gatito

Nasty!!

Atheist!!!!

That's a very good question too. It's pretty amazing that we're here witnessing all this and it's even more amazing that science make all these pronouncements about Consciousness but there's no scientific instument that can actually measure it in any way at all. This neurosurgeon has had his world turned upside-down because he's discovered that he was still conscious when his brain was "switched off", therefore he now knows from first-hand experience that Consciousnes isn't a product of his brain functioning. (And it doesn't really matter what appeared in his Consciousness - the point is that there was Consciousness in the absence of brain function.) Surely that's worth pondering for a few minutes?

Meditate on this:

A good teacher is always best but a good DVD may be better than a bad teacher. If you're going to learn from a DVD, practice in a room with some mirrors for feedback (and/or video yourself).

How do you explain the fact that people have different experiences of life?

Yeah - it's like Jerry Springer. On a serious note, be careful with doing your own thing - Kundalini Syndrome seems to be a real potential risk with energy Paths. Find yourself a good teacher and don't try to reinvent the wheel.

@ Blissmusic Great post. Music can certainly take some to the other side of the Gateless Gate - where it's seen that there's no-one.

Do a search on Kunlun on TTB and you'll find some interesting (and somewhat heated) debates about its provenance and its safety.

And watch out for reptiles............

Why does almost everyone believe that Consciousness is finite and personal when there's absolutely no evidence whatsoever for that belief?

No. It isn't.

Best one that I've come across: - Yang Tai Chi for Beginners (YMAA Taijiquan) Dr. Yang, Jwing-Ming (2012) www.amazon.com/Yang-Beginners-YMAA-Taijiquan-Jwing-Ming/dp/B006WPDKLI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1349880640&sr=8-1&keywords=Yang+Tai+Chi+for+Beginners+[DVD]

From Vedanta and Kundalini by James Swartz - full article here: - www.shiningworld.com/top/images/stories/pub-pdfs/Articles/Vedanta_and_Kundalini.pdf

Anyone interested in Emptiness may enjoy this (free) ebook Emptiness and Joyful Freedom by Greg Goode and Tomas Sander: - //nondualityamerica.files.wordpress.com/2012/07/emptiness_and_joyful_freedom.pdf It's about 100 pages, so here's a brief excerpt to whet your appetites : - You may also enjoy these websites: - www.heartofnow.com/files/emptiness.html www.emptiness.co/

Thanks TI A good teacher will, of course, tailor their responses to meet the student where they are in their own enquiry.

You can also use NoScript and Flashblock plugins.

Firstly, I've not read Nisargatta thoroughly and even if I had, it would be pretty presumptious to state authoritatively what he did or didn't believe in. However, I'd be very suprised if he did believe in reincarnation because that would require that he believed in the existence of separate individual beings, objects and time. I saw in your introduction that you'd moved away from Advaita because you consider that it contains logical flaws. Bear in mind that Advaita transcends logic, although logic can be used to deconstruct the false belief at the heart of all (psychological) suffering (the false belief being that you are a separate individual). What matters ultimately isn't what Nisargardatta believed but what you believe together with any unexamined evidence on which you base your beliefs. (And (IMO/IME) you're right; this is a Taoist forum, which the Taoists kindly allow the advaitans to use for our own nefarious purposes. So perhaps the Advaita Forum would be the best place to post such "specialist" questions in future. )

...

Me too. I like Stosh. Good luck with that one.

I was doing you the courtesy of informing you that it was not a trick question. I'd say that you're spot-on there Stosh.

No. I responded to MH comments about the thread having gone off-topic with a link to an article that was titled "What is the smallest possible thing in the universe?" Not a trick question - as I said, not even a question - just the title of an article that I thought might be of interest to anyone interested in discussing the Tao Particle (which doesn't include me ) . Sorry, I don't understand what you're saying here. I don't subscribe to the idea that "I think, therefore I am". As far as I'me concerned, Decartes got it back-to-front. I'm not uncomfortable Stosh; I'm just not interested in picking a frame of reference. Sorry.

No Stosh - I don't need to pick a frame of reference. If you have a clear question (which interests me) I'll do my best to answer it. That's all.