Nice Mermaids Real Ones

Mermaid
Witch
Religion
Evolution
... good to argue with!

Sexualization of Body Parts

Sexualization of breasts has changed human perception of moral and immoral.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTm5XZMRg8w&NR=1&feature=endscreen



This is just a video nothing to do with sexualization. But how do you see/feel about it anyway as you watch?

Feelings No Unique

http://weheartit.com/entry/38591628



http://weheartit.com/entry/35838035

Money

This is how we are?

It's an old file I've kept for a long time - from a website. 

I do like how the eyes are fixed to the cash - carrot!

But Australia has been relatively a fair place so far ... 

Defence

Conspiracy of conspiracy
Things the governments do not want you to know
Or things the video makers do not want you to know?

who'd bite the bullet?

so A reason of

Eating Banana

and

throwing away the bullets

a reason of

banana republic

and

the leadership never bites the bullet

Miserable Art

Human Jungle

Civilized

Almost Paradise

Peace Time 

& Wildest Minds

Phenomenally Thriving

The Tamed Crimes

Then Raiders

Now Gangsters

The Next Phase O' Mankind 

Will Be The Same Eyes

Finding For The Victims

Watching At The Victims

Sorting Out The Virgins 

Ten Enigmas

I’m not sure how many people have asked the same questions before. But I know some of the questions I’m asking have been asked. And so my questions are just complementing them. I’m not trying to change the world or anything like that. It’s just a work to inspire the readers to have fun for a while. Adding more questions will be great. Questions just come to everyone anyway. I think questions are fun; especially for the truth seekers! Questions based on reason encourage free thinking I think – although no thought can ever actually free as we have to base a thought on something existing which encourages us to ask. And it’s more than fun when our thoughts inspire ourselves for good – if inspire others as well, then it’s a bonus. So these are only ten questions (to become enigma, they must not be answered).

1. Based on a classic question: If what God doesn’t create cannot exist either physically or mentally (such as thought, etc), did God create evil on purpose?
a) Then does God want people to avoid evil His creation deliberately?
b) Then God did create evil to exist – as evil, evil doers, and the devil?
c) Does that mean God wants people to fight against evil or just avoid it?
d) Is that Free Will?
e) If yes, God created Free Will as well?


2. If Free Will exists:
a) If Free Will is created by God, is it really FREE?
b) Then God is not controlling anyone?
c) Then God is not showing everyone to see the good and not evil?
d) Or does God show good to someone and evil to another?
e) God doesn’t show good or bad to anyone but the good shows what is good and the devil shows what is bad?


3. If God is the same, why are heavens different?
a) Do Christians go to Jesus’ heaven, Jews to Judaist heaven (the abode of Jehovah the God of Israelites), and Muslims to Islamic heaven?
b) If so then what’s the point arguing and fighting as they are just destined to different heavens?
c) Do different Christianities go to different Heavens?
d) And different kinds of Muslims – such as Shiites, Sunni! Do they go to their different heavens too?


4. God is just:
a) Then do all people get the same rewards in different Heavens?
b) Do both kids and adults get the same rewards?
c) Do both males and females get the same reward?


5. Is a religious culture on Earth the same to the religious on a heaven?
a) Then does a heaven have different religious cultures of its own? i.e. Catholics have different Catholic cultures – for example.
b) Do priests become priests in heaven?
c) Do monks, etc become what they were as humans in heaven?
d) Or do all people become just the same – in justness and fairness unlike on earth?
e) Then do both male and female become equal in heaven?
f) If not, do man and woman become not to need being equal?


6. Heaven has eternal life for everyone:
a) Can God cease eternality from anyone He thinks an evil doer?
b) Then heaven is only for the good because heaven is perfect for everyone who gets there?!
c) Satan or a certain powerful evil committed sin and was sent to hell from heaven:
i. Then can there be another such evil doer? If not why not?
ii. If a person can become evil doer, does it support the claim ‘heaven is perfect and only for the good’?
iii. As long as God exists, as long as heaven exists, as long as hell exists, do more and more creatures go to hell for mistakes and unforgivable sin?!


7. God created heaven to be perfect but He did not create His angels, archangels etc to be perfect:
a) Why doesn’t heaven have everything perfect?
b) What is the definition of perfection in religious view?


8. A child dies and arrives to heaven, In this scenario, the child is either male or female:
a) Does the child keep growing into adulthood?
b) Does the child can get married later with its opposite sex?
i. If yes, does the child have to take a role, duty and lifestyle which are similar to of the earth?
c) Does the child maintain the traditional values it was born in?
i. If circumcision is to be performed to the child but the child died before that, does that child still require circumcising?
d) Does the child require learning the religious scripture?
e) Is a family in heaven allowed to have children of their own?


9. An old person dies and gets to heaven:
a) Does that old person maintain the age?
b) Does that old person get freed from old age – if that person desires?
c) Or can that old person change into any age at all any time?


10. If the good go to heaven and the bad to eternal hell, Gehenna, Jahannam, Jaina,
a) how does the earth need to be destroyed?
b) Is the earth to exist eternally at all?
c) Is the earth to exist with nobody on its surface but in hell only – in the Abrahamic view?

Overturning the bowl

Posted By Han Tun (Journey to Nibbanna Yahoo Groups)

Overturning the bowl is a symbolic phrase signifying the refusal to accept offerings from a particular person. The origin story for this transaction is a variation on the origin story for Sg 8. The followers of Mettiya and Bhummaja incite Va.d.dha the Licchavi to accuse Ven. Dabba Mallaputta of having raped his wife. (They show no imagination at all and instruct him to phrase his accusation in the same terms they taught Mettiyaa Bhikkhunii in the story to Sg 8: "The quarter without dread, without harm, without danger, is (now) the quarter with dread, with harm, with danger. From where there was calm, there is (now) a storm-wind. The water, as it were, is ablaze. My wife has been raped by Master Dabba Mallaputta." ) The Buddha convenes a meeting of the Community, at which Ven. Dabba (who attained arahantship at the age of seven) states truthfully that, "Ever since I was born, I am not aware of having engaged in sexual intercourse even in a dream, much less
when awake." The Buddha then instructs the Community to overturn its bowl to Va.d.dha, so that none of the bhikkhus are to have communion with him. (This, according to the Commentary, means that none of the bhikkhus are to accept offerings from his household.) Ven. Ānanda, on his alms round the following day, stops off at Va.d.dha's house to inform him that the Community has overturned its bowl to him. On hearing this news, Va.d.dha collapses in a faint. When he recovers, he goes with his relatives to confess his wrong doing to the Buddha. The Buddha accepts his confession and tells the Community to turn its bowl upright for Va.d.dha, so that the bhikkhus may associate with him as before.

The Community, if it wants to, may overturn its bowl to a lay person endowed with the following eight qualities: He/she

strives for the bhikkhus' material loss,
strives for the bhikkhus' detriment,
strives for the bhikkhus' non-residence (i.e., so that they can't live in a certain place),
insults and reviles bhikkhus,
causes bhikkhus to split from bhikkhus;
speaks in dispraise of the Buddha,
speaks in dispraise of the Dhamma,
speaks in dispraise of the Sa"ngha.

The Commentary adds that a lay person who has done any one of these things qualifies to have the bowl overturned. There is no need for him/her to have done all eight.

Unlike other disciplinary transactions (and unlike most Community transactions in general), the object of the transaction does not need to be present in the meeting at which the transaction is performed. This is apparently what the Commentary means when it says that the transaction may be performed within or without the territory. In other words, the lay person does not need to be in the same territory where the meeting is held.

The procedure is this: The Community meets and agrees to the transaction statement, which (in a motion and proclamation) explains the lay person's wrong doing and announces that the Community is overturning its bowl to him/her, that there is to be no communion between him/her and the Community. (The word for communion, here as elsewhere, is sambhoga, which literally means "consuming together" or "sharing wealth." An interesting anthropological study could be written on the implications of this word's being used to describe a bhikkhu's accepting alms.) The Commentary adds that the Community should then inform other Communities that they, too, are not to accept alms or offerings from the household of the lay person in question. And, as the origin story shows, the lay person should be informed of the transaction.

If the lay person mends his/her ways (in other words, stops doing the action for which the bowl was overturned in the first place and does not start doing any of the other actions that are grounds for overturning the bowl) the Community may then turn its bowl upright. The procedure here is that the person in question dresses respectfully, goes to the Community, bows down, and with hands palm-to-palm over the heart makes a formal request to have the bowl turned upright. The Commentary adds that the person should state the request three times and then leave the hatthapaasa of the Community's meeting while the transaction statement uprighting the bowl is recited, although there is nothing in the Canon to indicate that this last step is necessary. After the recitation, the bhikkhus may again accept offerings at the person's house. None of the texts mention this point, but the Community would seem honor bound to notify any of the other Communities who were
informed of the bowl's original overturning that the bowl has now been set upright.