XPost: alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.supp
rt.schizophrenia
From: fedora@fea.st
On Tue, 13 Jul 2021 05:52:09 -0700, one wrote:
>Noah wrote:
>> one wrote:
>
>>>To suppose a necessity exists, that a knowledge flower needs
>>>to be shared, on or off the plant or vine, one could. Yet to know
>>>how the flower flowering for no reason,
>>
>>Actually flowers do flower for a reason,
>
>Actually, causality is a paradigm.
>From another pov, all is one.
>Other povs are available.
>As wells, depths vary.
>
>> if you are the plant doing the flowering.
>
>If you separate
>the flower from the plant from the soil and
>the soil from the Earth, the Earth from the Sun and
>don't see all things as being one, Being, then,
>a carving of what is Uncarved is done.
>
>>The fact that flowers seem like simple ornaments for
>>pretentious houses, if the owner feels like ornamenting, is hubris on
>>the part of humans. Flowers are the way flowering plants do sex. A
>>very necessary purpose, humans seem to think concerning themselves.
>
>Seeing reproduction as a reason, the reason,
>one among many for any effect is possible
>for those who carve in terms of causal
>relationships sailing seas of Being.
>
>Selective perceptions may give rise to a view
>for those who care to see shells by a shore thing.
>One might assert, flowers flower to flower. Water waters.
>Suns shine. Planets spin. Then again, such is to divide.
>
>Chemistry, pure chemisty, is how chemicals appear to chemists
>who see the world through chemical eyes. Aye. There are no
>flowers, no birds nor bees nor sex. In reality, actually, all
>that exists are chemicals and chemistry. That's it.
>
>To see a flower as a plant's way of making more flowers
>or a seed as being a seed's way of making more seeds,
>to ascribe a need, a necessary purpose a proposer
>might propose what is suitable to plant a seed.
>
>Seeds of thought able to sprout wings, may be.
>Carving a system, flowers and pollen spreaders whether
>on the wind or an antenna, seeing sex as very necessary,
>in order to produce and reproduce, flowers of thought spring.
>
>>The dog in your back yard is there for his own reasons, even though he
>>might wag his tail, and lick your hand.
>
>There were two coyotes in the back yard once.
>Presumably they were after the neighbor's chickens were
>in the neighbor's yard, if one were to carve them, the coyotes,
>the yards, mine and theirs, chickens and all things from each other.
>
>> The cat sunning in your
>>window owns you if it decides to do that, rather than you own it, if
>>you notice carefully.
>
>When looking at being separate from, all things appear.
>
>To own, be owned, to identify with being an individual
>a family, a tribe or a species, one might do that and
>not give the process any second thoughts, aye.
>
>>Humans are not the center of the universe, which exists for its own
>>purposes. Humans are allowed to go along for the ride. Not that the
>>humans know what those purposes are.
>
>Carving people out of a universe might be natural,
>as if people were not the universe as it peoples
>its planets, at least one. Apples could be said
>to not be an apple tree when they fall too.
>
>To assume a universe has a purpose, is possible.
>To assume its purpose is not each and every point,
>not all the many individuals it is, galaxies, stars, planets
>flowering plants, insects and its people as well is possible.
>
>One may say, you are the purpose of the universe
>in which you live, for no reason other than being.
>All beings are by nature, naturally, as beings.
>
>A rock is the point
>of a mountain peak and is
>at the same time the mountain its
>very own self, as if neither were the earth,
>the Earth that mountains its self, nor any utter thing.
>
>To say a wave is not an ocean that waves,
>to say it is the wind, a mind moves as thought waves.
>
>>>s one simply does, and
>>>is not separate from an entire universe one may sail to see how
>>>an it is the universe its own self that flowers.
>>
>>Humans not being mindless (when they are not mindless) can decide to
>>purposefully do.
>
>Oar, so they may think and feel, naturally, given: language.
>From a physicist's perspective, given: causality, there is no
>free-will seeing as how every atom is simply an effect of
>cause and causality, like turtles, is all there is and are.
>
>> Humans exists for their own purposes too, like the
>>dog in your backyard. You get to decide. Do you want to purposefully
>>do, or simply do?
>
>Wu-wei is basically Taoism without question.
>Wei-wu-wei is next in line in a train of thought.
>
>To simply be, without-doing, without-intent, one
>may find thought springs, thought streams and just
>as water flows without knowing going to a sea for me
>to see a notion, an ocean of thought, occurs now and
>then, suddenly without notice, from Being Uncarved,
>10k-things appear, separate from all other things.
>
>Naturally, a cycle cycles.
>Aye, to spin words like a planet, ore, a star.
>In veins may run a mine of mine to mine.
>Two seek and find, causality, naturally.
It sounds like you see two options. Carve or not carve.
Awareness of things or awareness of unity.
There is at least one more, refusal to be aware.
Another might be, not carve means nothing can be better so don't try;
stare at the wall.
There are more, I'm sure.
You get to choose. Your not carve viewpoint is a choosing, your
carving.
Unity is beside the point for separate awarenesses that choose to be
aware, and think something can be better, whatever that means. I'm
sure cats would approve. All windows should have sunny window sills
on which to snooze. I think it is ok for cats to be happy rather than
otherwise, even if I am at unity with the cat.
>>>- being pointless ... given: aWay ...
>
>Thanks! Cheers!
Noah Sombrero
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
