|
Post by question on Sept 24, 2012 8:10:50 GMT -5
You fanboys are sick imbeciles and psychopaths. Phildo is a former weapons designer for the US Army. It's beyond me how anyone can value an opinion about suffering from someone who was in the killing business for the most criminal organization in the world. Of all people on this forum he is the most guilty by far, he is a murderer for f*ck's sake, of course he is going to wiggle around as much as he can in order to redefine suffering so that he can keep it as far away as possible.
|
|
|
Post by relinquish on Sept 24, 2012 8:33:22 GMT -5
You fanboys are sick imbeciles and psychopaths. Phildo is a former weapons designer for the US Army. It's beyond me how anyone can value an opinion about suffering from someone who was in the killing business for the most criminal organization in the world. Of all people on this forum he is the most guilty by far, he is a murderer for f*ck's sake, of course he is going to wiggle around as much as he can in order to redefine suffering so that he can keep it as far away as possible. The ONE and ONLY psychopath on this forum is YOU my friend. You've spoken at length about how obvious it is that volition is illusory, and then you completely 180 yourself and play the blame game, in an INCREDIBLY malicious manner.
|
|
|
Post by question on Sept 24, 2012 9:22:57 GMT -5
You fanboys are sick imbeciles and psychopaths. Phildo is a former weapons designer for the US Army. It's beyond me how anyone can value an opinion about suffering from someone who was in the killing business for the most criminal organization in the world. Of all people on this forum he is the most guilty by far, he is a murderer for f*ck's sake, of course he is going to wiggle around as much as he can in order to redefine suffering so that he can keep it as far away as possible. The ONE and ONLY psychopath on this forum is YOU my friend. You've spoken at length about how obvious it is that volition is illusory, and then you completely 180 yourself and play the blame game, in an INCREDIBLY malicious manner. 'Malicious'?! You accuse me of 'malicious'? He is a goddanm murderer, he and his kind should be put away forever... and you call my post 'malicious'? Sh*t for brains is what you are. You're a complete imbecile if you can't put this into proper perspective.
|
|
|
Post by silver on Sept 24, 2012 9:52:38 GMT -5
Well, that may explain why I never had much interest in traditional Buddhist teachings. Ha ha. The four noble truths were important to the Buddha and central to SOME Buddhist traditions, but during ten years of going to Zen retreats and interacting with a lot of Zen teachers I don't remember the subject of suffering or the four noble truths ever being discussed. Of course, Zen is sort of the black sheep of the Buddhist family because it pokes fun at most of the formal Buddhist teachings. It's attitude is more like "Words suck as a conveyor of truth," and this may be a good example of that. LOL. If a ZM asked me, "What is suffering?" I wouldn't say, "It's a mental overlay." I'd say, "Aaaaaieeee!" The phrase, "Life is suffering" doesn't hold much meaning for me, but in light of this discussion, perhaps I should amend my earlier statement. When I was lying in the hospital bed, there was no one suffering; there was only a body writhing in pain. (smile) The word "suffer" may be one of those abstractions that is useful only when used in an extremely loose way. It reminds me of the quote by some philsospher about the word "time." He wrote, I know exactly what time is until you ask me what it is. ;D Bottom line? I still like E.'s earlier definition--"Suffering is when you feel really really bad and stuff" or something like that. Problem is, now we have to argue about that definition for a month. ;D It's not the definition - it's like a lot of other things - it's how you use it.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 24, 2012 10:58:21 GMT -5
Suffering?....What suffering?..... Okay, my BS detector is going crazy here. Even if you have transcended suffering by parking your Peace yacht in the harbor for the night, surely you know there are fishing boats out there being tossed around in the waves and may not last till Midnight, so why would you ask 'What's it all about" What's the big deal?' Seems like it's a big deal to all those fishermen who won't be coming home. Thanks for running with the analogy (I do so like analogies). Would you suggest that I pull anchor, and venture out into tossing waves, myself, at risk of being tossed, myself? My only response to that I may take the tranquility of the harbor with me. But, I must first remain fast in that tranquility. Otherwise, I can work to extend the harbor, I suppose. In any event, because of the subjective nature of it, those waves aren't real, anyway. Suffering is as real as it gets. No I'm not suggesting you venture out into the storm unless you have a very sturdy boat and you're a very capable captain. I'm only suggesting you not get on the radio and ask 'What's the big deal?' and keep the channel clear for the search and rescue team.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 24, 2012 11:12:07 GMT -5
Well, yes, I've long had the impression that suffering was mind's "overlay on top of pain," myself. But E. didn't relate that, when asked directly, so I can't resonate. I asked you what your definition was, and you said, "feeling really, really bad and stuff." You did NOT say that it was overlay on top of pain, or anything else. Again, you asked for a definition of suffering, not for a discussion about the causes of suffering. Not being able to put stuff into words is not the problem here. The problem is that you repeatedly asked for a definition of suffering until I gave you a sloppy tongue-in-cheek one, and now you're turning it into an equation with impressions and conclusions of contradiction and hints of ineffability.
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 24, 2012 11:16:27 GMT -5
You fanboys are sick imbeciles and psychopaths. Phildo is a former weapons designer for the US Army. It's beyond me how anyone can value an opinion about suffering from someone who was in the killing business for the most criminal organization in the world. Of all people on this forum he is the most guilty by far, he is a murderer for f*ck's sake, of course he is going to wiggle around as much as he can in order to redefine suffering so that he can keep it as far away as possible. You're WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!...........It was the Navy. ;D
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Sept 24, 2012 11:21:13 GMT -5
Problem is, now we have to argue about that definition for a month. ;D It's not the definition - it's like a lot of other things - it's how you use it. Maybe I need a longer definition.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 11:49:20 GMT -5
You fanboys are sick imbeciles and psychopaths. Phildo is a former weapons designer for the US Army. It's beyond me how anyone can value an opinion about suffering from someone who was in the killing business for the most criminal organization in the world. Of all people on this forum he is the most guilty by far, he is a murderer for f*ck's sake, of course he is going to wiggle around as much as he can in order to redefine suffering so that he can keep it as far away as possible. Just because Phil designed weapons that maimed, inflicted pain and killed people, doesn't mean that he was the cause of suffering. Anymore than the designer of the Atom bomb caused suffering in Hiroshima.
|
|
|
Post by question on Sept 24, 2012 11:53:39 GMT -5
You fanboys are sick imbeciles and psychopaths. Phildo is a former weapons designer for the US Army. It's beyond me how anyone can value an opinion about suffering from someone who was in the killing business for the most criminal organization in the world. Of all people on this forum he is the most guilty by far, he is a murderer for f*ck's sake, of course he is going to wiggle around as much as he can in order to redefine suffering so that he can keep it as far away as possible. Just because Phil designed weapons that maimed, inflicted pain and killed people, doesn't mean that he was the cause of suffering. Semantics. He knew what he was doing, and even today he is still joking about it. People like him are the exact cause of suffering.
|
|
|
Post by question on Sept 24, 2012 11:54:07 GMT -5
You fanboys are sick imbeciles and psychopaths. Phildo is a former weapons designer for the US Army. It's beyond me how anyone can value an opinion about suffering from someone who was in the killing business for the most criminal organization in the world. Of all people on this forum he is the most guilty by far, he is a murderer for f*ck's sake, of course he is going to wiggle around as much as he can in order to redefine suffering so that he can keep it as far away as possible. You're WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!...........It was the Navy. ;D Murderer.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 13:27:51 GMT -5
Just because Phil designed weapons that maimed, inflicted pain and killed people, doesn't mean that he was the cause of suffering. Semantics. He knew what he was doing, and even today he is still joking about it. People like him are the exact cause of suffering. Well that's why I say suffering can't be understood. And it's not because your incapable of understanding, it's because the thought system that suffering supports is an illusion and nonsensical. It can't be understood why Enigma's part in murder isn't the cause of suffering. And it can't be understood that animals and babies don't suffer by Andrew.
|
|
|
Post by Beingist on Sept 24, 2012 15:16:02 GMT -5
Semantics. He knew what he was doing, and even today he is still joking about it. People like him are the exact cause of suffering. Well that's why I say suffering can't be understood. And it's not because your incapable of understanding, it's because the thought system that suffering supports is an illusion and nonsensical. It can't be understood why Enigma's part in murder isn't the cause of suffering. And it can't be understood that animals and babies don't suffer by Andrew. Hmm. Makes sense to me. Suffering ...just happens?
|
|
|
Post by andrew on Sept 24, 2012 15:26:19 GMT -5
Semantics. He knew what he was doing, and even today he is still joking about it. People like him are the exact cause of suffering. Well that's why I say suffering can't be understood. And it's not because your incapable of understanding, it's because the thought system that suffering supports is an illusion and nonsensical. It can't be understood why Enigma's part in murder isn't the cause of suffering. And it can't be understood that animals and babies don't suffer by Andrew. I could probably look a certain way and see that animals and babies don't suffer but its all too much thinking and too divorced from reality. You hear a baby scream for an hour and the observation is that all is not well. It doesn't have to be more complicated than that. In one way, I agree that suffering cannot be understood, but only to the degree that joy and love and anger and anything else cannot be understood. The point is, that if we were all asked to represent suffering with a picture, there would be a common theme to the pictures. There is a shared knowledge. An unspoken agreement in our experience.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 24, 2012 16:03:14 GMT -5
Great point, trf. Which is really the reason, I guess, for the thread. As long as I stay in the 'sense I am'; as long as I am aware of 'what is'; as long as I harbor in Peace, I just don't worry about suffering, or, its definitions, subjective, or objective. But, lots of folks around these here parts seem to think it's really important to talk about, and so I'm asking--what's it all about? What's the big deal? I mean, what's all these folks even talking about? Suffering?....What suffering?..... Okay, my BS detector is going crazy here. Even if you have transcended suffering by parking your Peace yacht in the harbor for the night, surely you know there are fishing boats out there being tossed around in the waves and may not last till Midnight, so why would you ask 'What's it all about" What's the big deal?' Seems like it's a big deal to all those fishermen who won't be coming home. So let me get this straight, your using your imagination to tell a story about some non-existent fisherman, to justify the existence of what?? Suffering? Doesn't that say something about sufferings existence if you have to imagine it?
|
|