Why are we not allowed to cut hair when it's ok to cut nails, since both are created by God?

Scarlet Pimpernel · #**127** (**permalink**) 14-Mar-2012, 02:42 AM

Quote:

what you wish to say clearly.

Veera I came as soon as I was summoned,just as we understand eachother through words exchanged and not by appearance,so it must be with the enlghtened one ,you can identify him from his speech,it may not be so easy to ascertain his state from his silhouette.
*

Parma · #**128** (**permalink**) 14-Mar-2012, 03:47 AM

A simple question, How do you identify a friend? How do you Identify a lover? If a person listens hears and gives their upmost respect to you then they are a person you should hold dear regardless, it would be your own downfall if you regarded them with nothing but contempt. Do you ask your people you love to change for you? If they change there will no longer be any love! People are to be recognized by there individual awakening. People say things as how about when no one would collect the guru's sees after he was martyred. You could have a thousand men with 5k's on if they dont have it in their hearts to do the service for the guru then they will not! You can not make your friends or your loved ones stick up for you. That is something that comes from within. The look is between god and the individual. People live in tribes in jungles will you say they have not found god, they will have a belief system not the same as ours maybe but it exists. It comes down to being able to love people for who they are not what you wish them to be. All people have their own service. When love is created try hurting anything even a dog of someone that has love for something and the lover will lay down his life for that! That is true love of the Guru Granth Sahib that is the true Khalsa and that is the truth in everybody. Try hurting the ones you love it is impossible!

amarjit singh bamrah · #**129** (**permalink**) 14-Mar-2012, 03:56 AM

Waheguru

I read this sometime ago I do not how true this is

Amarjit

======================

The Truth About Hair and Why Indians Would Keep Their Hair Long

United Truth Seekers
Thu, 08 Sep 2011 14:32 CDT

Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sikh-sikhi-sikhism/32165-why-we-not-allowed-cut-hair.html

© Black Elk

This information about hair has been hidden from the public since the Viet Nam War .

Our culture leads people to believe that hair style is a matter of personal preference, that hair style is a matter of fashion and/or convenience, and that how people wear their hair is simply a cosmetic issue. Back in the Vietnam war however, an entirely different picture emerged, one that has been carefully covered up and hidden from public view.

In the early nineties, Sally [name changed to protect privacy] was married to a licensed psychologist who worked at a VA Medical hospital. He worked with combat veterans with PTSD, post traumatic stress disorder. Most of them had served in Vietnam.

Sally said, "I remember clearly an evening when my husband came back to our apartment on Doctor's Circle carrying a thick official looking folder in his hands. Inside were hundreds of pages of certain studies commissioned by the government. He was in shock from the contents. What he read in those documents completely changed his life. From that moment on my conservative middle of the road husband grew his hair and beard and never cut them again. What is more, the VA Medical center let him do it, and other very conservative men in the staff followed his example.

As I read the documents, I learned why. It seems that during the Vietnam War special forces in the war department had sent undercover experts to comb American Indian Reservations looking for talented scouts, for tough young men trained to move stealthily through rough terrain. They were especially looking for men with outstanding, almost supernatural, tracking abilities. Before being approached, these carefully selected men were extensively documented as experts in tracking and survival.

With the usual enticements, the well proven smooth phrases used to enroll new recruits, some of these Indian trackers were then enlisted. Once enlisted, an amazing thing happened. Whatever talents and skills they had possessed on the reservation seemed to mysteriously disappear, as recruit after recruit failed to perform as expected in the field.

Serious causalities and failures of performance led the government to contract expensive testing of these recruits, and this is what was found.

When questioned about their failure to perform as expected, the older recruits replied consistently that when they received their required military haircuts, they could no longer 'sense' the enemy, they could no longer access a 'sixth sense', their 'intuition' no longer was reliable, they couldn't 'read' subtle signs as well or access subtle extrasensory information.

So the testing institute recruited more Indian trackers, let them keep their long hair, and tested them in multiple areas. Then they would pair two men together who had received the same scores on all the tests. They would let one man in the pair keep his hair long, and gave the other man a military haircut. Then the two men retook the tests.

Time after time the man with long hair kept making high scores. Time after time, the man with the short hair failed the tests in which he had previously scored high scores.

Here is a Typical Test:

The recruit is sleeping out in the woods. An armed 'enemy' approaches the sleeping man. The long haired man is awakened out of his sleep by a strong sense of danger and gets away long before the enemy is close, long before any sounds from the approaching enemy are audible.

In another version of this test the long haired man senses an approach and somehow intuits that the enemy will perform a physical attack. He follows his 'sixth sense' and stays still, pretending to be sleeping, but quickly grabs the attacker and 'kills' him as the attacker reaches down to strangle him.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32165

This same man, after having passed these and other tests, then received a military haircut and consistently failed these tests, and many other tests that he had previously passed.

So the document recommended that all Indian trackers be exempt from military haircuts. In fact, it required that trackers keep their hair long."

Comment:

The mammalian body has evolved over millions of years. Survival skills of human and animal at times seem almost supernatural. Science is constantly coming up with more discoveries about the amazing abilities of man and animal to survive. Each part of the body has highly sensitive work to perform for the survival and well being of the body as a whole.The body has a reason for every part of itself.

Hair is an extension of the nervous system, it can be correctly seen as exteriorized nerves, a type of highly evolved 'feelers' or 'antennae' that transmit vast amounts of important information to the brain stem, the limbic system, and the neocortex.

Not only does hair in people, including facial hair in men, provide an information highway reaching the brain, hair also emits energy, the electromagnetic energy emitted by the brain into the outer environment. This has been seen in Kirlian photography when a person is photographed with long hair and then rephotographed after the hair is cut.

When hair is cut, receiving and sending transmissions to and from the environment are greatly hampered. This results in numbing-out .

Cutting of hair is a contributing factor to unawareness of environmental distress in local ecosystems. It is also a contributing factor to insensitivity in relationships of all kinds. It contributes to sexual frustration.

Conclusion:

In searching for solutions for the distress in our world, it may be time for us to consider that many of our most basic assumptions about reality are in error. It may be that a major part of the solution is looking at us in the face each morning when we see ourselves in the mirror.

The story of Sampson and Delilah in the Bible has a lot of encoded truth to tell us. When Delilah cut Sampson's hair, the once undefeatable Sampson was defeated.

Reported by C. Young

Comment: SOTT can't confirm this story or the research it suggests took place, however, we have wondered on many occasions, what is the use of hair and why so many legends refer to hair as being a source of strength, from Samson, to Nazarenes, to the Long Haired Franks.

Parma · #**130** (**permalink**) 14-Mar-2012, 04:49 AM

Fair enough. If it helps define you for the better of you then fine, there will be arugments to counter act the case above and all sorts. My argument is with the people in authority not giving any other independant Sikhs or lovers of god, the chance to show love and devotion to god in the way they do. They class themselves as Khalsa without knowing that you can not define Khalsa! Purity can not be defined! Every man should be treated with the same respect. That is why I will not say a depiction of a man with a big beard or big hair is wrong either. The definition is a personal one between god and the individual, if it helps you feel royal fine, if make you feel uncomfortable change that be happy as god intends all that god loves is to be happy. Are you not happy when in love? Just because the 5k's are not adhered to they are not a sikh what rubbish. That is what will bring the downfall. Like I mentioned in a earlier post you can not define god and his humble subjects. God exsits in all.
p.s. This is all if the established order wants to last. It is for the established order to change. Otherwise it will all change without you it is happening as I type dera's are forming changing sikhism to individual paths in the end the established order will just become another dera. Either change to accept the full truth and nothing but the truth or the truth will change you. Simple. Who are you fighting for nobody because in the end religion is for peace, and the peacfull will not fight. So you will look foolish due to arrogance, and I tell you what it will be you who misses out, because you will be the next stone the next bin laden maybe. Look at history and instead of becoming history become apart of the future the truth. Develop as all things that survive do and so should sikhism it means learn. Learn it! Develop grow become one!

Archived_member14 · #**131** (**permalink**) 14-Mar-2012, 11:19 AM

Parma ji.

I appreciate that you question the significance of the 5ks. It is with this in mind that I now make some comments, some to further clarify, but some to correct with the idea that the arrow of understanding can gradually be straightened.

----
P: Fair enough. If it helps define you for the better of you then fine, there will be arugments to counter act the case above and all sorts.

C: It makes no difference as you point out, if one keeps hair or not when it comes to the development of understanding and other good qualities. But what if the reason for keeping it is wrong such as those given in the above article and elsewhere? Can one have a distorted understanding about cause and effect and be expected to understand the Truth?
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32165

----
P: My argument is with the people in authority not giving any other independant Sikhs or lovers of god, the chance to show love and devotion to god in the way they do.

C: No, it comes down to each individual doing what conditions dictate. You apparently are not influenced by the authorities, therefore if someone is, the authorities should not be made to blame. They too, are each different individual and will reap the fruits of their own actions and nothing to do with anyone else. I don't think it helps to point a finger at anyone, much less an abstract, labeled “authority”.

-----
P: They class themselves as Khalsa without knowing that you can not define Khalsa! Purity can not be defined!

C: I think what you are saying is that purity of mind does not come from paying attention to outward behavior, let alone how one looks and what symbols are held. It comes from understanding the mind and what are good and what are evil mental states. To think that conformity in outward appearance can lead to purity of mind is in fact encouraging of belief in the efficacy of rules and rituals which Guru Nanak spoke so much against. Some speak of ‘identity’ and of ‘pride’, but this is the stuff of “ego” which again is spoken against, is it not?

-----
P: Every man should be treated with the same respect. That is why I will not say a depiction of a man with a big beard or big hair is wrong either.

C: Second only to wisdom, kindness or friendliness is the greatest of virtues. Without it, there can be no compassion, no respect and other good qualities. Kindness does not differentiate between persons worthy and not worthy; this is because at the moment it perceives the good in the other person.

-----
P: The definition is a personal one between god and the individual, if it helps you feel royal fine, if make you feel uncomfortable change that be happy as god intends all that god loves is to be happy.

C: This can be misleading.
Being uncomfortable is not a reason to change nor is happiness the reason to go on with what one does. This is what each individual does anyway, and is it not because of ignorance and attachment? The right course of conduct goes against the stream of attachment. This means that any discomfort should be understood instead of reacted to with ignorance; likewise happiness is to be seen for what it is because otherwise, attachment takes reign and directs the show.

True, good deeds is often accompanied by pleasant feelings (happiness), but the feeling itself is *not* the measure. Besides attachment too comes with pleasant feelings, therefore if one were to go by ‘happiness’ this must be due to ignorance. Because a good deed is good because of its nature and not because it is accompanied by happy feelings.

-------
P: Are you not happy when in love?
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32165

C: And when there is love (my kindness), do you care whether or not that you are happy? Is this not because kindness is seen as valuable in and of itself? Why pollute it by appealing to the happiness which is only a feeling and in fact may or may not accompany it (because there can be neutral feelings as well)?

------
P: Just because the 5k's are not adhered to they are not a sikh what rubbish.

C: I do not really know what constitutes and what does not a Sikh. However I do know that if one believes that outward appearance and holding of symbols can lead to mental purity, this must in fact lead to much harm, and I don't believe that Sikh encourages this.

------
P: That is what will bring the downfall.

C: But some people measure growth in terms of the number of followers and in fact the number of Sikhs may not decrease. But the question is, how many recognize the essentials and how many misunderstand and are only Sikhs in name.

-----
P: Like I mentioned in a earlier post you can not define god and his humble subjects. God exsits in all.*

C: In my language, I think what you are saying is that you cannot measure good/ bad, right / wrong in terms of conformity or not, in holding symbols and outward appearance. This I agree with but with the added remark that one should not in fact come to a general conclusion about anyone. This is because a living being is one moment this mind state and another moment, another one, and this happens trillions of times in one second. In other words change, insubstantiality and impersonal is the nature of all phenomena. And as much as it is misleading to entertain a global idea about another person, I think it is wrong also to suggest to the effect that all people deep down inside are inherently good and are moving forward in the right direction.

ps: The unusual format is because my internet connection is down and this has been written in word and will be transferred to my smartphone and sent via 3G.

Parma · #**132** (**permalink**) 14-Mar-2012, 15:20 PM

C: It makes no difference as you point out, if one keeps hair or not when it comes to the development of understanding and other good qualities. But what if the reason for keeping it is wrong such as those given in the above article and elsewhere? Can one have a distorted understanding about cause and effect and be expected to understand the Truth?
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32165

Understanding at a pinnacle is just a form of thought. If your thoughts are distorted then what are they distorted by? I would conclude as the guru's have taught, the distortion is worldly vices. Nothing more or less. So put simply, How can one have a distorted understanding about the cause and effect of the truth, on that basis? There is no distortion apart from what you build up yourself!

C: No, it comes down to each individual doing what conditions dictate. You apparently are not influenced by the authorities, therefore if someone is, the authorities should not be made to blame. They too, are each different individual and will reap the fruits of their own actions and nothing to do with anyone else. I don't think it helps to point a finger at anyone, much less an abstract, labeled “authority”.

Each individual is not allowed to do as conditions dictate they are dictated too. You must not go to the gurdwara. If a simple man asked to read and do service of the gurbani they are not allowed to unless they have taken the 5k's in some temples. You may not experience the differences talk to a whole sikh community that feel excluded from there own temples. It whole sole purpose and rerasoning in why dera's and other paths are being formed. Breaking up sikhism

C: And when there is love (my kindness), do you care whether or not that you are happy? Is this not because kindness is seen as valuable in and of itself? Why pollute it by appealing to the happiness which is only a feeling and in fact may or may not accompany it (because there can be neutral feelings as well)?
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32165

I am surprised you disregard feelings so easily. Everything thing is based on feelings. From the point your mother and father make love and produce you to the point of death the feeling of pain. Religion is based on feelings. Humans animals plants energy some of these actions can not be seen only felt. Without feelings you will not wake up. Everything is bound by feelings. Love is the ulitmate feeling and love naturally brings enjoyment which brings happiness so to be neutral on happiness is like saying i am happy but I dont know it makes no sense. Even people with no concept of communication can understand feeling. That is how deep and big feelings are. Happiness is best understanding of one self try it be happy you will not wont to go back to being sad.

C: But some people measure growth in terms of the number of followers and in fact the number of Sikhs may not decrease. But the question is, how many recognize the essentials and how many misunderstand and are only Sikhs in name.

Obviously you measure growth in terms of numbers of followers, so how are you going to make someone follow you? Every human recognizes the essentials maybe not in your context but all humans have a conscions, the guru granth sahib is the best guide on forming that conscions better.
C: In my language, I think what you are saying is that you cannot measure good/ bad, right / wrong in terms of conformity or not, in holding symbols and outward appearance. This I agree with but with the added remark that one should not in fact come to a general conclusion about anyone. This is because a living being is one moment this mind state and another moment, another one, and this happens trillions of times in one second. In other words change, insubstantiality and impersonal is the nature of all phenomena. And as much as it is misleading to entertain a global idea about another person, I think it is wrong also to suggest to the effect that all people deep down inside are inherently good and are moving forward in the right direction.

It is not misleading to entertain a global idea. That is the whole concept of god. Show every man and women the view of love to all others as their brother and sister what is wrong with that concept? To enforce that view on your brothers and sisters is wrong but to view them as your brothers and sisters is not! Like the gurbarni is it is a natural state of progression. Like you said I agree conformity does not apply to appearance, people are born black, white, brown and everything else under the sun, and as such conformity should be liberal a personal point between the individual and god like the world as it is raw. Who are we to judge that Deep down people are not inherently good. Who is to be the judge? So you start to view people as evil or righteous that has a negative effect. View who you are conform to your own understanding of the gurbani, instead of placing it in a box. Listen like I said this is a battle to discover the truth inside you! Whatever path you take make it into a box or disperse it like grains of sand you can not win as the thought process is between the product and the maker. How will a computer work without a person to work the keyboard. This is longing that will not end that is how you know their is a god. You will not drink if you are not thirsty it is a natural custom a natural process to find peace and the truth you can not stop it build a damn build anything. Were you think nothing exsist something will still exsist. This is beyond comprehension it is the truth.

Archived_member14 · #**133** (**permalink**) 14-Mar-2012, 22:35 PM

Parma ji,

And I thought that you would agree with most of what I wrote. : -)

Quote:

C: It makes no difference as you point out, if one keeps hair or not when it comes to the development of understanding and other good qualities. But what if the reason for keeping it is wrong such as those given in the above article and elsewhere? Can one have a distorted understanding about cause and effect and be expected to understand the Truth?

Parma:
Understanding at a pinnacle is just a form of thought.

No, you are wrong about this. Understanding is a function by one mental reality and thinking is by another one. To get an idea of what the former is, I give you the following analogy:

Perception is like the village child who sees coins in the hand. He experiences only the glitter and shine. Consciousness is like the village adult, who experiences the glitter and shine and knows that it is money. Wisdom is like the money lender, he knows the true value of that money.

Thinking is a mental reality which arises with both ignorance and with wisdom performing a function which neither of these two does. So when it arises with ignorance it thinks wrongly about the object and when it arises with wisdom, it thinks rightly about it.

Quote:

If your thoughts are distorted then what are they distorted by? I would conclude as the guru's have taught, the distortion is worldly vices. Nothing more or less.

Ignorance is the root of all evil. However when it accompanies attachment, aversion, conceit, jealousy and so on, it is not so bad as when it is with wrong understanding. The distortion that accompanied wrong understanding is of the worst kind.

Quote:

So put simply, How can one have a distorted understanding about the cause and effect of the truth, on that basis? There is no distortion apart from what you build up yourself!

I was referring to the idea of cause and effect in the case of wrong understanding. So it was not about the Truth but what is fact is not the Truth. And this as I said above, is the worst of distortions. Because while the distortion that comes with other instances of ignorance such as attachment and aversion only conditions more of the same, this one mistakes what is not the truth for the truth hence leads one further away from the possibility of ever understanding the Truth.

Quote:

C: No, it comes down to each individual doing what conditions dictate. You apparently are not influenced by the authorities, therefore if someone is, the authorities should not be made to blame. They too, are each different individual and will reap the fruits of their own actions and nothing to do with anyone else. I don't think it helps to point a finger at anyone, much less an abstract, labeled “authority”.

Parma:
Each individual is not allowed to do as conditions dictate they are dictated too.

Each person does what conditions allow and these conditions are not within his or anyone else's control. If you follow someone else's dictates this is because the conditions which include your own ignorance and attachments, dictate that you do. If you are not influenced, this points to other tendencies, but nevertheless still not within your or anyone else's control. Choice is an illusion which wrong understanding likes to believe it has.

Quote:

You must not go to the gurdwara. If a simple man asked to read and do service of the gurbani they are not allowed to unless they have taken the 5k's in some temples. You may not experience the differences talk to a whole sikh community that feel excluded from there own temples. It whole sole purpose and rerasoning in why dera's and other paths are being formed. Breaking up Sikhism

But don't you at the same time believe that purity of heart is a matter of each individual's own development? So what if you can't go to the Gurdwara and do what you want to do? Is this an obstacle to right conduct? If you've accumulated much understanding and kindness, can anything stop these from arising in any situation? On the other hand if you have much ignorance and greed, what makes you think that these won't arise when you go to the Gurdwara? If it can happen to those you point a finger at, it can happen to anyone although manifested differently.

Quote:

C: And when there is love (my kindness), do you care whether or not that you are happy? Is this not because kindness is seen as valuable in and of itself? Why pollute it by appealing to the happiness which is only a feeling and in fact may or may not accompany it (because there can be neutral feelings as well)?

Parma:
I am surprised you disregard feelings so easily. Everything thing is based on feelings.

We are moved by feelings, this I have pointed out in my last response when I said:
“Being uncomfortable is not a reason to change nor is happiness the reason to go on with what one does. This is what each individual does anyway, and is it not because of ignorance and attachment?”

We are attached to pleasant feelings, repelled by unpleasant feelings and grow in ignorance in response to neutral feelings. This is the way we are and being fuel for continued existence, is the reason why we remain trapped. It is an aspect of wisdom which understands this to be the case and thereby grow less and less influenced by feelings.

Quote:

From the point your mother and father make love and produce you to the point of death the feeling of pain.

Yeah, the stuff of continued existence.

Quote:

Religion is based on feelings.

If by this you mean that most people are motivated to follow one religion or another due to attachment and the pleasant feelings which accompany it, I agree. But then this would be the wrong motivation and is reason why people of faith create such a bad impression on those who do not believe in any religion.

Quote:

Humans animals plants energy some of these actions can not be seen only felt.

Or perhaps you just imagine things and don't know that this is taking place. Energy is a concept, the product of the thinking process, what is experienced through touch are the earth, fire and wind elements. And yes, these are accompanied by either pleasant or unpleasant feeling, but feeling is feeling and not the physical phenomena being referred to.

Quote:

Without feelings you will not wake up. Everything is bound by feelings.

Let’s say this, all mental states are accompanied by feeling, some pleasant, some unpleasant and some neutral. Attachment can be towards pleasant feelings but not only this, but anything else, for example, color, smell, taste, concepts and so on. So in fact we may wake up in response to pleasant feeling, or we may wake up in response to some other object. And I don’t disagree that feeling is important, as you say, we are “bound by feelings”, but what I’m suggesting at the same time is that this is because of ignorance and attachment.

So from my point of view giving importance to whether the feeling is pleasant or not is a mistake. You however appear to be suggesting that we should be guided in doing what we do by whether this gives rise to pleasant feeling or not….

Quote:

Love is the ulitmate feeling and love naturally brings enjoyment which brings happiness so to be neutral on happiness is like saying i am happy but I dont know it makes no sense.

I think you would do well to distinguish feelings which accompany mental states from the other mental factors involved. Feeling accompanies all instances of consciousness, but so do, perception, concentration, attention, intention, life faculty and contact. When you refer to kindness, then there are several other mental factors including, faith, detachment, moral shame, non-aversion (kindness) itself and more. So really, feeling is just one small part of the experience, but more importantly, if you refer to kindness, this is non-aversion the reality which you would want to promote and not “feeling”! You are confusing one reality with another.

So accompanied by pleasant feeling or by neutral feeling, what is important is to see the value in non-aversion.

Quote:

Even people with no concept of communication can understand feeling. That is how deep and big feelings are. Happiness is best understanding of one self try it be happy you will not wont to go back to being sad.

Yes, as I said each mental state is accompanied by feeling and we all find this important. A man who is deaf, dumb and also blind, even he is moved by feelings, so too are animals and insects. And yes, people crave for more and more pleasant feelings, hence the phenomena of addiction to drugs and alcohol. And all beings are repelled by sadness given that this is accompanied by unpleasant feelings, but this is a conditioned response which happens regardless of whether there is any pleasant feelings to compare with.

Quote:

C: But some people measure growth in terms of the number of followers and in fact the number of Sikhs may not decrease. But the question is, how many recognize the essentials and how many misunderstand and are only Sikhs in name.

Parma:
Obviously you measure growth in terms of numbers of followers, so how are you going to make someone follow you?

You misunderstood me. I was pointing to the fact that there are people who do this but suggested that this in fact is not important.

Quote:

Every human recognizes the essentials maybe not in your context but all humans have a conscions, the guru granth sahib is the best guide on forming that conscions better.

You are imagining things and continue to believe in it in spite of evidence to the contrary.
All human beings have consciousness, but 99.99% of the time, this is rooted in ignorance.

Quote:

C: In my language, I think what you are saying is that you cannot measure good/ bad, right / wrong in terms of conformity or not, in holding symbols and outward appearance. This I agree with but with the added remark that one should not in fact come to a general conclusion about anyone. This is because a living being is one moment this mind state and another moment, another one, and this happens trillions of times in one second. In other words change, insubstantiality and impersonal is the nature of all phenomena. And as much as it is misleading to entertain a global idea about another person, I think it is wrong also to suggest to the effect that all people deep down inside are inherently good and are moving forward in the right direction.

Parma:
It is not misleading to entertain a global idea.

You misunderstood my reference to global. But I'll not go into this now as the response is already quite long. Maybe there will be another chance to clarify.

Parma · #**134** (**permalink**) 14-Mar-2012, 23:30 PM

Ok, I agree with what you wrote, do you agree : - )

No, you are wrong about this. Understanding is a function by one mental reality and thinking is by another one. To get an idea of what the former is, I give you the following analogy:

Perception is like the village child who sees coins in the hand. He experiences only the glitter and shine. Consciousness is like the village adult, who experiences the glitter and shine and knows that it is money. Wisdom is like the money lender, he knows the true value of that money.

Thinking is a mental reality which arises with both ignorance and with wisdom performing a function which neither of these two does. So when it arises with ignorance it thinks wrongly about the object and when it arises with wisdom, it thinks rightly about it.

So your saying their is no thought in understanding? May I ask how did you think that?

Ignorance is the root of all evil. However when it accompanies attachment, aversion, conceit, jealousy and so on, it is not so bad as when it is with wrong understanding. The distortion that accompanied wrong understanding is of the worst kind.
I agree!!

So from my point of view giving importance to whether the feeling is pleasant or not is a mistake. You however appear to be suggesting that we should be guided in doing what we do by whether this gives rise to pleasant feeling or not….

Yes giving importance to whether a feeling is pleasant or not is not a mistake. So you would rather have someone remain in a unpleasant feeling and stand their saying that's a nice feeling. No sain person will put up with that torture, sounds like a Nazi concerntration camp!
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32165

I think you would do well to distinguish feelings which accompany mental states from the other mental factors involved. Feeling accompanies all instances of consciousness, but so do, perception, concentration, attention, intention, life faculty and contact. When you refer to kindness, then there are several other mental factors including, faith, detachment, moral shame, non-aversion (kindness) itself and more. So really, feeling is just one small part of the experience, but more importantly, if you refer to kindness, this is non-aversion the reality which you would want to promote and not “feeling”! You are confusing one reality with another.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=32165

So accompanied by pleasant feeling or by neutral feeling, what is important is to see the value in non-aversion.

Now you want to split the mind apart, how many realities? Madness my fellow man! I guess the name is very fitting confused ji?

welcomemunda This is earth!

Parma · #**135** (**permalink**) 14-Mar-2012, 23:37 PM

cheerlead er