et-thoughts

Generally agreed with what you responded and would like to add "the jujitsu dance metaphor"... I envision this as the gentle art of directing energy flows in constructive ways to induce changes regardless of realizing what be going on or not... In other words if the bully wants to fight, thats their problem, we choose to exercise and dance with them till they realize that the only way to play is to play nice games Personally I prefer for better changes to just happen with or without my realization of what be going on. As sometimes I state "the best solution to a problem is not having it"! This is easier said than done especially when ones skills to move still require learning dexterity.

indeed! Ditto that... its for others and for us...

Gatito, I saw the link you provided... and think that.... :-) Me being, depends on me being ... the thinking, feeling, experiencing of dialogues is like the breathing in and out. If someone ask you to stop reasoning thinking talking listening breading feeling always remember that there is a reason ... and it may reflect what THEY need to do rather than what YOU need to do... better to focus and direct the thinking talking listening breading feeling than to stop them altogether... The same goes for the thoughts, the feelings, the experiences, the words, the actions, the body, the mind, the spirit, the ego, better to focus and direct them than the opposite... Wonder what you meant by cross posting and the other stuff you said... you are always welcomed to contribute as far as I am concerned... there is always a reason for everything that happens...

The reason I ask centers on discovering what I need to do to change what needs changing especially when the reasoning and logic used keeps beings from changing it rather than helping individuals make the change happen. Why seek the change? well to bring about a transformation for the betterment and enrichment of each and all. Say we be in a playground and a bully arrives. I would like to play nice, and would like others to play nice. So how do we get the bully not to be a bully without bulling them (and becoming a bully ourselves)? When we look at the situation the bullies are natural leaders that could induce everyone to play nice, if they choose to play nice games rather than bulling games. I see this situation taking place in other domains but for now will continue with this framing. The general question here encompasses a larger issue. It involves establishing ways to ensure the better ways 'infect and prosper' rather than the other way around. CONSIDER that we want others to change and embrace "a two-way discussion of the subject at hand" rather than accepting their unilateral stance which they just want to hold because of what they hold OR we what the unreasonable to be reasonable... Asking 'better for who' exposes a common notion that keeps some from realizing that what be better for them involves what be better for others. In a way I am also asking how do we get those who ignore the need to change and do not want to change to change to ensure that when I am one of those I change. Hope this helps to focus a bit more this thread and maybe discover a thing or two worth cultivating...

The reason I ask centers on discovering what I need to do to change what needs changing especially when the reasoning and logic used keeps beings from changing it rather than helping individuals make the change happen. Why seek the change? well to bring about a transformation for the betterment and enrichment of each and all. Say we be in a playground and a bully arrives. I would like to play nice, and would like others to play nice. So how do we get the bully not to be a bully without bulling them (and becoming a bully ourselves)? When we look at the situation the bullies are natural leaders that could induce everyone to play nice, if they choose to play nice games rather than bulling games. I see this situation taking place in other domains but for now will continue with this framing. The general question here encompasses a larger issue. It involves establishing ways to ensure the better ways 'infect and prosper' rather than the other way around. CONSIDER that we want others to change and embrace "a two-way discussion of the subject at hand" rather than accepting their unilateral stance which they just want to hold because of what they hold OR we what the unreasonable to be reasonable... Asking 'better for who' exposes a common notion that keeps some from realizing that what be better for them involves what be better for others. In a way I am also asking how do we get those who ignore the need to change and do not want to change to change to ensure that when I am one of those I change. Hope this helps to focus a bit more this thread and maybe discover a thing or two worth cultivating...

Actually the point is that To have a point in the land of the pointless is ... ...To have a point in the land of the pointless! though it might be practically impossible for many there to understand the point :-) given the pointless language... still the language can grow, by definitions and distinctions, which can enable or disable understanding. Language and beliefs can be restrictive or encompassing and depending on which beliefs and language one chooses the experiences change. So the point here is to wisely choose the enabling encompassing distinctions and explore the point fully ;-) I have a question for you and others regarding changing what some choose to believe by getting them to consider something 'better'... I observed that often this leads to a rejection rather than a transformation. My question is what is one to do to facilitate the transformation...

When thinking about Yin Yang point, I envision that circle with two half drops circling about ... The circle reminds me of a point so small that it has no size though in principle it still holds a circumference and the other parts... it also reminds me of a point that transcends into a line that transcends into a plane that transcends into a cube only to be baffled by the smoothness of a sphere which in a way is just a point... hope you get the point :-)

.

.

Note how the non-dualism notion still refers to the dualism notion... rather than referring to a singular distinct model referred at... It similar to how the restrictive way of zero-limits and infinite-limits talk about abundance in terms of limitless rather than infinite possibilities. The way to will the clouds away is to will a clear sky rather than will for the clouds to vanish...

manitou, Indeed its a hazy thread which hopefully will 'force' us to thread lightly :-) as we discover what surrounds us. Liked most of what you said about distinctions... would say distinctions are the very tool we use for singular purposes. By nailing down distinctions, I think we're choosing options among the possibilities... and if we choose the perfect singularity we are choosing friends without loosing friends... We can solidify our own separateness and unity at the same time! Recently, in the last year or so, I been wondering why should one be tolerant of the intolerant rather than just reflect back to them their intolerance without that making one be intolerant. Why "accept all things and every One as One And The Same" rather than recognize things and beings singularities and uniqueness? Why seek to see all beings as ourselves rather than seek to see each being and thing for what it be? let me share with you a metaphor with a singular point that is both unique and equal. Imagine a line from the smallest to the largest. Now pick two points in that line. Observe how below and above each point there be infinite more points, which makes the point be the same while still being uniquely different. Have to go so need to condense what I was going to say even more... Love our Brothers as love loves them... more latter on yin/yang

Thought to respond to two points you maid ... cut and copied them within what you said... In a humorous tone... its going to be impossible to negate all dualities with the particular distinction used... one would still keep the negation around... resolve all inner conflicts requires recognizing what be going on and choosing what will be going on next. Other singular integrations of situation are possible. What I have found works involved incorporating an additional point to the duality which creates a singular triad where all point become one and the same. For example there are three absolute meanings: 1 what was said 2 what was heard 3 what be shared. Then the three are one and the same true communication takes place. I wonder how one can be in the world of others and cause the set laws and prohibitions and behaviors there to change for the better without getting into trouble? In other words be a good catalysts rather than an accomplice or a bystander.

.

Just use a thermometer to know the water temperature and move away from the appreciative judgement calls of hot and cold... Sometimes when dealing with duality someone will put forth the notion of the map and the territory... to which I have added a third distinctive domain. So to me its : the map, the territory and the distinctions. This may come handy latter on. I hold that living with duality stems from what we been trained to conceive rather than some innate condition associated to living. In fact we can be trained to conceive using other notions. I like to use the example of up-down and upward. This last term 'upward' is defined as a base, and a direction of up. There is no need to define the term 'downward' in fact if we look at its definition we can see that its in essence the same one we have used for upward: a base, and a direction. The point I am driving at center on seeking a way to move from appreciative subjective biased dualistic calls towards distinctions that help us understand situations better. By permanent I mean something that will happen to be from one point into perpetuity. For example "this thought and feeling I have now". Once created it exists forever and ever. Sure in the next moment I may choose to create a different thought and feeling and that will add to what already exists forever and ever. The point that concerns me a bit is the twisted notion that seeks to make bad good and good bad rather than keeping it simple with the notion that good be good and bad be bad. This notion can take many forms: from there is no good and bad, its all relative, good and bad are the two sides of a coin... BTW the coin actually has three sides and there are good coins and fake ones. Some things that are now came to be just now, thus not everything that is has always been, though what is now will certainly always be even though it may actually cease to exist. I can define what be, regardless of my actual comprehension of it, though it would be better if we defined it on what be rather than some delusion of what be. How do we know its an apple tree rather than a pear tree? Where I live there is a saying that alludes to this notion not being quite so determinate and resulting in predicaments. I wonder if the notion of Yin and Yang results in predicaments that keep us distracted from the core of the matter. Perhaps the key resides in the distinctions we choose to use. Perhaps its now time to learn and or create better distinctions to use. what do you think?

Why fight the opponent and become an opponent when one can dance with them and remain a dancer? Use the swords to Cut the two sides stances into one flowing movement can make a fight become an exercise of dance.

some monsters seek to distract us from our experiences, entice us to certain experiences, for reasons that may be of others... There are sources of acceleration towards expansion and realization that have no real monsters which some monsters would rather individuals ignore. careful with the tricksters that want to cultivate tricks at your expense!

.

.

.

.

.

.

.