oushi wrote:Please, try including right speech into you practice.
Why should i bother when u don't
oushi wrote:Was this practice flawed, and now is getting better, or was it perfect and now is becoming politically correct?
No this practice is being gradually perfected to the capabilities of modern humans.
PorkChop wrote:Listen, your tradition throws tradition out the window, wipes its a$$ with the sutras, kills the Buddha, and looks down on everybody else... we get it.
Yeah, you quote Ch'an teaching quotes as justification of insulting non-Ch'an traditions.
oushi wrote:You seem to be quite aroused. Relax, or have a walk.
To the contrary you think anything that is not of the Ch'an tradition deserves admonishing for being non-Chan doctrine, ie "extreme form of fanatacism"
oushi wrote:You have problem understanding your own words.
No, your problem is a non-acceptance of my words because they dont conform to your Ch'an tradition; actually, given modern day Ch'an teachings, I have to question whether you have a tradition at all.
oushi wrote:You didn't refute a thing.
Bull, I think that I established that your thought is not in agreement with Madhyamaka thought at large, let alone the Prasangika position. I also said that walking is a form of meditation that has scriptural reference to the beginning of Mahayana and beyond.
oush wrote:You have only accused me of being Sarvastivadan.
No i said your statement was purely Sarvastivadan, and if u knew anything any other traditions besides your books, you would realize it was.
oushi wrote:The only think I didn't answer was a provocation between fraction. I used Bodhidharma to show that such behavior may be seen as fanaticism, nothing more, and you keep on bringing some crap about wiping an a$$. Knock it off please.
Bodhidharma is not in the T'ien T'ai tradition and neither is he in the Tendai tradition.
So you knock it off, please.
oushi wrote:I'm just sharing my opinion, which happen to be against such a practice. I see no merit in purposely risking ones life, or give it away
From your opinion:
A. You are not a bodhisattva, who would lay his/her life down for the benefits of sentient beings, which has been established earlier in this thread. B. You are thus not of the Mahayana tradition (too attached to your life and non-acceptance of sutras). C. Your opinion has no merit (based on the doctrinal position of Theravada, Mahayana, or Vajrayana).
This may be a strong position, but if u do not recognize either the Agama/Pali Sutta tradition that most buddhism is based on, or the Mahayana Sutra tradition that this school is founded on, then you really have no place to speak.