Apech

I can only say ... and I know its dull and boring ... but you do learn a lot from having kids and the rewards outweigh the time/energy etc. expended IMO. Its not for everyone of course ...

No!!! It says "Voted best spellcaster of the year in 2008, 2009 and runner up in 2010!" What went wrong in 2010? ... I want the top guy not someone who comes second!!!

Ok I'll drop my obsession with not liking the list. Its not so important. (I have to say I admire the way you are calmly dealing with a couple of attacks on here.) I'm not sure how much the field of psychology has dropped the ideal of being well-adjusted. I saw a BBC programme a couple of years ago where they showed that most people suffer from most of the mental neuroses that doctors like to label at one time or another in their lives. Its normal and quite ok to be affected by life, stressed or whatever as long as it doesn't completely take over our personalities. In fact its part of being human and certainly the hallmark of 'ordinary mind'. If we distinguish ordinary mind from eternal mind (that's my term for now - but I mean the true nature of consciousness itself) - then we go on a quest to discover this eternal mind and view it as a separate state. To get there we have to fight a lot of habitual tendencies and also do a lot of practice. Maybe we get close to it and experience the energy and bliss of that state - but its still separate from us - then perhaps we realise it ... but this is still not enlightenment. Then we work again to discover that that there is no essential difference between this eternal mind and our ordinary consciousness - this is when we are getting close to enlightenment I think. The journey will involve a lot of states which are not what the psychologists would call balanced. We go temporarily crazy or desperate or lost for periods. But to achieve the final goal we have to integrate what we experience into our selves - and this is both spiritual and psychological maturity I think.

Just to go back to the original definition and the dreaded list. Does this equal psychological maturity? and is this the same as enlightenment? I have two main problems with the list, one is the phrasing of some of the statements and what they mean seems to me highly subjective. For instance what does 'a few loved ones' mean ... could it be 100 people or just three or four (or in my case one person and two cats???) ... does this make me mature or not. The other is if I take up point 15 ... then I can demonstrate my maturity by not conforming to the rest of the list. This and more particularly his hierarchy of need thing have become like the ten commandments of management speak - a stick to beat us all with. I am sure this is not what he intended. But at practically every management training session I attended they were wheeled out as a kind of gospel truth ... if you disagreed then you were told you were wrong. Sometimes MAD and WRONG (Cat ). My issue with the 'enlightenment' thing is that the term is used in different ways by different people. For instance in the west 'the age of enlightenment' is about scientific progress and nothing to do with spiritual states. I think that people here are refering to some kind of heightened spiritual state gained in deep meditation or other similar practice. Well in my view that is most definitely not enlightenment. Enlightenment to me is typified by the Sage who not only understands the Tao but acts in accordance with it.

I think this is the point. Some kinds of awakening could be termed biological or perhaps evolutionary in terms of consciousness. I'm not sure that I would call them enlightenment - but of course its all a matter of defining terms before we use them. I still hold to something which you might call complete enlightenment which is beyond and yet encompasses both the transformed individual consciousness and the psycho-spiritual-emotional growth of the person. For me this is the Sage that LZ talks about. PS. I think I understand vivid appreciativeness a bit better now ... but I still hate the list (sorry Cat and Shakti ). I am vividly unappreciative of it.

I find lists like this almost incomprehensible. What does 'vivid appreciativeness' actually mean? I think there are better lists ... like the paramitas for instance, generosity, patience and so on. I think my answer to the original question is that those that consider themselves enlightened probably are not. Its possible to have experiences (even continuous ones) that impart energy and feelings of bliss and so on ... without properly integrating the meaning or significance of them into oneself. For instance do a lot of energy work, get a big light in your head and get high. So what? It is also possible to be a very wise mature being without any such experiences. True enlightenment is both beyond and the source for these states of being.

I think this is the true meaning. Its like not showing your hand first - or the samurai thing of the one who strikes first will loose. So you keep your weapons hidden - because if your opponent knows what you've got then you are likely to be beaten. This is not about being cowardly or secretive (which would be one interpretation) but is just good sense. If you are the sage ruler surrounded by enemies then this is the right way to behave. You show only what you want to show and nothing more.

The BBC is saying that his body has already been disposed of at sea? At sea? He was killed in Pakistan no where near the sea. Odd. Anyway I'm not sure it will make much difference to be honest.

So it's all meaningless now is it?

Funnily enough I've been BBQing sardines and this statement is so true - the more you mess the more they break up and become impossible to turn over - they become small pieces that fall into the fire. This is one of the things I most like about Taoism that it is based on some quite simple observations of reality - which are made profound by their interpretation. Taoists are not abstract thinkers but deal with a kind of concrete absolute. The great reflected in the small. Brilliant.

I'm not socially conditioned into thinking anything about the DL. I make up my own mind by watching, studying and so on. But you are entitled to your view and me to mine. What would be interesting would be a proper balanced debate rather than all the propaganda. I think it will always be a problem for a spiritual leader to have political authority also. Politics is not so much about truth as about power (the end justifies the means) and compromise. I would say that the DL has done the best he can with the situation in which he found himself which was a very difficult one. But if you prefer to think that he is some kind of CIA/Nazi stooge then I suppose that is your opinion. Alan Watts? Can you really compare them? Hmmm ... again up to you, it a free TTBs world.

Welcome to TTBs I hope you enjoy your stay here. A.

The media are incapable of handling anything properly - so they do promote a rather naive and patronizing image of both DL and old Tibet. But anyone who looks into these things quickly develops a more realistic view. I don't have time to link to this information but it is easy enough to find. You are only linking to a selecting of sites which are all linked anyway. Oh well I found your posts to be generally critical. First you have to establish that the DL 'serves' the CIA and then that they are an Evil Gestapo i.e. an internal secret political police. Because he has said that their practice is harmful ... but he hasn't stopped them doing it. You seem to prefer Chinese anti-DL propaganda - I don't know why. Well, obviously you don't follow the DL - do you practice? What form of practice do you do and who in your opinion is a good spiritual leader?

Hi and welcome.

Sounds a bit like you may need to work on hip flexibility. The mistake with half and full lotus is to twist the knee joint instead of the hip to get into posture. This book is good: becoming the lotus

Wingzero, Your comments don't seem very balanced to me. The sites you link to all push the same kind of line on the DL without any discussion. There is no doubt that Tibet was a feudal society lead by a religious and aristocratic elite. However its 'liberation' by the Chinese was harsh in the extreme. There were many documented crimes against the Tibetans and their culture. Once in exile the DL has used the growing popularity of Tibetan Buddhism in the west to his advantage and he has achieved a kind of celebrity status. You seem to see this as a wholly bad thing while others might say he was playing the only card he had against the overwhelming superior power of China itself. I am sure the CIA are quite happy to have the DL as a kind of pressure on the Chinese and I imagine they are active in Tibet - just as they are in most of the world - but this does not mean the DL works for, or is an agent of the CIA. The Dorje Shugden issue has been discussed endlessly and is based entirely on the fact that he considers this practice to be antithetical ... people do still practice it and he hasn't stopped them. People are free to listen to the DL and make what they wish of him. There is a free exchange of ideas in the democratic west, which is more than you can say for China itself. You think democracy is a joke - well that's up to you - but your freedom to say such a thing is protected by the principles of western democracy - i.e. individual liberty and the rule of law. Just because the Nazis (rather like the Victorian English) projected some of their own views into various indian philosophies including Buddhism, and that the DL met a German national when he was a child does not make the DL a Nazi. It just doesn't and it is a ridiculous argument.

Which TaoBum was this?

Ah ... we meet again !!!!! "Aren't you a TaoBum, ma'am?" "Yes we are!"

I can't find the one I use ... but this one looks good: Lemon Biscuits I like intense flavor so I would prob use two lemons (though depends on the size obviously) and a bit more sugar ... Our neighbour has a fantastic lemon tree and gave us a load of lemons which is why I have been looking for different ways to use them. Sending you lemon zest qi as we speak.

Color schmolor what's the difference?

Done.

Lord Drummond Pinky-Morford ... that was me next to the woman all dressed in yellow - I forget her name.

Positive and negative of yin and yang is not the same a positive and negative of action generating karma. The first is the action and responsiveness of energy itself and the second is about how if you do negative (Bad) things then they tend to generate negative (bad) results in the future. As you said above its all about cause and effect - and cause and effect is there because nature is a continuum - there are no gaps in it - so any action inevitably results in something ... hence karma = action. My take is that some actions promote harmony and integration e.g. love, respect and kindness to others. The effect of this kind of life is a kind of snowball effect of greater and greater wellbeing (although you have to count in all that went before of course) - while the effect of violent acts (for instance) is unpredictable and chaotic ... even when the violence is 'justified' ... for instance even though WW2 can be justified as a fight against fascism the trauma of the results of the violence have rippled through history ever since causing many social and personal problems which we see today. But you can't say (or I don't think you can) that we shouldn't have fought Hitler ... sometimes you have to bite the bullet even when you know the outcome might be very difficult. So the choices are a lot harder than just lets all be good as gold and never hurt a fly ...

Ok that's true but I was asking about you. I suppose you don't have to say if you don't want but it would make your arguments more convincing.

You seem to have a very vertical view of spirituality. I wonder what is your practice and tradition?