Jaidyn wrote:* Do not let this be a meta-discussion by discussing other discussions.
David N. Snyder wrote:This thread sounds like a meta-discussion but if the other moderators (who have more experience than me on these matters) deem it acceptable, we can keep this thread.
PeterB wrote:I think that this a meta- meta discussion. Its the very essence of a meta discussion.
I think it behoves you Jaidyn to settle in a while before launching a reform movement .
PeterB wrote:Clarification would have been nice. As it is I have even less idea what you are on about....
appicchato wrote:Funny (to me) how every time I see (or hear) the word 'individual' these days (and many in the past) I think of Alex...
David N. Snyder wrote:Jaidyn wrote:* Do not let this be a meta-discussion by discussing other discussions.
This thread sounds like a meta-discussion but if the other moderators (who have more experience than me on these matters) deem it acceptable, we can keep this thread.
Jaidyn wrote:Summary: Discuss this very argumentative way to approach Buddhism; the benefits, shortcomings, and traps in regard to developing true understanding of the Dhamma.
This part of the forum offers an unique atmosphere where you are encouraged, if it is your wish, to rely on your arguments rather then on common opinion or on texts otherwise regarded as authoritative. You are also encouraged to pick up controversial and challenging topics.
Are these kinds of discussions important or not for spiritual development? Why, and when?
From time to time people seem to be eager in participating, but does participation in such an atmosphere help your spiritual progress, or on the contrary: is it a hindrance whereby you rather stay away? What have you learned by participating or by not participating? How do you reach your conclusion regarding these questions?
Why this question? That which starts with good intentions can lead to discussions, which the individual takes as fuel for own bad intentions and delusion. Still I think there is a value in this way of discussing when good intentions and wisdom is predominant. In my belief this can both help or hinder development, and deeper understanding about the details of this process is therefore interesting. Better understanding would also help in deciding when and how to chose this approach. So I ask for your personal reflections My post need not to be replied to in a strict sense, if I gave that impression.
Because of the very nature of this thread I want to remind about the rules; particularly:
* Do not let this be a meta-discussion by discussing other discussions.
* Attack ideas and arguments but do not attack personally.
Appropriate conduct within the Dhammic free-for-all forum
Terms of Service (please read first)
Jaidyn wrote:Are these kinds of discussions important or not for spiritual development? Why, and when?
mikenz66 wrote:Hi Jaidyn,Jaidyn wrote:Are these kinds of discussions important or not for spiritual development? Why, and when?
Personally, I've not found heated argumentation to be particularly useful to me. In some cases it has helped me hone little details of my understanding, but in my experience the nature of forums such as this is that they tend to focus me on improving my intellectual sparring technique rather than development of my actual understanding of the Dhamma, which tends to come much more from off-line practice and other activities with like-minded practitioners and teachers, and from reading books and listening to talks from various teachers.
So, to me, these heated discussions tend to be interesting diversions, rather than real aids to development. Which is not necessarily a bad thing. Nothing wrong with some intellectual exercise, and it might as well be about Dhamma...
Others might have other experiences. It would be interesting to hear them.
Ben wrote:the DFFA forum came into being as the result of the experience and observations of a number of everyone on the mod/admin team who were either mods or members of the now defunct e-Sangha. At e-Sangha, certain ideas when challenged were grounds for banning as a means of managing long and ongoing discussions such as the validity of rebirth. When we established DW we wanted an environment where members could engage in robust discussion and debate and not feel that they would be punished or excluded as a result of challenging orthodoxy.
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.
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.
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.