Hereclitus VS. Buddha...

beebuddy · Post by **beebuddy** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 1:25 pm

Hereclitus' "Nothing endures but change..." or Buddha's "All things are impermanent?"

Or do they point to exactly the same thing?

hades · Post by **hades** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 1:57 pm

beebuddy wrote:Hereclitus' "Nothing endures but change..." or Buddha's "All things are impermanent?"

Or do they point to exactly the same thing?

Slightly different, yet very similar.

Hereclitus is saying that everything is impermanent, except for "impermanence".

Buddha is saying everything is impermanent, including "impermanence".

kowtaaia · Post by **kowtaaia** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 2:49 pm

They both say the same thing.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 3:05 pm

There are those who would argue Heraclitus was a Taoist.

beebuddy · Post by **beebuddy** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:10 pm

Dan Rowden wrote:There are those who would argue Heraclitus was a Taoist.

You mean, "Daoist." :)

beebuddy · Post by **beebuddy** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:11 pm

kowtaaia wrote:They both say the same thing.

Agreed, but for some reason I love Harry's version.

beebuddy · Post by **beebuddy** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:20 pm

Anyway, the real question is... Who would've won in a fight?

beebuddy · Post by **beebuddy** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:21 pm

hades wrote:
beebuddy wrote:Hereclitus' "Nothing endures but change..." or Buddha's "All things are impermanent?"

Or do they point to exactly the same thing?

Slightly different, yet very similar.

Hereclitus is saying that everything is impermanent, except for "impermanence".

Buddha is saying everything is impermanent, including "impermanence".

But impermanence is a quality or characteristic, not a thing.

Tharan · Post by **Tharan** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 5:40 pm

Hereclitus was fundamentally unhappy, thus everything died in his world view. Siddartha was fundamentally happy, thus everything lived in his world view. For both, death is a constant, yet it is how you deal with this constant that determines a judgement on the quality of a person's life. Both were correct.

hades · Post by **hades** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 7:28 pm

beebuddy wrote:
hades wrote:
beebuddy wrote:Hereclitus' "Nothing endures but change..." or Buddha's "All things are impermanent?"

Or do they point to exactly the same thing?

Slightly different, yet very similar.

Hereclitus is saying that everything is impermanent, except for "impermanence".

Buddha is saying everything is impermanent, including "impermanence".
But impermanence is a quality or characteristic, not a thing.

characteristics and qualities are 'things' as well...they obviously aren't nothing.

The exact expression of those statements are different. Hercs is an exclusive impermanence, Buddhas is all inclusive. Its subtle.

acid · Post by **acid** » Mon Nov 13, 2006 11:03 pm

hades wrote:
Slightly different, yet very similar.

Hereclitus is saying that everything is impermanent, except for "impermanence".

Buddha is saying everything is impermanent, including "impermanence".

characteristics and qualities are 'things' as well...they obviously aren't nothing.

The exact expression of those statements are different. Hercs is an exclusive impermanence, Buddhas is all inclusive. Its subtle.

hades, your comments are very boring.

hades · Post by **hades** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 3:07 am

acid wrote:
hades wrote:
Slightly different, yet very similar.

Hereclitus is saying that everything is impermanent, except for "impermanence".

Buddha is saying everything is impermanent, including "impermanence".

characteristics and qualities are 'things' as well...they obviously aren't nothing.

The exact expression of those statements are different. Hercs is an exclusive impermanence, Buddhas is all inclusive. Its subtle.
hades, your comments are very boring.

your boredom is an issue you have to deal with, I'm not here to entertain.

acid · Post by **acid** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 4:38 am

just try to be non-boring in the future, and you should be ok.

beebuddy · Post by **beebuddy** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 5:05 am

acid wrote:just try to be non-boring in the future, and you should be ok.

You are flamebaiting. It's no good.

beebuddy · Post by **beebuddy** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 5:07 am

Tharan wrote:Hereclitus was fundamentally unhappy, thus everything died in his world view. Siddartha was fundamentally happy, thus everything lived in his world view. For both, death is a constant, yet it is how you deal with this constant that determines a judgement on the quality of a person's life. Both were correct.

It's hard not to be skeptical of such a statement. It's even harder to make a cogent argument to the contrary.

beebuddy · Post by **beebuddy** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 5:09 am

hades wrote:characteristics and qualities are 'things' as well...they obviously aren't nothing.

So when you go outside and feel a fine-smelling plant do you touch leaves & petals or do you touch characteristics & qualities?

acid · Post by **acid** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:06 am

All the boys are looking up at me, 'cause I dance on the tabletop.

hades · Post by **hades** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 6:50 am

beebuddy wrote:
hades wrote:characteristics and qualities are 'things' as well...they obviously aren't nothing.
So when you go outside and feel a fine-smelling plant do you touch leaves & petals or do you touch characteristics & qualities?

Both.

A flower may have various qualities and characteristics, such as: Color, scent, pedals, leaves, a stem, roots...etc

Acid, your trolling attempts have failed, get some new material.
Thnx.

acid · Post by **acid** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 7:41 am

hades wrote: Acid, your trolling attempts have failed, get some new material.
Thnx.

You can call me "Ms. Acid", thnx.

beebuddy · Post by **beebuddy** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:03 am

hades wrote:
beebuddy wrote:
hades wrote:characteristics and qualities are 'things' as well...they obviously aren't nothing.
So when you go outside and feel a fine-smelling plant do you touch leaves & petals or do you touch characteristics & qualities?
Both.

A flower may have various qualities and characteristics, such as: Color, scent, pedals, leaves, a stem, roots...etc

Acid, your trolling attempts have failed, get some new material.
Thnx.

Well, needless to say, I disagree. It seems an odd way to use the word.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 9:44 am

Enough with the pictures, lads. Future posts containing them will be deleted.

acid · Post by **acid** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:19 am

you are just looking for an excuse to ban me. i already told you, i don't care if you ban me. i'm not sure why you are saying i can't use my avatar. your avatar is no better than mine. at least mine is a picture of someone. yours is just a stupid little drawing, or something.

Dan Rowden · Post by **Dan Rowden** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:34 am

You really need to stop dropping your username. I'm not talking about avatars, I'm talking about pictures inserted into threads. I doubt that reading board welcome and conduct threads is something you ususally do, but I suggest you read this:

Board Rules and Usage

I am not looking for an excuse to ban you; you are looking for an excuse to be banned.

acid · Post by **acid** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:40 am

oh. now i see what you are saying. then why don't you take out the Img tag option??

beebuddy · Post by **beebuddy** » Tue Nov 14, 2006 10:40 am

Dan Rowden wrote:Enough with the pictures, lads. Future posts containing them will be deleted.

Done & done!

GENIUS FORUMS

Hereclitus VS. Buddha...

Hereclitus VS. Buddha...

Re: Hereclitus VS. Buddha...

Re: Hereclitus VS. Buddha...

Re: Hereclitus VS. Buddha...

Re: Hereclitus VS. Buddha...

Re: Hereclitus VS. Buddha...

Re: Hereclitus VS. Buddha...

Re: Hereclitus VS. Buddha...

Re: Hereclitus VS. Buddha...

Re: Hereclitus VS. Buddha...