Seems like sometimes folks don't realize how the written word can come across. If you say something straight, but it disagrees with what someone else has written, you can be perceived as angry. Voice inflections, facial expressions, all the stuff that occurs in face-to-face dialogue is absent, and smilies just don't bridge the gap. So I think a lot of the difficulty arises because people are not accustomed to communicating through a faceless written medium.christopher::: wrote:What I wonder is a) how do you view this,
When there is tension, I think it works best if posters view their own tension first and foremost. The tension we perceive in another in their writing may or may not be present. Apart from that, I think it's OK to let folks vent and act stupid without worrying too much about it, because anyone who reads the thread can see for themselves what's going on, and everyone is going to bring their own interpretation to it. There is never, in my opinion, any reason to try to vex the other person or make things worse (which isn't to say that I've never personally done this). But in the world of Web boards, I think generally it's a big mistake to take anything personally.christopher::: wrote: b) how should people respond
Yes.christopher::: wrote: and c) is this a natural tension that should be expected,
Not really, because you can never control what the other person is going to do. The best we can do is be aware of the tension that arises within ourselves and work with that.christopher::: wrote: and d) do you have any suggestions for how this tension might be neutralized or diminished?
christopher::: wrote:I want to raise a bit of a controversial topic, as delicately and dharmically (sp?) as possible. Without going into details (of names, places) there appear to be tensions between practitioners of certain schools that are arising at times here on the Internet.
In contrast to this statement, Ajahn Brahm, spiritual director of the Buddhist Society of WA stated in a letter, “The Dalai Lama is not the ‘Pope’ of Buddhism and, charming as he often is, he sometimes gets it wrong.” Brahm also stated in his letter, “The Dalai Lama’s error is to look for his guidance in dodgy scriptures composed many centuries after the time of the Buddha.”
“The comment is coming from a very specific view of the world. He’s a political figure and he’s certainly no fool, and he’s not going to say anything to offend the Tibetan community,” said Venerable Bhante (Tejadhammo Bhikku), abbot and spiritual director of the Association of Engaged Buddhists Inc.
Buddhists question Dalai Lama
stuka wrote:Jackson explains that they couldn't touch Buddhadasa because his vinaya was impeccable.
Internet or elsewhere is a place to express one's views straightforwardly. Each is expressing what they believe to be most beneficial. If it was not like that, then chat site would be very boring and people would learn little. We learn when we are challenged. That is what dukkha is. The word dukkha in Pali means 'difficult to bear'. Dukkha is a challenge that allows the Dhamma to grow in us.
If we crumble in debate or discussion, or must resort to banning people to protect our faith, then our faith is weak. Buddha said for one whose faith in the Tathagata is unshakeable (ajala saddha), they are not poor, their lives are not wasted.
christopher::: wrote:Not saying you are "wrong" with anything just posted, but this is something that does create tension.
christopher::: wrote:a) how do you view this
b)how should people respond
c)is this a natural tension that should be expected
d)do you have any suggestions for how this tension might be neutralized or diminished?
jcsuperstar wrote:well this place is here
and theres treeleaf for soto zen...
what happens when you have a party and its not fun for your guests?
they find new parties..
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], Skriet and 22 guests