Post by ishika on Apr 9, 2009 13:31:24 GMT -5
Why are people, mostly zutarians, so intent on making Aang The Bhudda?
He's like, a mix of the Dalai Lama and the Hindu Avatar. He's the Dalai Lama because of the reincarnation/monkishness, and like an Avatar because of his power and connection to spirits.
And last time I checked, the Dalai Lama and The Avatar don't have to let go of love.
The Guru was not talking about Nirvana, he's not working off of Bhuddism. His name is GURU PATHIK.
I'm not saying that Bhuddists can't be gurus or have Indian names, but if they wanted to show that he was working off of Bhuddism, then couldn't they just make him a Tibetan monk? The air nomads are tibetan-based, and they obviously follow Bhuddism.
And nothing the Guru said seemed Bhuddist like. He does not share Aang's beleifs.
He was not hinting at enlightenment, can people get that through their heads?
Yangchen, the most successful Avatar out of the four we got to know, was not enlightened. She said that Aang couldn't be enlightened because then he wouldn't be reincarnated. Same with Nirvana.
Also-love is not a wordly attachment. I think we'd all agree, even if we have differing religions or no religion at all, that wordly attachments are *bad*. That they usually just make us unhapy.
I, personally, don't care. I'm not looking for Enlightenment/Nirvana. So even if love is a wordly attachment, I probably would not try to forget it.
But love isn't supposed to be forgotten anyway, because wordly attachements are BAD and love is a beautiful thing. Anyone who disagrees is an asshole.
So if Aang doesn't have to let go of love, then why did the Guru tell him to?
Aang: I can't let go of Katara, I love her!
Guru Pathik: There is a difference between love and attachment.
See? We're not talking about love, we're talking about attachment.
Kuruk lost Ummi because of arrogance, not attachment. Roku was realized and married (and you people who claim that he could have figured out Sozin if he didn't live with his wife can stfu, because I don't see how Ta Min changed ANYTHING. It was ROku's own stupidity.)
So maybe Aang doesn't have to let go of love-maybe he just has to let go of romantic love.
No.
Just, no.
Why is romantic love any less healthy than platonic/parental love?
Are we implying here that romantic love slows us down and pins us to Meaningless Wordly Concerns That We Should Not Care About?
Because I think romantic love, if it's healthy, can't be anything but good for you.
Hey! I just had another thought! Maybe Aang doesn't need to be enlightened or in Nirvana! Maybe he just needs to let go of his attachments because they get in the way of his Avataring (because we saw how the gaang held him back!)
So.....Aang is not enlightened or in Nirvana. So he is not at peace. But he can't talk to anybody he cares about because it would get in the way of his job.
What?
No, what? This is a real argument against taang and kataang, no joke.
Bye bye, restoring the population! Aang is too busy paying attention to his job to have a life/friends/family.
Having to sacrafise love to do your job, when it's really not neccassary because it HELPS you, is sad.
The girl Aang loves (let's say Toph, because this is a taang forum) would be totally against it if she knew Aang had to let go of love, romantic, platonic, parental, or all three.
So would all his friends.
The 'letting go' argument is overused. I do think that Aang should have let go of his attachment for Katara (the one that caused him to choose her over her own happiness), but not his love. The pure love that he felt for Katara was the same as what he felt for Gyatso and the monks.
They protected him. They nurtured him. Just like Katara does now (omg, Katara=Gyatso reincarnated?)
And he shouldn't have to let that go.
If he devolopes romantic love for Toph later on, and it's healthy, he wouldn't let have to let her go either.
He's like, a mix of the Dalai Lama and the Hindu Avatar. He's the Dalai Lama because of the reincarnation/monkishness, and like an Avatar because of his power and connection to spirits.
And last time I checked, the Dalai Lama and The Avatar don't have to let go of love.
The Guru was not talking about Nirvana, he's not working off of Bhuddism. His name is GURU PATHIK.
I'm not saying that Bhuddists can't be gurus or have Indian names, but if they wanted to show that he was working off of Bhuddism, then couldn't they just make him a Tibetan monk? The air nomads are tibetan-based, and they obviously follow Bhuddism.
And nothing the Guru said seemed Bhuddist like. He does not share Aang's beleifs.
He was not hinting at enlightenment, can people get that through their heads?
Yangchen, the most successful Avatar out of the four we got to know, was not enlightened. She said that Aang couldn't be enlightened because then he wouldn't be reincarnated. Same with Nirvana.
Also-love is not a wordly attachment. I think we'd all agree, even if we have differing religions or no religion at all, that wordly attachments are *bad*. That they usually just make us unhapy.
I, personally, don't care. I'm not looking for Enlightenment/Nirvana. So even if love is a wordly attachment, I probably would not try to forget it.
But love isn't supposed to be forgotten anyway, because wordly attachements are BAD and love is a beautiful thing. Anyone who disagrees is an asshole.
So if Aang doesn't have to let go of love, then why did the Guru tell him to?
Aang: I can't let go of Katara, I love her!
Guru Pathik: There is a difference between love and attachment.
See? We're not talking about love, we're talking about attachment.
Kuruk lost Ummi because of arrogance, not attachment. Roku was realized and married (and you people who claim that he could have figured out Sozin if he didn't live with his wife can stfu, because I don't see how Ta Min changed ANYTHING. It was ROku's own stupidity.)
So maybe Aang doesn't have to let go of love-maybe he just has to let go of romantic love.
No.
Just, no.
Why is romantic love any less healthy than platonic/parental love?
Are we implying here that romantic love slows us down and pins us to Meaningless Wordly Concerns That We Should Not Care About?
Because I think romantic love, if it's healthy, can't be anything but good for you.
Hey! I just had another thought! Maybe Aang doesn't need to be enlightened or in Nirvana! Maybe he just needs to let go of his attachments because they get in the way of his Avataring (because we saw how the gaang held him back!)
So.....Aang is not enlightened or in Nirvana. So he is not at peace. But he can't talk to anybody he cares about because it would get in the way of his job.
What?
No, what? This is a real argument against taang and kataang, no joke.
Bye bye, restoring the population! Aang is too busy paying attention to his job to have a life/friends/family.
Having to sacrafise love to do your job, when it's really not neccassary because it HELPS you, is sad.
The girl Aang loves (let's say Toph, because this is a taang forum) would be totally against it if she knew Aang had to let go of love, romantic, platonic, parental, or all three.
So would all his friends.
The 'letting go' argument is overused. I do think that Aang should have let go of his attachment for Katara (the one that caused him to choose her over her own happiness), but not his love. The pure love that he felt for Katara was the same as what he felt for Gyatso and the monks.
They protected him. They nurtured him. Just like Katara does now (omg, Katara=Gyatso reincarnated?)
And he shouldn't have to let that go.
If he devolopes romantic love for Toph later on, and it's healthy, he wouldn't let have to let her go either.