Stosh

Im thinking that the message being sent is that they feel they are doing just fine , they like it the way it is, they see nothing contrary to their beliefs in their behavior, and in response to their own sentiments and motivations they have no intent , no guilty imperative, to adjust their ways in regards to their conduct in the section. They feel everyone else is wrong to have negativity about the conduct of the thread. They want everyone who disagrees to butt out ouf their business, they feel no imperative to cooperate with the larger community in this regard. So The only thing to do is leave Sean to deal or not deal with it as he sees fit.

. I tried here to say what was basically true without biasing heavily for my own stance. This is the courtyard ,and I dont want to speak incorrectly regarding everyone elses views Meditation can be done for various reasons , health-happiness , enlightenment , mental acuity etc. Spiritually some feel that meditation brings one back to a more core essence of themselves or Tao or God. The Learner is right about my personal thing, that I personally dont wish to deconstruct my identity to the point where it goes away permanently. Others feel that there is great benefit to doing exactly that. I didnt want to exclude that since its a sentiment held by many.

If ones spirit is an extension of ones body-brain , and the body-brain can be changed , then then potentially one can change spiritually. If the folks here thought the subject matter was rubbish , well then its likely they wouldnt have much to say about it. Meditation is restorative , destruction of the self is , self destructive. I understand the skepticism which you present , but youre going to have to relax a bit and see what it is you may be able to benefit from regarding the content of Taobums. Starting with so much amplified doubt its likely that you wont be able to find any changes within so youll walk away before you accumulate enough background to challenge the mindset you went in with. If the goals you have about the spiritual , are things youre certain of , then the pursuit of them has certain value to you. You can be certain of that at least..right? and you already know the answers you want to satisfy arent findable at 'wal-mart'. If it turned out that all that happened for you was that you spent some time chatting with folks that couldnt be of help to you , would that really be so bad? such a horrible detour? such a waste? I dont think so , youd at least have gotten enough info to make a sound decision rather than abort too soon.

I can basically agree with that all there, personally I think the tax load is already way too high on both the wealthy and the less well off. Taxes do impede business , our debt renders govt less efficient per dollar collected, complex tax laws leave legal loopholes (especially for the wealthy- but also for the poor) , none of the congresses have been fixing anything..and especially the recent congress which I think should be held criminally liable for a failure to do their job, and the supreme court has a pack of idiots coming to nonsensical conclusions based on the precedent of stupidity set by courts before them. But thats what weve got.

I dont understand your contradiction here, MH , Neither Bush nor Reagan installed the 'flatter' tax platform , of eliminating income tax.. they ballooned the deficit which temporarily heats up the economy (but I agree Obama hasnt fixed the issues either.)

Flat tax rates favor the weathy personally because the cost of living is a lower percentage of their earnings unless they choose to spend far more than theyd need to for housing electricity expensive cars and such. The money they earn can be earned only because the whole system allows for it , and they are not responsible for the whole system so there is no solid basis to call graduated tax scales as unfair. If the less well off, can send their sons to fight to secure trade relations , sea lanes and so forth, one could potentially say they have inordinately shouldered the requirements of the system. Likewise , one cant say that a plumber is less important to society than a doctor, though they potentially do not make the same income and the garbage man likely works far harder than say some stock trader. The system is geared to allow the reward of services that society requires and to regulate the supply of those services. That doesnt mean it is actually equitable .... its just a system.. of 'give and get'. Unless youre one of the highly wealthy , a flat tax isnt in your interest , benefits dont magically appear as if from thin air when tax formulas are simple.. SOMEONE will sacrifice either way , SOMEONE has to pay for the service. Wealth-money derives its value from the efforts required to generate product and the need for it. The worker is the one who is creating wealth, the capitalist provides the situation for that work to be done. Theres a need for both , but the concentration of wealth is a trend that the graduated tax base was installed to mitigate,, unless you like the poor getting even poorer so that there is more for the most wealthy a flat tax should contraindicated , one doesnt need to have a 'complicated graduated tax system ' that can be done simply as well. It is the inequitable distribution of tax advantages and overspending which creates our economic woes most strongly,, not the idea of graduated tax.

Electrons themselves do whiz at near the speed of light , but they are grabbed up locally and so each one doesnt physically travel the lengh of the tube ,instead , a different electron pops out the other side. Dominos

The guys we have been reading already, are often brilliant , they have a lot to contribute, hopefully they dont get scared off at all. But they should be encouraged , to abide by rules of civil conduct just as in the other forums , If they want to handle it ' themselves..' I kind of like that idea... BUT with that grace afforded , they should hold themselves to the code of right speech that buddhism promotes, and not allow themselves to continue to be led by bad example which may indeed be rampant elsewhere, I dont think thats very much to expect and they might find they like it themselves , if they didnt feel as if they had to continually fend off attacks . When pushed, folks fight back , and do what they wouldnt have done otherwise, but no one benefits from perpetual infighting.

Its not the same mechanism as electricty in a wire,instead of plain electrons ( or electron deficiencies called holes) ,, Ions carry charge which pass through the cell membrane depending on the local electical situation (Picture the "wave"going around a stadium during a football match rather than cars on a road.) and this dump of ions progresses like a wave along the length of the nerve. The synapses are junctures ,, forks in the road , at which this progression can be propagated to another cell ,or cells. Ions move in or out of the cell 'laterally' while the wave progresses 'distally'. The energy 'generation' is done by chemically pumping ions back across the membrane, the nerve as a whole does this during the nontransmitting-resting phase, there is no 'origin', there is only the path.

My aura interferes with electronics.

The cops are trying to accumulate objectively supportable data which fits and formulates the reifications they hold, to most accurately reflect the universe ( which exists, but must be inferred ) or something like that.

Songstan used the word , so I was aiming mostly thataway, yeah I know its your thread but like trees having branches , if one cuts off too many then the tree withers. Ok Ok I can go with that too ,if you dont stretch it too far. Ive learned the hard way , that if I take the time to just go ahead and google up definitions for the words other folks use its easier to stay with the conversation , so I suggest it , to anyone who, likewise, isnt perfect or psychic. I dont put much stock in that yin yang thing , I get the basic idea , but just dont feel that my ideas on it have any practical impact on anything I do, but if it floats your boat , well thats a good thing for you. But for me ... eh ,, it doesnt do anything. I dont know what there is to not be sure about , but Ill rephrase if you think it would be handy. The stuff that doesnt exist in any way shape or form , doesnt exist... Folks do mathematical statistics , they say that there are certain 'probabilities' before things happen, but the probabilities they calculate are based on the limitations of what they know about the situation. In the end though , it NEVER WAS in the cards that it would happen the 'other' ways. ( Im not talking about quantum physics events ) Say I predict jordan is going to make a free throw , they look at stats and come up with some number more than half the time ,, Well just as he releases the ball , a plane smashes through the roof crushing the backboard rim and net fall on the floor. The stats didnt include the plane, the free throw never was going to make it into the net. The probability of missing was always one hundred percent .. and with hindsight, that should be perfectly clear. Thats why they say hind-sight , is 20/20 again , I was mainly just joshing Songstan with that there.

This is a taijitu

I doubt most of those guys are as techno savvy as yourself,

Im glad you brought up the word reification , if I understand this correctly ,its the process of considering the abstract as a thing materially real. If a mind defines god ,and then one considers god to be a real thing ( or everything) then thats a reification process right? the result is illusory and transitory right? Well , the material world is in flux always , so it is also transitory , as are our identities right ? And our identities are also reifications .. thats to say abstractions rendered ,perhaps falsely,or, as being considered as real. When we look at material events there again is a reification process , that we we interpret from our senses or subjective experience gets considered as being real. Yes we understand our senses are limited, and we do infer that what is out there for 'real' impacts what our senses say , but we dont actually see whats out there ' for real' . Its a reification we are familiar with , that is all. Now when you choose to do something , and do it , that impacts what is 'really' out there, so that which you are calling illusion must be real to impact it right? But the you that chooses, is a thing you consider real and illusion. The stuff out there which we observe likewise, is both real and illusion. Likewise, God is illusion, which we, who are illusion, also make real, by having these illusions about it... but its a false reification in that there is no objectively real aspect to it.. you cant demonstrate it or prove it. So as far as we can observe , there is no 'division between real and unreal' this is a false belief, all that exists is real. There is however both , objectively real and provable , vs subjective impressions of what is objectively real ,(or subjective opinions about that which is false not being objectively provable ) So there you have the explanation which you considered such a burdensome waste of time , in under two minutes. Youre welcome.

How is life , at the "top of all things" define top, and relate that to the taijitu ( which is a circle which presumably in flux philosophically.) I'd like to see how your ' law of duality' explains things ... because googling law of duality I first came on this quote. http://beverlyblanchard.blogspot.com/2013/04/the-law-of-duality.html "What becomes problematic with the Law of Duality is when we start thinking that one aspect of the spectrum is better than the other aspect of spectrum." and you said you welcome any and all such discussion.

Techno peeps run out of air , drop mics Peeps deleted.

So did you just say that you do approach what you consider as unreal with a derogatory attitude but arent doing it for any good reason?

Unfortunately you cant really speak for all the buddhists here,nor absolve them of what they actively have chosen to do, now can you ? That you or one holds a thing dear or sacred , wasnt given as a viable excuse for using the hostile speech ,( that I read) its said that it is unfit. Which takes the burden off someone like me to prosecute or you to mitigate - attone for..and places it squarely back on whichever party participated. The folks who arent really buddhist followers , still,, have heard of this basic entry level paradigm or directive, so either they dont have any respect for the teachings they profess to understand so thoroughly, or they really dont understand a word of what the teachings mean. Again what teeny little bit of kindergarten buddhism Ive read , doesnt make any exception whatsoever for considering the subject matter sacred.. Now if they just bicker on Dharma wheel or in Sanghas well then I feel Its quite clear that they have lost touch with the originals. Identitifying with the 'wrongdoers' , calling them brothers making excuses and apologies for them is clearly having a incorrectly biased affinity for a group based on name. Now I havent looked into it , but I would bet a chunk of change that Gautama wouldnt say one was acting entirely right or in the spirit of the dharma to do all this stuff . Understand please , yall can go ahead with whatever you want , and keep the thing going as it has been , and I do not hold to ideas of absolute right and wrongs , so I cant hold anyone as wrong really, yall would have to decide if Im off the mark here or not, ( which yall will Im sure anyway ) and Heck I know this here post isnt right speech either ! but Im not a buddhist.

I see lots of 'wrong speech'

Yes , but you sound a tad derogatory of that , am I correct? Why should you regard it negatively ?

I wouldnt say no one , but its becoming less popular they say ,, but Im outside all the time on the weekend, I do see folks at the beach ,and fishing and in parks and at the zoo and at museums , perhaps because I go there LIVE in REALTIME. Percentagewise I have no idea what that looks like. I guess ironically , I really dont see what point any of the technophiles make specific to them either. .. Whats the technophile,,,,,, point. You like phones, I like phones , you like air , I like air.

The spiritual discussion you come across is supposed to be an applied science IMO, learn explore read etc , but then youre supposed to go back out into the world and enrich the rest with what you learned -and vice versa. Let your mundane and esoteric worlds remain somewhat distinct and crosspollinating, and I think youd prosper in both all the more for that.

IMO there is no such thing as perfect anything , excepting fulfilling that nutriment you might lack, your diet may indeed be very low in carb , I like black eyed peas which dont have the oligosaccharides of most beans and so isnt likely to cause gas. ( that WAS a big portion of oats though)

And so all the little plants have their day to strive and perhaps succeed under a spell of benign indifference. What could be gooder than that?