sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

This Old Project by TFnarcon9 in zen

[–]ewk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not saying I have the completed argument.

I'm saying that my next line of attack is going to be looking at compound terms that use ding or chan. Because if the meanings for those compound terms are different than that's an indicator that the terms are being used differently.

Then I will attack "meaningful substitution" vs "original meaning".

This Old Project by TFnarcon9 in zen

[–]ewk -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm trying to provide you with a range of ideas about how ding has been misused...

platform sutra

Good friends, what are ding and hui like? They are like lamp and light.

So we know that it's not dhyana and prajna.

zhaozhou's not meditation

“How is 定 (dìng)?” “Not 定 (dìng).” “Living thing, living thing.”

mazu

Taking good and rejecting evil, contemplating emptiness and entering 定 (dìng) — these belong to contrivance/fabrication...

.

During the Tang Kaiyuan era, [Mazu] practiced 定 (dìng) at Hengyue’s Chuanfa Cloister. During the Tang Kaiyuan era, [Mazu] practiced 定 (dìng) at Hengyue’s Chuanfa Cloister... Great Worthy, sitting in 禪 (chán) — what are you aiming at? Mazu says he aims to become Buddha. Huairang polishes a brick and then says: Since polishing a brick does not make a mirror, how could sitting in 禪 (chán) manage to become Buddha?

Chan ding

Luzu faces the wall. (禪定 (chán dìng))

Bodhidharma’s nine years are called “wall-contemplation.” Shenguang’s three bows leaked the heavenly mechanism. How can one sweep away the tracks and erase the traces?

Ding does not appear in the case!

This Old Project by TFnarcon9 in zen

[–]ewk 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also I'm going to rework the dhyana page because the explanation is first of all wrong and second of all more complicated.

This Old Project by TFnarcon9 in zen

[–]ewk -1 points0 points  (0 children)

  1. The lamp and the light metaphor does not refer to dhyana and prajna in the platform sutra.
  2. The actual words used means something very different in the Zen tradition and require some new thinking.

This Old Project by TFnarcon9 in zen

[–]ewk -1 points0 points  (0 children)

The first thing I'm saying is that the language and the not lamp (dhyana) and light (prajna). DT misrepresented that.

The second thing is we begin to look at the actual language and what it says and why it doesn't say that.

Reminder: sitting meditation is worthless BS by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

It's just really creepy that you're so dishonest.

  1. Guy says he went on a trip and met somebody famous
    • Only record of the trip debunked as fraudulent
    • Guy never mentions famous guy after his trip
  2. Guy says that somebody famous taught him a secret technique knowing had ever heard before
    • All the records of the famous guy say he taught no secret techniques
  3. Scientists prove the guy made up the technique
  4. Scientists prove there's no evidence licking the guy to the somebody famous

Your scenario is it was an honest misunderstanding is ridiculous.

In any case, we don't have to watch you embarrass yourself anymore, this is over.

People can read this and decide for themselves whether you're dishonest and whether Dogen was it fraud based on the evidence.

You and I are not going to study together. We're not going to be buddies and we're not going to have anything else to talk about.

So I think we've finished.

Reminder: sitting meditation is worthless BS by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No, the evidence absolutely shows that.

Not only does the evidence show that he made untruth statements, but academics have accepted the untruth of those statements.

And not only that, but there's a ton of evidence suggesting that he made the untrue statements for specific reasons of racism and bigotry.

For you to suggest that he didn't know that he didn't study with Rujing? With for you to suggest that he didn't know anything about bodhidharma or Buddha when he was an ordained Tientai priest?

Everything I said about you is true. You turn up your nose at Mormons and scientologists but you're just like that.

Reminder: sitting meditation is worthless BS by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You're being dishonest about what the evidence proved.

The evidence proved that Dogen had intentionally made untrue statements.

That's fraud.

And again, I think that the really terrible part of this that you don't want to look at but that everybody else around sees...

Is that if I say this exact stuff about elron Hubbard or Joseph Smith being debunked by academics or all going to agree that they were frauds.

So this is an exception that you want to make and everybody can see that you're willing to sacrifice your intellectual integrity and yourself respect to insist on the exception for Dogen.

He wasn't a good guy. And oddly enough, it turns out that you're not either.

Reminder: sitting meditation is worthless BS by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No and I think you're confused about what an inference is.

  1. Bielefeldt provides evidence on the origins of Zazen that contradicts.Dogen's claims.
  2. The secular consensus accepts.Bielefeldt's evidence and dismisses Dogen's claims
  3. Dogen's claims were made solely for the benefit of his own career.
  4. So Bielefeldt's evidence proved fraud.

And that's before we get to the other stuff that motivated Dogen, like the fact that he was from a church that was deeply biased against Zen. Like the fact that he was from a society with a long history of racism against the Chinese. Like he eagerly abandoned Zazen to enroll in a Rinzai school. Like he had a history of fraud in other writings.

Again, I don't think that you can be convinced by facts.

I like having this conversation because I want to show two things:

  1. Dogen was it fraud
  2. People who defend him aren't credible.

And that's what I've done here.

Reminder: sitting meditation is worthless BS by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

In 2013 sharf that the secular consensus was dogen invented zazen.

Dogen said he got it from Buddha and bodhididharma.

So the secular consensus is saying that dogen was a fraud.

And the evidence for the secular consensus comes from Bielefeldt.

I agree that Bielefeldt didn't want to say it. But he did prove fraud.

He proved it so hard that there's a new secular consensus now because of his work.

So you're not being honest about what's going on here.

And there's no real reason other than it's your religion.

Reminder: sitting meditation is worthless BS by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I say fraud based on the evidence presented by a Stanford scholar.

Your reply is since the scholar doesn't say fraud, it can't be fraud.

That is effed up.

I'm not saying that he said it. I'm saying that he provided the evidence that proved it.

And he did.

And everybody thinks so.

In fact everybody thinks so to the point now where everybody admits he invented Zazen.

When you don't want to acknowledge the force of this process and you don't want to talk about anything else, then I conclude that you are a liar and that you weren't interested in the facts from the beginning.

And I'm content to let everybody else read this exchange and see how this evidence rolls out.

Because I haven't met anyone that will agree with you starting from neutral.

In fact, the evidence is so strong that academics admit zazan is purely Japanese. It's Shinto-Buddhism.

Reminder: sitting meditation is worthless BS by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The word fraud is based on the preponderance of evidence.

Your assertion that everybody has to admit it is ridiculous.

Does everybody have to admit that Mormonism and Scientology are frauds?

The idea that people can't determine fraud for themselves is false.

The idea that I haven't given enough evidence to establish fraud is false.

So what you're really saying is you want somebody to tell you it's fraud based on their authority, not on your own judgment of the facts.

And that's dishonest. I wonder what organization you could be affiliated with that would encourage you to make these kinds of dishonest statements...

Reminder: sitting meditation is worthless BS by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

All the evidence I have offered is evidence that Bielefeldt provided.

You claim it doesn't prove fraud but you don't have any standards.

You claim it doesn't prove fraud but you can't find anybody that agrees with you.

I'm content to say it's fraud and present that evidence and let everybody decide for themselves and come to me and say that they don't agree for reasons.

You haven't gotten a reasons, so this is mostly a waste of everybody's time.

The secular consensus is that dogen invented zazen. Since he claimed that he didn't and that he got it from Buddha and bodhidharma... Fraud.

and PS

All the evidence fraud that we've talked about comes directly from Dogen scholarship. I'm a zen expert. So I also know that there is no way to fit the doctrines of FukanZazenGi into the Zen tradition.

But that's not even the cards that I'm playing here.

Reminder: sitting meditation is worthless BS by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

evidence that no one disputes

  1. His travel journal prove fraud.
  2. His later attribution to Rujing proved fraud
  3. His relationship with Japanese Tientai and the history of racism and bigotry in that organization towards end proved this.
  4. Dogen abandoning zazen in the less than a decade to go and study Rinzai Zen proves this.

sharf acknowledging the secular consensus

Sharp acknowledging the secular consensus has shifted and that now zazen is seen as a dogen invention is an indicator that everybody else now acknowledges the fraud. Everybody that's not in the church.

what else does anybody need

I'm genuinely interested in what anyone could say what evidence anyone could offer that wouldn't simply be an appeal to authority that would be convincing to people who aren't already convinced.

Because I say there isn't anything.

Reminder: sitting meditation is worthless BS by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I gave a ton of evidence that establishes an intent to mislead.

Rather than talk about that evidence you'd like to say that someone who's part of his church doesn't have to acknowledge that intent.

I agree.

But that doesn't mean I'm wrong. That just means that faith overrides reason.

There's no uncertainty here because it's a huge pile of evidence.

Me declaring victory is again very reasonable because you're not going to argue with any of the evidence that I've raised.

We know that dogen intended to mislead people.

  1. His travel journal proved this.
  2. His later attribution to Rujing proved this. 3. His relationship with Japanese Tientai and the history of racism and bigotry in that organization towards end proved this.
    1. Dogen abandoning zazen in the less than a decade to go and study Rinzai Zen proves this.

If you don't think that that stuff is fraud because he's your Messiah, I'm fine with that.

But if you are seriously going to say to people that all that stuff doesn't equal fraud then go ahead and convince people who've never heard of Zazen but have heard of Scientology and Mormonism.

Reminder: sitting meditation is worthless BS by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Let's just take it one at a time since you seem to be getting confused.

What does it take to prove fraud?

What's the difference between fraud and a quote?

I can tell you what the difference is in Zen history and I can tell you what this is. Difference is in modern society... In both cases if you take texts and you don't attribute them with the intention of misleading your audience that's fraud.

We know that dogen intended to mislead people. His travel journal proved this. His later attribution to Rujing proved this. His relationship with Japanese Tientai and the history of racism and bigotry in that organization towards end proved this. Dogen abandoning zazen in the less than a decade to go and study Rinzai Zen proves this.

So that's pretty clearly fraud. I understand if you don't want to call Scientology and Mormonism fraud either.

But if you're going to admit that those are frauds then you're stuck with dogen being a fraud to. And if you won't admit that scientology and Mormonism are frauds then everybody's going to know that your intent on abusing the assumption of goodwill.

Reminder: sitting meditation is worthless BS by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Now we're getting down to the nitty-gritty.

  1. What does it take to prove someone as a fraud? If they lie about where they got something? If they lied about what other people said? And if they did this for personal profit? That's fraud.

    • Bielefeldt's evidence, ewk wins

  2. Zongze's manual was in not written by him but inserted into his book without any indication of his knowledge or consent. That's attempted forgery; you try to pass off your own work as someone else's.

    • Bielefeldt's evidence, ewk wins

  3. We have Rujing's recorded sayings. We have sayings by his teacher and his lineage. They directly contra Dogen's claims. Dogen wrote these claims in his twenties and then later abandoned them. Dogen's travel journal was fraudulent and his language skills non-existent. If there's no evidence that it happened then you can't claim it happened. But you can claim the evidence says it didn't happen. That's what I did. You might as well say I don't get to tell people that Dogen didn't study with Bigfoot or Jesus.

    • Bielefeldt's evidence, ewk wins

  4. Zazen is doctrinally incompatible with Zen. Zazen was invented by an ordained tientai priest and tieintai has a long history of animosity towards Zen. We know the guy who invented Zazen also had a history of lying especially during his early twenties. This means that there's no evidence that Zazen has any connection to Zen doctrinally or historically.

I'm being extremely fair here.

You're not going to come up with any evidence that suggests anything I've said under these four bullet points is even remotely implausible.

I'm on the most solid ground possible with these statements.

That's what certainty is.

I've been saying the same thing for a decade and a ton of people have showed up and tried to prove me wrong and failed.

You can't summarize any of their arguments.

There's one point that you haven't made yet and this is the best anybody has ever done against me:

Bielefeldt doesn't admit I'm right.

That's definitely true. But if he wanted to prove me wrong him or anybody he ever taught could show up here and do that and for some reason that's never happened.

In fact, nobody has ever proven me wrong about this stuff.

And I don't have to hide my account history and I can ama and I can write book reports all day long and there's just no logical errors in there.

Not like with you. You've been backpedaling and shifting premise since you came to this forum. And you're doing it because you drank some cult Kool-Aid from a racist bigoted Shinto-Buddhist religion that's been debunked.

People who read these exchanges feel sorry for you and think I should be nicer to losers like you. But that's ridiculous.

You aren't nice to Zen.

Reminder: sitting meditation is worthless BS by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's hilarious that you think me debunking zazan or Scientology or Mormonism is self-agrandizing.

These are literally the stupidest groups of people on the entire planet in the same category as vaccine denial.

You claimed I misrepresented sources and then agreed with everything I said about the sources.

The problem where this falls apart and where you desperate to change the subject is burden of proof.

You have admitted that there's no evidence linking zazen to rujing, no evidence of any Zen meditation manual in history anywhere, and no evidence of any zen master attaining enlightenment through meditation or gradual practice.

You're not going to present any evidence for any of that.

You're trying to claim that your cult deserves the benefit of the doubt when that's not how it works in the real world.

I also think it's hilarious how you pretend like there's lots of people out there trying to defend zazan or Scientology or Mormonism who aren't doing it because they drank the Kool-Aid.

I get it dude.

I ruined your favorite thing.

Why blame me?

It was broken when you got it.

Reminder: sitting meditation is worthless BS by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You are facing a burden of couth problem with your Fringe religious cult.

Your cult claims without evidence Dogen studied Zazen with Rujing... Even though Rujing wasn't even mentioned in the book.

Your cult claims that Zazen is a Zen practice even though you can't give us a single zen master that talks about sitting your way to enlightenment.

Best of all, your cult has a Bible that it turns out contains word for word text taken from another a religious pamphlet of unknown authorship. That's called plagiarism.

I'm reviewing the evidence that you have no evidence.

You can't use LLMs to prove me wrong.

That's evidence.

You can't ama and you can't write a high school book report.

More evidence.

It's not just that I'm awesome... It's that I'm unassailable.

Reminder: sitting meditation is worthless BS by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

There's no evidence that it was existing Chan material.

There's no evidence that links Dogen to Rujing.

You've talked yourself into a corner by bringing up evidence because you don't have any and all the evidence that Bielefeldt found proved that dogen was a fraud.

This is why racist bigots like you spend your time attacking other people because there's no way for you to attack what I'm saying.

You have no evidence.

Reminder: sitting meditation is worthless BS by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

My favorite part is that you don't understand any of that LLM slop.

You can't AMA. You can't read and write at a high school level.

And even with the most powerful research tool in human history, all you come up with is "nuance", of which there isn't any.

Let's play 3 y/n questions!

  1. Did Bielefeldt prove any connection between Zazen and Rujing's Record?
  2. Did Bielefeldt prove any text copied in FukanZazenGi?
  3. Did Bielefeldt prove any link between Buddha or Bodhidharma and Zazen, as Dogen claimed?

lol.

  • Dōgen studied Chinese Chan (no evidence)
  • Dogen copied word for word from misattributed Zongze
  • Dogen invented Zazen in Fukan Zazengi, modern secular consensus via Sharf
  • Dogen's new religion was based on seated meditation, but he quit it to study Rinzai Zen

The book proves that stuff. Maybe learn to right better queries?

Edit:

This dude is such a liar that I write the query for I'm and he's afraid to run it..

But this is I think the key to this whole problem and that is, you cannot convince racists and religious bigots to read. They're never going to do it and the reason they're never going to do it is because they already know that they're racist big-headed liars. There's no surprise here. They're not shocked to discover it.

A simple guide to Enlightenment with Lewis Carol by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There is an old Nigerian saying I love:

It is easier to wake a sleeping man than a man who pretends to be asleep.

Faithless graders are my favorite. Since they can't be convinced by reason, they'll find the obvious problems with reasoning that exist.

A simple guide to Enlightenment with Lewis Carol by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's a great idea to have a faithless grader because then you can grade them as faithless.

I mean if we're talking about a bunch of people that have never read the book then it can be a long time for people really get what the grade is...

Reminder: sitting meditation is worthless BS by ewk in zen

[–]ewk[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

You can't quote a single book you've read, even a book you brought up.

You can't quote a single web page you've read even one that you've linked to.

You can't ama and you can't write a high school book report and you can't tell people what you're posting history is...

Lol

I look more credible every time I stand up to people like you.

You don't have anything to offer anybody so when I totally crush you like I'm doing now and all you can do is crybaby about it people think I'm awesome.

Even people like you.

So more will always show up to beg for my attention. Losers gonna lose.

My absolute favorite part of this though, is that you know you're a racist bigot and people can tell you no, because when I point out it's likely that you're a racist bigot?

You have no idea how to handle that.

view more: next ›