Sunday, January 02, 2011

In Which I Am Criticized by the Master of Antaiji Temple

Markus in Finland recently sent me a link to this post in which Muho Roshi, the abbot of Antaiji temple in Japan criticizes me and then proceeds to praise himself for how much more of a bodhisattva he is than I am.

For those who don't know, Antaiji is famous mainly for being the temple that "Homeless" Kodo Sawaki and his student Kosho Uchiyama lived in. I've always been a little vague on this because Sawaki was known for being a master without a temple. Apparently he actually had a temple of his own, but he wasn't there most of the time because he traveled around the country leading retreats and teaching zazen as well as promoting the many books he wrote. Sawaki is my teacher Nishijima Roshi's biggest influence. Shunryu Suzki was also a big fan of Sawaki.

These days Antaiji is one of the few Japanese Zen temples that a foreign person can go and train in. Often when people ask me about training in a Japanese Zen temple, I refer them to Antaiji. A few people who have come to my Zen retreats and talks have taken the bait and gone out there.

All I know about Muho, other than what I just now gleaned from a quick skim of the Wikipedia entry on him, is that he's German. I'm not sure how he got to be the abbot of Antaiji. I've read a few of his pieces on-line and I always liked them. I believe it was Muho who first shed light on the hatchet job done on Kodo Sawaki by Brian Victoria in his book Zen At War. Muho pointed out a number of places where Victoria wildly mistranslated Sawaki to make him sound like he was a blood-thirsty promoter of the Japanese war effort in WWII. Sawaki was nothing of the sort and anyone who can read Japanese can read the pieces Victoria translated and easily see that Sawaki said nothing at all like what Victoria has him saying in his book.

Muho's criticism of me comes completely out of the blue as far as I can see. But judging by the piece Muho chose to write about, the man must be quite a follower of my writing. This is the kind of thing one could only find by conducting a pretty thorough search of stuff I've written. He chose to pick on something I wrote specifically to the group in Los Angeles that I used to sit with who had asked what it would take to get me to return there as a full time teacher for the group.

I thought about it for a very long time and came up with a list of conditions under which it would be feasible for me to do so. Apparently Muho thought the conditions I stipulated proved that I was not the kind, caring individual that he (Muho) is and he decided he'd better point that out.

The piece he criticized was not really intended for public consumption, although it was not in any way secret either. It was meant to point out to the folks who were asking me about this what I, as a guy who makes his living from writing books and lecturing, would need in order to lead a group in Los Angeles. I wanted the group to have realistic expectations as to what I could and could not do for them.

I have quite a bit of difficulty with what Americans call "setting boundaries." Very often when I am leading any kind of a group, certain people will take advantage of what a total push-over I am and monopolize my time. I decided that one way to remedy this and to be available to everyone fairly was to do what college professors do and have specific "office hours" during which I'd be available by appointment.

What I'm suggesting in the letter I wrote to the people in Los Angeles is an entirely new system very specifically tailored to my own personal life. It's completely different from what happens if one steps into an established temple with an established protocol and an established way of generating income. I'm not saying that's easy to do either. But most of the problems that my letter to the people in Los Angeles addresses are already solved if one has that kind of a temple.

Muho criticizes me for suggesting that I would not be available all the time for such a group in much the same way and for much the same reasons that Kodo Sawaki was not always available all the time for the regular attendees at Antaiji. I'm sorry, Muho, but if I were to make myself available 365 days a year at such a temple, I have no idea how I could earn my keep. And I'm pretty stubborn about earning my own keep.

FYI: Just in case the reaction to this piece becomes "Brad is planning to move back to Los Angeles and lead a group," I want to point out that I have no such plans at all. I am willing to discuss such a possibility if it becomes feasible. As of now, it is not feasible at all and there is no reason to believe it will become feasible any time soon.

ANYWAY, what bums me out most about Muho's piece is that it is so utterly disappointing. There are a small handful of people out there in the Zen world who take an attitude that goes something like, "You cannot be a real Zen teacher if you didn't become a Zen teacher the way I became a Zen teacher." This is completely missing the point of what it is to be a Zen teacher. Muho's sneering remarks about me make it clear that he holds that attitude.

It's pleasantly surprising to me that I encounter very little of this type of criticism. Most Zen teachers I know are very accepting of me, even though I didn't become a Zen teacher in what is now considered to be the standard way. I think most of them understand that what is commonly thought of as the "standard way" of becoming a Zen teacher is something that developed rather recently. Dogen never did zuise. Nor did Bodhidharma. Buddha himself never did either. Nor did any of these people suggest you had to. I'm unaware of Dogen ever recommending these steps either. The head monk ceremony and all of that stuff are, at best, from the late-medieval period. Many are very recent developments.

I'm hardly the only Zen teacher out there who has come by his Zen credentials in a non-standard way. Most of the teachers ordained by Kobun Chino Roshi were also ordained in non-standard ways, as were a lot of others. So I am not writing this just to defend myself.

Oddly enough, I can think of many situations in my association with Nishijima Roshi in which he placed me in much the same position as a ceremonially appointed "head student" and in which I did things that were sort of like zuise, though it was not at Eiheiji or Sojiji temples. Also my "training period" with him, though it was never called that, lasted about seven years, which would be pretty standard at a "real" temple. It involved, in an informal form, many of the same steps one would do ceremonially at a "real" temple.

Nishijima Roshi was not a fan of Soto-shu and its bureaucracy, organizational protocols, ceremonies and rituals. He didn't think it was necessary for a Zen teacher to be recognized by Soto-shu, even though he himself is. Dogen was never recognized by any such organization, nor were any of the great masters of the past. Organizations like Soto-shu arose much later and retroactively included the great masters of the past in their ranks. One wonders if Dogen would really have wanted to be seen as the founder of contemporary Soto-shu if he'd had any choice in the matter. I imagine he would not.

Having said that, I am aware that there need to be some kind of standards as to who is and is not a legitimate Zen teacher. Otherwise you get guys like "Zen Master Rama" claiming to be Zen teachers because they had a dream in which Buddha made them a Zen teacher or some such nonsense. But the basic standard is only that you have a legitimate lineage of a living Zen teacher who recognized your qualification to teach and who himself had a living Zen teacher, and so on for at least a few generations back. I have that. So does Muho. For that matter so, unfortunately, does Genpo Roshi. Which goes to show that this, in itself, doesn't mean everything. But it does mean something.

Still, I am very firm in my conviction that official recognition by the Soto-shu corporation of Japan is not a very good final criteria for what makes one a real Zen teacher. Muho seems to be concerned about the future of Western Zen. I sincerely hope he is not suggesting that recognition by the Soto-shu is the way to solve all of our problems.


«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 272 of 272
anon #108 said...

...Someone 'in the know' might, this very minute, being searching for a quotation from the older Dogen to the effect that only by leaving home can a monk attain the truth...

I prefer Dogen the teachling.

anon #108 said...

(couldn't find Bob's original on youtube. But the Byrds' is just luvvly :))

Anonymous said...

rather than use of the word 'immature' we could say Brad is in the infancy of his teacher-hood
or childhood of his teachercy

Anonymous said...

Colly - legend. Ginger legend.

Anonymous said...

we could say Brad is a published post punk preschooler in the buddhist shulle of rock

capcha queur I kid you not

Anonymous said...

Captcha the ashes are coming home I kid you not

john e mumbles said...

Ran at 11:55 AM.
..(tear) but, (sniff) I believe in YOU, Ran.

I really do. Your comments have been more coherent lately. Bravo.

Anonymous said...

we could say what Brad sez:

I'm a Zen monk, writer, bass player and film-maker. I wrote the books Sex, Sin and Zen, Hardcore Zen, Sit Down And Shut Up and Zen Wrapped in Karma Dipped in Chocolate. I received Dharma Transmission from Gudo Nishijima Roshi, who received his transmission from Rempo Niwa Roshi who was the head of the Soto Sect in Japan. I was also a student of Tim McCarthy, who was a student of Kobun Chino Roshi. I enjoy getting your e-mails. But please be aware, if you send me e-mail, I may use it in a blog either here or on Suicide Girls.

'nuf sed

captcha: realma I kid you not

Anonymous said...

A woman has an unfair disadvantage when it comes to honoring her teacher.

Mysterion said...

"living an ordinary life"

that is the essence of Zen.

Les Kaye made that message clear in the 70s...

Les' place.


Mysterion said...

Blogger roman said...
"Brad, I’d like to know your opinion of the importance of a Buddhist teacher’s understanding the philosophy of Buddhism."

I'm not Brad, I'm Charles.

But the basics are:

1) Birth is suffering
2) Life is suffering
3) Growing old is suffering
4) Dieing is suffering

Repeat, if necessary.

Anonymous said...

Brad maybe Sockrates Monkey may have some views to share--about snow, NY, and such!
Been a long time.

Life socks!

proulx michel said...

R said...

I tried to post and it didn't get through.

- However - check

“... you also hear of teachers who call themselves students of Zen master A, but if you look at their credentials, they have dharma transmission from Zen master B, who comes from a completely different lineage.”.

I have personally met two of those. Actually, most "disciples" of Deshimaru are in that category.

R said...

I wish pm was more explicit in his last post.

roman said...

Malcolm, I think Dogen often spoke or wrote in terms of saying something was the best or some way was the only way, to support that thing. See Zanmai o Zanmai, the King of Samadhis, where he sounds like zazen is the best or the only way. I am sure somewhere else he would tell monks that only a monk or nun practicing in the temple have the right way to the truth but other places he would praise an office worker, a layman, who found time to practice zazen and attained the truth. All those 'only this and not that" and "only you and not them" in Dogen's or Brad's or Nishijima's teaching is just to support the case, encourage people to do that particular thing. Today is the best day ever, it's just encouraging myself to make the best out of it.

Imagine Dogen writing: "I am not sure if zazen is the king of the samadhis. We should try all kinds of methods and go to all kinds of teachers, Buddhist or non Buddhist and only when we try all methods after several lives, we can decide to do one method without believeing it is the best. I am not sure if I understand what Buddha taught. Dogen, 1246."

216 said...

You should remember the time and place Dogen taught.

And as I somewhat keep saying - at the same time you guys consider yourselves so advanced and mature, - there are truths you keep yourselves from hearing by your stupid attitudes some of you can’t really help much.


YKW. (or you don’t, - some do)

anon #108 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
anon #108 said...

Hi Roman,

I think Dogen often spoke or wrote in terms of saying something was the best or some way was the only way, to support that encourage people...

Yes. Either that, or he changed his mind. Either view is fine with me. I didn't say, or mean to suggest that one or other was right. I did mean to say that the attitude Dogen expresses in Raihai Tokuzui works for me. I also wished to save someone who might want to provide evidence for "only this and not that" (it happens a lot on this blog) the trouble of doing so; for indeed, as you say, it would be evidence of no such thing.

Dylan's "My back pages" with its refrain "Ah But I was so much younger then, I'm older than that now" - a criticism of his earlier 'protest' writing - was written in 1964. Bob was 23 years old. Ironic, huh? Perhaps I should provide footnotes for my more cryptic, ironic contributions.


Perhaps one day, Ran, instead of expending so much time and effort reminding us all what fools we are (many of us have known for a long time now) you might help us; give us just a little clue as to what these truths you have discovered might be?

Along with that other idiot john e mumbles, I thought I detected a softer, more coherent tone from you lately. Do you think that might work better?

anon #108 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
anon #108 said...

PS to Roman -

Whether or not you're right that "'only this and not that" and "only you and not them" in Dogen's or Brad's or Nishijima's teaching is just to...encourage people to do that particular thing," most folks who say such things on the internet don't have such a liberal, pragmatic view of views.

FWIW, I'm not sure that "only this and not that" is the most skillful way of encouraging people. I think it more often causes fights and fanaticism than tolerant-of-others enthusiasm for one's own way.

...But sure, there's very little value in a teacher teaching something s/he doesn't wholeheartedly believe in.

... said...

Hi 108, I was always looking for a proof m is an idiot, thanks for that.

r said...

+ @ 3:27 you say: “Either that, or he changed his mind”.

- Does that really make sense to you?

anon #108 said...

Hi Ran,

Does it make sense that Dogen might have changed his mind?

It's certainly possible, Ran, yes. Do I know? No. Does it matter? Not to me.

pfff said...

It doesn't, Malcolm.

Not under the concrete circumstances.

delayed since before 108’s last one said...

I also don’t think roman is exact.

Sometimes if you want people to absorb a point you need to get it through in a way that is not, - is different from, - pure intellectual conceptual expounding through consideration.

The main point in what 216 wrote @ 1:30 am [in my humble opinion, - i.e.] is in the first sentence.

- The rest is just btw. However important in other contexts. (or perhaps he just wanted to get at you and mumbles; - did you do anything to offend him?)


Dogen was not interested in the particular explicit contents of his lectures sometimes, but in what would remain in the minds of those listening to them.

Uku said...

Hi Roman and Anon #108 (and all),

if you haven't already read, I strongly suggest Hee-Jin Kim's marvellous "Eihei Dogen - Mystical Realist" book. It really gives some perspective and perhaps helps to understand what was going on in Dogen's time and why Dogen sometimes wrote controversial things and why he sometimes denied even his own words. Of course Kim's writings are also interpretations (Dogen is dead, doh) but it's a best book so far, I think, about Dogen's life and his teachings.

anon #108 said...

Thanks Uku, I've heard good things about that book. It's on the wish list ;)

btw said...

What goes for Dogen goes for Muho as well.

I find it hard to believe he is holding the view about lay practice many of you seem to imagine he does.

His article was about the Ango.

Perhaps he didn’t express himself that well in part of it.

But your assumptions don’t seem reasonable.

+ said...

And as for brads letter, many might have got a bad impression out of it, including Brad himself, perhaps.

Muho only posts once in two months, so he’s not going to tell us that soon if he got things wrong. Though he might, still.

Jamal said...

I bet the Robert DeNiro of Raging Bull would punch the Robert DeNiro of Little Fockers.

Mr. BFM said...

Lol "zen masters" are fighting each other like little bitches.

Brad Brad.. don't pretend to be beyond your evolution. Well, I guess you are quite committed to that option already quite heavily.

mtto said...

Dylan's "My back pages" with its refrain "Ah But I was so much younger then, I'm older than that now"

You got it backwards. It's "Ah, but I was so much older then I’m younger than that now"

Much more interesting his way.

anon #108 said...

ooops. thanks ;)

Bobby Z said...

Wrong again mtto!

It's: "I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now."


anon #108 said...

SO embarrassing!

anon #108 said...

I mean...I knew.
Really I did.

...never live this down...never :(

mtto said...

Bobby Z, are you really calling me on punctuation on a blog comment? I actually copied and pasted the lyric off Dylan's own website. Maybe you should write him an angry email about his lack of punctuation on his online lyrics. The punctuation is all over the place in Tarantula as well. Best of luck in your crusade.

Bobby Z said...

MTTO, Its not punctuation, look at what you posted as a correction, then look at what I posted.


mtto said...

My Back Pages lyrics according to Bob Dylan Bobby Z, I trust him over you.

john e mumbles said...

Bobby Z's right mtto...

My Back Pages
Crimson flames tied through my ears
Rollin’ high and mighty traps
Pounced with fire on flaming roads
Using ideas as my maps
“We’ll meet on edges, soon,” said I
Proud ’neath heated brow
Ah, but I was so much older then
I’m younger than that now

Half-wracked prejudice leaped forth
“Rip down all hate,” I screamed
Lies that life is black and white
Spoke from my skull. I dreamed
Romantic facts of musketeers
Foundationed deep, somehow
Ah, but I was so much older then
I’m younger than that now

Girls’ faces formed the forward path
From phony jealousy
To memorizing politics
Of ancient history
Flung down by corpse evangelists
Unthought of, though, somehow
Ah, but I was so much older then
I’m younger than that now

A self-ordained professor’s tongue
Too serious to fool
Spouted out that liberty
Is just equality in school
“Equality,” I spoke the word
As if a wedding vow
Ah, but I was so much older then
I’m younger than that now

In a soldier’s stance, I aimed my hand
At the mongrel dogs who teach
Fearing not that I’d become my enemy
In the instant that I preach
My pathway led by confusion boats
Mutiny from stern to bow
Ah, but I was so much older then
I’m younger than that now

Yes, my guard stood hard when abstract threats
Too noble to neglect
Deceived me into thinking
I had something to protect
Good and bad, I define these terms
Quite clear, no doubt, somehow
Ah, but I was so much older then
I’m younger than that now

Copyright © 1964 by Warner Bros. Inc.; renewed 1992 by Special Rider Music

anon #108 said...

Is this about "Ah but..."?

I just checked my (original vinyl) copy of Another side of Little Bobby Dylan and he definitely sings "Ah but..."

john e - don't you mean mtto is right?


john e mumbles said...

Yeah, yer right Malcolm, I guess I was so much older when I made that comment, or endorsement, of BZ Sheesh, but I'm younger than that now...

anon #108 said...

...know whatcha mean, tosh ;)

anon #108 said...

If all you non-cockerneys are googlin "tosh" - google don't ave it, not like wot us Londoners use it. It don't mean "noun - slang chiefly ( Brit ) nonsense; rubbish". Not when you call someone it. It just means "mate"... same as "mush" (pronounced as in "tush", [as in "bum (as in arse-ole) - cheeks"]).

Don't say I neva tell ya nufink.

Mysterion said...

Anonymous Bobby Zimmerman, Hibbing said...
"Wrong again mtto!
It's: "I was so much older then, I'm younger than that now." - "

This is correct. Now, do you know what "back pages" are?

Things change...

also see: Tosefta or Baraitot

Miscellaneous 'back pages' are the addendum/changes to law books - loose leaf pages placed in the back of Law Books in between printings. They record the changes to the codified law since the printing of the hard bound book that they are placed within.

In the parlance of barristers: "Ignorance of the law is no excuse and the Real Law® is contained not in the book, but in the back pages."

The laughable point of "wisdom" is this: As a youth, you think you have it. As an experienced oldster, you become aware of the myth of wisdom - unless you become brain dead or just f*cking drop dead.

anon #108 said...

I say you Ozzies -

Read em and weep!

3-1 the series - and two of them by an innings plus lots :)

Knobby D said...

Hmmnnn... Is "back pages" some homo code for shagging male interns in the anterooms of the nation's capitol?

anon #108 said...

Where are ya, Colly-anon?
Gimme a hug!

Mysteryrhymen said...

I became brain dead
makin' all the bread
spread out on the bed
don't know what she said
I got the street cred
an now I'm gettin' head
and she's been fed
but I'm not gettin' a-head
with these feet of lead
seems like the more I sped
I wound up naked
then I got dressed instead
and fu*king dropped dead.

Sestercentennial said...


Anonymous said...

Brit English: mate = friend
US English: mate = gay partner

Are all Brits gays or are all Americans? Can't figure it out.

Hot Susan

Anonymous said...


roman said...

I think most of us here have made the mistake of supposing there is some kind of "hierarchy of wisdom". Malcolm, I am going to write a text about this problem at my blog.

anon #108 said...

I look forward to it, Roman.

For the record - I get the impression that some folk(s) might have got the impression I was advocating, or approving of either lay practice or monastic practice...or that I believe Dogen was...or that he simply changed his mind...or that Brad is right and Muho wrong or vice versa.

I wasn't. I'm not. I never said so.

As I wrote yesterday @3.27am, "Either view [whether Dogen was encouraging his audience or changed his mind about lay/monastic practice] is fine with me. I didn't say, or mean to suggest that one or other was right. I did mean to say that the attitude Dogen expresses in Raihai Tokuzui [quoted by Roman on the first page] works for me [I am not a monk]."

Other than to make known that Dogen said different things at different times about lay/monk practice, and so can be quoted by either 'camp' to support their view (if they're so inclined), and to point out that there are no right answers to these questions, I had no other purpose or agenda.

Harry said...

It seems to me that there certainly is a 'hierarchy of wisdom' in that some people act more wise than others at any given moment... this is a moment-to-moment situation of course and the person who was wise one moment may be the ass the next and vice-versa; so maybe I should be careful in drawing conclusions even if there are noticeable general trends.

...And on reifying 'Dogen's View/Philosophy' on whatever: Here's an interesting point that hopped out of the intro to Okumura's and Leighton's trans. of the Eihei Shingi:

"While some of Dogen's writing have rightfully earned him the modern reputation as a great philosopher, he was never concerned with producing a new, dogmatically consistent, philosophical doctrine along the lines of Western philosophical theories. Rather, his philosophy was always at the service of his main purpose: that of religious practitioner and spiritual guide.

The meaning of Dogen's words must be realized in their context of practical teachings for particular students. From the viewpoint of sincere spiritual practice, rather than the intellectual calculations and limited conceptualizations of consistency that are sharply criticized throughout Zen literature, Dogen's work can be seen as simply the natural unfolding of one person's awakened mind/heart."

Where we see Dogen as 'contradicting himself' (from the particular perspective indicated above) maybe we should rather see fluidity and responsivity to the current situation, and an absence of philosophical/intellectual stasis.



anon #108 said...

Okumura/Leighton may be right, Harry. And I know what you mean...

There again, there is much of what Dogen wrote which, I believe, clearly demonstrates that he did have a (non-static?) 'philosophy' - which included and transcended specific, local issues like lay versus monastic practice.

I believe that Dogen was very much aware of/consciously desirous of producing a body of writing which would be read by people long after the talks had been talked and he and his audience had shuffled off this mortal coil (his likely intention to revise the whole Shobogenzo is evidence, I think).

So - not just one or the other...probably ;)

john e mumbles said...

Do I contradict myself? Very well, then I contradict myself, I am large, I contain multitudes.

-Walt Whitman

Harry said...

Hi Anon,

I think the context of Dogen's 'philosophy' is really not an either/or, or either+or, matter. I think his rationale 'leaps free from abundance or lack' (or any mix of the two).



Harry said...

Oh, Anon 108 I meant to address that to...

Anonymous said...

This is off topic but I do hope it gets your attention and a response.
Regarding the Shimano Roshi business, I look at the Monkey Mind blog where there is an ongoing post of letters by Zen teachers and Roshis expressing their support of for the removal of ESR by the board of directors at ZSS....
why the hell did it take decades for any of this to surface. Reading these posts it is obvious top leaders and teachers in the Zen world knew about this for years and years?

Puzzle said...

Nishijima Roshi said Buddhism is no longer a religion but has evolved into a state in which it is now a philosophy.

- Now how do you accommodate this reasonably with the last quote H supplied?

- I mean - without reducing yourself to the attitude introduced in the last quote supplied by mumbles Rinpoche.

- Ai?

- I’d dare say: - Admitting ignorance is always more fruitful than self deceit.

Harry said...

Hi Puzzle,

It wasn't the authors' intention to negate religion or philosophy, or what we think and what values we ourselves hold. Master Dogen was indicating a way, and a specific method, by which we can understand what we think and feel for what 'they' really are (us real-ising them, them real-ising us).

Dogen's approach is very positive in this regard; it doesn't need to philosophically negate things as was/is often the case in Buddhist theory.

I think Nishijima Sensei considers that the theory of the ANS takes Buddhism out of the realm of mystery/ blind faith/ religion and brings it into the area of philosophy in that it is possible (as some see it) to understand and explain it holistically.

I think it can be said that Buddhism is a philosophy, but not one based in idealism (as much of Western philosophy is), because it's fundamental value is our own real practice/conduct/actions, which are not confined to a philosophy or any other thought.



Seagal Rinpoche said...

In the midst of movement and chaos, keep stillness inside of you.

Mark Foote said...

Anybody else find their comments not appearing here?- I got an email stating that my comment had been added, and there was nothing offensive about it.

Vanished, as will we all!

Mark Foote said...

Let me hope that it's the inclusion of the html tags on the link, and I'll try without them:

I watched Issho Fujita demonstrate the stretches involved in the sitting posture up at Sonoma Mountain the other day, and I was very impressed. Afterward I commented that while he spoke of stretches in two directions, in my experience it's more like three directions (pitch, yaw, and roll). He was very accepting of my comments, even when I went on to mention that in my perspective, the pulmonary and cranial-sacral respirations place consciousness to open feeling. In this I find myself strangely in accord with Gudo's SNS and PNS.

The Pali Cannon is unique in the literature of the world, in my opinion; someone on Tao Bums asked "at some point within Buddhism, do you use lose the structure?", and the Cannon made sense to me, like this:

Jamal said...

I'm no hillbilly singer.

anon #108 said...

Re (James Ford and) the Shimano Roshi business -

Moral outrage...public condemnation...written constitutions...ethics committees...

And so it begins.

If you are inappropriately handled by anyone - Zen Master or passing pervert - kick him in the bollocks (or her in the wherever) and/or go to the police and/or LEAVE.

...but nobody asked my opinion, did they?

captcha = swines

john e mumbles said...

bizarro seagal: you wish.

Unknown said...

one says something, the other says something else. and we already have a fight. because this is better, and that is better than the other thing.why do we always take everything so personally? -- aaargh damnit, my mötley crüe cd in the record player just ended :-( so, let's start it again: shout at the devil!!!!!! :-)

koji from austin said...

holy crap 269 comments! do you actually read all this shit? no wonder you don't have time to lead a group.

Anonymous said...

Hi Brad,
Although your post is four years old. I have to say that you are Brad centric in the motto of ''me, myself and I''
Alternative views are removed or censored as I can see above. Not the way of Zen as I understand.

BupSahn Sunim said...

Why does no one clean up the comments and remove the trolls? And why are comments allowed from unregistered users? And why are their racist comments?

Sort it out Brad!

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 272 of 272   Newer› Newest»