|
Post by dreamerrach on Apr 27, 2011 11:12:41 GMT -5
lol Oh the implication being that people aren't concerned with it? Puh-lease.
I had 10 karma points but they were all smote down. Pfft, like it matters! People were obviously upset MichaelSees commented on mine. And then I am sure there are people with lower karma points than what I had-yet had been here much longer-who were somehow offended that I had more than they.
They have no meaning. It is the same as "liking" a post on FB, but there's all these strange connotations about it here because it is "exalt" or "smite."
|
|
|
Post by ivory on Apr 27, 2011 11:14:22 GMT -5
this is a spiritual forum. the more karma points you have the closer you are to enlightenment
|
|
|
Post by dreamerrach on Apr 27, 2011 11:16:47 GMT -5
roflol Ohh right.
Other people on a forum surely know what enlightenment is and where a person is on their journey. And so we let everyone know with nifty "karma points," which no member arbitrarily assigns, ever.
Good system.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2011 11:23:38 GMT -5
you know he's right! It's true. They're from the universe ultimately.
i was always happy with 0. Now i'm in negative numbers. It feels different. Everybody's looking at me funny.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Apr 27, 2011 12:17:22 GMT -5
you know he's right! It's true. They're from the universe ultimately. i was always happy with 0. Now i'm in negative numbers. It feels different. Everybody's looking at me funny. Wow! You must have done sumthin really bad, or maybe you're just a bad person and God's punishing you? Hehe. Let's see if we can 'arbitrarily' fix that.
|
|
|
Post by dreamerrach on Apr 27, 2011 12:22:20 GMT -5
*amused how my words and phrases catch on* I do regret using the term "pissing contest," so vulgar to see pop up everywhere
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2011 12:23:10 GMT -5
well now i'm arbitrarily feeling like a yo-yo!
time to walk the dog
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 27, 2011 12:34:16 GMT -5
If, in fact, the middle way has anything directly to do with self or no self, which is new to me, it would say 'neither self nor no-self'. (In the same way that is says 'neither indulgence nor ascetism', or 'things don't cause happiness but neither do they cause suffering') It would not say 'both self and no self'. thanissaro bikkhu is one of my fave buddhist teachers. from the link above, it sounds like he'd agree with you: "So, instead of answering "no" to the question of whether or not there is a self — interconnected or separate, eternal or not — the Buddha felt that the question was misguided to begin with. Why? No matter how you define the line between "self" and "other," the notion of self involves an element of self-identification and clinging, and thus suffering and stress. " i like TB's emphasis on buddha's stuff regarding types of questions "As for the question, "Who am I?" the Buddha included it in a list of dead-end questions that lead to "a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion, a writhing, a fetter of views. Bound by a fetter of views, [you] don't gain freedom from birth, aging, and death, from sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, or despair." In other words, any attempt to answer either of these questions is unskillful karma, blocking the path to true freedom. "So if the not-self teaching isn't meant to answer these questions, what question does it answer? A basic one: "What is skillful?" In fact, all of the Buddha's teachings are direct or indirect answers to this question." www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/questions.htmlhere's a massive tome on questions www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/skill-in-questions.pdf
|
|
|
Post by cyberbluntz on Apr 27, 2011 15:24:15 GMT -5
I love how people takes what buddha says, rehash it to thier own words and sell it for profit. How very noble of them.
They are as ignorant as their following.
You guys are simply playing pretend, no-offense, but seriously need a reality check.
|
|
|
Post by cyberbluntz on Apr 27, 2011 15:25:40 GMT -5
If, in fact, the middle way has anything directly to do with self or no self, which is new to me, it would say 'neither self nor no-self'. (In the same way that is says 'neither indulgence nor ascetism', or 'things don't cause happiness but neither do they cause suffering') It would not say 'both self and no self'. That fact that this very basic teaching from which all your "beliefs" are derived from are new to you, says worlds to me.
|
|
|
Post by dreamerrach on Apr 27, 2011 15:27:36 GMT -5
Where do I go for a reality check?
If it's WalMart, I don't shop there!
|
|
|
Post by cyberbluntz on Apr 27, 2011 15:29:29 GMT -5
WalMart only sells merchandise from China basically. I don't blame you!
|
|
|
Post by dreamerrach on Apr 27, 2011 15:36:21 GMT -5
I save a ton of money by shopping elsewhere. People always believe they *must* shop there, or they won't be able to afford anything. Pfft, bull! I can shave plenty of money from their total cost--more than enough to justify going to more than one store.
*ahem* I'm a bargain shopper and proud of it.
So, reality checks come from China?
|
|
|
Post by souley on Apr 27, 2011 15:37:44 GMT -5
So it begins again?
|
|
|
Post by cyberbluntz on Apr 27, 2011 15:39:39 GMT -5
No, the reality checks come from reality! duh!
|
|