Aetherous

8 hours ago, whitesilk said:

Ephesians 2:14-15 NIV

 

"For he himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace,"

 

What do you guys think are "the two"? Any Biblical support for your idea?

9 hours ago, whitesilk said:

 

Isiah 14:12 NIV

 

"How you have fallen from heaven, O morning star, son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations!"

 

Rev. 22:16 NIV

 

"'I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star.'"

 

Also Revelation 2:26-28 NIV:

"To the one who is victorious and does my will to the end, I will give authority over the nations— that one ‘will rule them with an iron scepter and will dash them to pieces like pottery’ (a reference to Psalm 2:9)—just as I have received authority from my Father. I will also give that one the morning star."

And 2 Peter 1:19 NIV: 

 

"We also have the prophetic message as something completely reliable, and you will do well to pay attention to it, as to a light shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts."

I've heard that the Isaiah verse is related to Ezekiel 28:1-19. Not sure if they're about the same king, but both have to do with an excessive hubris (thinking one is more than just a mortal, or trying to be greater than the Most High) and loss of conscience...and they seem to use Satan as a metaphor for the king; or the king was identified as Satan/the fallen one.

I think it'd be questionable to interpret "morning star" as being Satan, though, given the other verses. It's clearly a good thing. But it's definitely a tricky subject given the Isaiah verse.

1 minute ago, ilumairen said:

Unasked, my stepmother told me I was love.

 

Probably even a more accurate barometer than one's family, is one's stepmother.

1 minute ago, rideforever said:

is that what you think I meant ?

 

Nope, I was just speaking about how I tend to be, in relation to someone who was a great example of love.

The pastor's wife at my church growing up was one of the most kind people I had ever met. She always warmly greeted me (and everyone), had deep concern for us on an individual level, made the day fun and bright, was genuine. If you needed anything, I'm sure she would've given it without a second thought. Just a true friend.

When I think about "love your neighbor", I think about her example, which is something I truly don't live up to...I tend to be more brutally honest with myself and others, rather than warm. She was never harsh like I am. While she knew right from wrong, I don't think she viewed anyone she came into contact with as irredeemable, as I often do.

Idk about shamanic journeys, but I think 2 ideas are good:
 

1) Focus on the things that redeem them as a person.

Let's say if they were once kind to you, but no longer are...focus on what they used to do for you. Or let's say they're not kind to you, but only to one other person...focus on how good they are to be that kind to that person. Or let's say you know of no redeeming qualities...imagine in a past life that they were the kindest person to you. Focus on that.

2) Imagine they're destined to endure the worst possible torment, for 100,000 years without ceasing. Keep imagining that happening to them, and think if it could really be real that they will go through that as a result of being unacceptable to you. If you truly keep envisioning it and thinking it could really happen to them, compassion will rise up for them naturally, and you'll want it not to happen.

The world isn't an illusion, but our notions about it might be.

10 hours ago, 2ndchance said:

The order of the evil dragons

 

Is that what they call themselves? 

8 hours ago, Pilgrim said:

I miss Steve Jobs he was purported to be a Tyrant who ceaselessly demanded perfection

 

Yes, from what I've read, he was a true asshole.

On 1/18/2019 at 12:42 PM, Zen Pig said:

I am sure the same thing would have happened to me

 

"Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power." - Lincoln

14 minutes ago, s1va said:

In India it is common for Hindus to grow Tulsi plants at home.

 

Once I worked with an Indian who suggested that people with odd health problems should grow their own tulsi plant...beyond merely having it as tea, or whatever else.

On 1/16/2019 at 4:24 PM, Rocky Lionmouth said:

On the bus home from the first sessioni started crying, i was in a lot of inner turmoil but it passed in an hour. God knows what he actually did but it worked.

 

That can be a common experience with blood letting treatments.

On 1/18/2019 at 2:32 PM, Nungali said:

The effects of the return itself can typically be felt the entire time Saturn is in the same sign it was when you were born, usually a period of about two and a half years that will fall sometime between ages 27 and 30.

 

 

26 was supremely rough, personally.

Seems like this thread belongs in the fiction writers subforum.

This is how you take care of the so-called "Lord of Death"!

I think this has been a pattern for you, Goldleaf. For years now (if I'm remembering correctly), you come to the forum and talk about how sleep is bad in one place, how moving to a new place seems better but then the sleep is bad there as well. It seems like an obsession.

It might not be, and you might truly be experiencing some strange phenomenon related to your sleep for all of these years...if that's the case, I feel bad about suggesting it could be an obsession.

But at least, it's good to contemplate why this seems like such a recurring theme for you.

5 minutes ago, alleniverson said:

thank you!

 

gratitude!

 

its`s like having christtmass all over again!

 

There was also this thread recently: 

 

35 minutes ago, Bruce Qi said:

regarding  that if you are negative in emotion you attract them i dont believe this is so.

 

That's just been my experience in the past...and your dream was negative.

Seems to me we are able to see shadow things more when we've been negative (such as emotionally), or if we're low energy. Being that they coincide with negativity, I would assume that they are in fact negative...but idk.

No one can say that the Daobums forum doesn't help us in our lives. We even teach basic reading and writing skills.

Someone at the forum, I think their name was Machin Shin, said that they were instructed to sungaze, and they ended up getting permanent eye damage from it.

When we glance at the sun, it does create an after image...look too long, maybe that after image stays...or a blind spot is created.

Do be careful with any practice you're trying.

1 hour ago, rideforever said:

One thing the Brits do better than anyone

 

Gordon learned attitude in the kitchen from one of the best (this guy is more intimidating than overtly offensive...kind of an interesting life story he tells here).

 

 

I also found this clip (the first half of it, before it gets messed up) hilarious...

 

 

16 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

@ Aetherous

 

You are right - the Wikipedia says that I am wrong. Now I'm  not a buddhologist, so I looked up "bodhisattva" in The Shambhala Dictionary of Buddhism and Zen, and there it says:

 

 

So what to believe?

 

 

Buddhism has all different types of teachings, for different levels of practitioners and perhaps for different stages of results...also different sects and branches, some of which are quite different from each other.

I was going to send you a private message about understanding Buddhist ideas and terminology an hour ago, but it had an error in sending and I chose not to rewrite it at the time...but I'll write the basic idea again here...

My personal opinion on how someone should learn Buddhism...it basically involves two things.

1) Have a legitimate teacher. This person may or may not be enlightened...who could discern the truth of that? But they should be a legitimate figure in a legitimate branch of Buddhism. This will mean that they've studied all of the texts, had prior legitimate teachers teaching them, and they gained experiential understanding of the texts and word of mouth teachings for themselves. As such, they're able to clarify things to you that would otherwise be completely obscure.

For instance, let's say you're new to Buddhist concepts, and you read two sentences from the root text of the Uttaratantra Shastra. Due to not having preliminary knowledge understood, it just reads almost like gibberish. If you're confident in yourself, you can think you understand some of it...but once you were taught with clarity by the legitimate teacher, you might realize that you had no idea and were just making things up in an attempt to make sense of things. After being taught legitimately, the two sentences are crystal clear.

So it's important to have a teacher, in Buddhism. This is not the type of path where a person can read books, or read online articles or dictionaries, and think that knowledge suffices.

As I said above, there are different forms of Buddhism. When you have a teacher, they're going to teach you one form of it...maybe it's what you individually need, or maybe it's just what they tend to teach everyone. But it will be the case that other forms of Buddhism might have seemingly contradictory teachings.

So perhaps some Buddhists really do think that bodhisattvas hold off on their complete enlightenment and wait until all sentient beings are liberated, before attaining it. This may be due to a misinterpretation, or due to a legitimate teaching they have. But other Buddhists don't think that.

All that matters is what you're taught, and more importantly, if it's sensible and useful to you.

2) The second part of understanding Buddhism, in my opinion, is having experiential knowledge. In my experience, Buddhist teachings are nearly incomprehensible if we don't practice, but the meaning becomes crystal clear when we do practice. Practice depends on what your teacher tells you to do.

So there is book knowledge and teacher knowledge...but the other side of the coin is experiential knowledge.

Imagine if you had never tasted chocolate...but you decided to become a chocolate expert. You read all of the books about chocolate; how it's prepared, how it tastes, the different varieties. You gained all of the information that people said about it, had a photographic memory, and were able to speak fairly accurately on the subject of chocolate.

But one day you actually taste the chocolate. Now you understand what they mean when they were saying it has notes of bitterness. You previously imagined the bitter to be like swedish bitters, but really it's something else. Now you know chocolate. You try different cocoa bean varieties, and are finally able to discern what they mean when they say one tastes more sweet. Now you can say things about it, too, rather than just repeat what others said, guessing what they meant.

This is kind of long winded...but yeah, basically...a teacher can elucidate the texts for you, and that's essential, and your own experience can really make things clear in a different way. Those are the two ways people should learn about Buddhism...not by looking things up intellectually from disparate sources.

42 minutes ago, freeform said:

Firstly you assume that I haven’t read your links. I have.

 

It's clear to me based on your responses that you still haven't read the links, or at least haven't understood them. I'm not just saying this out of our disagreement...you really apparently haven't seen many of the crucial things in those links. If you had, you wouldn't be saying many of the things that you are. Instead, we could have had a fruitful discussion. If you end up going back and actually reading those links, you'll see what I'm talking about.

 

About my faults here... I don't try to seem perfect when I'm not. If someone is clearly trolling me (as you are again doing in this thread, after just a week or two ago doing it in another thread), I get angry about it and treat them accordingly. The undisciplined and disrespectful are taught discipline and respect. I come from a military and combat background, where discipline is taught directly and forcefully, and obedience is expected...so, sorry if that seems ineffective for you. Yes, telling you to actually read is condescending...but it's also important to the discussion here, since that would have kept it from devolving into a meaningless and spiteful back and forth.

 

And yes, I should cultivate better, but hey I'm just human and a typical guy...not pretending to be someone with any attainment or importance.

 

Quote

I have repeated over and over in different ways - Yes compassion and loving kindness and the other virtues arise as a result of enlightenment.

 

And I've repeated too many times (once should have sufficed) that in Tibetan Buddhism, in Mahayana, it's also a means to enlightenment, and those qualities are of the buddha nature itself. I've given a lot of difference evidence for this, and have no need to repeat it again after this post. Genuine seekers and practitioners will find this information on their own, if they have an interest in these subjects.

 

Quote

You haven't shown any decent support for that statement.

 

Of course I have.

 

Quote

I have not seen CNR’s explicit views on this - feel free to post them, I didn’t see them.

 

I told you what he said. If you doubt me, that's understandable...you're free to go view all of his public video talks, and join the TTE program (which is where I think it's located) to hear it from him yourself. Maybe he even says it in his books (they're on Amazon), which are inexpensive.

 

Quote

I had the good sense to run far when I briefly met Sogyal Rinpoche in London many years ago.

 

It's good to be able to discern when someone isn't legitimate.

Anyway, freeform, I had nothing against you in the past, but I've seen that your style of communicating is just something I won't benefit from engaging (it won't benefit me, you, or anyone watching...it just drags us down and accomplishes nothing). I think when we have a discussion, it starts out beneficial for everyone to see because we can make some basic points, and that can lead to genuine people learning something...but it quickly becomes trolling and a waste of everyone's time.

I have to put you on ignore now, which is something I pretty much never do here. I don't think I've ever had ANYONE on ignore. Saying this is not to say you're worse than anyone else here, at all...but it is to say that this type of discussion we've been having is just not going to continue. Aside from this seeming rude, my best goes to you.

24 minutes ago, wandelaar said:

Thus the Bodhisattva postpones entering nirvana out of love for all suffering beings in the world.

 

Quote

 

"A commonly repeated misconception in Western literature is that bodhisattvas delay their own liberation. This confusion is based on a misreading of several different scriptural concepts and narratives. One of these is the Tibetan teaching on three types of motivation for generating bodhicitta. According to Patrul Rinpoche's 19th century Words of My Perfect Teacher (Kun bzang bla ma'i gzhal lung), a bodhisattva might be motivated in one of three ways. They are:

King-like bodhicitta - To aspire to become a Buddha first in order to then help sentient beings.
Boatman-like bodhicitta - To aspire to become a Buddha at the same time as other sentient beings.
Shepherd-like bodhicitta - To aspire to become a Buddha only after all other sentient beings have done so.
These three are not types of people, but rather types of motivation. According to Patrul Rinpoche, the third quality of intention is most noble though the mode by which buddhahood actually occurs is the first; that is, it is only possible to teach others the path to enlightenment once one has attained enlightenment oneself.[27] " - source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodhisattva#Early_and_Theravāda_Buddhism