Editor's note: A little followup regarding Monday's post. I wanted to respond to Ira's claim that our "universal rejection" is merely semantic, and therefore not well grounded.
The Parable of the Protobuddha
Before the historical Buddha was born beneath the sala tree, there lived another whom we shall call the Protobuddha. His understanding of Buddhism surpassed that of even Buddha's unsurpassable wisdom. He worked as a fishmonger, until one day he became enlightened under no tree at all. He was found by his friends lying in his hovel and not moving. They thought he had had a stroke, and on a makeshift stretcher they bore him out into the mountains to consult a wise healer. On the way they became overwhelmed with heat and thirst and stopped by a river. The Protobuddha suddenly stood up, assured his friends that he was okay, that he had to see a man about a horse, and then strode through the raging torrent to the other bank, where he again lay prone and did not move. His friends were too frightened to cross the river and left him there, returning to the city. The Protobuddha sat upright, composed his hands on his lap, and sat. He sat, sitting. There he sat, and turned grey, then silver, quickly, and he became translucent and disappeared; even the snail who crawled over his leg did not sense him. No one knows what happened after that. Maybe he went back to selling fish?
Interpretation by the Editor-in-Chief:
The Protobuddha realized that to move or not move was the same thing, to eat or not eat the same thing, to sell fish or not sell fish the same thing. Therefore he did everything and nothing. But mostly nothing, so therefore he did not become famous and spread his teachings like the historical Buddha. In the same way, the Protojournal of Universal Rejection has existed many times in the past, but you have not heard of it.