[allemnendup]

Hello Still In Motion,
-No, you got me wrong. I didn’t want you to believe what I posted. What I meant is, I didn’t like to debate. I knew you literally pull my leg because you wanted to debate. But I thought it would bring us to nowhere. After every debate, we still believe in what we believe or even more (I’ve seen that a lot.) We may pretend that we agree with each other just to look cool and feel good to ourselves. I don’t like to pretend.

-You got me wrong again. What I meant by "subforum Beyond Belief” is about “no school of thought.” Somehow I knew that you believe in Mahayana school and have your soft spot about this.

Hello again Wanderer,

I don't like to pretend either, and I will never act like I agree with someone, "just to look cool or feel good about myself." I do agree with you that mistranslations and misinterpretations of the Buddha's teachings have occured from the very beginning. What I do not agree with is your assertion that the arising of "Hinayana vs Mahayana" is an indication of this happening. To me it simply shows that different ambitions and styles of practicing arose.

I am sad to see that you do not like to debate, I do like to, because I believe it is a positive way to discuss and compare ideas and beliefs if everything is kept civil. Many of the opinions that I once held very tightly have since changed, partly thanks to in depth discussions and debates with intelligent and thoughtful individuals. Debating helps people see the flaws in other peoples positions as well as in their own, which can lead them to a new and perhaps more broad way of looking at things.

What a dull place the world would be if we never questioned each others and our own assumptions. You are correct that I am a practicioner of Mahayana, or more specifically Zen, but this does not mean that I am unwilling look at things from the perspective of another school of Buddhism or another religion or even athiests. In my experience, talking with people of other beliefs and religions almost always leads to a more empathetic and open minded view of things, even If I do not end up changing my outlook to be in line with the other person's way of thinking. I would suggest that if you are not ready to engage in debates then you should refrain from making statements that might be perceived as controversial or critical of somebodies beliefs.

As a side note, the phrase you used, "pull my leg" means "to trick, to fool, or to pull a prank" on somebody. It does not mean "to antagonize" somebody, which seems to be the way you intended to use it. I can see how the expression could be misleading to a person whose first language is not english. And just so you know, my intention was not to antagonize you. I honestly did not believe that what you said was entirely true, and that was the only reason for my response.

This passage is taken from Ven. S Dhammika's book "Good Questions, Good Answers"

Imagine an Englishman, a Frenchman, a Chinese and an Indonesian all looking at a cup.
The Englishman says, "That is a cup." The Frenchman answers, "No it's not. It's a tasse."
The Chinese comments, "You are both wrong. It's a pei."
And the Indonesian laughs at the others and says "What a fool you are. It's a cawan."

The Englishman get a dictionary and shows it to the others saying, "I can prove that it is a cup.
My dictionary says so." "Then your dictionary is wrong," says the Frenchman "because my dictionary clearly says it is a tasse."
The Chinese scoffs at them. "My dictionary is thousands of years older than yours, so my dictionary must be right.
And besides, more people speak Chinese than any other language, so it must be pei."

While they are squabbling and arguing with each other, a Buddhist comes up and drinks from the cup.
After he has drunk, he says to the others, "Whether you call it a cup, a tasse, a pei or a cawan, the purpose of the cup is to be used.
Stop arguing and drink, stop squabbling and refresh your thirst".

Muji, thank you for the story, I have heard that several times before in one form or another and I like it very much, although I don't think it really fits this situation. It is a good example of how people argue over senseless things that are obviously pointless to bicker about, but right now we are discussing very deeply held belief systems and spiritual practices, not just the name of an everyday object.

We are also not just disputing the name, we are talking about a situation where somebody appears to be discrediting the actual legitimacy and ability of "the cup" to function properly. If the situation in the story were to happen in the real world, the people involved would almost certainly realize what was going on, and end up learning the name of the cup in several different languages instead of arguing about who was correct.

Sadly, when it comes to religions and spiritual paths this is often not the case. Many human beings spend a great deal of time trying to tear down and minimize the beliefs of others because those beliefs are not in accordance with their own. This is truly a shame, but if people can be tolerant and understanding of others then reconciliation can occur, even if in the end they agree to disagree.

My apologies to Aloka-D for getting off topic.