Slandering buddha

A discussion on all aspects of Theravāda Buddhism
User avatar
egon
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu May 31, 2018 1:15 pm
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, USA

Re: Slandering buddha

Post by egon » Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:12 pm

rightviewftw wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 3:59 pm
Some might find the Canonical passages refering to commonfolk as rubbish or those refering to heretics as worthless people to be distasteful but i think it is only proper discernment.
Okey dokey karaoke!

rightviewftw
Posts: 1599
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Slandering buddha

Post by rightviewftw » Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:37 pm

ScottPen wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 3:52 pm
If a person considers me to be worthless garbage I reckon they've put me down, but what do I know.
You should not take everything personally, as a matter of fact i've no problem with any of your posts. I don't mind people expressing their opinions even if they are wrong. What i am trying to discourage is presenting such opinions as the Dhamma taught by the Tathagata.

User avatar
egon
Posts: 51
Joined: Thu May 31, 2018 1:15 pm
Location: Baltimore, Maryland, USA

Re: Slandering buddha

Post by egon » Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:47 pm

rightviewftw wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:37 pm
ScottPen wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 3:52 pm
If a person considers me to be worthless garbage I reckon they've put me down, but what do I know.
You should not take everything personally, as a matter of fact i've no problem with any of your posts. I don't mind people expressing their opinions even if they are wrong. What i am trying to discourage is presenting such opinions as the Dhamma taught by the Tathagata.
I didn't take it personally whatsoever. I don't consider myself to be garbage or worthless, nor to I consider the 5 aggregates that make up "myself" to be so either. I don't remember who said this, but it's a helpful quote for lots of people: "You probably wouldn’t worry about what people think of you if you could know how seldom they do!”

Perhaps I should have been more clear and less glib. A "put-down" isn't just in the intent; it's also in the perception of the recipient. So, if you specifically said that about me it would be irrelevant to me, because even if your intent was to put me down I'm unaffected by it. However, if wrong-action is characterized by the "putting-down" of another, my opinion is that expressing that someone is worthless and garbage is exactly that. Just my opinion, and expressed as such.

I am, however, pleased that you've no problem with any of my posts. I'm trying to be respectful and don't want to ruin anyone's experience here.

EDIT: I think this place needs a little less of me for a while, I'll believe I'll go back to lurking.

rightviewftw
Posts: 1599
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Slandering buddha

Post by rightviewftw » Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:57 pm

ScottPen wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:47 pm
rightviewftw wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:37 pm
ScottPen wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 3:52 pm
If a person considers me to be worthless garbage I reckon they've put me down, but what do I know.
You should not take everything personally, as a matter of fact i've no problem with any of your posts. I don't mind people expressing their opinions even if they are wrong. What i am trying to discourage is presenting such opinions as the Dhamma taught by the Tathagata.
I didn't take it personally whatsoever. I don't consider myself to be garbage or worthless, nor to I consider the 5 aggregates that make up "myself" to be so either. I don't remember who said this, but it's a helpful quote for lots of people: "You probably wouldn’t worry about what people think of you if you could know how seldom they do!”

Perhaps I should have been more clear and less glib. A "put-down" isn't just in the intent; it's also in the perception of the recipient. So, if you specifically said that about me it would be irrelevant to me, because even if your intent was to put me down I'm unaffected by it. However, if wrong-action is characterized by the "putting-down" of another, my opinion is that expressing that someone is worthless and garbage is exactly that. Just my opinion, and expressed as such.

I am, however, pleased that you've no problem with any of my posts. I'm trying to be respectful and don't want to ruin anyone's experience here.
It is good that you did not take it personally. perhaps i am overly aggro and it is an offense of wrong-doing, it is not clear to me atm but it seems clear enough that some people should be referred to harshly to emphasize the seriousness of their wrong doings.

User avatar
Sam Vara
Posts: 3995
Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 5:42 pm
Location: Sussex, U.K.

Re: Slandering buddha

Post by Sam Vara » Fri Jun 22, 2018 5:36 pm

rightviewftw wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 3:54 pm

According to you there is a logical error... a man who presumes intellectual equality among members of this board. We don't have to talk more.
Yes, I have a presumption of intellectual equality until such time as I am proven wrong. Isn't that the only polite approach?

Whether we talk more is up to you. It was you who originally took issue with a post I made; and not vice versa. Nobody forced you to take issue with it, and by extension you could cultivate a more general tolerance towards other viewpoints rather than waging an illiberal campaign to control other people. That way you could rest easier. Alternatively, you can continue to grump about what other people think. Under these liberal ToS which respect individuals' autonomy, you are very welcome to do so.

User avatar
Wizard in the Forest
Posts: 631
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 8:16 am
Location: House in Forest of Illusions

Re: Slandering buddha

Post by Wizard in the Forest » Fri Jun 22, 2018 5:39 pm

@ Right view for clarification, sorry Samvara!
I disagree. You have overextended your aversion to those who are plagued by skeptical doubt, and worse you used the words of the Buddha to do so. By doing so you create a lot of demerit for yourself, and it could cause you a lot of trouble for a long time. You're not supposed to use the Buddha's words to try and devalue them as people. The Buddha had a lot to say about devotion and praised faith, but what you're doing here is not defending the Buddha, you're attacking a person.
The Buddha wrote:If, bhikkhus, others speak in dispraise of me, or in dispraise of the Dhamma, or in dispraise of the Sangha, you should not give way to resentment, displeasure, or animosity against them in your heart. For if you were to become angry or upset in such a situation, you would only be creating an obstacle for yourselves. If you were to become angry or upset when others speak in dispraise of us, would you be able to recognize whether their statements are rightly or wrongly spoken?
-Brahmajāla Sutta


Take a foolish person who memorizes the teaching—
statements, songs, discussions, verses, inspired sayings, legends, stories of past lives, amazing stories, and analyses.
But they don’t examine the meaning of those teachings with wisdom,
and so don’t come to a reflective acceptance of them.
They just memorize the teaching for the sake of finding fault and winning debates.
They don’t realize the goal for which they memorized them.
Because they’re wrongly grasped, those teachings lead to their lasting harm and suffering.
Why is that?
Because of their wrong grasp of the teachings.

-Alagaddūpama Sutta

Remember, you aren't supposed to be obsessing about other people's approach of the Dhamma. The question is are people intending to slander the Tathagata. I don't think they are. I think they're just interpreting it wrong (in some cases), they're not familiar with it (in some cases), or they're just not seeing what you've seen yet. That'll come with time and patient practice, but if you turn them away from the Buddha and the Dhamma and the Sangha you have destroyed their search and their examination. Please be more mindful, exercise restraint, and be compassionate in the future.
"One is not born a woman, but becomes one."- Simone de Beauvoir

User avatar
salayatananirodha
Posts: 101
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2018 1:34 am

Re: Slandering buddha

Post by salayatananirodha » Fri Jun 22, 2018 6:30 pm

rightviewftw wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 3:59 pm
Some might find the Canonical passages refering to commonfolk as rubbish or those refering to heretics as worthless people to be distasteful but i think it is only proper discernment.
Thereupon, Ānanda,
those who measure
thus measure:[5]

These qualities are both in this man
and in the other.

Why then is the one of them mean
and the other exalted?

Such judgment is for them
to their loss and pain
for many a day.


For of the two
the one is immoral,
but does comprehend that mind-release,
that release by insight,
as it really is,
wherein that immorality of his
ceases without remainder;
for he has given ear,
he has used deep knowledge,
he has penetrated by view,
he wins temporary release -
this person, Ānanda,
is more goodly and excellent
than that other person.

Why so?

Because the ear of dhamma[6]
saves this person.

Who save the Wayfarer
could know the cause herein?

[97] Wherefore, Ānanda,
be ye not measurers of persons,
take not the measure of persons.

A person is ruined,[7] Ānanda,
by taking the measure of other persons.

But I myself, Ānanda,
and whoso is like unto me,
could take the measure of persons.

- AN 10.75 Migasālā
16. 'In what has the world originated?' — so said the Yakkha Hemavata, — 'with what is the world intimate? by what is the world afflicted, after having grasped at what?' (167)

17. 'In six the world has originated, O Hemavata,' — so said Bhagavat, — 'with six it is intimate, by six the world is afflicted, after having grasped at six.' (168)

- Hemavatasutta


links:
https://www.ancient-buddhist-texts.net/index.htm
http://thaiforestwisdom.org/canonical-texts/
http://seeingthroughthenet.net/
https://www.dhammatalks.org/index.html

rightviewftw
Posts: 1599
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Slandering buddha

Post by rightviewftw » Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:01 pm

Wizard in the Forest wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 5:39 pm
@ Right view for clarification, sorry Samvara!
I disagree. You have overextended your aversion to those who are plagued by skeptical doubt, and worse you used the words of the Buddha to do so. By doing so you create a lot of demerit for yourself, and it could cause you a lot of trouble for a long time. You're not supposed to use the Buddha's words to try and devalue them as people. The Buddha had a lot to say about devotion and praised faith, but what you're doing here is not defending the Buddha, you're attacking a person.
This is not true that i referred to people who experience skeptical doubt anything in particular. I've called heretics and people maligning Dhamma, quarrelsome people fixed in wrong view worthless, garbage and a cancer i also said a puthujhanna is unworthy of using sangha requisites in the other thread. I also report you for predicting kammic consequences, read ToS please.
Last edited by rightviewftw on Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:23 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16305
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Slandering buddha

Post by mikenz66 » Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:20 pm

rightviewftw wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:01 pm
Wizard in the Forest wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 5:39 pm
@ Right view for clarification, sorry Samvara!
I disagree. You have overextended your aversion to those who are plagued by skeptical doubt, and worse you used the words of the Buddha to do so. By doing so you create a lot of demerit for yourself, and it could cause you a lot of trouble for a long time. You're not supposed to use the Buddha's words to try and devalue them as people. The Buddha had a lot to say about devotion and praised faith, but what you're doing here is not defending the Buddha, you're attacking a person.
This is not true that i referred to people who experience skeptical doubt anything in particular. I've called heretics and people maligning Dhamma, quarrelsome people fixed in wrong view worthless, garbage and a cancer i also said a puthujhanna is unworthy of using sangha requisites in the other thread. I also report you for predicting kammic consequences, read ToS please.
Since you've started a meta-discussion, I'm going to simply close the report on WoTF post, rather than go to the trouble of moving both that post and this post. That would be troublesome for me...

In my opinion, you have missed the gentle humour of WoTF's post (its reference to some of the Buddha's admonishments in "cause you a lot of trouble for a long time"), and you have continued to call people "garbage", "worthless" and "a cancer". I suggest you rethink your approach to discussion with people you disagree with, since the I don't think many people will take your views seriously if you continue to hurl such insults.

:focus:

:heart:
Mike

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16305
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Slandering buddha

Post by mikenz66 » Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:32 pm

I think it might be worth considering the Buddha's advice on speech:
The Realized One does not utter speech that he knows to be true and substantive, but which is harmful and disliked by others.

The Realized One knows the right time to speak so as to explain what he knows to be true, substantive, and beneficial, but which is disliked by others.
https://suttacentral.net/mn58/en/sujato#8.2--8.3
Since I don't see much evidence that anyone here has the infallibility of the Buddha, I would even be careful about applying the above.

So, see also:
... a mendicant who wants to accuse another should first establish five things in themselves.

What five? I will speak at the right time, not at the wrong time. I will speak truthfully, not falsely. I will speak gently, not harshly. I will speak beneficially, not harmfully. I will speak lovingly, not from secret hate. A mendicant who wants to accuse another should first establish these five things in themselves.
https://suttacentral.net/an5.167
Of course, that's advice for mendicants, not lay people, but perhaps it's OK to interpret "mendicants" here as "serious followers of Dhamma"...

:heart:
Mike

rightviewftw
Posts: 1599
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Slandering buddha

Post by rightviewftw » Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:38 pm

mikenz66 wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:20 pm
In my opinion, you have missed the gentle humour of WoTF's post
i just hope you do not miss the violation of ToS and the unsubstantiated claims.

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16305
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Slandering buddha

Post by mikenz66 » Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:59 pm

rightviewftw wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:38 pm
mikenz66 wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:20 pm
In my opinion, you have missed the gentle humour of WoTF's post
i just hope you do not miss the violation of ToS and the unsubstantiated claims.
Yes, but I don't share your interpretation. There is a vague reference which I took as light humour, that you are interpreting as "threats of kammic retribution". It's a judgement call, of course, since neither of us can read WoTF's mind...

Besides, as I said, you already started a meta-discussion on the post, so I'm not inclined to waste time moving that post, your subsequent post, your next post, and so on, out of sight...

If you think a post should be removed, you should report it and not reply.

:heart:
Mike

rightviewftw
Posts: 1599
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Slandering buddha

Post by rightviewftw » Fri Jun 22, 2018 11:03 pm

mikenz66 wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:59 pm
rightviewftw wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:38 pm
mikenz66 wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 10:20 pm
In my opinion, you have missed the gentle humour of WoTF's post
i just hope you do not miss the violation of ToS and the unsubstantiated claims.
Yes, but I don't share your interpretation. There is a vague reference which I took as light humour, that you are interpreting as "threats of kammic retribution". It's a judgement call, of course, since neither of us can read WoTF's mind...

Besides, as I said, you already started a meta-discussion on the post, so I'm not inclined to waste time moving that post, your subsequent post, your next post, and so on, out of sight...

If you think a post should be removed, you should report it and not reply.

:heart:
Mike
i think the person making kammic predictions should be banned as i was banned for similar violation of that point of ToS, but apparently you don't care about the ToS afteral or use it selectively against people you dislike.
Last edited by rightviewftw on Fri Jun 22, 2018 11:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 16305
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Slandering buddha

Post by mikenz66 » Fri Jun 22, 2018 11:04 pm

rightviewftw wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:57 pm
... it seems clear enough that some people should be referred to harshly to emphasize the seriousness of their wrong doings.
I suggest carefully considering the advice of the Buddha that I posted here:
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=32227&p=478333#p478333

Can you locate a sutta passage where the Buddha advised harsh speech?
[Not a passage where the speech of the Buddha appears harsh...]

:heart:
Mike

rightviewftw
Posts: 1599
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 8:50 pm

Re: Slandering buddha

Post by rightviewftw » Fri Jun 22, 2018 11:05 pm

mikenz66 wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 11:04 pm
rightviewftw wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 4:57 pm
... it seems clear enough that some people should be referred to harshly to emphasize the seriousness of their wrong doings.
I suggest carefully considering the advice of the Buddha that I posted here:
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=32227&p=478333#p478333

Can you locate a sutta passage where the Buddha advised harsh speech?
[Not a passage where the speech of the Buddha appears harsh...]

:heart:
Mike
can you find a passage where i said that the Tathagata advised harsh speech?
Not a passage where the speech of the Buddha would appears to be harsh...

I think personally if someone is referred to as worthless, that is referring to harshly and i guess you think it only "appears" to be harsh. Well in that when i refer to heretics and people who have no regard for The Noble Ones as worthless trash, you can think of it in the same way.
Last edited by rightviewftw on Fri Jun 22, 2018 11:10 pm, edited 3 times in total.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: JohnK and 90 guests