Dear theY,
I guess I totally understand what you try to say. Anyway, please understand
that modern people are ensnared with the "You can (get what you want)!" -
Illusion and do not so easy understand that things are coming by deeds
and developed condition.
I understood this topic, since I wrote "Democracy", so I didn't denied
your reply, anyway. However, I categorized them in democracy principle,
not in kamma principle. Do you know "Why?"--hint: not about SEA I just write
only on dhamma principle.)[/b]
How ever, we need to be careful to make no generalizations as it easily leads
to caste thinking which is actually, even if denied, the normal way of SEAsian thinking.
So it is wise if it is between Demo-cracy and linear kamma - thinking.
TheY, you need to know that such declarations, as you made, would count as very
discriminating and you need to know that it is in a woman ruled country.
I have not discussed by democracy principle. I discussing by dhamma principle.
Top to bottom of my each reply come out from dhamma principle and pali text.
SEA thinking derived from dhamma, so you thought I let it from SEA.
Come back to dhamma, and claim dhamma more and more.
Also why female can free-discuss about us, but we can't discuss them. Is that fair?
Moreover we talking in academic principle, not slandering them.
discriminating by māna is one. And discriminating by paññā is another one.
If you can't seperate them. You can't let academic talking arise in this topic, too.
Please, don't let dhamma be what dhamma is not. I just analyzing
democracy by dhamma in book, with science. I'm not discriminating.
Every words of me can claim to pali text. When you say "discriminating",
you saying "pali text discriminating". You saying "science discriminating", too.
Who says woman can not be vigorous and get muscles?
You concentrating on democracy, and woman's rights more than dhamma.
Democracy just a part of dhamma, but you act like democracy can decide everything.
You cut my dhamma words/points off then walking dead about democracy, and woman's rights.
I'm sorry to ask, "are you a democrazy religious people?".
If not, why you cut off my dhamma words? Why you don't ask me about that word anytime?
1. I said "hard to make muscle". But you cut "hard"-- that is dhamma, off,
then make the rest words to be democracy by said "Who says woman
can not be vigorous and get muscles?"
2. I said...
(a) Democracy: Man and woman can have vigorous.
(b) Kamma: Man and woman can have vigorous upon their previous kamma.
But you cut "(a)" off ,then make the rest words to be democracy by said...
I guess I totally understand what you try to say. Anyway,
please understand that modern people are ensnared with the
"You can (get what you want)!" - Illusion and do not so easy understand
that things are coming by deeds and developed condition.
"Democracy: Man and woman can have vigorous." show
"You can (get what you want)!" in itself.
Why you act like I said not?
I guess we could cut of some parts here and make a separate Topic out of it, what do you think?
Great!
----------------------------------
Can you mind my dhamma words more?
Why you mind more democracy than dhamma?
Why you don't thing in pali-text more than samaṇa should do?
I claim many words from pāli and science, but why you overpass them?
There is unfair that I understand your democracy mind,
while you didn't under stand my words such as woman previous kamma,
"tihetuka-paṭisandhi, ekahetuka-paṭisandhi, and ahetukapaṭisandhi has not
vigorous of enlightenment", vigorous is not relate with born,
19 paṭisandhi-citta relation with personal vigorous limitation,
honestly access science.
It seem to be misbehave to accuse "you not understand my word".
But I mind your mind, so I have thought in your democracy
thinking before said that word.--------------------------------
Don't be serious, I just try to get you out of limitation of democracy.
Kamma has a part that be democracy and a part that not be democracy, too.
Again, all democracy is dhamma, but democracy isn't equal to dhamma.