'twasn't a criticism, 'twas but a recognition of her sharp wit.
KG
On 8/31/2012 10:07 AM, Edgar Owen wrote:
Kristopher and Merle,
Why the "Ouch?
Merle is just being honest and open here which is admirable.
Honest that she recognizes some of her attachments and open to finding
how to free herself from them.
Recognizing and understanding the things that keep one from
realization and being open to changing them is absolutely essential
for realization. This is a crucial part of the path....
Merle should be commended here, not criticized..... She shows an
openness to changing most are afraid to....
Edgar
On Aug 30, 2012, at 12:57 PM, Kristopher Grey wrote:
Ouch! Well, at least she didn't call you a 'Guru' Edgar!
KG
On 8/30/2012 7:44 AM, Merle Lester wrote:
edgar..you are absolutely right..tell me how i can move past this
point...be my teacher please...merle
Merle,
The problem with being happily mired in ignorance and being attached
to all the good things in your life is that you then are going to be
equally attached to any bad things that happen....
That's why Buddha spoke of the Middle Way and freeing oneself from
ALL attachments, both the pleasant and unpleasant ones...
Edgar
On Aug 29, 2012, at 10:31 PM, Merle Lester wrote:
illusions...huh?
peck away edgar
strip me bare
free from my bondage from
those golden daffodils and pixies that are calling me..".come
hither..play with us"
merle...dancing to the tune of "wild thing"
Bill and Merle,
I second that. Merle is a fighter and I don't think she'll leave
just because Edgar pecks away at her illusions!
She does have a thin skin sometimes but that of course is because
she still has attachments as do we all
:-)
Edgar
On Aug 28, 2012, at 9:23 PM, Bill! wrote:
Speaking for Al, the forum owner, and both the moderators, Edgar
and me, we all hope you stay. We get a commission on each post and
your membership here has already moved up the date of my
retirement by several weeks...
...Bill!
--- In [email protected]
<mailto:Zen_Forum%40yahoogroups.com>, Merle Lester
<merlewiitpom@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Â right..edgar..maybe this zen is not for me...why are you
saying crazy new age fantasy?
>
> ...there are plenty of practises of a human kind that believe in
nature and nature's spirits...communicating with nature. e.g
australian aborigines
> .it is not new fangled dangled...
> Â merle.
> .worshipping and communicating with the sun this morning at 6:30am
>
> Â
> Merle,
>
> Reread paragraph 4 Merle. I said nothing of the sort... I was
talking about incorrect facts, not the spiritual awe of reality.
>
> Do you understand the difference? You don't have to think the
flower understands what you say to it to appreciate the flower.
Zen is realizing and appreciating the TRUE nature of the flower,
not some crazy New Age fantasy facts you project onto it.
>
> Edgar
>
> On Aug 28, 2012, at 8:47 AM, Merle Lester wrote:
>
> > thank you for your clarification edgar
> >
> > ..remind me never to see the poetry in the dancing daffodil or
listen to the music that the leaves on the trees sing.
> > ..remind me i must be ever vigilant unless i fall from grace
and am reduced to praise and awe and wonder at the beauty of
mother nature especially her most glorious of all...her sexual
delights in the form of flowers never again to listen to their
glorious voices
> >
> > ..remind me that i must always remain ever scientific ever
logical and alert to childish silly fantasy games and illusions..
> > never again must i listen to the wind and the grasses when
they speak.
> > ..goodness me and oh jesus christ ..what would the red skin
indian say to your theories edgar?
> >
> > ...edgar save me from such silly ways
> > ..for life is not a bowl of cherries
> > it is hard real world made from solid rock..solid knowledge
based on facts and figures
> > ..and if one dare to fall and fall to such fancies as
projecting a human quality to a plant life and me daring to speak
plant language..strike me dumb
> > so i may never speak again of such unheard things..
> >
> > ... merle..the wolf carrying a bright yellow daffodil as a
peace offering to those who know what sitting bull would have replied
> >
> >
> > Joe,
> >
> > Flowers do have 'senses' in the sense that they have receptors
for and respond to light, touch, chemical signals and possibly
sound. They have fairly complex internal electrical and chemical
signaling systems....
> >
> > What I doubt is Merle's contention that her plants listen to
her and respond to what she says.... There is no evolutionary
reason they should do so and no scientific evidence that they do....
> >
> > I'd say Merle is projecting here which is a dangerous form of
illusion and the antithesis of Zen....
> >
> > There is a subtle Zen point here. It's fine to have personal
myths like this so long as one realizes they are just fun fantasy,
games and illusion and NOT reality. Illusion recognized as
illusion is reality, illusion seen as reality is illusion....
> >
> > One of the most dangerous illusions to Zen is the various 'New
Age' wishful thinking that falsely projects goody goody saccharin
fake sweetness on reality. It's like astrology, numerology,
anti-scientific religious delusions and the various forms of
'spiritualism' that all attempt to project the delusions of mind
onto reality.
> >
> > There is no realization so long as one is mired in these
illusions...
> >
> > Edgar
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Aug 28, 2012, at 12:31 AM, Joe wrote:
> >
> >
> >> Glenn,
> >>
> >> With respect, I *doubt* these "instrumental revelations".
> >>
> >> I am a professional and an expert in Scientific
Instrumentation, and I have nothing but doubts about these
botanical "experiments" that are so often cited. I believe they
are BS; and, if you have a while, I can show you exactly why.
Well, it may not be easy to get together.
> >>
> >> But, keep a skeptical -- and an open -- mind, I suggest!
> >>
> >> And don't be gullible.
> >>
> >> As much as I love flowers, too.
> >>
> >> --Joe
> >>
> >>> "Glenn Rogers" <rgthiessen@> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I saw a National Geographic program in which scientists
hooked up ECG monitors to plant flowers. [snip]
> >>
> >>
> >
>
