Apech

I'm not particularly recommending reading this book: https://www.equinoxpub.com/home/how-buddhism-acquired-soul/https://www.equinoxpub.com/home/how-buddhism-acquired-soul/ but it has an interesting thesis in that when Buddhism was translated into Chinese (which was a fairly rigorous process) the concept of 'shen' became thought of as an agent in samsara - a soul in other words and this was equated to buddha-nature (an idea which is prevalent in Yogacara for instance but not in early Buddhism). Even though this view was later 'corrected' it never really went away. I think perhaps the collective unconscious could be something like the Alaya-vijnana (the substrate or storehouse consciousness - again of Yogacara philosophy).

Not a hylozoist Chan Buddhist then?

New Years resolution:

Ok first of all what do you understand by 'sin'. The word is usually given to mean 'missing your aim' and comes from archery. So perhaps you mean you have a standard of behaviour that you aspire to but that you can't achieve (?). You don't say how old you are or what your state of health is - but obviously it is normal for people to have sexual urges. Sexual energy is very powerful and actually, any sexual activity (including sex with a partner) can screw up your energy - the energy is powerful and yet we carry a lot of emotional baggage relating to it (probably mostly from the energy field / chemistry at our own conception - in other words our parents sexual chemistry - not for picturing in the mind tho' ha ha). So it's kind of like playing with fire. However not many people achieve comfortability with celibacy and so you have to manage your sex life one way or another. People talk a lot about the problem with porn in terms of exploitation and so on - which I am sure is valid - but I think the worst thing (which includes any kind of projection) is that extends and solidifies the subject/object division, whereby your level of energy excitation is dependent on an image on a screen or whatever - so you are in the very act making yourself more divided or alienated from your own nature. If you think of qi as a sentient energy, self luminous and able to project images reflecting its own nature - then the urge for porn is really a misplaced wanting for the base energy and its own formal presentations to meet in a kind of perfect union - which is impossible if the level of objectification is high. The energy needs to rest in itself to realise its non-dual nature - which it can't when over stimulated. Habits like this tend to create neural loops which through inertia self-perpetuate. I think you have two options - one is just to try to limit its use to a manageable level while increasing practice levels so that as your practice gets stronger it basically squeezes out the porn addiction, or make a strategic decision to cut it out entirely (but you have to plan this to change other patterns in your life which might give rise to it - e.g. dump your computer, or change where you live, reorder your routines and so on). make a list of the triggers which might exist, including situations you find yourself in and work to avoid them.

Well ... while the laughter subsides. Buddhism and God don't mix really - and I think that the best response from a Buddhist to the 'is there a God' questions is - 'mu' as in the Zen koan about dogs and buddha-nature i.e. I refute the question.. Apart from anything else you have no idea what the questioner has in mind when they say the word God - so it's hard to answer. They might mean some kind of controlling supreme being who sits on a cloud and directs human sexual habits - or they might mean a mysterious and ineffable source or whatever. I've probably said before that Buddhism does not really make efforts to provide ontological solutions but concerns itself with how to liberate yourself from suffering. Maybe in the abhidharma there is some ontology - but then that is not the Buddha's words - and maybe in some sects like the Great madhyamika there's some belief in an existent and therefore something like a 'real' being or state of being - but otherwise it is neither affirmed or denied since it is not appropriate to the soteriological issue. or this is how it seems to me this morning at least

I will act as go-between for 10%.

In some sense or other we are mostly all from Denmark.

Oh the joy.

Yes I thought about that ... could be a connection but its not something I've ever looked into seriously. "A strong Blue Lotus tea has an intense calming effect similar to taking a xanax. Consuming Blue Lotus Flower tea also promotes stronger likelihood of lucid dreams. Lucid dreaming is the ability to become conscious of the fact one is dreaming. Lucid dreaming typically also gives dreamers the ability to control some or all of their dream. People frequently combine Blue Lotus Flower Tea with a number of other drugs for a more intense high, including alcohol and kratom. Blue Lotus tea can provide wonderful pain relief."

Maybe some relation to blue lotus use??? https://drugsandbadideas.com/2017/06/blue-lotus-effects-everything-you-need-to-know-about-nymphaea-caerulea/

I'm in denial.

Substitute DNA similar to populations from the Levant if you wish.

Cone-heads wearing hats? Just wondering. Also what they doing with those pogo sticks???

Loved Be Here Now - RIP Ram Dass.

I'm not a fan of racial theories - but they did find some Dynastic mummies to be semitic DNA - so maybe the Dynastic Egyptians came from the Middle East rather than Africa - but still I think most Nile Valley dwellers were probably African. I am partial to the theories which place the origin of the Old Kingdom back to the end of the last ice Age - but it is unproven.

Happy Winter Solstice everyone, have a short day!

'All' is 'one' in the sense that there is nothing other than it. Technically if we take the 'all' as a continuum then it has no parts - but it does have an infinite variety of expression, as witnessed for instance by the variety of life on earth. There is distinction - as this word comes from a root meaning 'to prick' or perhaps 'sting' (cf. distinguish) - because the expressions of the 'all' each have their own unique point or purpose - or if you like, function. Form follows function and so we perceive this as a variety of forms (10k things) - even though they all share the same inner nature which is not different to the 'all' itself. All is one - because whatever thing, form, being or so on you encounter has this as its source and nature. But it is not one at the head of a series like, one, two, three ... it is what the Vedantans call a one without a second - the absolute.

I realise that Egypt is a love it or hate it subject - but I find it hard to relate to a 'visceral distaste'. I'm not asking why this is the case by the way. I'm happy to stick to Sumer etc.

I'm lost now.

Ah ... I should read more slowly ... especially after a bottle of red ha ha.

There's a big difference in my experience between stopping mental chatter - or egoic thinking as you say - and 'stopping thinking' as such. Just my conclusion after a few years of practicing meditation - you are free to disagree of course

Obviously ... what I meant was everyone except Bruno!!!!!!!!! (I knew it was a quote though ).

I agree with this apart from the 'stopping thinking' thing.

That's a Bruno quote.