Informer

Being different is still being something other than you are. "Just Be" - Tiësto "Lyrics to Just Be : http://www.lyricsmania.com/just_be_lyrics_dj_tiesto.html You can travel the world but you can't run away from the person you are in your heart you can be who you want to be make us believe in you keep all your light in the dark if your searching for truth you must look in the mirror and make sense of what you can see just be just be they say learning to love yourself is the first step that you take when you want to be real and flying on planes to exotic locations won't teach you how you really feel face up to the fact that you are who you are and nothing can change that belief just be just be cause now i know it's not so far to where i go the hardest part is inside me i need to just be i was lost and i'm still lost but i feel so much better"

you had me until 1-22. Could it be sound , vibration, resonance combined with breathing to find the thyroid? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thyroid

A rats savior is the owl. How you ask? The rat gains wings.

You must determine what it is to know anything about it. Determining what it is not can help to narrow it down The pitfall is that you must not assume to know that which is unknown, you must allow it to remain unknown until it is really known.

Talk about a person then it becomes personal. Comments should only be directed towards the words or statement, not the person. Considering this is called a taoist forums makes it even more fitting to follow the "non-personal", discussion. I think it would be proper to understand that the focus of the topic is conducted at the data and statements being presented, not the presenter. When the words are being directed at a person that is conversing it becomes personal and it is also off topic. Non-personal is the only way to have a proper intellectual discussion. These are subtle differences that I think many could do better to understand, it would really raise the bar and produce more relevant and intelligent conversations on the subject matter or topic, while nipping off insults at the root before they can take hold and manifest into a full fledged ego battle. I will refuse to take part in such games and will point it out when I notice it, until it becomes clear. It should be known that personal experiences are subjected to subjectivity upon articulation. Experiences are not opinions or something you think and definitely not about someone else, unless that experience remains contained within a certain structure. The experience is about the one experiencing. (If it is about someone you are conversing with in person then it can be an experience when you are within the presence. It still only says about that subjected articulation of the experience from the point of view the experiencing. )

I guess it will continue to remain unknown until a realization is achieved. *shrug* Maybe you can go back to the topic at hand whenever you are ready.

Very good point, the variable of human error as defined by Murphy's Law "Anything that can possibly go wrong, does." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murphy%27s_law That is why it important to choose to know, rather then believe. To take everything you read with a grain of salt, then determine what you know and discard the rest that are beliefs or even accept it as unknown. If something that is known conflicts with something that is unknown, does that make the unknown a belief?

What is a "higher self" ?

Was is hardly part of realization. Realization is life altering and permanent ime. The statement was in regards to the ninja edit:

It's not about me, so let's not get personal. What you wrote above is simply attempted fallacious redirection of the failure to be able to formulate a proper rebuttal in a timely fashion. Have I said anything about you thus far? Why do you direct your comments at me rather than the statement?

This means that what an Arhat means to you is base on a: your indoctrination into a belief system, or b: your experience.

"Arhat (Sanskrit: अर्हत arhat; Pali: arahant), in Buddhism, signifies a spiritual practitioner who has realized certain high stages of attainment. The implications of the term vary based on the respective schools and traditions." "The alternative etymology is "foe-destroyer" or "vanquisher of enemies," which corresponds to the Jain definition." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arhat_%28Buddhism%29

One can never become fully enlightened, because for there to be one, there must be one experiencing consciousness.

I wouldn't put ad-lib into the quotes. "In the Idealist School, it is said ones false delusions are made by the consciousness, usually through the following procedures. The eighth consciousness is called the king of the consciousness from which subjectively one thinks of some Dharmas as objective. The former consciousness is subjective, the latter Dharma is objective. Human beings usually hold steadfast to the objective Dharma whether it is love or hate, but forgets that the consciousness holds only subjective views. Hence many sorrows occur." IV. To Know the Consciousness Thoroughly and Distinguish Its True Nature From Its False : http://www.yogichen.org/cw/cw32/bk077.html

Sometimes tradition and heart may conflict, when this is the case, I let heart decide.

There is no reason for the requirement of a "Buddha" to help one advance from the original realization of emptiness. To break an arhat free to become a buddha requires a buddha, would that even begin to make sense for the original realization of emptiness? No, because the initial realization of emptiness is one of the first actual realizations. If you realize the twofold without metta you are stuck and require a buddha. (imo) IE: teh pills.

Yeah dude, no . Not even close.

"Remember, the whole thing is hopeless. Taking care of the environment is hopeless, but we’ll do it. Achieving enlightenment is hopeless, but we’ll do it. Clarifying the mind, emptying the mind — impossible. We’ll do it. Just like the Four Vows say: “Sentient beings are numberless, I vow to save them.” How in the world are we going to do that, if they’re numberless? “Desires are inexhaustible, I vow to put an end to them. The dharmas are boundless, I vow to master them. The Buddha Way is unattainable, I vow to attain it.” Utterly hopeless. Yet we’re doing it." http://mettarefuge.wordpress.com/2011/05/06/the-bodhisattva-vow-the-whole-thing-is-hopeless-but-well-do-it/

How is it possible to judge unknown phenomena as empty without experiencing the unknown phenomenon as empty first? If I told you the matrix was an analogy for something real would you believe me or find out for yourself?

You don't have to take the vow to see what it is pointing at. That's the whole thing, the truth of religions is to point that out first an foremost imo. If all a bodhi means is to take a vow, then I misunderstood that term completely. So Arhat is only realized single emptiness of "ego" or "residual self-image" or "self" ? Is that what you are saying?

?

If you think about how you will feel when someone dies, you can actually feel it. These are attachments that many people are not aware of, and can be relinquished by bringing it to the fore-front of your mind and coming to terms with this fact. It also seems to help when you look at the big picture and how many people feel bad each and every day because of the death of another. Why is one death more special to you then another? What do you guys think?

Edible plants field guides would be something to consider, I got one for fungus and one for plants.