3bob

considering this board and its members are all over the map with metaphors from multiple traditions and various meanings (including myself to whatever degree or anyone else including yourself then such should not be a surprise, besides I'm not trying to in effect set up and run a school like our op.

Surely you do not want to control the minds of others, but wait yes you do as demonstrated by your silly and sick put downs of whoever does not fit your into your court.

You've got to be kidding but you are not...your true colors are obvious to any who can see them, thus will I kiss your ass or follow your rules? - hell no.

I'd say that "mind", shining or otherwise is a dualistic device and nothing more, mind is not the truth or Ocean that is beyond the dualistic realms, the best it can do is go still so that Spirit meets Spirit without being drawn off into identification with another mental thought realm adventure.

Physical reality (so to speak) includes all levels or forms of energy including those which can not be seen with physical eyes or detected by the normal body related senses...(like x-rays, electromagnetic waves, etc.) thus we presently have tools that greatly extend what can be sensed and then translated into data that we can see or whatever sense may be used, thus if we had powerful enough tools we could see right up to very first manifestation of Tao - yet not beyond... and such manifestations would include the light bodies of souls. (with some experiments of supposedly weighing a persons body by the second before and after death that indicate what would normally not be expected, namely a change in mass via the departure of soul or whatever term one may prefer)

Ok, I could have made that more clear by saying at the level of identification with soul we are not the same weaving but at the level of Ocean identification we are the same without even a we to mention such... Still, The "Tao gave birth to the One", so is the One to be seen as a manure pile? Does a good mother see and treat her child as a manure pile? Nope.

In other words Infinity is your meaning that an atom (so to speak) that is indivisible and indestructible can not be "cultivated" into something essentially different than that? I'd say mind is like a lenses that thinks it sees, but the seer that uses it knows better. Big hugs also ;-)

Hello Manitou, On the soul level (and other levels) I'd say we are not all each other for at that level we are all unique weavings of light...but for what could be called the Ocean level there is then only an ocean of undifferentiated and unwoven light. Also, can "reality" be connected to illusion and if so then how? (along the lines of the how can the Tao be connected to the Ten Thousand if the Ten Thousand are comparatively labeled or seen as illusion?)

Read the rules Deci, (for you do not make them) and as long as we, us and those that you don't approve of are close to within those rules then any posts including yours are fair game... if you can't abide by that then go somewhere else to set yourself and your school up.

I mean Jesus is an Elder soul (and or immortal) just like there are Elder souls (or immortals) in other traditions, so in that case the answer to your question would be no, we are not all Jesus. As for the "us" it depends on what level of us you mean?

MH, on one count you are correct, the physical body of Jesus per your description was made of elements of this world, but per another description his golden white-light body is not of this world per what many know as "normal" physical elements and thus can not be counted the same way.

lots of neato "by-product" stuff - although by said definition that is not the point is it.... (?)

If the historic Buddha taught the simple but deep saying of, "May all beings be happy" then it follows that common ground has been encouraged instead of being harmed or discarded, for when common ground is harmed or discarded then suffering in one way or another will be encouraged along with any of the so called complex, advanced or secret type teachings being more or less negated

There is no place that God is not, which is very easy to say and very difficult to see, (to paraphrase a teaching I came across) also God can not, not respond to the truth of seeing him/her without separation in all beings... and in that case there is joy which sorrow can never undo! Jaya Sat Guru!

Kundalini yoga is not to be messed with in any way as is often prevalent with the attempted and westernized money making ventures related to same; I would only study same under the guidance and direction of a Self-realized master. (which are not found in every other street corner yoga studio in the united states where fantastical teaching claims tend to be made, in fact I'd say there are extremely few such masters in the entire world and they would never make a public scene about such)

having will will not be enough...although willfully surrendering will will make an opening

How many here see the T.T.C. as a whole and or in its the context (through many various translations and also through one's direct experience) speaking to the spiritual stuff while also giving pointers for the physical and ethical realms? (which is cool and also needed)

You are free to respond or not regardless of what 3bob wants... Btw, I see the T.T.C. responding and correlating with my last post in Chapter 16 via the saying of: "...To be one with the Tao is to abide forever. Such a one will be safe and whole Even after the dissolution of his body" And with the logic and teaching above it follows that the body and the brain that it supports (or Brian if applicable) meets dissolution yet can "abide forever" "safe and whole" - which if one accepts that level of reasoning found in the T.T.C. (which to me is about more than only flesh and blood and human ethics) then such a saying is very reasonable... and if one does not accept that level of teachings in the T.T.C. (or at least the possibilities of same) then it is reasonable to say that such sayings in the T.T.C. are illogical, unreasonable and probably fantastically imaginary to them.

"Please do not personify Tao. There is no brain for Tao. Sorry. Remember, Tao follows Tzujan. It needs no brain" By MH Ah this is where a lot of conceptual problems come up as in: to personify or not to personify, to de-personify or not to de-personify... me thinks somewhere in the middle although with some dependence on the framework... If a Sage is one with the Tao as directly alluded to in the T.T.C. then going by your pov they do not need a brain - hehe Btw, one can step out of and view their body (and also brain) from quicker energy realms - thus it could be said that non-physical brains and or minds, which of course are way before and also after the formation of just a flesh and blood one exist...

The term "Self" is used extensively in the (translations of) Upanishads... thus it is being misused and or misunderstood above if it was meant to be equated with illusion. And yes, God only knows how many masters/saints/sages are working on the other side in trying to help this side through their wonderful light bodies. I'll leave the Taoism questions/correlations to the Taoists... Om

Where is the brain of the Tao? (and does the Tao have to have a brain before it exists beyond normal existence, hehe) (and isn't it a little strange that this string has spun so long, eh?)

mind over duck ? video: http://msnvideo.msn.com/?channelindex=2&from=en-us_msnhpvidmod#/video/6cd81e6a-dcd8-e725-8fc4-ed8c4df30c8e or is it just getting in line for supper?

There is no such thing as sexual energy, although there can be energy in a sexual area. Energy can also be in a hell area where the predators are not picky about what comes their way...

GMP, Yep, that was the same video that you found... (many would seemingly feel a mixture of some kind of laughter and some kind of disbelief in such strangeness, and also wonder about a creepiness factor per some of the body language along with certain eye and facial expressions - although that is only my take )

Brahman is talked about a lot here in the west but not so much Brahman as Mahadeva, go figure... .