Huseng wrote:He's stepped down from his political seat of power, though, and has been promoting democracy.
Well, I mean, democracy doesn't work in all situations Huseng.
I mean if you were to hold up your hand, and have a vote, in the classrooms where you went to school, and said, "I'd like to take a vote, on whether I should get an "A""
That wouldn't work.
You're not there to vote on whether you think you're great.
You're there to be taught by others.
There is a "right answer". If you get a low test score, you don't get to get an "A", just because you take it to a vote.
That basically makes any concept of accuracy, completely solipsistic.
We have physics in a book too, but in a classroom setting you are still taught by others.
And, credentials are necessary to protect people from fraud.
It doesn't have to be a flawless credentialing system. It just has to work reasonably well most of the time.
You know, I mean even if an architect or engineer is a shitty engineer, I'd rather them have some credentialing before designing a building I am in.
Even if, some engineers bribe their professors or certify-ers to let them pass when they shouldn't, It's still way better than no system at all.
You're problem is you think there isn't any enlightenment at all, or that it's some sortof analytical "consciousness theory" or something like that.
A philosophy basically. Like Aristotle or something.
That's not what this is, this isn't something solipsistic, it's understanding something, from a level of consciousness that you can't from an ordinary mind.
There is a "right answer" even if there are many ways to express it.
And you don't believe that, because you think you've got a consciousness theory that nearly understands what the Buddha taught, and so you think you're almost there.
But the problem is, and here's where your arrogance lies, is that you don't think anyone else has an understanding of enlightenment.
Including very prominent Buddhist teachers, or teachers with a lot of credentials and experience, and years of practice.
And so anything anybody says, that says otherwise to what you understand you "know" must be wrong.
But do you see how arrogant that is? That's not even scientific, science uses the process of peer-review.
I mean Huseng, Occam's Razor suggests that the simplest answer; the one that makes the least assumptions, is that you are simply wrong.
But you're stubbornly going on about this, even though many people have debunked your ideas, shown that your logic is faulty, clearly addressed your concerns, explained the reasons why things are so, and yet you keep going on about it anyway, as if they have said nothing.
That's not rational.
"Life is full of suffering. AND Life is full of the Eternal
IT IS OUR CHOICE
We can stand in our shadow, and wallow in the darkness,
We can turn around.
It is OUR choice." -Rev. Basil
" ...out of fear, even the good harm one another. " -Rev. Dazui MacPhillamy