AUT: Re: Re: response to tahir Re: Re: Re: Star Wars

["Tahir Wood" <twood@xxxxxxxxx>]

>>> commie00@xxxxxxxxx 02/18/02 11:39AM >>>
as per requested by a few people, i'm going to lay off of this conversation.

Tahir: Well actually I'm not until I've responded to the personal abuse contained below.


however, i can't pass this up:

> what the hell does this have to do with the "conservation of energy?" this
> was refering to death... that is: since energy can not be created or
> destroyed (only transformed) according to physics, what happens to all the
> physical energy in our bodies when we die? according to buddhism it simply
> disperses into everything else. and that "it" is not "you", since there is
> no consciousness, no affectations of being a living being left there. its
> just electricity, etc. transforming and moving on.
>
> Tahir: This IS conservation of energy. It is neither created or destroyed.
It just reappears somewhere else in some other form. And as I've pointed out
to you, this doctrine does appear in other religions and philosophies, for
example in Ibn Rushd. What on earth do you understand the word
'conservation. to mean then?

merriam webster's college dictionary (10th edition, 1993):

conservation: 1: a carful preservation and protectiojn of something, esp.
planned management of a natural resource to prevent exploitation,
destruction or neglect; 2: the preservation of a physical quantity during
transformations or reactions

now, how the hell does the dispersal of physical energy at death have
anything to do with "conservation"?

Tahir: Energy is neither created nor destroyed, as you said, despite its dispersal. Therefore it conforms to the second definition you provided above.

okay, i apologize everyone, and this post will be my last on this thread...

Tahir: I'm not apologising to anyone for what comes below.

but this idiocy

Tahir: Fuck you too.

 is too good to pass up:

> Tahir: "Purportedly" and "arguments" sounds like some of your projections
onto Buddhism are also contested in Buddhist circles too.

then clearly they can not be projections... for me to be projecting would
have to mean that i am placing something there that is not there already. do
you even own a dictionary?

Tahir: I'm saying that you have not been consistent. You have tried to defend Buddhism by focussing on one of its strands as if that is the only authentic one and all the others are "perversions" (your word). That is a projection in my opinion in that it projects your purist fantasies onto the real concrete history of a tradition, denying the reality of all the bits that don't fit your schema.

> Tahir: "prejudices"? Me? When you have the gall to denigrate the
philosophies and traditions of millions of people and ages of history around
the world in favour of the chosen, true, pure and unique one? Give me a
break.

how about actually reading my posts instead of just reacting to half baked
delusions in your own head:

Tahir: Once again, fuck you.

i stated from the begining that there are debates within buddhism around
specific aspects... the theories i have given are those that are supposedly
general to all buddhisms... however, certain buddhisms (particularly some
that stem from the mahayana school, such as tibetan buddhism and pure land
[amida] buddhism) actually seem to project some kind of afterlife. now, even
within these schools there are those who say all the afterlife talk is just
symbols, and those who seem to actually believe it. yet, all still somehow
lay claim to the basic ideas i have reported... this creates an obvious
contradiction.

Tahir: And the point I made, which you lost, probably deliberately, was that such contradictions (and on the same issues) are found in various other traditions too. But you were too busy defending your own particular brand of happy clappy smiley to even notice.

have i stated my opinions thru this? of course. but you, apparently, can not
tell an opinion from a report. (just like you can't define conservation,
projection...)

Tahir: Fuck you again with your personal abuse (see below).

my point?: i am not the one trying to reduce buddhism to some kind of
hippy-dippy, brainless, hipster, cult thing. i have, from the begining,
stated the differences and contradictions... allowing for all the
variations, etc.

Tahir: No you didn't. You said all of them were "perversions" except for one. All the rest of the variations in Buddhism were as bad as all the rest of the monotheistic and polytheistic traditions, which to you are not even worth discussing, despite my various points that I made about them. Don't try now to falsify also the history of this argument just like you do to the rest of history.

 in fact, the bulk of my argument with you has been trying
to get it thru your impossibly thick skull

Tahir: Fuck you too.

that there is a fuck of a lot
more to buddhism than you are prepared to grant, given your obvious
prejudices based on some unfortunate experiences with a small number of
people claiming to be buddhists.

Tahir: Well I have to say one recent case does stand out as the worst of them all.

 thus you have condimed the ideas of
millions of people, while never once bothering to try to understand a bit of
it... and thus your attitudes on buddhism are intensely reactionary,

Tahir: Oh rubbish! I repeatedly tried to inject soem historical understanding into this while you were annointing with the words "dialectical" and "materialist" one strand out of all the religious traditions of the people of the world. That is so reactionary (seeing as you've decided to introduce the R-word into this), just like all the rest of the fundamentalists in this world who feel the need to exalt one tradition at the expense of all the others.

 and
counter to the effort i would think a marxist would put into understanding
such things in a materialist sense.

Tahir: Which you never even came close to. FOR EXAMPLE: Why would it be that one particular group of people in one corner of the world in ancient times suddenly developed a "dialectical" and "materialist" worldview unlike everybody else everywhere who remained steeped in superstition and darkness until you came along to point them back to that one pinpoint of light back there in ancient history.

> let alone the fact that 90%+ of bar activity is centered around alcohol,
>
> Tahir: Ooh shocking!

and apparently you've injested enough, killing enough braincells, to where
you can no longer read or think clearly.

or maybe perpetual drunkeness explains the ineptitude you've demonstrated
thruout this exchange...

Tahir: Again fuck you with your personal abuse.

> you know, you make a lot of fucking leaps of logic... how the hell did you
> come to "any school of thought is more or less as good as another" from
> "this kind of thinking is possible anywhere [etc.]"?
>
> Tahir: It follows logically from what you said.

damn, son.

Tahir: Fuck you, you're the college boy nerd not me.

go buy a book on elementary logic or something... cause what you
said no way "follows logically" from what i said.

Tahir: It's interesting that you choose to be abusive rather than to back up this supposedly logical claim. Confirms what I always suspected, people who are 'into' Buddhism usually reveal themselves to be utter arseholes before very long.

that fact that you think so is kinda pathetic, really.

> i wasn't saying that all schools are equal, but that no schools are above
> criticism and reproach.
>
> Tahir: I look forward to your learned critique of Buddhism, which I will
certainly engage with.

what's the point. i used to have quite a lot of respect for you. now i have
none.

Tahir: For my part, I always thought you were a nerd, ever since the time you claimed that the ruling classes of all countries were somehow equal and when I challenged you to show how the ruling classes of Rwanda, Mocambique, etc. were equal to that of the US you just discontinued the thread.

at any rate... if you really want to continue this, just email me off the
list.

Tahir: No ways.





i won't respond to you here, on this thread, again.



_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com



     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---


     --- from list aut-op-sy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---