Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Fool OP wrote

Reply to comment by ewk in Ewk challenged me to an AMA. by Fool

  1. No real background, only started reading after your first post. I was wrong about some of the things I said then, but I admitted as much. I do have a background in Egoism/Nihilism though, it is thought that Stirner was inspired by Zen.

  2. While irrelevant, I barely completed "high school" due to not attending. I feel this question is more telling of your perception of the world than anything.

  3. None. Wait, does sitting on it while completing an unrelated test count? Still none though.

  4. I read some Wikipedia articles. I drive past a Buddhist temple sometimes. The monks once told me to leave while I was sitting with some friends smoking weed under an archway at the front in the middle of the night.

  5. No, and no. I use to say I was Communist but never supported a Communist party... Now I'm fool.


If you think any of that matters you haven't been paying attention to the criticism.

I've said it before, Raddle is small enough that people read and engage with everything. As such thinking of it as a new forum is meaningless, we create forums for single use jokes, and people still view the posts.

It is also an anarchist focused website, so talking about "real masters" and not being able to handle critique is understandably not going to be appreciated.

You keep going on about things that aren't real Zen, and nothing about what it is. The people here assess you on the quality of the ideas you put forth, and all we're seeing is an internet tough guy talking about being hot stuff, with no ideas supporting it, and no ability to learn - you talk about being critical of "religion"... with religious zeal.

Whether your historical facts are correct, has nothing to do with the downvoters, nobody is hurt by you saying Japanese Zen is crap, nobody cares about that, just the philosophical ideas you present.

PS. The ghost is me saying that you're spooked - haunted by cultural ideology that is an illusion.

8

ewk wrote

You aren't engaging though, that's the odd thing.

People who didn't go to college often argue that college isn't a guarantee. While that's true, it's beside the point. You can't assess a high school book report if you haven't read the book.

There isn't any such thing as "Japanese Zen", just like there are no Mormon Christians.

I guess as soon as you read a book your ideas about who is spooked will have some meaning... until then?

All you got is make believe: www.reddit.com/r/zen/wiki/getstarted

PS. Read Huangbo. A guy once complained bitterly that Huangbo just said no all the time and never explained anything. It's touch to recognize a family member when you've never met the family.

−2

Fool OP wrote (edited )

I was engaging, but I think there was a misunderstanding of communication. I presumed words were not needed. The words appeared too clear to require an explanation, but I can try be more articulate.

There isn't any such thing as "Japanese Zen", just like there are no Mormon Christians

Umm... So you're saying all Zen are Japanese, like all Mormons are Christian. Edit: 👁️

5

ewk wrote

The religions that come out of Japan have no connection to Zen and never did.

Japan has never produced a single zen master.

This is blatantly obvious if you look at the historical record because all they have is people who pray in a seated position and that's not Zen

−3

Fool OP wrote

all they have is people who pray in a seated position

Noted: will pray during brachiation. 🥳

4

astroemi wrote

No one ever said you needed a degree of any kind. That's you inserting your prejudices about what other people are into the conversation.

You know how ancaps claim to be anarchists but are full of shit? how do anarchists know they are full of it?

Now apply that to Zen. How do you know if someone is an ancap of Zen?

−2

Fool OP wrote

No one ever said you needed a degree of any kind. That's you inserting your prejudices about what other people are into the conversation.

They asked level of education, they brought it up as though it matters. They keep repeating about not reaching highschool level, so I am inferring based on the fact they keep bringing it up as though it is important.

How do you know if someone is an ancap of Zen?

I had actually thought about that, I mentioned Entryism in one of my other posts, but you all kept inferring things as though I was mentioning things I was not.

3

astroemi wrote

Do you think you have to go to hishschool in order to read at a highschool level and do a book report? It's just a word to talk about something, it has nothing to do with wether or not you have a shitty diploma. It's a skill anyone can work on.

I don't see where you talked about Entryism, could you link to it? Furthermore, how is that related?

−2

Fool OP wrote

hishschool

Got it, I need to "practice" skills to "become" what I need to, before I am allowed to engage.

Entryism

I think my words of conceptual interpretation set off alarm bells, that identified me trying to push something - the "wrong thing", when really... I was naively cutting at the concepts.

3

astroemi wrote

You are not even trying to talk to me at this point. You just want to make strawmans.

You can do whatever you want, but if you lie about being able to do something you clearly can't do, don't be surprised if you get called a liar.

−1

ewk wrote

It's interesting to me that you bring up an anarchist focused website as if somehow anarchists don't cite sources, rely on evidence instead of rumor, and generally contribute to the intellectual life of the world with critical thinking.

All the anarchists I've read were very much academically capable.

When someone down votes you but doesn't have any reason to downvote you and then one guy wanders in who wants to talk about his church that sounds less like an anarchist group and more like a fringe church meeting...

−2

Fool OP wrote (edited )

as if somehow anarchists don't cite sources

Yes, but the source being Anonymous is no reason to exclude it. The point is in the insight not the messenger.

who wants to talk about his church

I never talked about a church... I just had a naivity of the context, which I said as much, even then.

and more like a fringe church meeting

I'm sure you're well aware what that sounds like 😜

3

ewk wrote

Yes it is 100% a reason to exclude something when you don't know who to attribute it to.

Nobody would say that Christianity is defined by a random anonymous book that can't be dated... Especially when Christians clearly point to the Bible as the source of their religion.

Nobody would say that an anonymous book defines women authors or black Americans if the book is anonymously written about a non-specific time period.

I guess there could be anarchists who are larpers just like there a Buddhists who are LARPers. Lots of people claim labels that they are in no way interested in or obligated to.

−3