flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.

Index > Heap > Buddism (possibly offencive, beware)

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 12, 13, 14  Next
Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
MichaelH



Joined: 03 May 2005
Posts: 402
MichaelH
Hmmmmm....., the argument that "the religious/philosophical text/transcript" that I reference is the most authentic of all ..... difficult to debate with someone who uses this as a basis to an argument but isn't it fascinating how all beliefs fall back to this method of debate..... kind of makes debating a subject pointless when someone does this.
Post 12 Jan 2007, 23:04
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tom tobias



Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Posts: 1320
Location: usa
tom tobias
Here is a Bachelor's thesis, by a guy named Jonah Winters:
http://bahai-library.org/personal/jw/other.pubs/nagarjuna/
Jonah wrote:
The uniqueness of much of Buddhism lies in the way it seeks "Ultimate Truth" and the manner of Ultimate Truth it finds. Truth, for Buddhism, is relative.

Note that, then, for Buddhists, who believe that truth is relative, if a tree falls in an uninhabited forest, one may not insist on a concurrent generation of a sound as the tree strikes the earth. For a scientist, the tree crashing down does cause a sound, whether or not one has a microphone there to record the sound. There is nothing RELATIVE about the sound of a tree crashing, for a scientist. The falling tree will ALWAYS make a sound, independent of our ability to perceive it, as it interacts with an inflexible structure, the planet earth. For a scientist, it is the mechanism of sound generation that is of utility, while for the Buddhist, it is conversely one's willingness to detect the sound that is instructive.
Jonah wrote:

The Buddha did not teach that there is an Ultimate, nor did he deny it. He did not declare the Ultimate to be ineffable because mystical and inherently beyond the scope of thought, nor did he embrace agnosticism and say that we just can never know its nature. The Buddha simply would not talk about it.
Scientists, and scientific thinkers, do not AVOID topics, even controversial ones.....We may indeed NOT KNOW, and NOT POSSESS, the truth, or even an idea of what COULD POSSIBLY be the truth, or even sometimes, utter conjecture, but pure and convincing ignorance alone will not deter our resolve to attempt clarity and resolution on any topic. No question, for us, is taboo.

JCI (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) Got out my copy of the Koran (Quran) today:
Q3:54
Quran wrote:
As for those who disbelieve, I will punish them with a severe punishment in this world and in the next,...

Hmm....
Post 13 Jan 2007, 11:55
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tantrikwizard



Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 142
tantrikwizard
tom tobias wrote:
Jonah wrote:
The Buddha did not teach that there is an Ultimate, nor did he deny it. He did not declare the Ultimate to be ineffable because mystical and inherently beyond the scope of thought, nor did he embrace agnosticism and say that we just can never know its nature. The Buddha simply would not talk about it.


This can be debated. The problem is comparing the western 'god' with the eastern 'brahman'. There is a clear differences between the two which should be recognized. Among the differences are:

Western 'god' is a sentient individual, a seperative consciousness
Eastern 'brahman' is the insentient absolute, the unified totality of consciousness and intellegence.

Western 'god' is the transendent creator and strictly not creation
Eastern 'brahman' is not seperate from nature, nature being part of brahman.

Western 'god' is strictly not you.
Eastern 'brahman' includes you, though the individual seperative consciousness is normally unaware of its union with the absolute.

I think it is incorrect of Jonah to suggest Gautama did not teach the ultimate because it is included in the very definition of brahman. At the roots of buddhism is the goal of 'union with the absolute' as is the goal of other eastern philosophies such as hinduism from which buddhism was derived. It is often accepted that the reason Gautama started buddhism was because the hindus had created jehova sort of dieties which were contrary to the sutras and vedas and had 'fallen off the path'
Post 13 Jan 2007, 20:41
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
reciprocity != love
love > reciprocity

If you don't have love, you have nothing. If you don't love your neighbor, who do you love? Can anything be better than pure love? Yes, but it is God, who is all-loving. If self is everything, who will you turn to? How about the One greater than all of us. If loving self alone is so great, then why are there so many of us others out there? Because a loving God is not all about self but about loving others, being patient and kind.

BTW, the pope is not far removed from Christ. He is the "Vicar of Christ", descended from the line of St. Peter (first pope, chosen by Christ himself). As a priest (and bishop of Rome), he still leads the Mass on Sundays and holy days, including sacraments like the Eucharist (instituted by Christ at the Last Supper). That is his job and calling, to help others. Christ is not dead, and more than a few can verify this. He is definitely alive, so talk to Him (e.g., pray: give thanks, acknoledge Him, petition His help). DO ask Him for assistance, but DON'T trust your own judgment over His. Also, DON'T pretend that you don't need Him sometimes. DON'T pretend that you're perfect like Him (lies are bad, how can you fool an all-knowing God?). Be nice to others because He demands it. Emulate His loving behavior, don't offend Him by offending others. Follow Him (and His 10 commandments, which are fairly complicated but fundamental to living a decent, happy life).

Denying God or saying one can save oneself when one cannot would be bad (nothing good would come from that). How do we know Jesus is God? Because He has proved it over and over and over again. Who else can forgive sins (Judaism says God only) or revive the dead (Holy Spirit = Father of Life) ?

Gautama never did anything. His teachings solve nothing other than making oneself sound falsely intelligent through empty talk. There is nothing scientific, useful, or inherently brilliant that I've heard from Buddhism, only error. Do not let yourself be embarrassed by falling for such (probably unintentional) falsehood. Mere talk, just empty words.

It's better to say, "I don't believe," or "I'm not convinced," or "I honestly don't know" than pretend to know what you don't. But, to those of us who have been abruptly awakened (!!!) to the reality of God (and annoyed by those who permanently reject Him), it would be destructive to pretend that Jesus is not God.

Lots of people claim to be God. But, there is only One (Christ, who is Messiah and Lord).
Post 19 Jan 2007, 00:05
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
tantrikwizard



Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 142
tantrikwizard
rugxulo wrote:
reciprocity != love
love > reciprocity
...long winded ideological jesus and god sermon...


All praise be to Gandolf and his side-kick Frodo for saving middle earth from the wrath of Saromon!!! All praise be to the all knowing and all loving Gandolf. Worship the one true Frodo or burn in eternal fires of mount doom!!!!
Post 19 Jan 2007, 01:51
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Reply with quote
Maverick



Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Posts: 251
Location: Citizen of the Universe
Maverick
rugxulo wrote:
reciprocity != love
love > reciprocity

If you don't have love, you have nothing. If you don't love your neighbor, who do you love? Can anything be better than pure love? Yes, but it is God, who is all-loving. If self is everything, who will you turn to? How about the One greater than all of us. If loving self alone is so great, then why are there so many of us others out there? Because a loving God is not all about self but about loving others, being patient and kind.

BTW, the pope is not far removed from Christ. He is the "Vicar of Christ", descended from the line of St. Peter (first pope, chosen by Christ himself). As a priest (and bishop of Rome), he still leads the Mass on Sundays and holy days, including sacraments like the Eucharist (instituted by Christ at the Last Supper). That is his job and calling, to help others. Christ is not dead, and more than a few can verify this. He is definitely alive, so talk to Him (e.g., pray: give thanks, acknoledge Him, petition His help). DO ask Him for assistance, but DON'T trust your own judgment over His. Also, DON'T pretend that you don't need Him sometimes. DON'T pretend that you're perfect like Him (lies are bad, how can you fool an all-knowing God?). Be nice to others because He demands it. Emulate His loving behavior, don't offend Him by offending others. Follow Him (and His 10 commandments, which are fairly complicated but fundamental to living a decent, happy life).

Denying God or saying one can save oneself when one cannot would be bad (nothing good would come from that). How do we know Jesus is God? Because He has proved it over and over and over again. Who else can forgive sins (Judaism says God only) or revive the dead (Holy Spirit = Father of Life) ?

Gautama never did anything. His teachings solve nothing other than making oneself sound falsely intelligent through empty talk. There is nothing scientific, useful, or inherently brilliant that I've heard from Buddhism, only error. Do not let yourself be embarrassed by falling for such (probably unintentional) falsehood. Mere talk, just empty words.

It's better to say, "I don't believe," or "I'm not convinced," or "I honestly don't know" than pretend to know what you don't. But, to those of us who have been abruptly awakened (!!!) to the reality of God (and annoyed by those who permanently reject Him), it would be destructive to pretend that Jesus is not God.

Lots of people claim to be God. But, there is only One (Christ, who is Messiah and Lord).


OH MY GOD!!!!

Lord, save us from the Lord, please.

Anyway, thanks God I'm atheist.

Ok, it's that I thought we were already in the second millennium, and that the middle ages were over, they ain't. Very Happy

_________________
Greets,
Fabio
Post 19 Jan 2007, 05:51
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
Maverick



Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Posts: 251
Location: Citizen of the Universe
Maverick
tantrikwizard wrote:
rugxulo wrote:
reciprocity != love
love > reciprocity
...long winded ideological jesus and god sermon...


All praise be to Gandolf and his side-kick Frodo for saving middle earth from the wrath of Saromon!!! All praise be to the all knowing and all loving Gandolf. Worship the one true Frodo or burn in eternal fires of mount doom!!!!

Thank you for increasing the seriousness of this conversation (and I mean it *really*).

_________________
Greets,
Fabio
Post 19 Jan 2007, 05:54
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
tantrikwizard: burn on the stake, heretic!

Gandalf, Saruman.

Smile
Post 19 Jan 2007, 09:47
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
tantrikwizard



Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 142
tantrikwizard
f0dder wrote:
tantrikwizard: burn on the stake, heretic!

Gandalf, Saruman.

Smile



HAHA, you can tell I didn't read the book (or the DVD box cover for that matter)
Post 19 Jan 2007, 19:06
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
Bible accounts of St. Paul's conversion (from Acts of the Apostles)

The summary of the conversion of St. Paul (Jan. 25)

excerpt from the above URL wrote:

Paul’s entire life can be explained in terms of one experience—his meeting with Jesus on the road to Damascus. In an instant, he saw that all the zeal of his dynamic personality was being wasted, like the strength of a boxer swinging wildly. Perhaps he had never seen Jesus, who was only a few years older. But he had acquired a zealot’s hatred of all Jesus stood for, as he began to harass the Church.

One sentence determined his theology: “I am Jesus, whom you are persecuting” (Acts 9:5b). Jesus was mysteriously identified with people—the loving group of people Saul had been running down like criminals. Jesus, he saw, was the mysterious fulfillment of all he had been blindly pursuing.

Paul’s life became a tireless proclaiming and living out of the message of the cross: Christians die baptismally to sin and are buried with Christ; they are dead to all that is sinful and unredeemed in the world. They are made into a new creation, already sharing Christ’s victory and someday to rise from the dead like him. Through this risen Christ the Father pours out the Spirit on them, making them completely new.

So Paul’s great message to the world was: You are saved entirely by God, not by anything you can do. Saving faith is the gift of total, free, personal and loving commitment to Christ, a commitment that then bears fruit in more “works” than the Law could ever contemplate.


The anniversary of this conversion is celebrated next Thursday. No one is born a saint, but we are all called in different ways to follow God (not just an ideal, but a perfect person who created the world), living according to His truth (i.e., avoid ALL sin/evil, do only good).

P.S. Another good conversion/biography is that of St. Augustine (see his Confessions where via Christ's grace he corrects his former errors, surely you will find him brilliant, as was St. Thomas Aquinas and many others).

This post is mainly for your reference as I don't expect anyone to read all these links. But, if you honestly seek the truth, here it is.
Post 19 Jan 2007, 21:07
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
MichaelH



Joined: 03 May 2005
Posts: 402
MichaelH
Here's a link too exactly the same conversion method you speak of rugxulo

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobotomy

Read it, I'm sure when you "found God" you were actually suffering from clinical depression and you still haven't sought any medical help for it.

BTW rugxulo, how do you come to believe that crashing a thread about buddhism and lecturing everyone about christianity, is in fact loving your neighbour? To me it looks like you are in fact doing the opposite and actually disrespecting your neighbour Sad However I suppose you did say "if you honestly seek the truth, here it is", I agree, it's a very good example of a christian showing complete disrespect for everyone ..... so what else is new Exclamation
Post 19 Jan 2007, 22:33
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
It is not crashing the thread because I assume you want some good ol' fashioned experience. Or maybe you like ignorance. "Philosophy" is defined as seeking the truth, and that's what I was referring to. Of course you won't probably listen to anything I say, but I'm just posting a few pointers.

In particular, the danger of falling into such an error as Buddhism is not something I take lightly. It's one thing to be curious, but it's another to believe and act wrongly, and that can lead to serious/lame-o consequences.

Annoying someone inadvertently while actually seeking to benefit them in the long term is not what I'd call a bad thing. In fact, I'd probably consider this a spiritual work of mercy (instruct the ignorant). Should I be silent? Don't you want an honest comparison? Or should you just jump at the first thing that you hear?
Post 20 Jan 2007, 04:44
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
MichaelH



Joined: 03 May 2005
Posts: 402
MichaelH
Quote:

Don't you want an honest comparison?


Sure I do, an honest comparison would be terrific and a refreshing change to the completely dishonest comparison you keep ranting Wink
Post 20 Jan 2007, 11:43
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
tom tobias



Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Posts: 1320
Location: usa
tom tobias
rugxulo wrote:
But, if you honestly seek the truth, here it is.
Here, I must follow the teachings of Buddha, as explained by tantrikwizard, and argue that truth, at least for matters involving historical figures of nearly a thousand years ago, is relative.
Thomas Aquinas is one of my heroes, not because of his belief in Christianity, but because of his zeal for both education in general, and Aristotle, i.e. rational empiricism, in particular. In the thirteenth century Aquinas traveled throughout Europe, living in both Koln and Paris, where he attended universities well known to me....
Catholic assertions of Aquinas' greatness never cease to amaze me, given his unequivocal support of an atheist, Aristotle. As regards Aquinas' efforts, at the end of his life, to heal the schism between the papists and the orthodox Christians, one cannot help but note, the same problem still exists, today. It will always exist, as long as humans proclaim some kind of special ability to interact with non-existant, supernatural life forms--god--which is what any pope is supposed to be able to do. The Buddhists may be correct about relativity of truth, regarding historical data, since we have no video footage from ancient times to confirm or repudiate various opinions, but, as regards analysis of current problems, I retain confidence in Aristotle's method, rather than meditation, reflection, introspection, and wishful thinking, to yield the "truth".
Smile
Post 20 Jan 2007, 12:41
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
Dishonest comparison? Where? All I'm doing is refuting any credibility Buddhism has as religion (or anything else, really). What is it good for? Christianity (2 billion people!) says you can't save yourself, okay? Got it? Good.

BTW, if this thread wasn't so over the top with praise for Buddhism gibberish, I probably wouldn't respond. But having so many fall into error because of it would be bad. (Also, that slam against the pope displeaseth me, too).

P.S. tom tobias, you're such a doubting Thomas. Laughing
Post 20 Jan 2007, 15:05
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
f0dder



Joined: 19 Feb 2004
Posts: 3170
Location: Denmark
f0dder
Since I was a child, I sought my own ways, Who's god and who's not.
I'm so sick of hearing you preach about heaven, All this bullshit about aradise, People decide, Lord jesus Christ.

The christians must be stopped, From spreading all the lies, The only way to kill there hate, With a stab in the back.

Have mercy, It's the end, Of your life.
Post 20 Jan 2007, 15:12
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
rugxulo



Joined: 09 Aug 2005
Posts: 2341
Location: Usono (aka, USA)
rugxulo
Obviously you're quoting a song lyric. Not very impressive. We hate? Then why are we the ones getting stabbed in the back? You misunderstand what love and hate are.

Anyways, maybe I'm naive to think Christianity isn't so offensive. It's not like it's unheard of. You guys must have had some bad experiences in the past to be so angry at it. I thought I gave a fair comparison to Buddhism, but it's no secret that I am biased (as is anyone who believes in anything ... even not believing).

I have no idea why you give such credence to atheism when most people don't believe in that. The idea of a loving God is not unpleasant. Anyways, you're outnumbered! Laughing

If I say I like the Atari Lynx, most people say, "Get a real game system! PS3 r00lz!!". And yet, even though it's annoying, there is some truth to that. The Lynx is the minority view. So, how can I say, "They're all wrong!" when I am only one person. Surely I don't view my own opinions as superior to everybody else combined, do I? It's easy to be stubborn, but why stick to what doesn't work? When my Lynx finally breaks, what will I do then? Where will I go? I have to have something!

(This is all rhetorical. Actually, my Lynx hasn't gotten much use and last time I tried, it booted up but the graphics were all garbled. Sad )

P.S. Confucius said that if either a very few or a great many people pay attention to something, it is worth looking into. (Granted, I don't really suggest reading his works either, but hey, he had at least one good point). Everybody in the world is NOT crazy just because they don't believe what you do. I certainly don't think anyone on this forum is evil, crazy, stupid, or anything of that sort (far from it).
Post 20 Jan 2007, 15:27
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
tantrikwizard



Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 142
tantrikwizard
rugxulo wrote:
"Philosophy" is defined as seeking the truth, and that's what I was referring to. Of course you won't probably listen to anything I say, but I'm just posting a few pointers.


Christianity is not philosophy, its an ideology like the KKK, nazisim or fanatical islam. Additionally, philosophy is not truth seeking, that is a philosopher. Philosophy is truth defining. Truth is reality, as it exists, without interpretation or distortion. What is real is true, what is not real is not true. "Truth seeking" is absolutely the most stupid thing one can do. There's no mysterious esoteric hidden "truth". When deprogramming religious fanatics I advise them to substitute "truth" with "reality" in their speech. If the two cannot be interchanged in one's speech then chances are they're not talking about truth at all. The word "truth" is often used by fanatics to justify their "belief". Kookoos call their beliefs "truth" so as to more easily digest it. There's no need to go searching for a mysterious esoteric invisible "truth" such a thing doesn't exist.

rugxulo wrote:
In particular, the danger of falling into such an error as Buddhism is not something I take lightly.


Care to backup the errors of Buddhism with some evidence? Your opinions really don't matter, either back up your statements with some evidence or retract them.

rugxulo wrote:
Annoying someone inadvertently while actually seeking to benefit them in the long term is not what I'd call a bad thing.


This is what makes xians outstanding hypocrites. They have arbitrarily decided that you are wrong and they're right, and have also decided that it is up to them to fix you. They have judged you as backward sinners and going to hell unless you think as they do. They condemned you to hell and then attempt to save you from their hell.

rugxulo wrote:
In fact, I'd probably consider this a spiritual work of mercy (instruct the ignorant).


Christianity is not spirituality, it is religion. Christianity is more like spiritual masochism. In christianity you are a sinner, backward, going to hell, the 'flesh' is evil and a freak of nature. In christianity humans are god's mistake. This is not spirituality, it is anti-spirituality. Buddhism is spirituality because it nurtures the body, mind and spirit, christianity is anti-spirituality because it condemns the body, mind and spirit.

rugxulo wrote:
Should I be silent?


Yes, keep quiet.

rugxulo wrote:
Don't you want an honest comparison? Or should you just jump at the first thing that you hear?


There is no honest comparison. Comparing Buddhism to xianity is like comparing culinary arts to astro-physics. Buddhism is an actual philosophy, xianity is an ideology because its based in faith, belief, hope and other forms of schizophrenia. A proper comparison would be evaluating the differences, not a sermon about crackpot christs or juvenal jehovas.

You seem to admire Paul (Saul), he was the one of the greatest delusional schizophrenics of history and his words are completely incredible. Saul never mentioned a single gospel word of Jesus and never mentions a single miracle performed by Jesus. Saul never meet Jesus, he was a blood thirsty murderer, and like many psychotics, he had delusions of grandeur and probably had invisible friends. Saul changed his name to Paul after having a heat stroke and switched from killing christians to becoming a proponent of christianity. Not only was Saul a psychotic mass-murderer, he also had a multiple-personality disorder. Its unsafe to trust anything written by psychotic mass-murders with MPD, just like you cannot trust the writings of Hitler. In Roman's 3:7 Saul writes "For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto God's glory, why yet am I also judged a sinner?" Here Saul admits he's lied about his testimony, if he's lied about any of his testimony, chances are he's lied more than once and what he writes shouldn't be trusted. It is unsafe to trust a psychotic mass-murdering liar with MPD.
Post 20 Jan 2007, 19:32
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Reply with quote
tantrikwizard



Joined: 13 Dec 2006
Posts: 142
tantrikwizard
rugxulo wrote:
Dishonest comparison? Where? All I'm doing is refuting any credibility Buddhism has as religion (or anything else, really).


Where? what have you refuted. You have only blabbered some opinions, refute it already with some logic and evidence, not your opinions.

rugxulo wrote:
What is it good for?


Though I'm not a Buddhist, Buddhism is a good cure for christianity. Thats one thing its good for. Its rather clear you have either never studied buddhism or have completely failed to understand what you have studied. If you would like a lesson you can private message me and I'll help clear up any confusion you may still have.

rugxulo wrote:
Christianity (2 billion people!) says you can't save yourself, okay? Got it? Good.

This is probably one of the best bits of evidence that christianity is wrong. The masses are never right, it is always the few that make the big changes. Never underestimate the stupidity of people in large numbers. Even the crackpot christ knew the masses were always wrong, in Matthew 7:14 he says "Narrow is the way and few are those that enter", so which few of the 2 billion zealots are right? If the way is narrow and only a few get it right, are you one of the rare few? If so, why do you count yourself amongst the 2 billion that have it wrong?

rugxulo wrote:
BTW, if this thread wasn't so over the top with praise for Buddhism gibberish, I probably wouldn't respond.


Praise for Buddhism? Where? Care to quote the praise for Buddhism? I haven't seen much 'over the top praise', I have seen a few facts and a few opinions but not a lot of praise. I think that I have been the biggest advocate for the philosophy on this thread and I'm not a buddhist nor a proponent of the man Gautama, he is dead just like the crackpot christ. There has been intellectual debate and proper comparison and contrast between Brahman (the closest buddhist equivalent of a god) and the juvenile jehova, but I havent really seen any over the top praise. Please site some of this 'over the top praise'

rugxulo wrote:
But having so many fall into error because of it would be bad. (Also, that slam against the pope displeaseth me, too).


First you must show the error in it. You have failed to do this, you have just preached about the crackpot christ and the juvenile jehova. No one really cares about bronze age messianic cults. Preaching about your jesus cult is not showing the error of buddhism, it is just preaching. First present something creditable to refute the philosophy of buddhism then you will be getting close to creditable.
Post 20 Jan 2007, 20:00
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger Reply with quote
tom tobias



Joined: 09 Sep 2003
Posts: 1320
Location: usa
tom tobias
rugxulo wrote:
Confucius said that if either a very few or a great many people pay attention to something, it is worth looking into. (Granted, I don't really suggest reading his works either, but hey, he had at least one good point).
I think he had more than one good point....
Razz
How about this one:
zhi zhi wei zhi zhi
bu zhi wei bu zhi
shi zhi ye
I leave it for YONG to provide a proper translation, but it may be thought of as a kind of continuation, or part deux, for your sentiment expressed above.
Umm, in my opinion, I would say, contrary to rugxulo, that I do really recommend reading the Analects. If those who contribute to HEAP took the time to read even ONE Chinese proverb, per week, (many of them predating KongZi,) then, our collective submissions to this forum would improve dramatically. Of course, on the other hand:
niu bu yi shui
bu neng an niu tou di
Smile
Post 20 Jan 2007, 22:37
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4 ... 12, 13, 14  Next

< Last Thread | Next Thread >
Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Copyright © 1999-2020, Tomasz Grysztar. Also on YouTube, Twitter.

Website powered by rwasa.