old3bob

which particular ray of light coming from the the sun is a true ray of light?

soul is evolutionary, the "Soul of soul" or Brahman if you will is non-evolutionary... soul merges back to the "Soul of soul" in certain schools of Hinduism but not in others. Btw, how many steps and concepts are we getting ahead of truly following the precepts of yama and niyama while talking about more advanced stuff? Note: there is the saying that Brahman is the "eater of death" so one could speculate about all that evolves and what death (and life for that matter) means in relation to evolution...but lets not torment ourselves too much.

grasping at straws to give or justify a Buddhist bias...is what it sounds like. (or maybe you are just being transcendentally cryptic for the hell of it?)

Chinese finger traps come in many forms...

so what are you trying to imply? Note: "budh" to awake, know is a word from Sanskrit (which it is said to have a 3500 year history thus Buddhists obviously did not have the term 3500 years ago being that Buddism was not yet founded along with it not yet adopting the Sanskrit language)

I miss-expressed the raft parable earlier, so this: “The dharma too is like a raft. It serves the purpose of crossing over, not the purpose of grasping. “When you understand that the dharma is like a raft, and that you should let go even of positive things (dhamma), then how much more so should you let go of negative things (adhamma).” Stephen Batchelor

the historic Buddha (edit) had to set his raft down, and by all accounts knew it. the Self (a four letter word to some Buddhists) is not bound by rafts either...

Yes, if they have: 1. high fructose corn syrup 2. hydrogenated fats 3. unknown/ unlisted gmo ingredients 4. traces of roundup and such 5. too many insect bodies or parts 6. a trump label 7. over or under cooked, improperly stored, sealed and or way past the expiration date 8. if they don't have any whole grain flour thus just bleached. 9. too many grams of sugar even if its organic 10. preservatives that only someone with a PHD in chemistry might understand and which could cause deformed body parts or strange new appendages. 11. last but not least if they taste like crap and are way expensive! (also if the "cookie monster" rejects them)

so the following question should arise: can good cookies come from evil masters? Me thinks not. Btw I still don't understand why Jesus didn't help that poor fig tree instead of putting it down being that it was just a plant...oh wait a minute maybe that was that an applegory...

we can all epitomize or not until the cows come home... the catch is that only Self can know/be the Self.

the "four fold negation" per Buddhism points to the fact that one can not know (in the common meaning of the word) - anything definite except for the indefinite, for instance: " 1. Not real. 2. Not unreal. 3. Not both real and unreal. 4. Not neither real nor unreal. Another way we can look at reality is as one (or “oneness” in spiritual terms), as many separate things, or as any combination thereof. So the four negations are: 1. Not one. 2. Not many. 3. Not both one and many. 4. Not neither one nor many. You can practice Madhyamaka by studying its logical arguments why any assertions about the nature of reality are self-defeating. You can also use it as a kind of koan practice. Accept, for the sake of argument, that things are not real, unreal, both, or neither. Contemplate where that leaves you. In either case, the Middle Way philosophy cuts through conceptualization and points you directly to the true nature of reality" Hmm, it does? Good luck with what to me is a deeply and totally convoluted form of mental gymnastics; or just study the Upanishads which do not make such mental speculations that can easily leave one adrift in forms of further confounding pretzels. (although there is a time place for pretzels, until there is not, lol)

the "still small voice" can roar instantaneously with truth and a will that follows it which can not be denied...for then there are no self-consuming or negating conflicts of doubt concerning a right decision...

in the Chandogya Upanishad all things are described as springing from the Self, thus in that sense connected to the Self but still not the Self which does not have their limits...obviously there are many other schools besides Advaita Vedanta which we should not assume as being the final word on Sanatana Dharma even if it is sometimes presented that way.

more like all uphill for the body, btw. there are examples of women who will marry a lot older guys if you know what. Michael Douglass makes more than 50 k year, otherwise....

"things" come and go, form and unform, while the kernel implied is not a thing at all and is also not nothing thus could be alluded to as No-Thing (or not a thing itself) from which every-thing springs.

Btw to the OP... it is not up to any particular yogi (or Guru) that is Self-realized to do this or that per what remains of their human personality, for in being Self-realized it is the Self that acts through a human vehicle. In the Saivite tradition (which you are probably well aware of) the Self also manifests as Lord Nataraja who creates, maintains, destroys, conceals and also reveals with Grace, a Supreme Grace which is not taught in Buddhism although they certainly teach of compassion. My favorite Upanishad is the Chandogya, and I'd say that along with the other Upanishads the Self is pointed to about as well as possible by its Self realized authors or enlightened Rishi's. (thus not with speculation)

umm, your *stated definition were your own words...which can then be applied (if stood by) to anyone that falls under it whether that be a major figure such as the historic Buddha, Jesus, a beginner of any path, or anyone in between... * "Don’t buy into rhetoric irrespective of which side it comes from. This kind of stuff (X is only a lower stage in our tradition) is a sign of unripe practitioners" Dwai I hope I don't need to give quoted examples of what major figures have said throughout history about their way being the only way, the best way and such while others fall short in this or that way.

ok, so minds may not be changed but neither will certain facts by those who care about the proofs related to same. Btw. going by your earlier and stated definition the historic Buddha was an, "unripe practitioner" based on his own recorded words (in well recognized Buddhist scripture and to paraphrase here) claiming that all other paths besides what he established were the "lessor" or worse...

well this string brought up the issue and you were interested in arguing your pov earlier...now you are not, why is that? (anyway such is not a congruent follow up to me, btw you and I may be entitled to our opinions but we are not entitled to ignore the recorded words or teachings that refute our opinions about them)

and are you doing so further with what could be taken as a condescending smiley face and a shunt to video as a reply? Btw, I'm leaving it up to someone else if they want to share comparisons as to what various schools of Taoism and other major ways that came out of China, Japan, Nepal, etc. may have to say about each other per records ...being that it would be hard to imagine them being in perfect accord about a joint equality among themselves, thus with no "lessors".

"don’t buy into rhetoric irrespective of which side it comes from. This kind of stuff (X is only a lower stage in our tradition) is a sign of unripe practitioners" from Dwai. I truly wish that that statement was true but almost all the founders of all the major paths have more or less and in one way or another indicated that religions or schools other than their own were or are the lessor . The historic Buddha did so, Jesus Christ and all the Christian sects did and do so, Mohammed and most of the Muslim sects did and do so, the last Sat Guru of Kashmir Saivism did so, the school that you often espouse did and does so, the major sects and sub-schools of Hinduism more or less do so although normally in a far more tolerant and enlightened ways per common precepts), many smaller groups and their leaders do or did so like Sri Nisargadatta Maharaj, anti-guru gurus like Krisnamurti did so, etc. etc. times whatever the number may be throughout history?

ultimate evil is the ultimate test for goodness beyond the point of slipping back...

...anyway is there a mask expert out there who is sure about brands and quality and what is a fair price? We know a great deal of the masks are going priority wise to health workers on the front lines to help or save people and that is how it should be but the general population should still be able get some high rated masks so they to have less chance of ending up in the hospital.

Masks are a major issue to help mitigate the virus spread and millions (billions) of people need good masks at fair prices, but greed has really kicked in on the sale of masks !! for instance I just looked on-line and people are selling n95's, kn95's, astm's (with many or most being dubious knock-offs ) and also lower level dust filtration masks being passed off as astm's for hundreds of times what was probably their original cost! To top that off the information about the masks is often confusing or misleading to the max about their quality and medical grade, for instance the outside of the box may look like it is a certified US product but then inside is a product from who knows where in China with unknown quality! Human greed to steal from those in a time of suffering is sky high and I think it is abhorrent that major on-line sellers do not watch dog masks for quality and fair prices that they are allowing to be sold through their company! I've way overused my only true n95 mask and some information says that can increase possible infection, so WTF and aw-shit! Lucky for us we can mostly stay home but that too has its limits, while millions of other people met such limits months ago!

universal justice does prevail in the long run because it is rooted in truth, an unbreakable inviolate truth of Spirit, whereas evil is only a stealing, dangerously corrupting thief with no root... and I'd say that refutes the half baked idea of opposites but equals.