Steve Rowe wrote:I read all 4 pages of that - WTF is wrong with me?
Bao wrote:Steve Rowe wrote:I read all 4 pages of that - WTF is wrong with me?
You post all too seldom. You have too much experience to not share it with the world.
Dmitri wrote:Bao wrote:Steve Rowe wrote:I read all 4 pages of that - WTF is wrong with me?
You post all too seldom. You have too much experience to not share it with the world.
He probably has a secret Facebook page he didn't tell people about.
Dmitri wrote:Bao wrote:Steve Rowe wrote:I read all 4 pages of that - WTF is wrong with me?
You post all too seldom. You have too much experience to not share it with the world.
He probably has a secret Facebook page he didn't tell people about.
Bao wrote:Steve Rowe wrote:I read all 4 pages of that - WTF is wrong with me?
You post all too seldom. You have too much experience to not share it with the world.
But you are right, as a member I probably should post more on here as well.
Steve Rowe wrote:You mean you're not following me on Fakebook, Twatter, Insultagram, mememetube and my blog?
But you are right, as a member I probably should post more on here as well.
dn2 wrote:"Whereas some brahmans and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, are addicted to talking about lowly topics such as these — talking about kings, robbers, ministers of state; armies, alarms, and battles; food and drink; clothing, furniture, garlands, and scents; relatives; vehicles; villages, towns, cities, the countryside; women and heroes; the gossip of the street and the well; tales of the dead; tales of diversity [philosophical discussions of the past and future], the creation of the world and of the sea, and talk of whether things exist or not — he abstains from talking about lowly topics such as these. This, too, is part of his virtue.
"Whereas some brahmans and contemplatives, living off food given in faith, are addicted to debates such as these — 'You understand this doctrine and discipline? I'm the one who understands this doctrine and discipline. How could you understand this doctrine and discipline? You're practicing wrongly. I'm practicing rightly. I'm being consistent. You're not. What should be said first you said last. What should be said last you said first. What you took so long to think out has been refuted. Your doctrine has been overthrown. You're defeated. Go and try to salvage your doctrine; extricate yourself if you can!' — he abstains from debates such as these. This, too, is part of his virtue."sn56.9 wrote:"Monks, do not wage wordy warfare, saying: 'You don't understand this Dhamma and discipline, I understand this Dhamma and discipline'; 'How could you understand it? You have fallen into wrong practices: I have the right practice'; 'You have said afterwards what you should have said first, and you have said first what you should have said afterwards'; 'What I say is consistent, what you say isn't'; 'What you have thought out for so long is entirely reversed'; 'Your statement is refuted'; 'You are talking rubbish!'; 'You are in the wrong'; 'Get out of that if you can!'
"Why should you not do this? Such talk, monks, is not related to the goal, it is not fundamental to the holy life, does not conduce to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, tranquillity, higher knowledge, enlightenment or to Nibbana. When you have discussions, monks, you should discuss Suffering, the Arising of Suffering, its Cessation, and the Path that leads to its Cessation. Why is that? Because such talk is related to the goal... it conduces to disenchantment... to Nibbana. This is the task you must accomplish."an10.69 wrote:"There are these ten topics of [proper] conversation. Which ten? Talk on modesty, on contentment, on seclusion, on non-entanglement, on arousing persistence, on virtue, on concentration, on discernment, on release, and on the knowledge & vision of release. These are the ten topics of conversation. If you were to engage repeatedly in these ten topics of conversation, you would outshine even the sun & moon, so mighty, so powerful — to say nothing of the wanderers of other sects."
windwalker wrote:Ian C. Kuzushi wrote:Dishonest? WTF?
Like I said a BS move. Another site, same name, same content not announced or made known on what might be called the primary site. Ok got it..
Kind of goes along with those who talked of useing real names and yet makes changes to their own feeling it's ok I guess.
Must be a different way of looking at things.
Regardless, there are two RSF sites, now everyone knows it
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 58 guests