debating and attitude in the meantime

Forum for discussion of Tibetan Buddhism. Questions specific to one school are best posted in the appropriate sub-forum.
User avatar
PadmaVonSamba
Posts: 9438
Joined: Sat May 14, 2011 1:41 am

Re: debating and attitude in the meantime

Post by PadmaVonSamba »

Malcolm wrote: Sat May 27, 2023 2:02 pm
PadmaVonSamba wrote: Sat May 27, 2023 2:01 pm
Malcolm wrote: Sat May 27, 2023 1:50 pm

There is always a trade off between literalism and actual meaning.
Posing is generally done to create a false impression about oneself upon others, and involves pretending. But pretending, by itself, doesn’t necessarily involve posing. Especially in the context of Buddhist practice, and perhaps greatly in Tibetan Buddhism which provides so many props and activities. it’s easy to pretend to oneself that one is sincerely practicing, without ever even cutting through one layer of mental bullshit, without developing any genuine compassion.

I don’t know if this is what jet.urgyen was suggesting, and admittedly I am not familiar specifically with his previous posts or general tone used when posting. But I would be interested in hearing his (or maybe it’s her) defense of that term.
He said that most people in the DC were pretending to be realized. I and others took umbrage at his suggestion.
Okay thanks
EMPTIFUL.
An inward outlook produces outward insight.
jet.urgyen
Posts: 2753
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2017 12:29 am

Re: debating and attitude in the meantime

Post by jet.urgyen »

Malcolm wrote: Sat May 27, 2023 1:54 pm
jet.urgyen wrote: Sat May 27, 2023 1:49 pm Please fellows, let's stay on topic, on the propper manner.

I already made a respectful debate question to Malcolm and for 3 days it remained unanswered, and then the topic got closed because the discussion produced much agitation.
I answered your question. You were not satisfied with the answer. You wanted to know why there were no realized people in the DC, I told you no one can tell from outside who is realized and who is not.

If you want respect, you have to show respect.
And you said that ChNN was not a total realized being, that two of his students would probably make good teachers, and then reluctantly corrected to Gurus. How can you distinguish this two probably good Gurus among the hundreds of students if not by judging the realization they have, you just flip a coin? But the main question was yet anothere, unanswered. The question was -just in case you want to answer- ¿is it ChNN's fault that according to you only two people among hundreds have the a qualifications that you yourself simehow noticed on them to be gurus?

Now, back to topic. How is this disrespectful?
Certainly it is not good, for the sake of the conversation, to reach the level of insults.

Someone should have thought of that before they insulted the Dzogchen Community, someone who apparently now is pleading for civil discourse.
I guess that "that someone" is me. If you review, i never insulted you personally, nor anyone, and the offense you endorse is in no other place but in you. You took it very personal Malcolm.

If i say your attitude is childish because the way you answer or by the refuse to answer, that would be insulting as well?
true dharma is inexpressible.

The bodhisattva nourishes from bodhicitta, through whatever method the Buddha has given him. Oh joy.
User avatar
Ayu
Global Moderator
Posts: 13254
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:25 am
Location: Europe

Re: debating and attitude in the meantime

Post by Ayu »

We received some reports, because the demand for respectful speech has been contravened.
Topic locked for review - - - > that means, moderation has to read and decide some measures and THEN this topic possibly can be unlocked again.

Meanwhile, eveybody may cool down.
User avatar
Ayu
Global Moderator
Posts: 13254
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2012 8:25 am
Location: Europe

Re: debating and attitude in the meantime

Post by Ayu »

If you are missing a post, it must have landed in the tail of posts that I removed. It started with a very blunt and personal criticism on a member. This would be appropriate in private discussion in order to work it out. But here the post served as a public pillory.
The other removed posts were only part of the discussion around that initial post.

Please, if you try to discuss such intimate problems, choose a not public subforum then. The contents here is available at Google - those accusations are not worth to destoy a persons complete reputation.
I agree that some people have to discuss it, but not here. Rather it's a topic for PM.

Furthermore I realise that the topic is not about Tibetan dharmic debate (as I assumed) but invites to meta discussion about our discussion culture on DW.

If that kind of possibly destructive discussion has to take place urgently, please choose a less prominent place. Not available at Google's are all the subfora you do not see as long as you are not logged in.

Topic will be kept locked.
Locked

Return to “Tibetan Buddhism”