05 Nov 10
Originally posted by bbarrNo, this is just a fractal of an argumentative conversation we had at another thread. And now here you are, stating you ‘re “…done with the Spirituality forum. The good ol' days are gone. Too bad, really, since this was the most philosophically sophisticated of the RHP fora. Now it is a wasteland of jibberish.”
This is just obscurity masquerading as insight. In prose, I deal in arguments, and the giving and taking of reasons. If you have a question, ask it plainly.
Methinks there never were “good” and “bad” per se days back then -there were debaters whose arguments you were enjoying so much that you were interacting with them. But who actually was enjoying these conversations other than your own mind along with the mind of your fellow debaters? And what exactly your respectful minds were sharing?
I think the sole thing that was taking place back then, it was the interaction of your mind with the mind of your fellow RHP members regarding specific epistemic objects. It seems to me you happen rather to enjoy that interaction because, along with these members, you had established common specific epistemic instruments that they eased you all to access specific epistemic objects. This way, your conversations themselves back then were agents of producing units of knowledge. Mind you: no interaction, no product. Thanks to these products, you, along with your fellow debaters, knew that if in fact you were seeing “no thing” you were actually seeing all of you “no thing”. Consensus! Consensus that wasn’t accepted on the basis of blind faith, but on the basis of the proper function of (your common) epistemic instruments with which you were accessing (your common) epistemic objects.
And today? It seems to me that in relation to our Taco and Vishvahetu you lack of the necessary common epistemic instruments and epistemic objects that would allow you to interact with them “fruitfully”. However, to me these individuals, as any other person, are merely koans. I do understand their theses in full because to me there is no such a thing as an “inhabitable” region in their respectful minds; I evaluated their theses and I know that they do not hold, but I am aware of the fact that for them they hold perfectly. You see, when I see no thing and Taco and Vishvahetu see too no thing, all of us three we do see a different thing (due to the fact that, although our epistemic objects are the same, our personal respective epistemic instruments are different. No consensus, therefore no product: should I were now justified to state that, due to the lack of consensus, my days here in this forum are “…bad” and that the forum itself “…is a wasteland of jibberish”?
Methinks first one establishes specific epistemic instruments and solely then one gets access to specific epistemic objects. As long as our Taco and our Vishvahetu will be -thanks to their own mind and their free will- unable to bring up a solid basis for their respectful specific epistemic instruments, we will be forced to watch them constantly trying to open the gateless gate with a tin can. No problem -this is their own respectful way of interaction and I can live with it🙂
So I argue that the “wasteland of jibberish” is merely a reflection of you;
Wasteland of jibbberish
Hell
Koan
Paradise
Cause-Effect
Wu wei
This and That
methinks It's only You;
Who are you?
😵
05 Nov 10
Originally posted by black beetleYikes, asking plainly questions is exhausting
No, this is just a fractal of an argumentative conversation we had at another thread. And now here you are, stating you ‘re “…done with the Spirituality forum. The good ol' days are gone. Too bad, really, since this was the most philosophically sophisticated of the RHP fora. Now it is a wasteland of jibberish.”
Methinks there never were “good” and ...[text shortened]... Paradise
Cause-Effect
Wu wei
This and That
methinks It's only You;
Who are you?
😵
😵
05 Nov 10
Originally posted by black beetleI have no idea what you're attempting to say.
No, this is just a fractal of an argumentative conversation we had at another thread. And now here you are, stating you ‘re “…done with the Spirituality forum. The good ol' days are gone. Too bad, really, since this was the most philosophically sophisticated of the RHP fora. Now it is a wasteland of jibberish.”
Methinks there never were “good” and ...[text shortened]... Paradise
Cause-Effect
Wu wei
This and That
methinks It's only You;
Who are you?
😵
05 Nov 10
Originally posted by black beetleNan-in, a Japanese master during the Meiji era (1868-1912), received a university professor who came to inquire about Zen.
So you still cannot see that the inherent existence of your "wasteland of jibberish" is just You😵
Nan-in served tea. He poured his visitor's cup full, and then kept on pouring.
The professor watched the overflow until he no longer could restrain himself. "It is overfull. No more will go in!"
"Like this cup," Nan-in said, "you are full of your own opinions and speculations. How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup?"
😵
05 Nov 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieRob, i think that's the most eloquent thing you've ever posted on this forum.
Nan-in, a Japanese master during the Meiji era (1868-1912), received a university professor who came to inquire about Zen.
Nan-in served tea. He poured his visitor's cup full, and then kept on pouring.
The professor watched the overflow until he no longer could restrain himself. "It is overfull. No more will go in!"
"Like this cup," Nan-in s ...[text shortened]... pinions and speculations. How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup?"
😵
The irony is that your one posting with regards to Zen, is worth more than the countless gibberish you've posted on Christinaity over the years. 😉
05 Nov 10
Originally posted by divegeesterdivegeester, vishvahetu and tacoandlettuce,
By two spamming idiots vishvahetu and tacoandlettuce.
You people who encourage and tolerate their trolling are not doing this site any favours.
(oh! the shock of placing them together in the same embracing sentence);
these and all of us,
who or whatever we are,
are one thing in common.
Each is a supremely, utterly unique "individual"
Ming, Grandpatzer and the Chief Justice
not one like them again
in all the universe of universes
shall we meet just like now and here.
ua, vagabond and ThinkofOne
they enter and exuent left
but not before they too have left
their indelible, unique trace
of whatever or whoever they are
hard to define, but nonetheless unique.
What an honor to meet such utter uniqueness
strange, unsettling, or sublime as they may be,
and stranger still that none are fixed but change and change again,
even each step of now we take, each discussion,
and each post, unique, unique. What an honor.
And sometimes, what a laugh!
Yes laugh, for really we make too much of these
apparitions of finality, these changing "selves"
so absent of final definition, so empty and unique.
Oh, Samantabahdra, Bring it on, bring it on!
05 Nov 10
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI know Nan-an's sword was sharp; how sharp is yours?
Nan-in, a Japanese master during the Meiji era (1868-1912), received a university professor who came to inquire about Zen.
Nan-in served tea. He poured his visitor's cup full, and then kept on pouring.
The professor watched the overflow until he no longer could restrain himself. "It is overfull. No more will go in!"
"Like this cup," Nan-in s ...[text shortened]... pinions and speculations. How can I show you Zen unless you first empty your cup?"
😵
😵