schroedingerscat

This reminded me of a poem. Thanks for sharing.

Thank you! What would you say ‚it‘ is? How do you know ,it‘ is pure? How can ,it’ be objective in an subjective individual? How would you describe the feeling of ,de‘?

What is your way of recognizing the good from the bad? How do you know that down the causal chain things will not take unexpected turns ? How do you make sure or verify you can rely on your judgement?

Where is this from @Taoist Texts? Would you be able to give some context to this?

What according to daoist scripture and doctrine happens at ‚realization‘ on the meta-physical plane with the person that has this occurring to themselves? What happens on the meta-physical sphere when someone ‚turns the light around‘? What happens on the meta-physical sphere when Yang Qi is rising? And what happens on that meta-physical sphere when one touches on the central channel? Is any one of those an equivalent of what happens at death? Or partly? Is something lost or something (freedom?) gained?

in your opinion, can that be really separated?

Are we responsible for the things people might do or say they do (via abuse of power through misinterpretation, falsification and manipulation?) in our name after being long dead? Then doing nothing is probably the wisest, indeed. edit: besides, there are theories that he might have had studied in asia (however far off they may be) and it seems to me he was familiar with ‘some’ wisdom tradition, but of course very subjective impressions indeed, and what do I know anyways… didn’t mean to derail the thread though, sorry, please carry on…

So the difference is whether one occupies oneself only intellectually (analytical mind > scholar) with the theories or also with bodily practice (active physical engagement for dissolution of emotions and distortions > practitioner)? And some Buddhist schools, like @stirlings (which btw.?) say mind alone suffices? edit: in other words: is there really a difference between scholar and practitioner?

When you have ordered (and payed !) for a book about physics and the mind and instead receive one about the divine feminine and sexuality. ? ??? ...guess that means, the buddhist-physicists community just rejected me, no?

I hope 鞏三孝 doesn't mind, that I am quoting this from another thread, but I found it also fitting here and would like to pose in a question regarding 'the middle path of these' combined with what Small Fur said in this thread I understand willingness and arbitrary decision will not help, if one hasn't been lead beyond the self, to act on compassion instead of empathy (unconscious resonance)... but is there no way to 'get there by approximation' like the graph of a mathematical function that goes close to zero, even while never reaching it? What would you say is the difference in it... what is compassion, that empathy is not? Ideas on this, - anyone ?

Can you please explain this in easier words and more detail? How can resolve happen? Under which circumstances is that disassociation? Interesting, that there still are some, why then if for someone 'insight' has occurred? Working with obscurations then has already happened before the real gnosis of non-duality? And there can be no half baked non-duality either? So hypothetically speaking, if there would still be obscurations even after a glimpse of non-duality, one would work backwards, as to make obscurations real first, 'work' on them (how?) by feeling, accepting and then dissolve them into the unreal? That might be quite distracting, no ? And not quite helpful to integrate into the conclusion that all phenomena are inherently empty? But then again, more then someone here said, that there are always different levels / challenges of deepness to get into? Get well soon, @Apech and @manitou! May the fog leave and the blue sky come back without any blood clots or the like.