Are there Buddhists here?

[rossum]

Based on your responses, it's clear that you not only "do not yet know exactly how karma works", you have no idea. Which of course also means that you don't know what it IS. Ditto for atman. Why don't you simply admit it? Instead you keep trying to pretend that you do, which makes it all the more obvious.

What part of "we don't know yet" do you have a problem with?

 

[Algernon]

What part of "we don't know yet" do you have a problem with?

Seriously? Your response is way out of line. The following is what you wrote in your last post regarding karma:
I know that karma exists because I can see its effects. I do not yet know exactly how karma works. For the moment I follow the "We don't know yet" option.

As you well know, the part in bold is to what I was referring. Specifically the "do not yet know exactly" part which implies that you have at least some idea when the fact is that you have no idea. What's more, when I asked you how you think karma works, your response in post #49 was literally "I have no idea".

You seem to have let your pride get the better of you. I can't think of a Buddhist I've come across that has exhibited that kind of pridefulness. Perhaps carryover from having been "brought up as a Christian"? Now there's a group - especially evangelicals - where humility is the rare exception.

 

[rossum]

As you well know, the part in bold is to what I was referring. Specifically the "do not yet know exactly" part which implies that you have at least some idea

I do have some idea, which is why I gave you the example of Bernie Madoff earlier. Actions have consequences. Sometimes the link is very obvious; other times the link is less obvious. I only have "some" idea because of the obvious links -- they are easy to follow. The less obvious links are in the "We don't know yet" category.

 

[Algernon]

I do have some idea, which is why I gave you the example of Bernie Madoff earlier. Actions have consequences. Sometimes the link is very obvious; other times the link is less obvious. I only have "some" idea because of the obvious links -- they are easy to follow. The less obvious links are in the "We don't know yet" category.

Now you do have "some idea"? When before you had "no idea"?

How is it not underhanded of you to have removed the following from your quote of my previous post?
What's more, when I asked you how you think karma works, your response in post #49 was literally "I have no idea".

This on top of your prideful post #61 where you were out of line and underhanded in trying to make my response to you seem unreasonable.

What's it going to take for you to start showing some integrity?

While I'm used to getting this type of thing from evangelical Christians, it is a rarity from a Buddhist.

 

[rossum]

Now you do have "some idea"? When before you had "no idea"?

How is it not underhanded of you to have removed the following from your quote of my previous post?
What's more, when I asked you how you think karma works, your response in post #49 was literally "I have no idea".

This on top of your prideful post #61 where you were out of line and underhanded in trying to make my response to you seem unreasonable.

What's it going to take for you to start showing some integrity?

While I'm used to getting this type of thing from evangelical Christians, it is a rarity from a Buddhist.

I have part of an idea but not the whole of an idea. If that doesn't satisfy you then I suggest that you look elsewhere.

 

[Algernon]

I have part of an idea but not the whole of an idea. If that doesn't satisfy you then I suggest that you look elsewhere.

Even here you continue with your underhandedness. What doesn't "satisfy" me is your behavior as I've repeatedly pointed out and as you well know.

Given your behavior on this thread, it's clear that you need to direct your focus to the Noble Eightfold Path (Right Speech in particular). Based on what you've posted thus far, it seems that your focus is on using meditation to "feel good". Pity. One can reach enlightenment sans meditation, but cannot without adhering to the Noble Eightfold Path.

 

[Algor]

This is an odd dialogue, Algernon.

Rossum seems to have been quite straightforward, but you sound upset. What am I missing?

 

[Algernon]

This is an odd dialogue, Algernon.

Rossum seems to have been quite straightforward, but you sound upset. What am I missing?

Not sure what you have in mind. Can you elaborate? Perhaps it would help if you were to give a few specific examples.

 

[Algor]

Well, I can't figure out what exactly you are angry at in posts 60 and 62. Why do you think he would have to know how karma works to know what it is, and the same for atman? Are the doctrines really that rigid, or am I missing something?

Note: I have at best a very superficial understanding of Buddhism, and I am asking out of genuine ignorance.

 

[Algernon]

Note: I have at best a very superficial understanding of Buddhism, and I am asking out of genuine ignorance.

The same applies to @rossum based upon responses given in this thread. Of course, the difference is a lack of humility on the part of @rossum in acknowledging it.

Well, I can't figure out what exactly you are angry at in posts 60 and 62. Why do you think he would have to know how karma works to know what it is, and the same for atman? Are the doctrines really that rigid, or am I missing something?

Angry? Just calling BS and deceit where it applies.

Ask yourself this: If one only has a superficial understanding of something, how much do they really understand? How much do they misunderstand?

 

[Algor]

Angry? Just calling BS and deceit where it applies.

Ask yourself this: If one only has a superficial understanding of something, how much do they really understand? How much do they misunderstand?

Hm. Why is it BS and deceit? That's what I am not understanding.

 

[Algernon]

Hm. Why is it BS and deceit? That's what I am not understanding.

It's not as if it wasn't explained. Perhaps you only gave it a superficial read. Perhaps you need to take a closer look at what was said, what was omitted, how it was framed, etc. As they say, "The devil is in the details".

Give it a go. Let me know what you see.

BTW, since you didn't mention it, does that mean that you now understand what you asked earlier?:
" Why do you think he would have to know how karma works to know what it is, and the same for atman?"

 

[Algor]

It's not as if it wasn't explained. Perhaps you only gave it a superficial read. Perhaps you need to take a closer look at what was said, what was omitted, how it was framed, etc. As they say, "The devil is in the details".

Give it a go. Let me know what you see.

BTW, since you didn't mention it, does that mean that you now understand what you asked earlier?:
" Why do you think he would have to know how karma works to know what it is, and the same for atman?"

Doesn’t sound like your ideas are worth the effort. Toodles!

 

[Algernon]

Doesn’t sound like your ideas are worth the effort. Toodles!

Is that assessment based upon a "very superficial understanding"?

 

[Algor]

Is that assessment based upon a "very superficial understanding"?

It isn’t based on my understanding of Buddhism.

 

[Algernon]

It isn’t based on my understanding of Buddhism.

Didn't say it was.

Be that as it may, nothing you've posted thus far leads me to believe that the answer to the question isn't "Yes".

 

[Slyzr]

It's not as if it wasn't explained. Perhaps you only gave it a superficial read. Perhaps you need to take a closer look at what was said, what was omitted, how it was framed, etc. As they say, "The devil is in the details".

Give it a go. Let me know what you see.

BTW, since you didn't mention it, does that mean that you now understand what you asked earlier?:
" Why do you think he would have to know how karma works to know what it is, and the same for atman?"

Religion, is about religion.

Trying to 'find a better way".