3bob

Thanks again for the replies Seth, And in regards to your reply below: "End' is not really emphasized to us like it is in others. I don't really see the same focus on an 'End' like there is in the big religions." I meant more as a main goal or main motive, for instance King Solomon had great power and knowledge in the world and also to whatever degree in magic and in the "astral" realms, but came to the conclusion that those as his main motive were not enough or would end in up in "vanity" (per the book of Ecclesiastes) since they could not give answer to or satisfy complete spiritual meaning for the whole kit and caboodle and one's place in it. In comparison I'd say the Navajo Indians learned more than Solomon per their saying below: Walking In Beauty (Blessing) "Today I will walk out, today everything unnecessary will leave me, I will be as I was before, I will have a cool breeze over my body. I will have a light body, I will be happy forever, nothing will hinder me. I walk with beauty before me. I walk with beauty behind me. I walk with beauty below me. I walk with beauty above me. I walk with beauty around me. My words will be beautiful. In beauty all day long may I walk. Through the returning seasons, may I walk. On the trail marked with pollen may I walk. With dew about my feet, may I walk. With beauty before me may I walk. With beauty behind me may I walk. With beauty below me may I walk. With beauty above me may I walk. With beauty all around me may I walk. In old age wandering on a trail of beauty, lively, may I walk. In old age wandering on a trail of beauty, living again, may I walk. My words will be beautiful."

per the "noble eight fold path" I'd say it points to the meaning that one has little or no time or place for asides.

agreed that the verse # or particular source should be easily available or given...

Have you contacted Ms. Bancroft and verified your story, and while you were at it also verified that all the rest of the Buddhist quotes and material she complied were some kind of fake-ish paraphrases as one might hear being implied by you. (I'll bet the answer is no)

and, or - so what about it? (if those sites show some appreciation for a Buddhist saying)

CT, below is the full quote - but I'm not sure of its verse number? "Those who attain perfect wisdom are forever inspired by the conviction that the infinitely varied forms of this world, in all their relativity, far from being a hindrance and a dangerous distraction to the spiritual path, are really a healing medicine. Why? Because by the very fact that they are interdependent on each other and therefore have no separate self, they express the mystery and the energy of all-embracing love. Not just the illumined wise ones but every single being in the interconnected world is a dweller in the boundless infinity of love." -Prajnaparmita that was offered in contrast to what sounded like a profound(?) but blah blah, hum drum connotation per "nothing miraculous"

"nothing miraculous"? I'd say nothing blah, blah, being that the Buddha proclaimed, "a dweller in a boundless infinity of love" (Prajnaparamita) along with a great many of His other sayings!

an unhatched bird in an egg shell does not "give up" trying to crack the shell until it free of same, after which it would then be foolish to keep pecking at the shell

in some cases yes in other cases no - for example the historic Buddha proclaimed his realization to the hilt both verbally and also in teaching actions. Thus if he had remained a non-verbal hermit in the forest along with not speaking to any students who might seek him out even in the forest - then what teachings would Buddhists (if they even existed as a way) be reading, writing down and studying now?

Seth, It has been a very long time but I remember reading some of Carl Jung's material along the lines of the "collective unconscious", is that parallel to part of what you are getting at? (and I'd have to further review his writings if so) I also realize that the conceptual and rationale mind can not really pin down or handle a great deal of what it sounds like you are speaking of and or pointing to through the teachings you are following...which I can sense is a whole lot! I do believe it is possible to forge and or weave a state of "soul" that can hold death at bey for super long periods in the astral and other realms, but that is not really enough in the end is it ? To me only the power of the "Self" which sees death die is enough. There is the saying of, "Foxes have dens and birds have nests but the Son of Man has no place to lay his head" thus we are driven on and on, and also burned up as grass before the mid-day sun until we know that which we already are, and without attachment to a weaving which could be unwoven. (although weavings surely have their place!) I'm probably missing a lot of your meanings but thanks again for sharing parts of your way! Bob

Seth, Ok, it sounds to me like you and some others are talking about our physical-instinctive self driven by energy directly related to same, along with not quashing its various and more or less built-in and basic adaptations for survival. I see that as our animal nature that in essence is amoral and has one main and very limited genetic directive along with a related "astral" type of program, namely "the law of the jungle". Human beings are much more complex for better or for worse (thus the additional descriptions used in the earlier saying) than the other mostly reactive animals or certain types of beings and thus have a far greater potential range of ways of dealing with and living in said jungle. For instance animals do not have the option of breaking the laws of nature they live and die by, whereas mankind does to a greater extent including forms of self-destruction or to finally find his place in the spiritual scheme of things as a steward and keeper of laws higher than just the jungle level.

Hate and a form of fear are joined at the hip so to speak... but I would say that such a form of fear is not always so obvious in its ways - namely in the twists and turns it may take in both inner and outer manifestations . For instance one who lusts for power both hates and fears those that threaten him and may or will attack an apparent outer threat to quiet a twisted inner threat that is gnawing upon itself. Such a process or inner beast does not happen suddenly but grows and takes hold if not examined, understood and brought forth from the shadows where it loses it stolen power in the light of self insight. (also, and or more simply put: fear of an other can easily lead to hate of that other)

Hello Seth, Thanks for taking the time and making the effort to share that information! It sounds like a feeding of the "fetch" to me and if so (?) where would the fetch fit in with the following saying? "One evening, an elderly cherokee brave told his grandson about a battle that goes on inside people. he said "my son, the battle is between two 'wolves' inside us all. one is evil. it is anger, envy, jealousy, sorrow, regret, greed, arrogance, self-pity, guilt, resentment, inferiority, lies, false pride, superiority, and ego. the other is good. it is joy, peace love, hope serenity, humility, kindness, benevolence, empathy, generosity, truth, compassion and faith." the grandson though about it for a minute and then asked his grandfather: "which wolf wins?..." the old cherokee simply replied, "the one that you feed""

"The seeker who has confidence in the way will go beyond the way and find the end of suffering. The seeker who goes beyond the way enlightens the world, just as the moon shines as it passes from behind the clouds." from the Dhammapada

Seth, Thanks for the personal feedback. I kinda of get some of the "animistic" principles you mention through my limited contact and also studies of American Indian ways... I don't get an allowing of "darker aspects" unless one is talking about a joining with the evil forces within and without? (which would be or sounds exactly counter to the idea of joining to a wholeness?)

Tao gets things "even", as no one else can.

In my definition a great Taoist Sage has gone or advanced beyond the realm of the gods and whatever their limits may be? Thus one with Tao without any designs (of their own), even the heavenly designs of the gods.

Seth, What is the goal of this practice you are doing? How would you compare it with your past or present interests in forms of Buddhism and Hinduism?

ok man.

I imagine Laozi, if in the vicinity and as an advanced being probably would have intercepted such an event and more or less nipped it in the bud before it blossomed to such a point of violence against a child. (along the lines of doing so called small things which take care of or intercept certain big things before they get out of hand)

enlightenment will never and can never be in any future time, that's the catch of it or to it, along with the hell of it when thinking about it.

To OP: Isn't that about like asking if all human beings get angry now and then? But if you mean something like, "does a great Taoist sage get angry" then I say such a question and its answer would be a lot different...

So the egg is in the chicken and the chicken is in the egg, but unless it becomes an eagle it can only fly so far.

"I hope you were buckled up at least, while you were posting, eating a hot dog, smoking, and sipping a beer all at once"...."and shootin' dice'" along with driving an old three speed on the column with your right arm around your girlfriend and your left arm and hand reaching through the steering wheel spokes for shifting while making a left or right turn at the same time - (btw, for most of the younger guys and a few of us older add using a smart phone to that whole scenario - which takes having all your marbles working together to pull it off)

no-thing can not be nailed down by or as a thing. (but things or aspects can and do reach to the threshold of no-thing since they are connected through a super-duper, electro-magnetic transformer like dealy-bob)