Posts by mark taslov
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I really can't for the life of me understand why so many people consider feelings as somehow occurring outside of biology.
Nice, Giovanni.
The English term 'spiritual' itself, with it's secondary definition,
of or pertaining to the spirit or soul, as distinguished from the physical nature: a spiritual approach to life.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/spiritual?qsrc=2888
does seem something of a misnomer.
-
Yes, when I was young and foolish I hadn't learned that it is not necessary to read a book to the end.
I can only assume that your parents weren't 'The Beatles' obsessives...
Dao de Jiing #47
-
I think in Thailand the name lent itself to all sorts of word play, because it's part of the verb "to be".
Sounds like great fun...partake:
-
English: Mark: ....skid-mark, a trail of left on the ground by tyres, and....
ha. Thanks. perspective!
But you do have to read a bit about it to realize that.
you'd think...at least to know how what you're knowing is defined. There is something telling in your reading of that book to the end.
-
sorry Ben, no offence intended, it's a very light word, used most amicably in this case.
-
笨 bèn: stupid; foolish; silly; slow-witted; clumsy
-
haha, reading to learn zen ben....rich ironies.
-
bingo!
-
Sounds like Buddhism and Catholicism have population increase as a common goal..
and yet 350 million Buddhists vs 1b+ Catholics...
Buddhism, however, has plenty to say:
Buddhist sexual proscriptions ban homosexual sexual activity and heterosexual sex through orifices other than the vagina, including masturbation or other sexual activity with the hand. Buddhist proscriptions also forbid sex at certain times - such as during full and half moon days, the daytime, and during a wife's menstrual period or pregnancy - or near shrines or temples. Adultery is considered sexual misconduct, but the hiring of a female prostitute for penile-vaginal sex is not, unless one pays a third party to procure the person.
Where's this text from? Seems a little a bit of a misrepresentation.
-
And Mr Taslov, if you thought that was infuriating I can only presume you have not read the in-depth recent Q and A with Mr Rianz or Chris Keall's blatant misrepresentation.
Thanks Sacha, yeah it was Mark's link to the Q&A that boiled my kettle, not sure if now is a good time to touch the Mr Kealls contribution. Best to take my meds first.