retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,
![]()
This ad-hominem red herring that those who aren't interested in brothelizing the Dhamma (and Vinaya) are somehow dour-faced, is wearing a bit thin now.
![]()
Metta,
Retro.

tiltbillings wrote:So, when teaching, no funny stories, and no lightness in one's personal interactions?
polarbuddha101 wrote:I wouldn't go that far, the Buddha was known to poke fun and use wit himself on occasion.
manas wrote:...
Dan74 wrote: ... dour faces ...
Sure, and he used poking fun to great effect.polarbuddha101 wrote:tiltbillings wrote:So, when teaching, no funny stories, and no lightness in one's personal interactions?
I wouldn't go that far, the Buddha was known to poke fun and use wit himself on occasion.
Edit: However, the Buddha used his wit to teach dhamma not just for the sake of being funny.
It was a good and plainly obvious joke; humor can be touchy thing, obviously.Dan74 wrote:retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,
![]()
This ad-hominem red herring that those who aren't interested in brothelizing the Dhamma (and Vinaya) are somehow dour-faced, is wearing a bit thin now.
![]()
Metta,
Retro.
That was meant to be a joke, retro... Sorry, my bad. I even tried to put a smiley at the end of it, but...
Bhante, so, if it is not an another's judgment that really matters, which we can then probably ignore if the humor is not really directed at anyone, it is one's own judgment that really matters whether or not what we post in the lounge, for example, is being childish or childlike, which is a distinction that Benedictine nuns that taught me in grade school used to harp upon.Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:Pay attention to your own mental states when playing with your friend's dog. You will then know whether you're being childish or just innocent and child-like.Aloka wrote:Sorry but I'm a bit confused, Bhikkhu Pesala. If I'm having fun playing with and talking in silly girlie voices to a friend's dog, is that childish or child - like ?
tiltbillings wrote:It was a good and plainly obvious joke; humor can be touchy thing, obviously.
I was just making an observation, and you now make my point that that humor can, indeed, be a touchy thing and very individual. That is simply a matter of fact which is neither good nor bad. As for the "red herring":retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,tiltbillings wrote:It was a good and plainly obvious joke; humor can be touchy thing, obviously.
... and here we go again.
![]()
Metta,
Retro.

There are tons of recordings by tons of different Dhamma teachers out there, among all of that I am sure you can find teachers who do use humor rather well. I am not talking about doing stand-up comic routines, but I am talking about seeing that life can be an occasion for lightness of spirit.SamKR wrote:tiltbillings wrote:So, when teaching, no funny stories, and no lightness in one's personal interactions?polarbuddha101 wrote:I wouldn't go that far, the Buddha was known to poke fun and use wit himself on occasion.
Funny stories and wit maybe useful if they help to make listeners understand Dhamma and arouse wholesome states of mind.
But I am not sure about how far a Dhamma-teacher should go about using them. I believe a good teacher knows how to use them appropriately.
= "Red herring is an English-language idiom that commonly refers to a logical fallacy that misleads or detracts from the actual issue. It is also a literary device employed by writers that leads readers or characters towards a false conclusion, often used in mystery or detective fiction." (Wikipedia)Well, that is definition, and it certainly looks that you are not using it correctly.retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,
= "Red herring is an English-language idiom that commonly refers to a logical fallacy that misleads or detracts from the actual issue. It is also a literary device employed by writers that leads readers or characters towards a false conclusion, often used in mystery or detective fiction." (Wikipedia)
Metta,
Retro.
Yes, well, Dan's post, in my opinion, was not saying that at all. He was, I would say, just poking fun at the idea of "dour-faced." He was not saying that anyone was such, but then you'll have to ask him what his intent was.retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,
Yes I am.
A false premise is being established that those who aren't interested in brothelizing the Dhamma (and Vinaya) are somehow dour-faced puritans, incapable of "fun" (i.e. false conclusion
tiltbillings wrote:Yes, well, Dan's post, in my opinion, was not saying that at all. He was, I would say, just poking fun at the idea of "dour-faced." He was not saying that anyone was such, but then you'll have to ask him what his intent was.retrofuturist wrote:Greetings,
Yes I am.
A false premise is being established that those who aren't interested in brothelizing the Dhamma (and Vinaya) are somehow dour-faced puritans, incapable of "fun" (i.e. false conclusion
Aloka wrote:This is a spin-off from another thread about Ajahn Brahm, because it wasn't really relevant to that topic.
Is it possible for practising Buddhists to have fun ? I'd be interested in reading other peoples comments about this.
Thank you.
Dan74 wrote:My intent was just to have fun, possibly of the silly kind (I was never too good as discerning the demarcation line). Even my kids sometimes tell me to stop being silly, so, I guess I am...
As for "brothelizing" (great word!), I think implying that people who disagree with you are "brothelizing the Dhamma", is possible less than charitable. After all we are Dhamma brothers, aren't we, or perhaps Brothelizing Brothers, or Bothersome Brothelizing Brothers? Just call us, BBB, for short!
Cittasanto wrote:Dan74 wrote:My intent was just to have fun, possibly of the silly kind (I was never too good as discerning the demarcation line). Even my kids sometimes tell me to stop being silly, so, I guess I am...
As for "brothelizing" (great word!), I think implying that people who disagree with you are "brothelizing the Dhamma", is possible less than charitable. After all we are Dhamma brothers, aren't we, or perhaps Brothelizing Brothers, or Bothersome Brothelizing Brothers? Just call us, BBB, for short!
Bad timing maybe? But its recent use does need born to mind.
I believe brothwlizing is also a reference to previous thread
brothelizing the Dhamma
Registered users: Alex123, Bhikkhu Pesala, Billymac29, Bing [Bot], cooran, EmptyShadow, Exabot [Bot], fivebells, Google [Bot], Khalil Bodhi, Lazy_eye, Majjhima Patipada, mikenz66, mirco, piotr, reflection