Apech

I could tell you about my life and keep you amused I'm sure http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqDj5CP3Kag

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GOCAC8FCqE Lord have mercy, it rained both night and day.

The first bhumi of a bodhisattva is the joyous realisation of shunyata (emptiness). So anyone following this path would wish to have this realisation.

Listening on vinyl just like the old days.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYUCia9B810

No. 2 ... an armed force ... ... BUT army would be simpler I think.

Interesting ending in this translation ... different form the others which suggest the Sage avoids extremes and so on. How different this chapter is from Western psychology where the emphasis is on progress and making a mark on the world. Here it is saying you can't really do that. Many people in our societies would ridicule a person who behaved in the way this chapter suggests. All the more reason for thinking the Tao is profound and wise. Actually it is so hard to be quiet and still and non -interfering when everything is shouting at you to 'take arms against a sea of troubles and by opposing end them' to quote another bard.

Oh I think that's a bit unfair (possibly true though ironically). Enlightened is a proper English word ... as per 'The Enlightenment' which has nothing to do with Buddhism. It can just mean someone who has understood ... i.e. the Sage who embodies the Tao ... it doesn't have to mean Buddha. We are all confused I would suggest ... its just some of us are less confused than others ...

[*quote name=deci belle' date='02 August 2011 - 02:42 AM' timestamp='1312249361' post='279527] Hi Mal! Now that I can do code for italics, please teach me what to do for putting what I'd normally highlight and paste after pushing the quote button that don't work for me anymore. Thank you!❤ [/*quote] miss out the * before word quote. Just put [*quote] and [/*quote] if you don't need the author ... again miss out the *.

I see you have decided what I believe and that it is based on a "patriarchial viewpoint". Egyptian culture was a form of patriarchy I suppose ... but it was one in which women had a strong role and many rites and privileges ... and of course the religion had many goddesses including one's which were seen as creatrix (e.g. Neith). So I don't see how my describing accurately what the Egyptians were saying gives me a particularly patriarchial view point. Oh and what does " like expanded cold multiples into heat" actually mean?

No, sorry, I was trying to explain that you cannot make equations like this. Also I think I should point out that in the Chinese Tradition Heaven (sky) = yang and Earth is yin (see trigrams in I Ching etc.). Making correspondences between systems (e.g. China and Egypt) is confusing without first properly defining the terms involved (and even then ....) ... inverting basic principles in any system based on your own ideas is even more likely to confuse.

Sorry came late to the discussion : I think it means that the way to know the children is to know the mother. Look at the 10k things and wonder 'what, why, how?' ... the answer is the mother.

Just some off the top of my head thoughts as I read this. 1 ) I wish more people on TTBs would read the first two lines 2 ) To me it reads like this. Most of us are caught up in the world where there is pressure to be right. Or rather to talk about how right you are. If you don't people think you are weak and stupid. They think this is being assertive but its actually just being noisy. As in "empty vessels make most sound". The sage goes beyond this ... he listens to people and knows that they don't know anything ... so he keeps his own counsel ... because they talk so much that they will never listen anyway. Add to this that the truth is ultimately inexpressible. 3 ) The sage lessens the disharmony, the jangly edges, the jumbled up-ness which also arise because of the speed of the world. Not to say being quick is wrong but being caught up in the knock knock of daily life is not what the sage does. He's interested in being integrated, quiet and wise ... the profound union within and with the way. Just some thoughts. PS. Its so peaceful here in the TTC sub-forum ... maybe there's something to this Taoism lark.

Would you like me to stick my head in a bucket of water?

Welcome to TTBs and look forward to these discussions. A.

I just thought I'd post this link in case anyone else is interested in these subjects. Henadology

I understood the character to mean a hill with trees removed based on Stigs posts above.

I think I half agree with you and half disagree. I'll give another historical example which will not please Vaj. (). In the lineage of Karma Kagyu Tib. Buddhism the stated role of (the saintly) Gampopa who was himself a student of Milarepa, was to merge the monastic tradition which was started by Atisha with the line if the siddhas (i.e Nilopa, Tilopa, Marpa, Milarepa ....). To me these are two classes of tradition. One orthodox Buddhism the other a line of mystics. While the second clearly saw themselves as being buddhists they were not monks and their activity was outside the 'normal' teachings - as the life of Gampopa illustrates. So its it possible to do what Gampopa is said to have done? Can genuine mysticism which is individual and spontaneously revelatory sit inside an organised orthodox system? If no ... then what purpose if any did Gampopa serve in establishing (through his successor Karmapa) the lineage? In other words can it be a comfortable home for a mystic or is there always a compromise in which the mystic will always either to have to break out ... or keep silent? The other way to look at it is ... to be properly individual you need something to kick at. This would give a kind of negative purpose to dogma. Lastly ... K's point ... if I understood it ... if the mystic dwells in truth and reality (the mystery) is truth ... then how can it be oppressed by lies anyway?

Was she well endowed ... with the spirit?

Hill empty of trees and dancing female shaman ... I like the fact that there are both images. Just a word for the hill (since everyone else seems to like the dancing shaman ... for obvious reasons I guess). Hill with trees ... the hill has trees and could be said to be 'a treed hill' or a 'wooded hill' ... remove the trees and you have just 'hill'. What has changed? Compare ...the subject has predicate .. remove the predicate and you have only subject. Something is happening ... a dance ... the dancer and the dance ... the person and the pattern of movement ... remove the predicates and you just have 'dancing' ... Hmmm ok carry on ...

What a brilliant question! Vaj says dive in and find out ... well presumably the persecuted mystics did just that. Going back to Big J ... why didn't he save himself (assuming he was enlightened) - Pontius Pilot asked him "What is truth" and he didn't answer. Sorry I am rambling. I'll come back when I have thought a bit more.

No I wasn't joking exactly just thinking out loud. Bruno was burned at the stake and I am sure many recanted simply because it was more ecominical to carry on in secret than to make a big statement by dieing. I know its a different field but look at Gallileo he recanted ... but was still right in the long run. No what i meant was that they (mostly) still used the terminology of the Judeo-Christian tradition ... the Godhead, Christ the logos and so on. Jesus himself seemed an ok bloke ... shame about the cross and all that. So running in secret behind the orthodox is a mystical tradition. The question is would this be possible if there was no orthodoxy.