[Buddha-l] Confused

[lemmett at talk21.com]

I have absolutely no idea what you mean or if I have inadvertently being insulting.
>>>Not trying to offer a last word or anything (no really)-- 
but, Mr. Luke, if you are a 'real' live putujana like the rest of
us, 
I'd suggest that your encounter with Buddhism has been
trumped (and screwed) by the Mahayana texts you apparently are
reading.
So you are unable to ask meaningful questions because of it. 
Wouldn't be the first time that such texts confused, and later
(hopefully) amused, eh? 

>>>How about considering the gradual approach? Do you have patience?
How about starting to learn something about the ideas the Buddha
himself
allegedly taught, before plunging into arcane trumped-up
"philosophical" questions?
Haven't you ever heard of 'putting the cart before the horse'
(old adage 
found in some ancient texts)?

>>>Being a one-time philosophy major is guaranteed not to be
helpful,
as your latest confirms. Doesn't even help with generating a few
good belly laughs.

>>>Cheers, JK

>So what you're saying is that phenomenologically wisdom is
everything. But from the perspective of I don't know science and
catching the bus on time it's pseudo-philosophy?
LukeHome of the pseudo-contributer

Maybe my tongue in cheek comment is true and wisdom [of the Cartesian meditations I mean...] is only authentically wisdom when its project is complete and it grounds the sciences. I can't find that book right now but then in its inferior form it could well be hollow in comparison to everyone else's opinions on science.
So I'll leave the list alone if that's what's wanted. Like I said I don't have many burning questions, bits here in there form books that are unclear and a little interest in what it means to attain any kind of enlightening understanding as a lazy member of the laity in the UK. But not like my interest in the conceivability of death. Thanks, L