Mark,

You seem to have your homunculus in a bunch; I am not interested in the ravings 
of such a creature.   


Marsha 



On Oct 15, 2012, at 2:58 AM, 118 wrote:

> Hi Marsha,
> Why should I consider that?
> 
> I am waiting for answers to you two questions.  Or were they just presented 
> so you could bitch at somebody.  Do you have anything original going on in 
> that pretty little head of yours.  I am convinced that you do not understand 
> the quotes you paste since you have never given me reason to do so.
> 
> But who knows.  Could you explain those quotes to me in your own words?
> 
> Didn't think so.
> 
> Besides, that is not what Buddhists see.  You are being misled.  Or perhaps I 
> am wrong again.  What Buddhist do you know who see things that way?  I know 
> plenty of Buddhist who don't.  They are pretty straight forward.  I attend 
> their temples, and celebrations.
> 
> Hagen is stuck in some glorified intellectual nonsense.  If what they see is 
> illusory, they are trying to escape into some kind of la la land, because 
> they are suffering from the delusion that they are suffering.  You buy into 
> this whole suffering nonsense.  They are only suffering if they think they 
> are suffering, just like you must feel you are suffering and therefore lash 
> out on contributors to this forum.  You suffering is an illusion, remember.
> 
> Why would Hagen write a book if his words were illusory?   Maybe you should 
> ask that pompous wannabe.  His world may be illusory because he is so 
> confused.  Here he is, writing a book for one of his illusions.  Must be 
> lonely in that ivory tower.  He has nothing to teach his illusion since it is 
> a projection of his mind.  How nihilistic, writing a book for no reason.  
> Writing that it is illusion, but living as if it were real.  He has tied 
> himself up in knots.  Something is very wrong with that kind of person.
> 
> Stop reading and do some thinking for a change.  You will find it refreshing 
> to be in the real world.
> 
> Mark
> 
> On Oct 14, 2012, at 9:19 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Mark,  
>> 
>> Here's something for you to consider:
>> 
>> 
>> "When buddhas look at the world, they don't _see_ solidity.  They don't 
>> _see_ selves_.  They see only flux.
>> 
>> "This is not to say that the awakened no longer see forms like the rest of 
>> us.  They do.  But they _see_ forms --- or, rather, "formness" --- as 
>> illusory.  They _see_ that all things arise together.  They _see_ that the 
>> apparent existence of anything is dependent on all that it is not.  And they 
>> _see_ this dependence as nothing other than change and motion themselves.
>> 
>> "The Buddha called this phenomena dependent arising.  Dependent arising is 
>> the formula, "When this arises, that becomes."  When the days lengthen, 
>> spring flowers bloom.  When days shorten, autumn colors appear and leaves 
>> fall from the trees.  Spring flowers are inseparable from lengthening days; 
>> autumn colors are inseparable from days of less and less light.  Indeed, 
>> spring flowers _are_ the longer days; fall colors _are_ the shorter days.  
>> In Reality, all phenomena work together as a seamless whole. 
>> 
>> "Dependent arising is not vague, mystical, remote, intellectual stuff.  The 
>> buddha-dharma is very practical and down-to-earth.  Just pay very close 
>> attention to your actual experience, and you'll _see_ it for yourself."  
>> 
>> 
>> (Hagen, Steve, ‘Buddhism: Plain and Simple’, p.146)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Oct 14, 2012, at 11:15 PM, 118 <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> Mark:
>>> Given the nature of your response to me and Jan Anders, I can see that you 
>>> only wish to find fault in others.
>>> 
>>> Can you not participate without being bitchy?
>>> 
>>> Why can't first answer the questions rather than always being on the 
>>> attack?  You come across as a very resentful.  What happened to you that 
>>> you are this way?  Surely you can't have any close friends, the way you 
>>> treat people.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Mark
>>> 
>>> On Oct 14, 2012, at 9:11 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> 
>>>>> Mark
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Marsha


 
___
 

Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org/md/archives.html

Reply via email to