I made a topic for discussion of this timeless model and you are completely derailing this thread telling me how i am unable to understand it and need to study, how my questions are bad but i am merely asking for some basic definitions...
You gave references to some authors and don't want to answer the questions, THAT IS FINE you don't have to answer but there is no need to put down the questioneer and tell me how there is something wrong with me.
If my questions are too ill defined, tell me which one for i was simply asking for definitions.
Actually you did do this in the very next sentence;retrofuturist wrote: ↑Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:31 amI'm not the one to ask, because I'm not proclaiming something that is outside of the All. I repeat, "I'm simply saying there are dhammas, or not."
I suppose you are not willing to be questioned on the matter.retrofuturist wrote: ↑Tue Jan 15, 2019 3:10 am You're over-reaching... I'm simply saying there are dhammas, or not. That which is not experienced is outside "the All" and thus of no relevance to the Dhamma.
I did not choose you to be expert, i just saw you were giving advice left and right about this stuff and figured you knew what it was you was talking about.
Anyway i am not interested in further discussion with you.
If somebody is capable of discussing Nanavira's interpretations i would like to further explore the matter i would be happy to proceed from where Retrofuturist dropped off.