old3bob

if we see all as pretty in their own way could there be a not?

if that is the case then all Hindus and Buddhists should not also get stuck with less important things - thus equally share all land and properties, all monies, all vested interests, all monasteries or temples, and every other type of possible resource, etc... but that will never and should never happen right? (what does the fwiw mean?)

that sounds kind of like a diplomatic, and round about no to my earlier question, for in this world many teachings are not being seen with equal validity to others.

which "you" would that be, him, they, her, you, we, me, us or them?

you wouldn't be implying or putting words in my mouth along the the lines of obsession would you? Btw. the historic Buddha was sometimes what could be called "obsessive" about denial and rejection of Brahman/Atman/eternal teachings post his enlightenment - does that match up or count per your definition? btw. you don't sound like the same guy or is that just my imagination?

so is anyone going to say that they have heard of or that they themselves as an initiated Buddhist who goes by their scriptures/schools and ordained teachers that they unequivocally embrace Hindu/Upanishad teachings on Brahman/Atman and eternal meanings regarding same? I doubt it...

and to not assume that another does not know what it means, right?

has anyone ever heard an initiated Buddhist per Buddhist teachings or their Lama's or ordained teachers (like the Dalai Lama) ever say that they embrace Hindu teachings on Brahman/Atman and such eternal non-changing meanings, all evidence and recorded statements from same say the answer is NO.

the paths you mention and very liberally correlate and melt together in one big pot via what to me are new age like and idealistic presumptions all have human founders (as authorities) except for Hinduism...and perhaps Taoism in some ways?

yea, I've heard that one which is tricky since He was not thrown off the Blue Cliff.

so its interesting (or fascinating if you will) to me that the historic Buddha going by what you say would then also have to refute Buddhism, which most Buddhists would never do...

and it would be a stretch for a Buddhist to boldly posit Brahman, but not a stretch to boldly deny same... "ce la vie"

"the non-dual nature of mind" is not how Hindu teachings use the term mind, so no matter how hard a correlation junkie may try to conflate such with teachings of the Upanishads such will never jive. Granted mind can be calm and clear but it is still not and never will be Brahman which is beyond all categories that mind can be related with, including even the connection of pure light or prana which is Brahman's "first born" so to speak, for mind is still a "thing" or a construct, "the first and the last construct"; btw. I'd also say mind is not pointed to as "no-thing" in Taoism.

didn't know that yogi's did this as much as he is saying...and is something to consider since there is such a mixture of energies going on around most of us in many ways!

i don't remember if it was at this site or another butt there was once a guy who used the handle, "happy bowl movement", lol

well per the Upanishads the Self is so very fast (so to speak) that it is like standing still everywhere at once...

did you mean to post the above on the other string?

thank God we have will, for without it we could not willfully choose between crapping our pants or using the bathroom, among far greater issues! (abstract, cosmic, complex, philosophical and or mystical ruminations be dammed, I prefer and willfully choose the bathroom)

because the quantum bee on the other side of the universe moved its wings?

yea, probably nicer than some seagulls who will purposely drop shit bombs on people just for laughs.

"Because nondual philosophy is so absolute siddhis are not of any import..." By Bindi I've heard masters call siddhis (when used correctly) as being "tools of the trade" so still important as benefits that can be used to help students, yet not to get hung up with them nor to deny them. Also it is not that they own spiritual power for their own purpose's, but that the power has them willingly for its greater purpose.

From American Indian ways: "Coyote Symbolism and Meaning – Coyote symbolizes playfulness, adaptability. The ability to see the truth in a situation, knowledge, and intelligence are some of the common metaphorical meanings associated with the spirit animal coyote." which includes being, "wily enough"

"waste not want not" if safely edible.