Ambition vs. the dhamma

[thepea]

But yes I agree I’m not practicing theravada but rather the dhamma without religious belief structure.


Why am I not present?

You're like a person who speaks only English, but who goes to France, and then frets that the French don't speak English, but insists on speaking only English to them.

Goenka used many words to describe ultimate truth(nibanna) god, love, peace, etc... theravadens dislike some of these.
This is either a discussion forum for dhamma or it’s a religious sect.

[purple planet]

You are ignoring the points made by me and other people

and distort it to other things , and than "answer" the things you have distorted them to

(like you asking "what this table is made of ?" than someone answers you "wood" and than you respond "you are wrong this gate is made out of metal")

I think it can be beneficial for you to figure out why you do this distortion cause there is a reason behind this , I think you can discover this by yourself in no time if you are brutally honest with yourself

The goenka quotes i gave dont talk about what is going on his centers only or monasitcs only , goenka very clearly talks about eating meat in general ... but you distort this reality of what is written

Nothing good can come to you from conversations like this (but bad can) if you dont try to understand what people are writing to you , and not replying to the points made by people (not just me you did this to others as well)

Buddhism is about finding the truth ... but if you even distort the truth of what was written here (no matter if wrong or right) than you will not be able to reach more important truths , the conversation needs to be honest and direct

[purple planet]

Here we go again. Some dhamma for you, if you can put aside your own ideas and ambition for a moment:

"A man may plunder
as long as it serves his ends,
but when others are plundered,
he who has plundered
gets plundered in turn.
A fool thinks,
'Now's my chance,'
as long as his evil
has yet to ripen.
But when it ripens,
the fool falls into pain.

Killing, you gain
your killer.
Conquering, you gain one
who will conquer you;
insulting, insult;
harassing, harassment.

And so, through the cycle of action,
he who has plundered
gets plundered in turn.
— SN 3.15"

Plunder is specific to war. Killing a Buffalo for food is not war.

Here is another example - the quote is clearly talking about killing , it clearly talks about teachings about kamma in general as well (not just about specific cases) yet you decide to talk about war as if its not general

this might be from lack of understanding , other comments can be from some ego thing of not wanting to admit you are wrong about something (pretty anti buddhist) , greed to not give up on fishing etc but when you again and again distort what is said in replies there is some reason for it

and you can say its a text and you go by personal experience which is fine ... but you didnt do that , what you did to is misunderstand the point of that quote

Another example i already gave of the conversation you had with sam vara and how you wrote you dont see the text he quoted says that killing fish is unwholesome whne that text says this in a clear way

so almost everything people write to you , you just distort (and i could give more examples) , the opposite of reality and what is actually happening , the opposite of buddhism

[SDC]

Well again we have the translations and language fraud over 2500 yrs.

You do realize you’ve already admitted, on multiple occasions, that you’ve never made an effort to verify this fraud for yourself and simply took your teachers word for it?

Never, and this mainly comes from my own investigations into religious belief structures.
It’s a collective issue.
Collective groups manipulate the language to support their belief structures.

The scale to which that would have to be done to the suttas is incalculable, not mention there would have to be even further efforts to establish consistency with underlying themes - something you would know if bothered to read them. Such an effort would never be covered up by history because there would always be an opposition to such change; and instead of erasing history and corrupting it like you’re suggesting (vast conspiracies and spooky corruption), those in opposition would simply split and establish a new school, leaving the other relatively intact, which is what happened. Thank goodness you do a good enough job discrediting yourself. It makes it so much easier for me to just amplify a bit more, ensuring you appear thoroughly untrustworthy.

The Pali Canon and those who adhere to the meanings and consistency of meanings, far from being mere arbiters of the Dhamma, are but the first sign of a trustworthy direction to pursue. At least in that direction there is a standard to fall back on when the individual is ready to do their own work.

[Tl21G3lVl]

Good ambition?
Bad ambition?
Where is the line between?

A good ambition would be one that doesn’t involve or result in death, lying, cheating, loss, or harm.

[thepea]

Here we go again. Some dhamma for you, if you can put aside your own ideas and ambition for a moment:

"A man may plunder
as long as it serves his ends,
but when others are plundered,
he who has plundered
gets plundered in turn.
A fool thinks,
'Now's my chance,'
as long as his evil
has yet to ripen.
But when it ripens,
the fool falls into pain.

Killing, you gain
your killer.
Conquering, you gain one
who will conquer you;
insulting, insult;
harassing, harassment.

And so, through the cycle of action,
he who has plundered
gets plundered in turn.
— SN 3.15"

Plunder is specific to war. Killing a Buffalo for food is not war.

Here is another example - the quote is clearly talking about killing , it clearly talks about teachings about kamma in general as well (not just about specific cases) yet you decide to talk about war as if its not general

this might be from lack of understanding , other comments can be from some ego thing of not wanting to admit you are wrong about something (pretty anti buddhist) , greed to not give up on fishing etc but when you again and again distort what is said in replies there is some reason for it

and you can say its a text and you go by personal experience which is fine ... but you didnt do that , what you did to is misunderstand the point of that quote

Another example i already gave of the conversation you had with sam vara and how you wrote you dont see the text he quoted says that killing fish is unwholesome whne that text says this in a clear way

so almost everything people write to you , you just distort (and i could give more examples) , the opposite of reality and what is actually happening , the opposite of buddhism

Let me parrot your comment and say that I feel exactly like 65-80% of the members feel towards me. In that you all twist the meanings of the suttas and you all have been doing this for centuries.
The texts you all present about killing has to do with a state of mind. The type of mind that leads to the lower destinations. Fishing or a native tribe hunting Buffalo is not akin to the householder swinging his four iron in the basement trying to kill a mouse that he’s strongly averse to living with.
Killing bedbugs and head lice to protect a child is not the same type of killing as going through a village in Vietnam and murdering the entire village women and children because they were feeding Charlie.
It’s different, it’s equally similarly frustrating for me to repeat this point over and over.
Now for the monastic, they are protected from killing. They reside in a bubble.
Buddha created this bubble. Now the lower ariya can remain in the bubble after attaining the fruit, but it’s not necessary for them to have this protection.
The arahant must be protected.

[cappuccino]

The arahant must be protected.

they are protected by a lack of ill will

[thepea]

The arahant must be protected.

they are protected by a lack of ill will

No!
Monastics are not free from ill will. Some are equally full of hate anger greed jealousy etc.... as most layman.
They live by training rules and if they break them, they cease to be a monastic. It’s a bubble that requires the layman to support otherwise it does not exist.
Monastics would have to hunt and gather food, build shelters and all the other things that go along with survival.
Their practice would suffer.

[purple planet]

Wow , you again do it , you distort what i write

It is not even a matter of who is wrong and right about X topic ... you distort the conversation itself !

Now you again dishonestly trying to ignore and avoid the point im making which is you distort the conversations

did you see the examples i gave ? do you notice you distort the conversation ?


What is the point in talking about this if you just dishonestly distort what is written to you ? this is not even a point of agreeing not agreeing about a topic . i made the point that you are being dishonest about what is said in the conversation itself

Not only you ignore the point i made with example on how you distorted the conversation , but because of that you repeat this same dishonesty for example you write "Now for the monastic" .... when clearly this is not talked about them and i wrote to you that goenka quote is applying to everyone not just monastics

you pretend to want to know what buddhism says about killing but you are dishoenst and dont really want to , so you distort what is said to you by people - you distort the conversation itself ... and when i remark to you about that you just ignore it and keep on distroting and divert the topic

[cappuccino]

No!
Monastics are not free from ill will.

The Arhat

[thepea]

You are ignoring the points made by me and other people

and distort it to other things , and than "answer" the things you have distorted them to

(like you asking "what this table is made of ?" than someone answers you "wood" and than you respond "you are wrong this gate is made out of metal")

I think it can be beneficial for you to figure out why you do this distortion cause there is a reason behind this , I think you can discover this by yourself in no time if you are brutally honest with yourself

The goenka quotes i gave dont talk about what is going on his centers only or monasitcs only , goenka very clearly talks about eating meat in general ... but you distort this reality of what is written

Nothing good can come to you from conversations like this (but bad can) if you dont try to understand what people are writing to you , and not replying to the points made by people (not just me you did this to others as well)

Buddhism is about finding the truth ... but if you even distort the truth of what was written here (no matter if wrong or right) than you will not be able to reach more important truths , the conversation needs to be honest and direct

How can animal flesh be bad?
Monastics in Sri Lanka eat it every day.
Every day they are brought chicken dishes, fish dishes, etc...
they seem peaceful and happy, they aren’t frothing at the mouths.
Why does Goenka say this?
Personally I think it’s to appease the newbies to dhamma.
You begin meditation and you hear the no killing garb and everyone thinks they have to be a vegetarian or vegan. Then after years of practice your attachment to this discipline falls away and you simply eat what is offered to you. Your happy with oatmeal or steak and lobster. You have gratitude to everyone/thing that helped to bring this to you.
With new students coming in weekly they can’t have the kitchen burned to the ground or vegans huddled with vegans and flesh eaters huddled together with their tribe.
It’s easier that way, less for people to bitch and complain about.

[thepea]

No!
Monastics are not free from ill will.

The Arhat

Yes.

[Sam Vara]

Wow , you again do it , you distort what i write

Take a look at this, pp, about thirty pages of it. I'm sure you will be able to make up your own mind...

viewtopic.php?t=43248

[thepea]

Wow , you again do it , you distort what i write

It is not even a matter of who is wrong and right about X topic ... you distort the conversation itself !

Now you again dishonestly trying to ignore and avoid the point im making which is you distort the conversations

did you see the examples i gave ? do you notice you distort the conversation ?


What is the point in talking about this if you just dishonestly distort what is written to you ? this is not even a point of agreeing not agreeing about a topic . i made the point that you are being dishonest about what is said in the conversation itself

Not only you ignore the point i made with example on how you distorted the conversation , but because of that you repeat this same dishonesty for example you write "Now for the monastic" .... when clearly this is not talked about them and i wrote to you that goenka quote is applying to everyone not just monastics

you pretend to want to know what buddhism says about killing but you are dishoenst and dont really want to , and you distort what is said to you by people - you distort the conversation itself

PP I’m trying to answer you and others. Of course you feel like I’m distorting your Buddhism because we are in disagreement. It’s the same with Sam and David and many others. I disagree with your interpretation of the teachings.
I’m coming at a lot of this from an entirely different angle than the rest here.
I’m not concerned with convincing anyone here or converting them to my way of thinking. It’s simply about freely being able to politely discuss my truths.
It’s a meditative practice. I have absolutely zero authority here or control. I follow the TOS and speak my truth.
Over and over and over and over and over.... like you all do. We simply disagree, and that’s ok.

[purple planet]

will be able to make up your own mind...

That i am wasting my time and his purely energy stealing and this is idle chatter by me ?