Apech

If we got rid of the Queen we would still need a head of state - presumably an elected president ... and no matter how hard we might try we would not be able to find someone of the quality of Donald Trump. Its just a fact

The way I see it is that the Queen as a constitutional monarch and therefore head of state is not so much the person as 'the Crown' ... in the same sense as all state functions, legislation and so on are formally belonging to the Crown = the state. So kissing the Queens hand as a politician is not subservience to her as a person but more a way, a protocol for acknowledging that what you do is on behalf of and for the benefit of the nation and not yourself. Americans swear allegiance to the flag - or swear an oath to 'the people' and in actuality this is not much different. It's very much if it ain't broken don't fix it approach so ... if everyone is generally happy with having a monarch, who symbolises the state but has no real operational powers then why change?

Excellent link thanks. The Middle Kingdom Coffins had two basic types the Northern and the Southern - the southern had the star maps - what are usually thought of as the decan stars for mapping the hours of the night. But this is a good insight that the coffin like a boat navigates the night sky. Some coffins also have the Book of the Two Ways on the base for navigating the underworld.

The Buddha used the term awakened. Enlightenment is really a western term to do with the use of reason to shed light on things. However of course due to translations 'enlightenment' is a common word for what the Buddha had. Good or bad as expression - they do bring out the two sides of awakening. In Daoist Internal Alchemy you cultivate Xing ( original nature) and Ming (life). In Buddhism you cultivate emptiness and appearance (or luminosity), in vajrayana prana and citta and so on. In Ancient Egypt Osiris and Ra (or the union of the the two souls). This brings out an experiential fact that there is both our original nature or still, clear, emptiness which we cultivate by not-doing - by letting go of all attachments and resolving ourselves to our true nature .... and there is life/light energy qi/prana which we cultivate for both health and longevity and more importantly elevated states of awareness beyond the limits of the mundane. Real awakening is the union of these two. It is the realisation of our own nature but in communion with all existence, all others. This way we have the non-duality of nature, relation and the variety of existence which is the pure flow of the absolute or Dao,

Huh like you already didn't do that!

As far as I know kundalini is first mentioned in some of the Upanishads ... but I'm not not sure which. But it would be very surprising indeed if there was not an equivalent practice and so on at the time of the Buddha. The Buddha rejected other schools such as Samkhya and ascetic yoga ... but he took many terms from Vedic religion and used them himself. Tantric Buddhism did not emerge until the period 600 -1200 AD ... much later at which time candali was definitely accepted.

Only if you are being hasty.

If your enemy's enemy is your friend, then is your friend's friend your enemy?

You have no enemies??? Brian you ____ _____ing ____!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Really? You might need to explain this point of view.

I agree it would be dangerous ... and ultimately either pointless or distracting.

She's real

No I was responding to the OP that the Tibetans misunderstood the Buddhas teachings.

Tummo and candali (kundalini) practices come from the mahasiddhi tantric traditions developed in medieval India (600 - 1200 AD). They were passed to the Tibetans who preserved them. They are completely legitimate and also Buddhist (although it would take a long post to explain how this might be). If you want to know about Buddhism I would read Buddhist texts and commentaries and not Gurdieff etc.

The Daoist way.

Liberty only exists because of captivity.

If it was oven chips on offer the queue would be even longer.

You do remind me of someone else

Nope.

In that case I can say he doesn't challenge any of my beliefs.

What beliefs of mine is he challenging?

It's very common for writers to pick and chose from ancient texts to support their theories instead of reading the text for itself.

Glad you guys are getting along so well. I thought the paper (or the part of it on Taoism) was disappointingly brief and superficial. No mention of the way and it's virtue and what that might mean. I think some people will take from anywhere to prop up their own beliefs, like thieves and robbers in fact.