S: Most who like to eat meat ironically don’t want a single animal killed for them. Strange isn’t it, to miss the cause and effect of supply and demand? In existentialism, this is called ‘bad faith’ – not being true to what one already knows :-[ Maybe vege advocates should try this trick in public - free 'meatballs' on demand. Use mock ones of course! (The only 'fresh meat' is that still on happy living animals. Any other meat are just carcasses.)

C: Brilliant idea for campaign against the consumption of animals. Should do the same for the rest like baby lambs, baby cows and even fish. Throw in a human baby if that's what it takes for meat-eaters to realise the hypocritical preferences they have over this animal and that.

S: Then again, I have a feeling that most meat-lovers won't become 'enlightened' on this, even if the joke is played on them to awaken their compassion. Looking at the video, there is disgust and horror at the 'killer', but what about towards their own continual demand? May all be well and happy.

J: Thanks for sharing, but let's not judge the meat-eater. Perhaps quitting meat (like smoking) is not so easy for some people. Some of the nicest, kindest people I know are hardcore carnivores.

S: No judgement... Notice the comment has a '?' at the end :-] It’s not all or nothing. Reducing is better than not. And those who are already nice to humans can always be nicer to animals. May all be well and happy, humans and animals.

E: Things can be change if we are willing to… with compassion…

J2: New research by Dr Brock Bastian from UQ’s School of Psychology highlights the psychological processes that people engage in to reduce their discomfort over eating meat: ‘Many people like eating meat, but most are reluctant to harm things that have minds. Our studies show that this motivates people to deny minds to animals,’ Dr Bastian said. Read more in this article:
http://www.sciguru.com/newsitem/11437/Denying-mental-qualities-animals-order-eat-them

In ‘Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows’, similar to the first movie in this series, Holmes is depicted visualising ahead the possible courses of attack by his enemies, so as to be able to swiftly counter them step by step in the most efficient manner possible. While this is ingenious in its own right, as if seeing the opponent’s chess moves ahead of time, the scenes of what really happens next always differs – but Holmes improvises in the moment, from moment to moment, accordingly.

This is a good reminder of how even the best laid plans can come to nothing or close to nothing in the event of reality’s messy unpredictability. Cause and effect can be convolutedly dynamic, like the events of life itself, with the intersection of past karma’s ripening and the present fresh karma being created. Plan if you will, but do not be too rigid, or it would be a sure path to defenceless failure. Keep your mind on the objective, but improvise, improvise, improvise! What else can we do?

A planned fight sequence that went right in Sherlock Holmes 1:

He, a stone-cutter, saw
a rich man gathering many luxuries,
and wished to be like him.
Suddenly, he became him.

He saw
a high official getting much respect,
and wished to be like him.
Suddenly, he became him.

He saw
the hot sun making him sweat,
and wished to be like it,
Suddenly, he became it.

He saw
a dark cloud blocking his light,
and wished to be like it.
Suddenly, he became it.

He saw
a strong wind blowing him aside,
and wished to be like it.
Suddenly, he became it.

He saw
a huge mountain blocking his might,
and wished to be like it.
Suddenly, he became it.

He saw
a small stone-cutter chipping his body,
and wished to be like him.
Suddenly, he became him (again).

Notes: The retold story of the stone-cutter reminds us of the interdependent cycle of worth, of how even the humblest can be the most powerful. The stone-cutter was not truly weak, but weak only from his discontent, from wanting to satisfy his craving for power. Whatever our station in life is, we are like the stone-cutter. How about re-writing the story with you in it, to see how you are already powerful enough in your own right? True power, however, is from having and using great and selfless compassion and wisdom, not from any egoistic self-serving power.

Buddhism speaks of the worldly Five Desires, for wealth, sex, fame (status and power), food and sleep. With wealth, it is not difficult to satisfy the other four desires. These Five Desires all fall short of the noblest desire – for Enlightenment, based on Bodhicitta, the aspiration to guide one and all to it. All other non-spiritual desires are cyclical, ultimately pointless.

Benjamin Hoff’s retelling of the classic Chinese story in ‘The Tao Of Pooh’: 

There was once a stonecutter who was dissatisfied with himself and with his position in life. One day, he passed a wealthy merchant’s house and through the open gateway saw many fine possessions and important visitors.

Read more

On a recent phenomenon of some in the news who keep saying they are misunderstood:

If you keep needing to claim you are misunderstood,
you either really need to improve your communication skills,
or stop lying that you are misunderstood for saying what you meant.

In other words, there is no need to keep saying you are misunderstood.

The foolish hear the tone of harshness, and miss the bitter words of truth.
The wise listen to the words mindfully too, for the harsh is not always wrong.

The foolish hear the tone of niceness, and cling to sweet words of falsehood.
The wise listen to the words mindfully too, for the nice is not always right.

- Stonepeace

Related Sayings:

忠言逆耳
Good advice goes against the ear.
信言不美，美言不信
Trustworthy words are not beautiful, beautiful words are not trustworthy.
良药苦口  
Good medicine it bitter in taste.

As the wise know that the foolish are attached to the tone,
they are mindful of not using a harsh tone,
unless it is truly wiser to do so.
If not, they would no longer be wise.

- Stonepeace

The most important article I wrote so far, this year:
http://thedailyenlightenment.com/2011/12/buddhist-questions-answers-on-2012

Q: Is there a need to find an enlightened teacher?
A: No, but it makes sense to find teachers who are more enlightened than us.

Q: Why not just find an enlightened teacher?
A: It’s not easy to discern who is enlightened as we are not enlightened ourselves.

Q: How do we find teachers who are more enlightened than us then?
A: By becoming more and more enlightened ourselves.

Q: How do we become more enlightened if we might not already have teachers more enlightened than us?
A: That’s the paradoxical part, isn’t it? Just do the best with your wisdom and be open to increase it!

There’s no need to assume any teacher to be enlightened. We always need to be discerning, to not believe anyone blindly. This is what the Buddha taught too, to test his teachings. Many teachers, even if they are generally good, have some shortfalls, because most are not enlightened, or are not as enlightened as we assume them to be.

Good to learn from many sources and not just one fixed source – because it can be wrong – in parts, even if not totally. Always with an objective, discerning and questioning mind, taking references to the sutras and dead great Patriarchs’ commentaries on the sutras, whose lives are proven blameless. Question the sutras and Patriarchs’ teachings too, on whatever is questionable.

A fully enlightened person (Buddha) will not make any mistake of spreading unfounded teachings, that confuse, that need to be taken back. The fully enlightened’s conduct is like the Buddha in the sutras. Even if anyone is the manifestation of an enlightened being, the Buddha instructed that it must never be revealed, unless one is about to pass away, to inspire others. Anyone who even hints that he or she is such a manifestation when well and alive is definitely not such a being. Even so, it doesn’t mean deathbed proclamations are always right, as an enlightened person’s conduct when alive should be like the Buddha, with unmistakable compassion and wisdom. 

What if the scientific side is wrong?
What if the other side(s) is wrong?
What if you are wrong?

The question to ask is -
which side is more credible
and thus more reliable.

Even so,
all of the above might be wrong.
So just live mindfully best you can in every year, on every day!

Related Article:
Buddhist Questions & Answers on 2012
http://thedailyenlightenment.com/2011/12/buddhist-questions-answers-on-2012

A relative had a nightmare, where many people leapt in to a fire, as a ‘gift for god’. They claim it will be painless. She just stood there with the family and watched, and saw a familiar face wanting to throw her son into the fire, whom she saved in time. I was there to tell others not to jump too.

My crude interpretation of this is that the fire could represent a BBQ pit, as there was an extended family BBQ gathering she went to recently. Maybe it was a subconscious guilt trip that she was barbecuing family members from past lives (when they were animals) over a fire, to satisfy the demon of greed who lords over them like an evil god, who demands sacrifices, falsely claiming that animals die painlessly?

Always reciprocate even the smallest kindness done for us.
Never seek reciprocation even for the greatest kindness done for others.

- Stonepeace

A: 受人滴水之恩，当以涌泉相报. (When receiving another’s kindness of a drop of water, it should be repaid with torrents.)
P: Seeking reciprocation is one sure path to suffering. People who give without expecting any form of reciprocation almost never have failed businesses or marriages.
S: And even when there are failures, it’s ok for them as they never cling to expectations of payback.

X: What should we do if the kindnesses are taken for granted?
S: When we see our kindness to be taken for granted and feel unhappy, it means there was reciprocation expected. Just as we wish others to be kind to us without expecting reciprocation, why should we expect others to reciprocate our kindness?

However, if one is bullied despite being kind to another, it is also being kind to the person by addressing the issue, to prevent the person from creating negative karma. If the person refuses to see the reasoning, further continual kindness might touch and transform the person. In the worst case scenario, for the good of the person, we might need to pause being kind for a while.

P: Teachers are actually leaders. Some people say that ‘those who can’t do, teach’.
Well, mentoring and coaching is a way of ‘doing’, yes?

S: The best teachers, like the Buddhas, don’t just teach; they ‘do’ too, and did it.
They attained Enlightenment and teach the path to it.
With their experience, their teaching is unsurpassable.

(To do is the practical and to teach is the theoretical.)

Feng Zikai’s satirical comic ‘Creating oneness of thought’.

The dumbing of the masses according to political preferences;
the direct opposite of mass ascension to oneness of perfect wisdom in Pure Land!

If this is 100% true, this is another good reason to migrate to Pure Land,
the land of no greed and currency, where all thrive on self and shared spiritual merits,
where material well-being is already abundant for all without the concept of ‘wealth’.

Here’s something more confounding than the conventional concept of time-travel,
that is ironically possible – somewhat…

Question: How do you travel to the past while you travel to the future?
Answer: By hanging on to diehard habits, thus going around in circular rebirths, even though somewhat going forward.

If there is universally accepted reasoning,
there would be not a single conflict in the world.

The question is whether the deluded can or are willing
to acknowledge sound reasoning to be reasonable,
whether the less deluded can or are willing to show why it is reasonable.

(I used to think there’s no delusion more terrible than self-delusion…
till I encountered self-delusion that seeps over to delude others en masse!)

[The graphic is a joke - because circular reasoning is almost always faulty.]