Quotessence
Home / Topics / Commentary Quotes

Commentary Quotes

Browse 282 quotes about Commentary.

Related topics

Commentary Quotes

“John does not say 'the sins'... But he says, 'the sin of the world,' as if the whole mass of human transgression was bound together, in one black and awful bundle, and laid upon the unshrinking shoulders of this better Atlas who can bear it all, and bear it all away. Your sin, and mine, and every man's, they were all laid upon Jesus Christ.”

“We should expect nothing less from the language that was originally given by God, to His human family. Hebrew was the method that God chose for mankind to speak to Him, and Him to them. Adam spoke Hebrew—and your Bible confirms this. Everyone who got off the ark spoke one language—Hebrew. Even Abraham spoke Hebrew. Where did Abraham learn to speak Hebrew? Abraham was descended from Noah’s son, Shem. (Ge 11:10-26) Shem’s household was not affected by the later confusion of languages, at Babel. (Ge 11:5-9) To the contrary, Shem was blessed while the rest of Babel was cursed. (Ge 9:26) That is how Abraham retained Hebrew, despite residing in Babylon. So, Shem’s language can be traced back to Adam. (Ge 11:1) And, Shem (Noah’s son) was still alive when Jacob and Esau was 30 years of age. Obviously, Hebrew (the original language) was clearly spoken by Jacob’s sons. (Ge 14:13)”

“These were emotions she didn't know how to carry. There was the insult of having her death celebrated when she wasn't even dead. When she was, in fact, amidst them all right now, and only out here because they'd sent killers to fail in her home. But this? To be dying from the poison of those assassins, and while looking for emergency food to survive the injury, to be told by a drunk rich boy with inconvenient hair that she had never really existed? Now their songs made unkind sense to her. This revelry was a kind of fear, for hatred was the fear people let themselves enjoy. Never had she imagined such a thing. Humans were so creative in their disappointments.”

“There were no gods in the shrine she passed, at least not visible ones. Gods never showed themselves to humans even when they dumped miracles on them, which Shesheshen thought was wise. If humans got used to the presence of gods, they'd probably hunt them for profit and glory and other nonsense, just as they did to monsters. Gods were smart to keep a light touch.”

“Wait,” one of the apes objected, “we have never driven a car! What if we destroy everything? The humans might use our lack of experience to add stronger restrictions to apes, and we might look incapable.” “Well,” another member insisted, “that would be absurd. It’s not our fault that we are inexperienced! The humans were the ones who did not give us access to the experience we need! It’s in their nature: discrimination. I mean, they even restricted each other from having education, voting, and career rights!”

“We are living in the Selfie Society of Me.”

“Anyone can smile for a photo, but who is still smiling after the selfie?”

“Yazar, günümüz fizik ve astrofizik dünyasındaki katı yapıyı eleştirerek, bilimin özündeki anarşist ruhu ve yaratıcı düşünceyi yeniden canlandırmayı hedeflemektedir. Metin, antik İyon felsefesindeki logos ve mitos arasındaki dengeyi, modern kuantum mekaniği ve topoloji ile harmanlayarak doğayı anlamanın yeni yollarını önermektedir. Özellikle ROSE postulatı aracılığıyla, fiziksel yasaların ötesindeki yapısal gerçekliklerin ancak topolojik yaklaşımlarla kavranabileceğini savunmaktadır. Bilimsel ilerlemenin sadece deney ve gözlemle değil, felsefi derinlik ve estetik sezgiyle mümkün olabileceği vurgulanmaktadır. Sonuç olarak bu kaynak, bilimi ideolojilerden arındırarak hakikate ulaşma yolunda daha özgür ve disiplinlerarası bir bakış açısı sunmaktadır.”

“I am the prodigal son every time i search for unconditional love where it cannot be found. Why do I keep ignoring the place of true love and persist in looking for it elsewhere? Why do I keep leaving home where I am called the child of God, the beloved of my Father?”

“What movie are you guys gonna see anyway?” “I don’t...know,” I answered when Rider remained quiet. An idea formed. “Do you want to come?” Jayden blinked as if he was surprised. “Aw, that’s sweet of you, but I’m not good sittin’ in a theater.” My brows furrowed. “Why?” “Because he’d talk through it,” Paige answered from the couch. “He would literally talk through the entire movie.” “True dat,” one of the other guys responded. I grinned. “It’s true. You know, I like to add commentary every once in a while,” Jayden explained. “But for some reason people be all upset over that.” “I can imagine,” Rider replied drily. “I like to think what I’m addin’ actually enlightens the experience,” Jayden said. Paige snorted. “I don’t think enlighten is the right word.” “My entire presence is enlightening,” he replied. Hector looked over his shoulder, eyebrows raised. “I can come up with a few words that describe your presence. Enlightening is not one of them.”

“Yes, questions continue, since the notions I used only represented the what’s instead of the how’s, the why’s, the when’s, etc. Like what happened in the lectures, the facts were enforced, but nothing was done to dive deeper into them. Finally, I was eventually able to solve one side of the rubik’s cube, now realizing that I had inadvertently taught myself the same way I had been lectured. I realized how even the Rubik’s cube can generate rudimentary and superficial knowledge in a user.”

“Have the courage to take off your mask and be humbled.”

“If any object (as some fanatic persons have done), Jer. 31.34, "And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour," &c., 1 John 2.27, "And ye need not that any man teach you," I answer, [1.] These scriptures are to be understood comparatively, in the same sense as God said he would have mercy and not sacrifice, Hos. 6.6. The Spirit of illumination and knowledge shall be so abundantly poured forth under the gospel, and God shall so write his laws in the hearts of his people, that there shall be almost as much difference between those under the old covenant and those under the new covenant, as there is between those that need a teacher and those that need not a teacher.”

“The phone rang. It was a familiar voice. It was Alan Greenspan. Paul O'Neill had tried to stay in touch with people who had served under Gerald Ford, and he'd been reasonably conscientious about it. Alan Greenspan was the exception. In his case, the effort was constant and purposeful. When Greenspan was the chairman of Ford's Council of Economic Advisers, and O'Neill was number two at OMB, they had become a kind of team. Never social so much. They never talked about families or outside interests. It was all about ideas: Medicare financing or block grants - a concept that O'Neill basically invented to balance federal power and local autonomy - or what was really happening in the economy. It became clear that they thought well together. President Ford used to have them talk about various issues while he listened. After a while, each knew how the other's mind worked, the way married couples do. In the past fifteen years, they'd made a point of meeting every few months. It could be in New York, or Washington, or Pittsburgh. They talked about everything, just as always. Greenspan, O'Neill told a friend, "doesn't have many people who don't want something from him, who will talk straight to him. So that's what we do together - straight talk." O'Neill felt some straight talk coming in. "Paul, I'll be blunt. We really need you down here," Greenspan said. "There is a real chance to make lasting changes. We could be a team at the key moment, to do the things we've always talked about." The jocular tone was gone. This was a serious discussion. They digressed into some things they'd "always talked about," especially reforming Medicare and Social Security. For Paul and Alan, the possibility of such bold reinventions bordered on fantasy, but fantasy made real. "We have an extraordinary opportunity," Alan said. Paul noticed that he seemed oddly anxious. "Paul, your presence will be an enormous asset in the creation of sensible policy." Sensible policy. This was akin to prayer from Greenspan. O'Neill, not expecting such conviction from his old friend, said little. After a while, he just thanked Alan. He said he always respected his counsel. He said he was thinking hard about it, and he'd call as soon as he decided what to do. The receiver returned to its cradle. He thought about Greenspan. They were young men together in the capital. Alan stayed, became the most noteworthy Federal Reserve Bank chairman in modern history and, arguably the most powerful public official of the past two decades. O'Neill left, led a corporate army, made a fortune, and learned lessons - about how to think and act, about the importance of outcomes - that you can't ever learn in a government. But, he supposed, he'd missed some things. There were always trade-offs. Talking to Alan reminded him of that. Alan and his wife, Andrea Mitchell, White House correspondent for NBC news, lived a fine life. They weren't wealthy like Paul and Nancy. But Alan led a life of highest purpose, a life guided by inquiry. Paul O'Neill picked up the telephone receiver, punched the keypad. "It's me," he said, always his opening. He started going into the details of his trip to New York from Washington, but he's not much of a phone talker - Nancy knew that - and the small talk trailed off. "I think I'm going to have to do this." She was quiet. "You know what I think," she said. She knew him too well, maybe. How bullheaded he can be, once he decides what's right. How he had loved these last few years as a sovereign, his own man. How badly he was suited to politics, as it was being played. And then there was that other problem: she'd almost always been right about what was best for him. "Whatever, Paul. I'm behind you. If you don't do this, I guess you'll always regret it." But it was clearly about what he wanted, what he needed. Paul thanked her. Though somehow a thank-you didn't seem appropriate. And then he realized she was crying.”

“Always support younger writers, and do all you can to nourish that spirit of creativity, and original risk. The unique manner of literary innovation that younger writers may engage in, ultimately is priceless. Writers, poets and authors are the spokespersons for ours and the next generations. Support them, mentor them, protect them from the viciousness of popular opinion, which is generally nothing more than censorship wearing the cloak of righteous indignation.”

“Although each of the yanas, or vehicles (theg-pa) to enlightenment, is perfectly correct and sufficient to catry the practitioner to liberation, each of them possesses its own definitive view and its own particular methods, as explained in the introduction above. However, Dzogchen Atiyoga represents their culmination in therms of its being the view of the Dharmakaya itself. And since Dzogchen is itself not curtailed or restricted by any limitations in terms of practice, a Dzogchenpa, or Dzogchen practitioner, is able to use any of the methods found in these other vehicles and practice them when found useful or necessary. But this is always done while maintaining the Dzogchen point of view. Once having ascended to the summit of the mountain peak of Dzogchen, we should not retrace our steps to any lesser view, for this would create an obstacle to our further development. In terms of the spiritual path of liberation and enlightenment, the higher level of teaching includes and enhances the lower levels of teaching, rather than excluding them. Thus all of the methods found in the Sutras and the Tantras lie open to the Dzogchenpa, but such a practice is not thereby limited by them. The practice should be tailored to the individual, to his or her needs and capacities, and not coercing the individual to fit the mold of the practice. This is a profound point and should be understood well. Thus is says in the text {the Conclusion of Patrul's "Special Teaching of the Wise and Glorious King"} that all of the methods of found in the eight lower vehicles, that is, the Sutras and the Tantras, accompany the view of Dzogchen as its friends and helpers.”

“In Tibet, there were innumerable great scholars and bodhisattvas, but unless a scholar was told by his root guru to compose a commentary on a specific text or received a prediction from his yidam deity, he would not write one. Even when great scholars or bodhisattvas did write something, they would first check themselves to make sure that their intention was not merely to win respect, prove themselves to be a great scholar, gain material wealth, or acquire a good reputation. As every Dharma text is meant to benefit being and guide them on the spiritual path, they would only write if they had a pure, unselfish motivation. Even in the context of the Sutrayana path, though the past great scholars and realized beings wrote many commentaries on the Buddha's teachings, these writings would first be examined by other great scholars to determine whether the text was in exact accord with the Buddha's teachings. If the text did agree with the Buddha's teachings, it would be presented to the Dharma king and discussed with him. If they all agreed that the text was qualified, the writer would be invited to discuss the text and answer questions from the Dharma king and the scholars. If it was perfect and qualified as a text that could benefit beings, the author would be recognized as a good scholar and the text would be respected. If the author claimed to be a scholar but wrote a commentary that the others found not to be in accordance with the Buddha's teachings and therefore not beneficial, they would proclaim that the text had no value. It would be tied to a dog's tail, and after the dog had run around with it for a while, the text would be thrown into a fire. This was because a commentary would be read by many people, and if it was not in accordance with the teachings of the Buddha, readers could develop wrong views, create negative karma, and fall into the lower realms in their next life.”

“XL is dedicated to understanding shifting business dynamics and helping our clients thrive in increasingly complex and changing environments. 'The Future of the Company' platform will allow us to offer insights and commentary on these essential topics to a global and diverse audience and feature insights from XL experts.”

“One reason that a truth and reconciliation process is needed for group selection is to return to the simplicity of the original problem and Darwin’s solution. As Ed Wilson and I put it in our recent review article titled “Rethinking the Theoretical Foundation of Sociobiology“: Selfishness beats altruism within groups. Altruistic groups beat selfish groups. Everything else is commentary.”

“The author brings to the table a healthy skepticism of the conventional wisdom, an admirable ability to separate fact from fancy, and an undisguised repugnance for the mumbo-jumbo that's the curse of so much commentary on anything to do with economics or investment. A World of Wealth is not only a lively read, but an exceptionally enlightening and rewarding one to boot.”