my subscriptions
POPULAR-ALL-RANDOM | LOADING...MORE »
JohnDoe_John 1 point

What do you mean by

ethics and morals

?

General answer would be: to make life better. To live better and die better. To help others.

ClownTree22 1 point

In what ways do you think they help us live and die better?

JohnDoe_John 1 point

they

Who?

ClownTree22 1 point

Ethics and morals

Load more comments
acun1994 1 point

free of contradiction

I meant to emphasize this part. In the context of the conversation, what facts or assumptions are held by both parties to be true, that is what I meant by facts. Apologies for the confusion.

ClownTree22 1 point

Ok, I think I understand. Thank you. So not necessarily universal facts, but things held true by individuals... assumptions.

acun1994 1 point

Correct, at least to my knowledge.

Apologies again for the confusion. The terms used may be slightly warped in their definition due to my being in Computer Science.

ClownTree22 1 point

No worries, you've been very helpful and your thoughts and pleasant dialogue are very much appreciated.

Load more comments
ClownTree22 commented on a post in r/ProRevenge
Tinfoilpain 18 points

Yeah, how does she know the husband asked the kid to knock over the cans? Kids can be dicks all on their own. And if the dad did, why would he ever tell OP?

ClownTree22 5 points

Perhaps OP left out the part where the neighbor yelled out the instructions to his son at the top of his lungs while simultaneously pointing at OP's trashcan with a lazer-pointer and making exagerated kicking motions with his legs.

ClownTree22 commented on a post in r/Buddhism
ClownTree22 2 points

To me, the safest route would be to never place your full trust in what someone tells you and follow words/advice only when you understand why and how the practice will benefit you and personally agree with the practice. There will always be danger in placing your faith in other humans, and following advice that does not make sense/you don't personally agree with, no matter what their title or how many followers they have.

ClownTree22 commented on a post in r/Buddhism
1
ClownTree22 0 points

Some people do, and some people don't. I personally take the following view on the matter:

"Now, Kalamas, one who is a disciple of the noble ones — his mind thus free from hostility, free from ill will, undefiled, & pure — acquires four assurances in the here-&-now: "'If there is a world after death, if there is the fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then this is the basis by which, with the break-up of the body, after death, I will reappear in a good destination, the heavenly world.' This is the first assurance he acquires. "'But if there is no world after death, if there is no fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then here in the present life I look after myself with ease — free from hostility, free from ill will, free from trouble.' This is the second assurance he acquires. "'If evil is done through acting, still I have willed no evil for anyone. Having done no evil action, from where will suffering touch me?' This is the third assurance he acquires. "'But if no evil is done through acting, then I can assume myself pure in both respects.' This is the fourth assurance he acquires. "One who is a disciple of the noble ones — his mind thus free from hostility, free from ill will, undefiled, & pure — acquires these four assurances in the here-&-now."

ClownTree22 commented on a post in r/Buddhism
Guga_ 1 point

Maybe I should have said "justification". The Christians and Muslims have "I am just telling you that not believing in Jesus/God will get you into everlasting punishment, it's not a threat, it's a fact." This offer no reasonable argument other than stating it as fact unwarrantedly.

ClownTree22 2 points

I think its important to remember that, unlike other religions, the Suttas are not considered gospel and, as a practitioner, you are expected to analyze information and determine for yourself if it is worth pursuing/having faith in. I personally don't believe that I will end up in hell just for not believing someone had/has "superhuman states", even if it says so specifically in a Sutta. That is not consistent with what I have come to understand about the dharma, so I do not accept it. In the practice, you may come across lots of Suttas and teachers who claim "This is true, so you should believe it!"; however, you don't have to accept any of it if you don't personally find it agreeable.

Kalama Sutta

"Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' — then you should enter & remain in them.

ClownTree22 commented on a post in r/funny
andersberndog 1,109 points

AMA request: this guy

ClownTree22 48 points

"I fear not the horse who has practiced 10,000 kicks one time, but I fear the horse who has practiced one kick 10,000 times."

UltraBananaBuddy 2,109 points

The horse is like “This is for eating the last sugar cube fuckface.”

ClownTree22 2 points

Maybe the horse thought they were actually going to be in a battle and just wanted to practice his kicks beforehand?

ClownTree22 commented on a post in r/Buddhism
Phuntshog 22 points

Hear hear.

Another issue with simply quoting Sutra is that it gives the impression that the dharma is worthwhile because it was spoken by Lord Buddha. The dharma is worthwhile because it is true and because it works, and in a sense, Lord Buddha is venerable because he found and taught the dharma, not the other way around.

Furthermore the idea that anything "done to" the dharma after Lord Buddha must be a distortion, disregards the jewel of the sangha. All this compiling, editing, commenting and rephrasing and elaborating wasn't just done by mere scholars. It was done by experienced practitioners, who through their own practice of the jewel of the dharma approached the same ownerless truth Lord Buddha was the first in the era to find. The teachings of our masters in the past twenty-five centuries may not all be Lord Buddha's words. They're still Lord Buddha's teaching.

In short, to assume that no one since Lord Buddha realized what he originally realized, even in part, means to assume the dharma doesn't work and the sangha is unreliable. In that case, why bother quoting the sutras? The "originalism" that seems to motivate relying on quotes only, is a Buddhism that subtly (and without that conscious intention, I'm sure) discourages taking Refuge in the Three Jewels...

ClownTree22 1 point

As a practitioner who studies the Pali Canon, I would agree that simply quoting suttas is not, by itself, evidence of what the Buddha taught or representative of "true dharma", and should be read with a healthy dose of skepticism. I would also say the same holds true for the words of any so-called teacher or "master" past, present, or future, no matter what their title or reputation; their words should be heard or read with a healthy dose of skepticism. If a practitioner follows the words/advice/direction of a sutta or a teacher, it should be because those words are in accordance with their own understanding. I learned that from a Sutta, and accept it because it makes a lot of sense to do this.

"Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' — then you should enter & remain in them.

Gundi9 8 points

I never said they are out of reach. Only that looking to scripture as your primary source to confirm a Buddhist idea is misguided. And that is what I see a lot of. By all means study scripture. It's important. But don't use it as the primary source. Oral transmission is the primary source. And don't think for a second that your understanding of scripture is correct until you have instructed in a way that confirms it.

ClownTree22 1 point

Personally, I think if an idea makes sense (i.e., its plausible) according to what I have come to realize through my own experience as a practitioner, then I will consider it even if its not totally consistent with my prior beliefs. If an idea does not make sense according to my knowledge/experience, but I am still curious as to if the idea could be valid in some way that I am currently unaware, then I might ask for evidence to support the idea... if it's a Buddhist idea, then I would naturally ask for scriptural evidence. If there is scriptural evidence, then I would take the time to read and analyze the new information and see if it now makes sense; if it does, I adjust my view accordingly... if it doesn't, then I wont. The great thing about the Suttas is they usually don't simply say "this is true, believe it!"; they often times explain why something is true through similes and examples. If the person doesn't have scriptural evidence for me to analyze for myself and the only evidence they have is essentially "Believe me, its true!", then no thanks.

ClownTree22 commented on a post in r/Buddhism
ClownTree22 1 point

Believing in the supernatural aspects are not a requirement of walking the eightfold path:

Kalama Sutta

"Now, Kalamas, one who is a disciple of the noble ones — his mind thus free from hostility, free from ill will, undefiled, & pure — acquires four assurances in the here-&-now:

"'If there is a world after death, if there is the fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then this is the basis by which, with the break-up of the body, after death, I will reappear in a good destination, the heavenly world.' This is the first assurance he acquires.

"'But if there is no world after death, if there is no fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then here in the present life I look after myself with ease — free from hostility, free from ill will, free from trouble.' This is the second assurance he acquires.

"'If evil is done through acting, still I have willed no evil for anyone. Having done no evil action, from where will suffering touch me?' This is the third assurance he acquires.

"'But if no evil is done through acting, then I can assume myself pure in both respects.' This is the fourth assurance he acquires.

"One who is a disciple of the noble ones — his mind thus free from hostility, free from ill will, undefiled, & pure — acquires these four assurances in the here-&-now."

PanditaExpress 2 points

Long before they were written, the sutras were passed down through an oral tradition of repetition. Monks would chant them together to ensure accuracy. I am going to assume this phrase is included because the sutras were literally heard.

ClownTree22 1 point

Thank you. Would it be recommended to use similar language in my everyday life if I am trying to use right speech? For example, if I heard something from my teacher or read something from a Sutta, should I say "I have heard/read..." instead of "The Buddha taught..."?

ClownTree22 commented on a post in r/angelsbaseball
ClownTree22 1 point

What about "Goku"?

Wikipedia

Goku is depicted as carefree, cheerful and friendly when at ease, but quickly serious and strategic-minded when in battle. He is able to concentrate his Ki and use it for devastatingly powerful energy-based attacks; the most prominent being his signature Kamehameha (かめはめ波, lit. "Turtle Destruction Wave"), in which Goku launches a blue energy blast from his palms.

ClownTree22 commented on a post in r/mildlyinteresting
SYLOH 286 points

Yeah, that fight was way too short.
The Alien screeched once then Lincoln buried an axe in its skull and it was dead.

ClownTree22 14 points

If I'm going to be spending hard earned money to watch a "Alien vs. Whomever" flick, I expect to experience more than one horrible alien screech. If that's the case, then next time they should provide the Alien with a far less formidable adversary than honest Abe.

ClownTree22 commented on a post in r/todayilearned
ClownTree22 5 points

Why don't right-handed specialists exist in the same way? Usually the left handed specialist pitchers have a sweeping breaking ball the breaks away from the hitter... couldn't a right handed one do the same but in the opposite direction?

bobdanderson 1 point

Thinking of long term benefits goes directly against living in the moment.

ClownTree22 1 point

It only has to be a momentary decision: be honest. If you can get really good at it and honesty is habituated, then hardly any effort is required. Plus, you get the benefit of being known as an honest, trustworthy person.

view more:
next ›
348 Karma
31 Post Karma
317 Comment Karma

Following this user will show all the posts they make to their profile on your front page.

About clowntree22

  • Reddit Birthday

    December 8, 2016

Other Interesting Profiles

    Want to make posts on your
    own profile?

    Sign up to test the Reddit post to profile beta.

    Sign up