@JeffryGonzalez But it seems that it is those who insist gods exist who need to explain what they mean by “exist,” if there’s doubt.
-
-
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness anybody that would take such a literalist approach to reality is sort of missing the point of the dharma, I'd say.4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JeffryGonzalez
@JeffryGonzalez Not sure what you mean. “Gods literally exist” is what Reggie Ray seems to be saying.2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness but also all phenomena of duality. Your toaster, for example.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JeffryGonzalez
@JeffryGonzalez So gods and toasters are both existent and non-existent, but are they existent and non-existent in exactly the same way?3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness as aspects of innate mind, they are the same, yes.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JeffryGonzalez
@JeffryGonzalez Yeah, but the issue is not whether they exist as aspects of mind—no one has a problem with that—but externally.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness As usual, my problem is when we predicate "reality" on conventional mind. A proto-positivist dharma? No thanks!3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JeffryGonzalez
@JeffryGonzalez Well, no one is going to force it on you!1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Meaningness
@Meaningness Ha! That's good! I really like a lot of what you've written; very helpful! I hope I don't come of as adversarial at all.3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@JeffryGonzalez Thanks! No, not adversarial. It’s possible to disagree in a friendly way!
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.