On Nov 4, 2008, at 1:01 PM, enlightened_dawn11 wrote:
What about it? Are you imagining it would exclude relative
distinctions?
There is no need to change anything like you suggest and no need
to
fall into accepting or rejecting.
it is not really a philosophical discussion i was aiming for.
Nor I.
it is just that you said that you were fortunately self-sufficient,
or words to that effect, and i questioned that because of your
continued religious involvement with i assume buddhism.
I have no religious interest in "Buddhism" ( a western term). While
I'm aware that Buddhism can be practiced religiously, I would
consider that a departure from what buddha-dharma is, an awakening
school.
my opinion is that as a result of your continued religous crutch you
are not as you claim self-sufficient. i could have an incorrect
opinion, although you haven't said anything substantial enough for
me to change my opinion.
Let me put it to you this way (since you don't seem to be "getting
it"). There is nothing that would need to rejected nor is there
anything that would need to be accepted and one can still be self
sufficient. I do not have to accept "religion" nor do I have to
reject it. No need at accept sacred rituals, but again, no need to
reject them or be averse to their practice, esp. if they serve some
relative benefit for myself or others. No need to get caught in
drawing certain experiences towards oneself nor is there a need to
feel averse and avoid or shut down certain experiences. No need to
reject friends, enemies or teachers nor accept them. There's no need
to change any thing.
