one_awakening wrote: ↑Sat Jul 28, 2018 11:58 pm
I now respond with noble silence. This way, the "I am right" self is replaced with the "I don't need to prove anything to anyone" self. This is a far more peaceful state.
What is and how is this "noble" silence felt ?
I have an ide, but not sure at all ..
If you didn't care
What happened to me
And I didn't care for you
We would zig-zag our way
Through the boredom and pain
Occasionally glancing up through the rain
Wondering which of the
Buggers to blame
And watching for pigs on the wing
- Roger Waters
A better solution is to limit your forum posting to one post a week, and see how addicted you are to posting. I guarantee you that your mind will rebel, will probably resort to other addictions like arguing on reddit or other sites.
All problems you have with other people or the world stem from your own addictions
budo wrote: ↑Sun Jul 29, 2018 8:02 am
All problems you have with other people or the world stem from your own addictions
“In contemplating right understanding (samma-ditthi) I like to emphasize seeing it an an intuitive understanding and not a conceptual one. I have found it very helpful just contemplating the difference between analytical thinking and intuitive awareness, just to make it clear what that is, because there is a huge difference between the use of the mind to think, to analyze, reason, criticize, to have ideas, perceptions, views and opinions, and intuitive awareness which is non-critical.”
User1249x wrote: ↑Sat Jul 28, 2018 5:34 pm
If the cheating cannot be overcome should the superior party also cheat or should they forfeit the match if it pertains to a Dhamma discussion on the forum?
Best to walk away. Of course brutes can appear both ignorant and wise at different time, tailoring their response.
chownah wrote: ↑Sun Jul 29, 2018 5:47 am
If someone perceived you as being an ignorant brute how would you like them to respond to you?
I would prefer them to be kind to me and most respectful
But then they wouldn't be a vile, ignorant brute, so your topic would be moot.
User1249x wrote: ↑Sat Jul 28, 2018 5:34 pm
We might occasionally encounter these vile, ignorant brutes and their views.
Now these "slow" people could never "win" fairly so they tend to cheat and use lowly tactics. As i see it if the weaker opponent cheats it is still possible to win unless the cheating is of such nature that it cannot be overcome.
If the cheating cannot be overcome should the superior party also cheat or should they forfeit the match if it pertains to a Dhamma discussion on the forum?
If a party truly is superior, then they will win. Such is the nature of superiority.
The problem with the Übermensch (who complains about being dragged down by the Untermenschen) is that he's not actually superior, but is just a pompous ass.
User1249x wrote: ↑Sat Jul 28, 2018 5:34 pmWe might occasionally encounter these vile, ignorant brutes and their views.
Now these "slow" people could never "win" fairly so they tend to cheat and use lowly tactics. As i see it if the weaker opponent cheats it is still possible to win unless the cheating is of such nature that it cannot be overcome.
If the cheating cannot be overcome should the superior party also cheat or should they forfeit the match if it pertains to a Dhamma discussion on the forum?
I think the first step is to practice not thinking of them as "vile, ignorant brutes" because that type of thinking is pretty much the opposite of metta.
mikenz66 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:46 am
However, you seem quite attached to being right, and also somewhat dismissive of possible alternative interpretations.
To be fair. Over half the forum is like this. And the second part even the moderators frequently do. I've found that theravada Buddhist discussion groups in particular do the second part quite rampantly.
"Do not have blind faith, but also no blind criticism" - the 14th Dalai Lama
"The Blessed One has set in motion the unexcelled Wheel of Dhamma that cannot be stopped by brahmins, devas, Maras, Brahmas or anyone in the cosmos." -Dhammacakkappavattana Sutta
mikenz66 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:46 am
However, you seem quite attached to being right, and also somewhat dismissive of possible alternative interpretations.
To be fair. Over half the forum is like this. And the second part even the moderators frequently do. I've found that theravada Buddhist discussion groups in particular do the second part quite rampantly.
I agree. That's why I tried to make some positive suggestions of how to supply information and opinions without being dismissive and without opening oneself up for endless argument.
User1249x wrote: ↑Sun Jul 29, 2018 12:13 am i try to give them a taste of their own medicine...
124. If on the hand there is no wound, one may carry even poison in it. Poison does not affect one who is free from wounds. For him who does no evil, there is no ill.
125. Like fine dust thrown against the wind, evil falls back upon that fool who offends an inoffensive, pure and guiltless man.
Dhammapada
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.
mikenz66 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:46 am
However, you seem quite attached to being right, and also somewhat dismissive of possible alternative interpretations.
To be fair. Over half the forum is like this. And the second part even the moderators frequently do. I've found that theravada Buddhist discussion groups in particular do the second part quite rampantly.
I agree. That's why I tried to make some positive suggestions of how to supply information and opinions without being dismissive and without opening oneself up for endless argument.
I mean, really. This is such a first world problem. I think that someone who truly is as advanced as they imply to be would have no problems of this kind. Feeling offended in a discussion of Dhamma is a luxury most people don't have.
mikenz66 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:46 amHowever, you seem quite attached to being right,
I don't see it as a matter of being attached to being right. Being attached to being right isn't the problem. Being attached to being right is important to one's wellbeing.
The problem is, rather, being attached to converting everyone else to one's own point of view. A problem is, also, being attached to being thought of well by everyone else. IOW, what's at work are the attachments to social power and to fame.
mikenz66 wrote: ↑Sun Jul 29, 2018 7:46 amHowever, you seem quite attached to being right,
I don't see it as a matter of being attached to being right. Being attached to being right isn't the problem. Being attached to being right is important to one's wellbeing.
The problem is, rather, being attached to converting everyone else to one's own point of view. A problem is, also, being attached to being thought of well by everyone else. IOW, what's at work are the attachments to social power and to fame.
I think that "IOW, what's at work are the attachments to social power and to fame." does not capture all of the possible things that might be at work....for instance it might be for some people that they can not feel comfortable in their attachement to their view as being right if there is someone who is willing to argue against it....one must then vanquish all opposition to find that comfortable spot with ones own views.
chownah
chownah wrote: ↑Wed Aug 01, 2018 12:53 pmit might be for some people that they can not feel comfortable in their attachement to their view as being right if there is someone who is willing to argue against it....one must then vanquish all opposition to find that comfortable spot with ones own views.
= being attached to converting everyone else to one's own point of view. Like I said earlier.
some people that they can not feel comfortable in their attachement to their view as being right
But this seems neurotic.
"I'm right and I know I'm right, but I don't feel comfortable about that unless everyone thinks that way too." Who would think a thing like that, other than a person with high neuroticism?