fuki wrote: ↑Thu Feb 15, 2018 1:42 amRejecting "God" or "Self" only creates a framework and thus asserts the "thing" in the very rejection. Its pretty silly as far as I can see. Merging with the absolute or "becoming one" is the sound of one hand clapping, its a joke, then the bell echos in primordial space and we forget about it all again, which too is part of the joke, the source of the smile on Buddha's face and its unfanthomable gifts are not a product of practise or correct buddhadharma, let alone dreamcharacters pratteling on about who are the "true buddhists" or not.Meido wrote: ↑Wed Feb 14, 2018 8:17 pmUpon further reflection, though, it is clear to me he was right. Many Buddhist types who reject "God" really just reject that which is easily rejected: the crudely anthropomorphized tribal deity. But they continue to hold tightly to a less-defined spiritual "oneness" or "source" of reality, and to view the goal of practice through the lens of atonement, "returning to" something, or "becoming one with" something. Even the choice often made to capitalize "One Mind" and "True Self" perhaps speaks to this. It's a factor worth acknowledging when discussing dharma in these parts.
I think the reason that views and distinctions among views are discussed extensively at DW is because it's an internet discussion forum about Buddhism. This means Buddhists participate. Buddhists are really good at debating views, and have been for centuries. It's bad manners to discuss people too much and practices are often off-limits to online discussion, so what's left to debate? Views, positions, perspectives, narratives...
1. threads about cats
2. thread about dogs
3. that long thread about music
4. thread about food, preferences in food, the vegetarian question, the vegan question...