Aetherous

My thoughts: soulmates are a disaster waiting to happen. Relationships need to be down to earth and about how you are with a person, not up in the clouds and dealing with such powerful concepts. Sometimes soulmates are there to help us grow...and growth can be the most painful thing: what happens when you have a genuine soul connection...your entire soul is wedded to hers...and then you break up? You get soul loss. The body can actually die from this. You should protect your soul, not make it vulnerable to a person that you don't truly know yet. Your soul should stand on its own two feet, you should be an individual, and not go head over heels for another soul up in that non physical realm. So I say - give up notions about soulmates. Just find someone you admire and respect, who you're attracted to, who you can be good toward. Then be your best, and try to make life enjoyable and beneficial together.

I like that approach - it's more balanced. Of course complete specialization makes us a master of one thing, and a failure of everything else, which isn't good. On the other hand, no specialization at all makes us stagnant in terms of societal progress and personal achievement. Maybe it's good to have one thing be paramount, a few other things be interests that we cultivate (but not to the extent of the specialization), and then stuff that doesn't interest us be pretty much off-radar. As for myself, I chose Chinese Medicine so I'm specializing in a certain style of that.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/14017/report-obama-admin-funneled-billions-left-wing-amanda-prestigiacomo "...congressional investigators claim the Obama Administration funneled billions of dollars to left-wing activist groups—such as the National Council of La Raza, National Urban League and National Community Reinvestment Coalition—through a slush fund scheme of the Department of Justice."

It's fairly profound.

Cause and effect?

Enlightenment (in the Buddhist definition) requires absolutely all negative emotions to be overcome...so any semblance of that in a person is a sign of unenlightenment. Beyond that, like I said (the blue letters in the quote box of this post), I think there is omniscience (knowing literally everything) in true enlightenment...so if we aren't there yet, what's the use of saying we're enlightened? Enlightened but clueless? Anyone who rolls out of bed in the morning is awakened. I don't see the point in using that term. Awakened to what? If we're using it in the same sense as enlightenment, then the only "awakened" person is one who is awakened to all knowledge. If they're clueless about some things, then they're not awakened to those things yet, are they? So how could they be called awakened? Every smartphone zombie is just as awakened as this person on his high horse.

You don't consent to finding evidence? Fair enough...

As a side note - it's been really interesting to watch this happen on Twitter. Unabashed control of public opinions by: deleting certain member's accounts, shadow banning accounts (they still exist but you can't see what they tweet), deleting 'likes' numbers, promoting only certain comments under a tweet, not showing what's truly "trending" in terms of hashtags, etc.

Yes, truly. http://www.theblaze.com/news/2012/08/23/surprised-news-corp-donates-more-to-democrats-than-republicans/ WSJ is absolutely not right wing these days.

I was really under the impression that the left owned/controlled basically everything media-wise (like Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc). Even Fox News.

I was completely unaware of it happening.

I was surprised to read this today and discover that the right is doing the same thing that we knew the left was doing.

So mote it be.

Some would say that happens on the false paths.

IX

Absolutely no problem: http://www.nysun.com/foreign/iraqs-wmd-secreted-in-syria-sada-says/26514/

I support Brian. Make Daobums Brian Again. (but it's really true that WMDs were shipped out through Syria)

That guy is not stating ANY facts, but just talking nonsense. There is literally nothing like that in TCM.

Dragon isn't a term used at all in TCM, nor do they have treatments for changing people's sexual orientation...but "dragon" was used in historical Chinese Medicine to describe the yang of the Kidneys. I'm not aware of a single Chinese Medicine practitioner who ever changed someone's sexual orientation.

I've read about some people saying that Gayatri requires the mudras in addition to the mantra...anyone here practice that way?

Rendered incapable in some fashion...in some cases killed, in others imprisoned, or just made to be powerless.

People who murder others for depicting their religious leader need to be kept under the boot.

VIII

What context is the phrase used in?