mike..i do not get your drift here?..zombies are in films... brain damaged folk are not zombies... merle
Merle, Are you winding me up? : ) Ok. How about people, who for whatever reason, are brain-damaged at birth so that they only have basic mental functions. It could be said they are acting 100% to their true nature. An enviable state? Mike Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPad ________________________________ From: Merle Lester <[email protected]>; To: [email protected] <[email protected]>; Subject: Re: [Zen] original nature Sent: Sun, Jun 23, 2013 4:27:43 AM zombies are not REAL..merle Merle, Really?? The point being that Zombies just follow their basic instincts without the ability to transcend them. Humans can. Mike Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPad ________________________________ From: Merle Lester <[email protected]>; To: [email protected] <[email protected]>; Subject: [Zen] original nature Sent: Sun, Jun 23, 2013 4:02:32 AM mike...the films were made by humans... merle Joe, Wow, all those zombie and werewolf movies got it wrong then. Don't try to survive. Just get bit and enjoy your new nature eating brains and ripping people apart. Maybe we should also feel somewhat envious of brain-damaged car accident survivors.? After all, they have no ability to know they no longer have a self to transcend. Mike Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPad ________________________________ From: Joe <[email protected]>; To: <[email protected]>; Subject: Re: [Zen] how good is that? Sent: Sat, Jun 22, 2013 2:51:09 PM Mike, I have a feeling that animals don't have the sense that they have a "self". Thus, for them, there is nothing to surmount, nor to transcend, because a self is not in fact a part of their psyche. I say "in fact", but that is part of my assertion (it would be hard to test or to prove). We only gauge that Humans have a "self" because they say they do, or they say that they feel that they do (they never prove it to us); and, by personal introspection. However, after (our) sufficient personal introspection, we find no self, but find a nature which had merely been covered, for long, by illusory mental activity and our holding of images or sensations before the mind, like a screen, via "thoughts" that we could not let go of, for various and multiple reasons. The fact that Humans *can* slough off the sense of a sense and return to their original nature is a good escape hatch, but one that animals do not need. Animal don't need the medicine, because they were never ill. To me, it seems that animals very gracefully accept the way that they must live: It seems that Humans make themselves take it on the chin, While animals live in utter Grace. Human beings labor to regain their Original Face, While even Dung Beetles have a shit-eatin' grin! --Joe > uerusuboyo@... wrote: > > Bill!,<br/><br/>Like I said in another post, it's not a question of being > superior to animals (good or bad), but that we have the potential to > transcend the self and realise our true nature - true peace and happiness > that comes with a cessation of suffering. No other animal that we know of can > do that. It's not because we're chosen or have been singled out, but because > evolution has gone that way for us (whether that's a natural consequence of > life and evolution, I don't know). Spiders and foxes blindly follow their > instincts with no ability for introspection/empathy towards others in regard > of their actions. Are you seriously saying that unwaveringly following their > nature is more exalted than our ability to do those things?? You and Merle > can bemoan the fact you weren't born as ants or fruit-bats, but I'll rejoice > in my humanity and "strive" to reach our highest potential.
