But now you are doing the same to me (see bold). I was the first to respond to your post and stated a position pretty much similar to yours, or at the very least, not diametrically opposed to it.Jikan wrote:Where did I claim or even imply I was such? I'm simply arguing for the willingness to listen to criticism from others, even when we don't want to, as Ananda took the Buddha's advice to heart.uan wrote:Good to know that all who criticize here are Buddhas and enlightened masters deploying skillful means to strike to the heart of the very obscurations blocking each earnest practitioner's paths and leading them to enlightenment.
Comments like yours are good examples of the kind of behavior I'm trying to argue against. (Again, I'm trying to criticize behavior and not persons.) You've found a way to dismiss what I've said on the basis of your assumptions regarding my position. If you present me as some sort of internet pretender who claims to be an arya, then you've given yourself permission to feel good about ignoring what I've said.
Nor did I criticize a person or persons. Rather I was using satire to underline a specific point - that Buddhas can do certain behaviors because they are Buddhas. Surgeons can use sharp knives to perform surgery. I have sharp knives at home, so if my kid ever needs his appendix out, I guess I can do it myself. Not.
So if I were to offer an critique (not criticism), it's that you could make a stronger argument for your position with more relevant examples.
I think we both agree that Cone has deep understanding (deeper than my own, that's for sure).Jikan wrote: I'd like to thank Cone, by the way. It's clear to me he gets what I'm trying to say, which tells me that I'm not completely off the reservation in how I've articulated this idea so far.