I am happy with your way of handling my thread.
My intention has survived into the new thread you created in compensation, and it gladdens me that it turns into interesting discussion.
Is "The Dhammic free-for-all" a worthy approach to Buddhism
Re: Is "The Dhammic free-for-all" a worthy approach to Buddhism
The Dhammic-free-for-all is also useful for those of us whose practice isn't strictly Theravadan but who would like to have some input or discuss matters with our Theravadin brothers and sisters.
To me it's been very valuable to learn a little of how some experienced folks here view things, both for my practice and general knowledge.
Besides strong debate and the feelings it evokes can be good practice in itself. Not necessarily "feel good" practice especially when we believe that we must always be calm, composed and detached but it's an opportunity to face things we would rather not face, which I think is vital for practice.
To me it's been very valuable to learn a little of how some experienced folks here view things, both for my practice and general knowledge.
Besides strong debate and the feelings it evokes can be good practice in itself. Not necessarily "feel good" practice especially when we believe that we must always be calm, composed and detached but it's an opportunity to face things we would rather not face, which I think is vital for practice.
_/|\_
Re: Is "The Dhammic free-for-all" a worthy approach to Buddhism
I stay away from that forum. I have enough self-produced pappanca.
Re: Is "The Dhammic free-for-all" a worthy approach to Buddhism
That's me.Dan74 wrote:The Dhammic-free-for-all is also useful for those of us whose practice isn't strictly Theravadan but who would like to have some input or discuss matters with our Theravadin brothers and sisters.
Agreed.Dan74 wrote:To me it's been very valuable to learn a little of how some experienced folks here view things, both for my practice and general knowledge.
Not so sure about that ... my feelings about anything sectarian, which is where the DFFA often comes into its own, are not strong enough to drag me out of my 'calm, composed and detached' zone. Interested, yes; angry, no. My first approximation to 'the truths of Buddhism' is that doctrines that all major traditions agree on are probably correct and things they disagree on are a little less certain.Dan74 wrote:Besides strong debate and the feelings it evokes can be good practice in itself. Not necessarily "feel good" practice especially when we believe that we must always be calm, composed and detached but it's an opportunity to face things we would rather not face, which I think is vital for practice.
But, on balance, the DFFA works well and I think Retro's reasons for its existence are sound.
Kim
Re: Is "The Dhammic free-for-all" a worthy approach to Buddhism
Hi jaidyn,
personally, I've not found engaging in argument in the 'dhammic free for all' conducive to either mental calm or wisdom. The reason I've involved myself there quite a bit in the past, is that it was fun and/or interesting. But although arguing or hammering out views does not seem to advance insight for me, it is a better option than reading the newspaper, with all it's nonsense about wars, politicians, etc. But as for spiritual development, pitting 'my view' against 'your view', if that's what you were getting at, is futile and a distraction from the real work that needs to be done, which involves observing thought, and not simply becoming better at using it to defeat an opponent (I'm not implying that anyone here does that, just musing).
personally, I've not found engaging in argument in the 'dhammic free for all' conducive to either mental calm or wisdom. The reason I've involved myself there quite a bit in the past, is that it was fun and/or interesting. But although arguing or hammering out views does not seem to advance insight for me, it is a better option than reading the newspaper, with all it's nonsense about wars, politicians, etc. But as for spiritual development, pitting 'my view' against 'your view', if that's what you were getting at, is futile and a distraction from the real work that needs to be done, which involves observing thought, and not simply becoming better at using it to defeat an opponent (I'm not implying that anyone here does that, just musing).
To the Buddha-refuge i go; to the Dhamma-refuge i go; to the Sangha-refuge i go.