Apr 11, 2012 -- 1:33AM, Aka_me wrote:

Apr 10, 2012 -- 12:49AM, Ferretling wrote:

So, I suppose in conclusion what I am saying is that I will provide reference when I can, but that sometimes I cannot, other than to provide a generally accepted interpretation of what that text means, though it will, of course, in my answers be from the Zen standpoint. Your mileage from sect to sect may vary.

and that's perfectly fine... acknowledging this IS the mileage that matters.

delusion in thinking it need not be done is the flip side of the coin.

Nonsense-nobody needs to prove a thing to you:  You're the one making unsubstantiated claims.  It's so beyond ridiculous you might as well ask women or those interested in and knowledgeable about women to prove that women have vaginas.  This is a claim accepted by the relevant community, it needs no proof.  Further-you've proven not to concede any points no matter how much proof is piled on you...  Thus again, playing a rigged, inequitable game, you lost the courtesy of demanding a thing in the Buddhist forum.  It was a respect that was given freely but lost due to abuse long ago.  

Because bahais require a ridiculous belief that Buddhism conforms to barbaric, abrahamic nonsense does not suddenly make it our burden.  Instead, it only makes you appear insecure in your faith that you are so upset that Buddhists base their beliefs on Buddhist doctrine, which completely contradicts your notion that it's the same as the bible, torah, quran, etc.   A person secure in their faith has no reason to harass others to agree with them, as their faith alone is enough.  

Apr 13, 2012 -- 1:37PM, NATAS wrote:

It would be "nice"  to have respect for the religion, respect for the people making posts, answering questions directly, staying on topic, not answering a question with another questions, and supporting your claims with evidence  if asked. 

But one doesn't have to do anything of those things.

 

Well, AKA, I mean "Natas",

In the past, answering questions, offering evidence, and getting to the heart of a topic has worked so well.  There is adequate respect from the non-Buddhists, that Buddhists, like anyone else understand their own faith, and certainly moreso than others who hardly know a thing about Buddhism, that is what has allowed so much respect on this board :)

Mutual respect is simple and free flowing when both parties respect their strengths but also know their own weaknesses.  As everyone knows, dialog is impossible with a person who believes they know everything.  As such, we are so fortunate that the non-Buddhists here have self respect enough to know the limits of their knowledge and make an effort to understand the faith and/or practice of the Buddhists here.  I am truly greatful; without this basic human quality of a trace of humility, this board would be difficult, be pretty pointless, and nothing Buddhists say would be of interest to the non-Buddhists, even on the subject of Buddhism, and I bet at a certain point, answers would quit being based on an assumption of dialog and mutual learning, and certainly have room to wander off topic as all topics by non-Buddhists would appear to be fraudulant... So we're lucky that's not the case!

Apr 13, 2012 -- 2:26PM, Bob_the_Lunatic wrote:

Apr 13, 2012 -- 1:37PM, NATAS wrote:

It would be "nice"  to have respect for the religion, respect for the people making posts, answering questions directly, staying on topic, not answering a question with another questions, and supporting your claims with evidence  if asked. 

But one doesn't have to do anything of those things.

 

Well, AKA, I mean "Natas",

In the past, answering questions, offering evidence, and getting to the heart of a topic has worked so well.  There is adequate respect from the non-Buddhists, that Buddhists, like anyone else understand their own faith, and certainly moreso than others who hardly know a thing about Buddhism, that is what has allowed so much respect on this board :)

Mutual respect is simple and free flowing when both parties respect their strengths but also know their own weaknesses.  As everyone knows, dialog is impossible with a person who believes they know everything.  As such, we are so fortunate that the non-Buddhists here have self respect enough to know the limits of their knowledge and make an effort to understand the faith and/or practice of the Buddhists here.  I am truly greatful; without this basic human quality of a trace of humility, this board would be difficult, be pretty pointless, and nothing Buddhists say would be of interest to the non-Buddhists, even on the subject of Buddhism, and I bet at a certain point, answers would quit being based on an assumption of dialog and mutual learning, and certainly have room to wander off topic as all topics by non-Buddhists would appear to be fraudulant... So we're lucky that's not the case!

Well mainecaptain, I mean bob the lunatic it all does boil down to "evidence" AND "reason". 

What is the "evidence"?  

What is the "source" of the evidence. 

What is the "quanity" of the evidence. 

What is the "quality" of the evidence.

I don't think that every Buddhist even every "expert" Buddhist has the same "faith". 

I agree 100% that humility is an important virtue.  

 To quote Dirty Harry "A man has got to know his limitations."  

Part of being "respectful" is not to assume that a Non-Buddhist has a "hidden agenda" or to assume that you know the mind, intent, or what they are thinking or struggling to say.  

If the Non-Buddhist "really" wants to know what Buddhism is "really" about the Non-Buddhist could learn the theory from reading about Buddhism from books or internet links written by Buddhists, prefably "experts".   However I don't think that you need to be a Buddhist to be an "expert" on Buddhism. 

If a Non-Buddhist wanted to know about Buddhist practices, such as meditation I do think that it would be better to go to a person who "practices"  Buddhist meditation.  Prefably a person who is an "expert" at "Buddhist" meditation.  I don't think it is neccessary for a Non-Buddhist to learn a Buddhist practice from an "expert" Buddhist.  

 By the way you guessed wrong.  I am not AKA.  

And I would be willing to bet more than a dollar that you are not mainecaptain.  

 And just one more thing.   I think that if the intent-agenda of a Non-Buddhist was to simply "learn" about Buddhism then they can also go to one of the other Buddhist's forums such as "Welcome Buddhism" or "Buddhism" in which "Discussion-Debate" is.....discouraged.  

IMHO it would be "mindfull" to keep that in "mind".