoughts of self were stressful (and stress was an impediment to meditation and therefore meditators should avoid thoughts of self).
> How can there be a sensible conversation if half of the participants think we are talking about a no-self characteristic of reality, while the other half think we are talking about a not-self meditation strategy?
> Ken H
I love it, applause, applause, applause. GREAT APPLICATION! I mean, the cement of the BUDDHIST FOUNDATION could not exist without the ingredient ANATTA existing and being constituent in the FOUNDATION mix. That's the example used to illustrate the concept of FARCICAL and FARCE i.e. "surely you jest" (jesting is a function of the court jester, no?).
John Lennon had it nailed when he sang about MIND GAMES since we are dealing with the MIND ONLY school which leads me to my current confusion with/in THE ALAYA VIJNANA.
It's a good thing that you, Ken H., recognized a characteristic of the group and it's function of discussion because "that which is discussed" is nothing but a perspective thus is nothing more than a concept or conceptualization of the individual.
Only that which has been experienced can be questioned as being a concept or not. Experience is the Buddha's most sought after behavior since only through experience can the individual decide the truth, rigpa, about a "thing" or not. Are we to believe that each individual does not have any experience in the Buddha's words and teachings because they are devotees of BAUBLES and TRINKETS abandoning all else to the wayside based on it's monetary value as if they were members of a communist party in a tiny little town like Beijing?
Sorry, "my baby", Henny, won't let me type anymore. She needs something to eat and protection while eating, from the male dogs upstairs so I've gotta end this "jest" of illuminating thought.
Hi Rob E RE: Hi Jon. RE: I will get into the next part about the Satipatthana sutta later, as I need to look at it to continue the discussion. J: Glad toMessage 483 of 483 , Oct 1View Source
Hi Rob ERE: Hi Jon.
> RE: I will get into the next part about the Satipatthana sutta later, as I need to look at it to continue the discussion.
> J: Glad to hear you'll be checking out the text of the sutta for a change!! :-))
:-) I appreciate what I desperately hope is your humor here, and if so, is very funny.
I will get back to you with the usual sutta quotes as soon as I can. :-)
Very very funny, Jon. ; - /
- - - - - - - - - -
J: You may have forgotten in the confusion over the new format that you have already come back with a quote from the Satipatthana Sutta. My reply to your message can be found here: