bye bye frogs.
tara
So many varieties of frogs, dying out all over the place. What are we doing?
Collecting the few left and trying to keep them in a lab, attempting to help
them reproduce in that lab. Lots of coverage on how we are doing
this.....very little discussion on what is causing this other than a five
minute mention - us, our lifestyle, our pollution, our over population, our
rape of our earth.
Perhaps more attention should be spent on looking at the cause, instead of
trying to save species after the fact.
The canary has been warning us for decades.
Seems like we stupid humans will wait for nature's balance to fix it as
nature will.. Wars, viruses, disease, etc.
stupid us!
tara
Charles E Hardwidge
news:0001HW.C47DFCE9...@news.usenetmonster.com...
Wassup, Tara? Are Fwogs the new Fwuffy wabbit?
Tch. Girls.
--
Charles E Hardwidge
Evelyn
news:0001HW.C47DFCE9...@news.usenetmonster.com...
Yes. Frogs and bees and now bats. In my area there is a strange disease
affecting and killing all the bats. Bats consume HUGE numbers of insects
every night. Without them life we could be inundated by an overgrowth of
flying insects that the bats keep in control. Yes.. Stupid us. I
hope they can find a way to stop these awful losses.
--
Best Regards,
Evelyn
"Like the light of the sun moon and stars, may the love, compassion and
wisdom shine forth. May they strike every single living being and dispel
the darkness of ignorance, attachment and hatred that has lurked for ages in
their being. When any living being meets with another may it be like the
reunion of a mother and child who have long been separated. In a harmonious
world such as this may I see everyone sleep peacefully to the music of
non-violence. This is my dream." -- 17th Gyalwa Karmapa Orgyen Trinley
Dorje
>
Evelyn
"Charles E Hardwidge" <bo...@nospam.co.uk> wrote in message
news:td06k.11384$E41...@text.news.virginmedia.com...
Nothing to do with 'girls' or 'fwuffy' things. She's right, and if you
looked into it a bit more you would know that it could make for a very
unpleasant world in the future.
Charles E Hardwidge
news:48592a1a$0$27965$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
> "Charles E Hardwidge" <bo...@nospam.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:td06k.11384$E41...@text.news.virginmedia.com...
>> "tara" <jackpine@airpost{removethis}.net> wrote in message
>> news:0001HW.C47DFCE9...@news.usenetmonster.com...
>>> Seems like we stupid humans will wait for nature's balance to fix it as
>>> nature will.. Wars, viruses, disease, etc.
>> Wassup, Tara? Are Fwogs the new Fwuffy wabbit?
>>
>> Tch. Girls.
> Nothing to do with 'girls' or 'fwuffy' things. She's right, and if you
> looked into it a bit more you would know that it could make for a very
> unpleasant world in the future.
Don't worry, I'm on top of these things. They're an issue as are more
fundamental questions of approach. I just figured, I'd put my usual windy
reply aside and take a cheap jab. The problem, as always, isn't plans but
planning, and developing vision and getting people behind that.
Now, I get frustrated with the fundamental flaws in the Anglo-Saxon
economy, but this issue could turn out to be a good thing. It's hard to
explain but a refocusing is critical to success. This and recessionary
pressures is coming along at just the right time.
--
Charles E Hardwidge
Keynes
wrote:
No bees around here. My neighbor is pollinating
the zucchini by hand. Visiting chicago I saw one
bee (not a honey bee) visiting a berry bush. Only
one blossom in a dozen is producing a berry.
Something's happening. Maybe.
Noah Sombrero
>> Seems like we stupid humans will wait for nature's balance to fix it as
>> nature will.. Wars, viruses, disease, etc.
>>
>> stupid us!
>>
>>
>> tara
>>
>>
>
> No bees around here. My neighbor is pollinating
> the zucchini by hand. Visiting chicago I saw one
> bee (not a honey bee) visiting a berry bush. Only
> one blossom in a dozen is producing a berry.
>
> Something's happening. Maybe.
Much already has. Humans, of course, need to be very careful about
being premature. Just think what would happen if they set out to cure
a die off that proved to be a natural population fluctuation. The
humiliation would be unbearable.
It just might be that human vices like greed, materialism, etc. might
have no deleterious effect to humans or to the world they live in. How
foolish to abandon them in that case. Why it might be that somebody
could argue that greed and materialism aren't vices at all.
tara
Robert Epstein
Okay, I'm going to be accused of "defending Tara" again, which is not my
intention, but really Charles: does it ever occur to you to take an
"asshole break" just for the sake of inconsistency?
Robert
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Robert Epstein
Charles doesn't like the warm and fuzzy. More's the pity, as they are
what is worthwhile in living.
I'll bet if you did a psychological history of Charles - and somehow
survived the experience - you would find that his warm and fuzzy side
was slapped down pretty hard at some point vewwy vewwy long ago....
Charles E Hardwidge
"Robert Epstein" <vze2...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:azC6k.45815$Xu2.37623@trnddc04...
> Charles E Hardwidge wrote:
>
>> Wassup, Tara? Are Fwogs the new Fwuffy wabbit?
>>
>> Tch. Girls.
>
> Okay, I'm going to be accused of "defending Tara" again, which is not my
> intention, but really Charles: does it ever occur to you to take an
> "asshole break" just for the sake of inconsistency?
Tara's makes a play at being breezy but it's all shoulders to the cartwheel
when a bee takes lunch in her bonnet. Policy is great but you've got to have
the character to back it up as well. And no, rushing in and waving your dick
around doesn't count, Bob. C'mon, guys. Transcend the cliché.
--
Charles E Hardwidge
tara
(in article <cxD6k.12495$E41....@text.news.virginmedia.com>):
Is that so?
tara
Tang Huyen
Charles E Hardwidge wrote:
> Tara's makes a play at being breezy but it's all shoulders to the cartwheel
> when a bee takes lunch in her bonnet. Policy is great but you've got to have
> the character to back it up as well. And no, rushing in and waving your dick
> around doesn't count, Bob. C'mon, guys. Transcend the cliché.
Your insults are classy and witty,
Chuckie. Let 'er rip, dear.
Tang Huyen
Evelyn
Quite possibly.
Noah Sombrero
No, the old DT was a classy and witty insulteur. There has been none
since, not even the new DT, and certainly not Chas, who is petulant and
petty. Still having a hard time with your box, Tang?
--
Noah Sombrero
Keynes
wrote:
What we need is more do and less do-do. Get the gov't and
the people on the same page and march, hup two three four.
Management needs to get a clue. Labour needs to get busy.
Everybody get together and gather at the cliff preparing to all
jump off in the same direction, dicks wagging at full staff.
Why can't everybody take my advice and directions? It's all
for their own good. Until then I'll just squirt venom in all
directions. It's all I can do to save the world.
(You Chummy bastards. Kiss my fucking claws.)
Robert Epstein
you've evaded the point well. good parry, but to no object.
robert
Robert Epstein
They may be fun for you, but they are off base. What good is a system
of retorts that distorts its object to no purpose? It only supports the
egoic desires of the self-important one who serves them up.
The fact that you applaud this type of series of disassociated little
niceties is kind of embarrassing.
Okay, just for fun, let's break down a couple of Charles' formulations
above:
"Tara makes a play at being breezy."
No she doesn't. That's nonsensical. The setup is contrived. Tara
displays a wide and erratic range of comments, emotional outbursts,
views, statements of friendship, self-reflection, etc. She's one of the
least packaged poster, and "being breezy" is not a pretension of hers.
It is one of Charles perhaps.
"shoulders to the cartwheel when a bee takes lunch in her bonnet."
so she's all business when personally offended. this is Charles'
followup in contrast to his false setup, and is equally false. he's
making tara out to be a hypocrite, which she is not.
the "cartwheel" image continues Charles' constant misogynist image of
women as children or otherwise ineffectual, which started this in the
first place. what a little bitch he is!
Then he interprets me commenting on his "asshole" approach by accusing
me of "rushing in and waving my dick around" in a cliched way, and
ignores the framing of my comment which purposely bracketed this out.
At least acknowledge that I had already dealt with this interpretation
in advance, and respond to it. Instead, he goes on with his
one-dimensional agenda and critique undisturbed by what has actually
taken place.
Talk about someone who is out of touch, and you are sympathetic to it
because you are equally uncomfortable with both women and reality.
Robert
= = = = = = = = =
Robert Epstein
I have accused Charles of being petulant and self-aggrandizing each time
he begins his round of witless wittiness, composed of weird,
disconnected comments that strain at showing his intelligence.
Eventually he goes into a wild snit and disappears, then reappears like
a jack-in-a-box when some spirit moves him. Maybe this time will be
different.
Robert Epstein
<smile>
Tang Huyen
Robert Epstein wrote:
You take mere words on the screen too seriously,
too literally and too personally, especially as you
take them vicariously, on behalf of somebody else.
Just relax and enjoy, dear. Chuckie throws witty
and classy insults, which are to be appreciated as
such (namely, as witty and classy insults).
Everything else can be left aside, as they are satire.
Satire is not meant to be literal, and not meant to
be taken literally. It is pure, clean fun.
By the way, Buddhism is in the same direction.
Tang Huyen
Evelyn
news:6YKdnRZ_fMtntMPV...@supernews.com...
Witty and Classy? I think not. I think Roberts assessment was right on.
Dave K
> Tang Huyen wrote:
>
> > Charles E Hardwidge wrote:
>
> >>Tara's makes a play at being breezy but it's all shoulders to the cartwheel
> >>when a bee takes lunch in her bonnet. Policy is great but you've got to have
> >>the character to back it up as well. And no, rushing in and waving your dick
> >>around doesn't count, Bob. C'mon, guys. Transcend the cliché.
>
> > Your insults are classy and witty,
> > Chuckie. Let 'er rip, dear.
>
> > Tang Huyen
>
> They may be fun for you, but they are off base. What good is a system
> of retorts that distorts its object to no purpose? It only supports the
> egoic desires of the self-important one who serves them up.
I want to agree with you Robert, but the fact that I find Charles
funny as hell gets in the way of my better judgement.
If it's any consolation though, I immediately reverse course when he
directs his insults at me, for I am admittedly thin skinned.
-DaveK
Charles E Hardwidge
"Robert Epstein" <vze2...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:6Wl7k.182$cv5.156@trnddc01...
Presentation and reactions are part and parcel of developing consensus. A
little pressure and people revert to type. This is the fallacy of
competition.
--
Charles E Hardwidge
Robert Epstein
You're entitled to that view, Tang, but just because they are "mere
words" doesn't mean that they don't reflect precious views of those who
espouse them. I don't feel like I'm "jumping" at the words, just leting
you know what I think is behind them. If what I said about you
personally is not true, feel free to drop it as you apparently have.
Robert Epstein
thanks for being open as usual and encouraging self-revelation.
and I forgive you for thinking Charles is funny. :)
I find him a bit of a loser myself.
Julian
Entitled by whom?
> but...
snip.
Phew! That's OK then.
Tang Huyen
Charles E Hardwidge wrote:
> Presentation and reactions are part and parcel of
> developing consensus. A little pressure and people
> revert to type. This is the fallacy of competition.
The poseurs, fakers and pretenders are good at putting up
a nice facade, but usually they can do so only when things
go their way, and they are not challenged. But when they
are challenged, they tend to forget their sham, lose their
cool, and show their true colours, and this can be
accomplished by some mere words on the screen. And
once they lose their cool and blow their cover (blow their
sham), they keep right on in the same track, without any
awareness of doing so. They revert to type, and give
themselves away, without any awareness of doing so.
That they revert to type is funny enough, but that they do
so without any awareness is even funnier.
One can easily tell the people who have never started
Buddhist practice, regardless of how many years and
decades they claim to have spent in Buddhism and how
many fancy experiences that they claim. They show no
mindfulness, and they betray this fact by the double fact
that they easily and repeatedly become uncentred and
destabilised, and that once they become uncentred and
destabilised, they tend to become *more* uncentred and
destabilised, and so on and so forth, in a self-reinforcing
spiral, which is the very contrary of mindfulness. It all
happens as if they had reached a takeoff point in
becoming uncentred and destabilised and then there is
no restraint any more. In addition, they don't know
moderation, they don't know when to start and when to
stop, both in intensity in the moment and in length of
time. They show no balance and perspective, no
detachment and equanimity, no measure and proportion.
They constitute a walking button, with a neon sign on
their forehead flashing: "I am a walking button". The fact
jumps right off the screen, year after year.
"Every end exposed" -- Musashi.
"Open on all sides." -- Musashi.
(I know nothing about Musashi, but borrow the quotes
from somebody else on these boards, though he
probably takes them to mean the contrary of what I take
them to mean).
Tang Huyen
KittyP
This is so not my business, because it appears that you and several in the
other newsgroups appear to gain pleasure in ferreting out people you
consider to be shamming enlightenment. The internet makes for easy pickings
for that activity I'm sure. But I will try one more time with a question to
anyone who enjoys the activity who might wish to answer. Perhaps since I
usually don't read x-posts I didn't see it if anyone explained it
previously. Why do you do it in the first place? I'm asking in the sense of
how it might, or might not, assist your own practice (I mean if you are
Buddhist)?
Kitty
Julian
It's not my business either therefore I might as well butt in too...
It is done for the benefit of the "victim" and others.
If the "victim" is shamming, itself and others will benefit
from having its fraud exposed.
If the "victim" isn't shamming it'll get a good laugh.
A pretty clearcut win-win, no?
Noah Sombrero
>> "Every end exposed" -- Musashi.
>>
>> "Open on all sides." -- Musashi.
>>
>> (I know nothing about Musashi, but borrow the quotes
>> from somebody else on these boards, though he
>> probably takes them to mean the contrary of what I take
>> them to mean).
>>
>> Tang Huyen
>
> This is so not my business, because it appears that you and several in the
> other newsgroups appear to gain pleasure in ferreting out people you
> consider to be shamming enlightenment. The internet makes for easy pickings
> for that activity I'm sure. But I will try one more time with a question to
> anyone who enjoys the activity who might wish to answer. Perhaps since I
> usually don't read x-posts I didn't see it if anyone explained it
> previously. Why do you do it in the first place? I'm asking in the sense of
> how it might, or might not, assist your own practice (I mean if you are
> Buddhist)?
This question asked and related points made many times about his
obsession and obvious lack of mindfulness.
Maybe he thinks not answering, and not changing shows how enormously he
drops everything.
We will probably never know.
--
Noah Sombrero
Wilson
It shows how tremendously more enlightened he is.
--
Wilson
Noah Sombrero
> It's not my business either therefore I might as well butt in too...
>
> It is done for the benefit of the "victim" and others.
> If the "victim" is shamming, itself and others will benefit
> from having its fraud exposed.
> If the "victim" isn't shamming it'll get a good laugh.
>
> A pretty clearcut win-win, no?
Three choice alert.
Actually, given that there must be at least 3 possible situations, and
each situation must have at least three choices, 9 choice alert.
But yes, victim and laugh. Appropriate word choices.
--
Noah Sombrero
KittyP
"Julian" <julia...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:pK-dnWnQ_of...@bt.com...
It actually does sort of make a weird kind of sense. Thanks.
It would make even more sense if the people doing it were Bodhisattva (with
an attitude ;) though. But that isn't the case here, is it?
Kitty
Invisible Lurker
Oh yes, Tang has superior understanding!!
I am just waiting for God to come down from heaven
and annoint him!
--
Invisible Lurker
Now with 50 percent greater invisibility!!
jfe...@googlemail.com
Robert Epstein
Julian, darling! Where have you been?
Robert
- - - - - - - - - - - -
Robert Epstein
>
> Charles E Hardwidge wrote:
>
>
>>Presentation and reactions are part and parcel of
>>developing consensus. A little pressure and people
>>revert to type. This is the fallacy of competition.
>
>
> The poseurs, fakers and pretenders are good at putting up
> a nice facade, but usually they can do so only when things
> go their way, and they are not challenged.
My favorite maneouver, which you and Chuckie share, is when you make
believe the other person is over-reacting to deflect their criticism.
That is a beauty!
Robert
- - - - - - - -
dt
"God?" "GOD???"
Oh, Sandy, you're *sooo* naive!
DT
Dave K
All the more to laugh it up.
Tang's encouragement of Charles is mischief. Tang's admonition to
have balance and perspective is ok, but there's no reason go around
encouraging people to act stupid in order to give yourself something
to have balanance and perspective about. It's like giving yourself
more work.
As I said I find Charles funny when I have the outside perspective.
The trick is to be able to laugh when it's directed at me, which is
hit and miss in my case. I will admit that I could be laughing more
than I do.
Somewhat related to this. I've been looking at the mythology of the
trickster/fool/jester/clown lately. They are all tied up together.
Can't help thinking of Tang when I read this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickster
"Many native traditions held clowns and tricksters as essential to any
contact with the sacred. People could not pray until they had laughed,
because laughter opens and frees from rigid preconception. Humans had
to have tricksters within the most sacred ceremonies for fear that
they forget the sacred comes through upset, reversal, surprise. The
trickster in most native traditions is essential to creation, to
birth".[1]"
"The trickster deity breaks the rules of the gods or nature, sometimes
maliciously (for example, Loki) but usually, albeit unintentionally,
with ultimately positive effects."
Ok, that's not exactly Tang, becuase I don't think he's intentionally
malicious, but thinks he's doing us a favor, so it ends up turning out
bad. But it's something to think about anyway.
-DaveK
Robert Epstein
Just sticking my nose in: it's probably a distraction from his own
practice. It may be that most newsgroup activity is also a distraction,
but meddling with others' spiritual state is an especially precarious one.
Robert
= = = = = = = = = = = =
Robert Epstein
good point!
robert
- - - - - - -
Charles E Hardwidge
news:I5adneNFxcwdHsLV...@supernews.com...
>
>> Presentation and reactions are part and parcel of
>> developing consensus. A little pressure and people
>> revert to type. This is the fallacy of competition.
>
> The poseurs, fakers and pretenders are good at putting up
> a nice facade, but usually they can do so only when things
> go their way, and they are not challenged. But when they
> are challenged, they tend to forget their sham, lose their
> cool, and show their true colours, and this can be
> accomplished by some mere words on the screen. And
> once they lose their cool and blow their cover (blow their
> sham), they keep right on in the same track, without any
> awareness of doing so. They revert to type, and give
> themselves away, without any awareness of doing so.
> That they revert to type is funny enough, but that they do
> so without any awareness is even funnier.
I was just a bit pissed at Tara's vague and breezy topic when she's been
dismissive and rude of my comments in the past. It's no more complicated
than that. Now, some people have run away with their own arguments and
emotions but that's a mistake. By reflecting on performance and
relationships it's possible to route around individual and collective
failure, better develop the self, teamwork, and long-term success.
Personally, I've spent enough time explaining and being jerked around so my
focus is shifting more from theory and inclusive and more towards action and
persuasion. The challenge is to overcome personal procrastination and
develop a more rounded character. That's not easy nor what I'd choose but
something I consider necessary. Hannibal never made that leap and paid the
price for it. I don't intend to go down that path.
I have the same character type, policy vision, and approach as Prime
Minister Gordon Brown, and it's interesting seeing him make the same
mistakes I've made in the past as he grows into the role. I've been
following that closely to see how well my judgement predicts events and what
examples I can lift to boost my own morale. By learning from other peoples
experience I get the benefits with none of the costs.
It's a goals, process, and outcomes thing.
--
Charles E Hardwidge
Déjà Flu
...But it's something to think about anyway.
>
> -DaveK
The Tease:
Like you don't have enough to think about (anyway)?
What happened to Thought Airbrakes - the Imperial
Doctrine of Buddhism? What happened to "losing your mind"?
And now you adopt something *else* to think about?
Sheesh!
The Taisho:
"It's all OK" is just from your (and my) wee-bitty
perspective. You know that the "subjective" thing that
your brain does is habitually and genetically recursive,
right? Before I woke up, when I was doing yoga and exploring,
I had this really weird thing going that would happen
pretty frequently. My 'perspective' (if you can call it that)
would flash back and forth like the big bang from nothing
to everything. That's the best way I can put it, anyway.
I knew, probably from some recursive mechanisms, that it
was an illusion just as I knew (at the age of 5) that my
"out of body experience" was an illusion. So, what I think
I'm trying to say is that the subjective experience of
"awakening", "enlightenment", etc., is something that is
pretty subjectively impressive but has no impact on the
political murders in Africa or Corporate Rule in America
and if you don't get to work on those things you've
"Stepped Backward Into Your Cave" (Fight Club). This is why
I consider "Buddhism" just another narcissistic religion.
The Sequel:
I'm not open to insanity or insistent flights of imagination.
I've failed Tang's misunderstood Musashi criteria by miles,
but not my scientific understanding of it. I'm a rational monkey
and I'm very careful to watch for illusions and delusions.
It's called "mindfulness". I credit "Buddhism" with creating the
puzzle, not solving it. I credit great doubt and great determination
for that. The entirety of the unsane "self" recursion and the
endless preoccupation with it is simply stupid. The Idea of
Self is the first thing to go in the rational mind - when that
recursion is commented out, one has more telescope and microscope
time. You can help by donating to the LHC or learning to fly
and bombing Africa with food. The Middle Way is also acceptable.
"Buddhism", if approached via its "scriptures", is dead science.
It's filosophical fossil fuel - light your own way.
eu de Flu
jerry
Déjà Flu
hya, jerrybean :)
All the kids were down playing in the lake yesterday.
They smelled like dead fish when it was over and I hadda
vacuum twice to get the sand out of the carpet. Kitchen
sink leaked when we made lunch - the P-trap compression
fitting had gotten loose again. Fixed that. Aiden and
Weston both gave me a kiss before they left.
That's "buddhism" for ya, and that's all there is to it... ;)
Ali
wrote:
Well, first you must study the ferret koan, child. Ned may or may not
assist in your enlightenment.
Ali
Step aside, out of the way! I'm butting in here!
Not only is it not that, but it's not something else, either. And
that is the most precarious thing, even more so than a killer rabbit.
jerry
it is so simple, I cannot figure out how it has gotten so complex :o)
Ned
"Ali" <lal...@yayaya.com> wrote in message
news:v8n064h95cs469viv...@4ax.com...
>
>>> (I know nothing about Musashi, but borrow the quotes
>>> from somebody else on these boards, though he
>>> probably takes them to mean the contrary of what I take
>>> them to mean).
>>> Tang Huyen
>>
>> This is so not my business, because it appears that you and several
>> in the other newsgroups appear to gain pleasure in ferreting out
>> people you consider to be shamming enlightenment. The internet makes
>> for easy pickings for that activity I'm sure. But I will try one
>> more time with a question to anyone who enjoys the activity who might
>> wish to answer. Perhaps since I usually don't read x-posts I didn't
>> see it if anyone explained it previously. Why do you do it in the
>> first place? I'm asking in the sense of how it might, or might not,
>> assist your own practice (I mean if you are Buddhist)?
>> Kitty
>
> Well, first you must study the ferret koan, child. Ned may or may not
> assist in your enlightenment.
>
"No, and no." said the ferret. Hyakujo said, "But that's not the
right answer." The ferret said, "But if I'd given the right answer,
I'd never have gotten to be a ferret."
Ned
(But that probably comes down on both sides of the issue.)
KittyP
"Ned" <ned...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:hfKdnYk2QuQ3_f3V...@earthlink.com...
Works for me. heh
Kitty
Ned
"KittyP" <kitty...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:AXZ7k.326$3D7...@newsfe05.lga...
>>>>> (I know nothing about Musashi, but borrow the quotes
>>>>> from somebody else on these boards, though he
>>>>> probably takes them to mean the contrary of what I take
>>>>> them to mean).
>>>>> Tang Huyen
>>>>
>>>> This is so not my business, because it appears that you and several
>>>> in the other newsgroups appear to gain pleasure in ferreting out
>>>> people you consider to be shamming enlightenment. The internet makes
>>>> for easy pickings for that activity I'm sure. But I will try one
>>>> more time with a question to anyone who enjoys the activity who might
>>>> wish to answer. Perhaps since I usually don't read x-posts I didn't
>>>> see it if anyone explained it previously. Why do you do it in the
>>>> first place? I'm asking in the sense of how it might, or might not,
>>>> assist your own practice (I mean if you are Buddhist)?
>>>> Kitty
>>>
>>> Well, first you must study the ferret koan, child. Ned may or may not
>>> assist in your enlightenment.
>>
>> "No, and no." said the ferret. Hyakujo said, "But that's not the
>> right answer." The ferret said, "But if I'd given the right answer,
>> I'd never have gotten to be a ferret."
>> Ned
>> (But that probably comes down on both sides of the issue.)
>
> Works for me. heh
> Kitty
>
Well, done and done.
Ned
Tang Huyen
KittyP wrote:
> "Julian"
>
> > It's not my business either therefore I might as well butt in too...
> >
> > It is done for the benefit of the "victim" and others.
> > If the "victim" is shamming, itself and others will benefit
> > from having its fraud exposed.
> > If the "victim" isn't shamming it'll get a good laugh.
> >
> > A pretty clearcut win-win, no?
>
> It actually does sort of make a weird kind of sense. Thanks.
>
> It would make even more sense if the people doing it were
> Bodhisattva (with an attitude ;) though. But that isn't the
> case here, is it?
Thanks heaven, not a Boshisattva in the
model of the Japanese war criminals who
were Zen masters, basically all Japanese
Zen masters in WW II !!!
Tang Huyen
Keynes
Ordinary mind is the buddha.
(Or is it flat-earth republicanism? Can't tell which.)
Keynes
Them that knows likes their ferrets rare.
Dave K
Hypocrite.
Anything you write or preach, when rigidly adhered to, whether it be
in accordance with "scriptures" or not amounts to your own sort of
dogma. Don't you see that? You speak of great doubt and
determination, (you exclude faith becuase it sounds too "religiony"
for you) and you damn the Buddha's teachings as a fossil, as if yours
is somehow better.
What's the difference between one's own application of Fu-ism vs.
one's own application of the Buddha's teachings? Methinks you miss
the nuances here. Is the problem the teachings, or the attachment?
If it's the attachment, then you're no better off than I am with rigid
adherance to anti-scriptureism. If attachment isn't an issue, then I
should be able to memorize the entire Tipitaka and there will still be
no problem. If attachment is the problem, then what good is your way
compared to any other? You say "light your own way" and then you say
"by the way, it's this way" and hand me a torch.
So you see, I'm doing exactly as you say. I'm just not doing it the
way you'd like to see. If I was, I wouldn't be doing what you say,
would I?
So don't you worry. Everything's gonna be ok. Got my torch and my
path. I just happened to bring a few books along for encouragement,
inspiration, and kindling.
-DaveK
Charles E Hardwidge
It's a little difficult to shoehorn something in among all the arguing and
posturing but this is as good a place as any.
I note everyone has overlooked the simple and obvious in favour of building
complex explanations and tearing clothes. In a private newsgroup a similar
argument broke out today among the Formica classes because some guy set fire
to his garden to clear the overgrowth.
One is rarely left speechless but this is one of those times.
--
Charles E Hardwidge
Julian
I don't know.
Ali
wrote:
Ever have a ferret latch onto your knows?
You won't like it.
jerry
"Dave K" <dkots...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8a124f85-7278-478b...@x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Hypocrite.
-DaveK
Who showed Buddha the way? :o)
KittyP
I ....sense a story.....
Kitty
Dave K
> "Dave K" <dkotsch...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:8a124f85-7278-478b...@x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Sure as shit wasn't Fu!
-DaveK
Noel Friesen
-DaveK
yeah. it was me you'd think it'd be easier to get someone to eat and then
after it finally clicks, he's all like check it out I cn touch the sun and
we're all one and four noble truths, dharma blabla and then back to blissing
on the sun-touching. he goes on and on like that until *ahem* hey, that's
really great and all but why don't you go try doing that somewhere else im
trying to get my planting done you see and then he's like "I go to beat the
drum of the immortal in the darkness of the world... " which sounds a little
weird to me but whatever so I says Oh! great. It's just over that way,
hang a right at the big rock, you can't miss it, your friends are waiting
for you. which is how is showed buddha the way.
Dave K
Far out.
Déjà Flu
OMFG! it really WAS you... :)
Julian
> Julian wrote:
>
>> Robert Epstein wrote:
>>
>>> Tang Huyen wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Robert Epstein wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> They may be fun for you, but they are off base. What good is a system
>>>>> of retorts that distorts its object to no purpose? It only
>>>>> supports the
>>>>> egoic desires of the self-important one who serves them up.
>>>>>
>>>>> The fact that you applaud this type of series of disassociated little
>>>>> niceties is kind of embarrassing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Okay, just for fun, let's break down a couple of Charles' formulations
>>>>> above:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Tara makes a play at being breezy."
>>>>>
>>>>> No she doesn't. That's nonsensical. The setup is contrived. Tara
>>>>> displays a wide and erratic range of comments, emotional outbursts,
>>>>> views, statements of friendship, self-reflection, etc. She's one
>>>>> of the
>>>>> least packaged poster, and "being breezy" is not a pretension of hers.
>>>>> It is one of Charles perhaps.
>>>>>
>>>>> "shoulders to the cartwheel when a bee takes lunch in her bonnet."
>>>>>
>>>>> so she's all business when personally offended. this is Charles'
>>>>> followup in contrast to his false setup, and is equally false. he's
>>>>> making tara out to be a hypocrite, which she is not.
>>>>>
>>>>> the "cartwheel" image continues Charles' constant misogynist image of
>>>>> women as children or otherwise ineffectual, which started this in the
>>>>> first place. what a little bitch he is!
>>>>>
>>>>> Then he interprets me commenting on his "asshole" approach by accusing
>>>>> me of "rushing in and waving my dick around" in a cliched way, and
>>>>> ignores the framing of my comment which purposely bracketed this out.
>>>>> At least acknowledge that I had already dealt with this interpretation
>>>>> in advance, and respond to it. Instead, he goes on with his
>>>>> one-dimensional agenda and critique undisturbed by what has actually
>>>>> taken place.
>>>>>
>>>>> Talk about someone who is out of touch, and you are sympathetic to it
>>>>> because you are equally uncomfortable with both women and reality.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You take mere words on the screen too seriously,
>>>> too literally and too personally, especially as you
>>>> take them vicariously, on behalf of somebody else.
>>>> Just relax and enjoy, dear. Chuckie throws witty
>>>> and classy insults, which are to be appreciated as
>>>> such (namely, as witty and classy insults).
>>>> Everything else can be left aside, as they are satire.
>>>> Satire is not meant to be literal, and not meant to
>>>> be taken literally. It is pure, clean fun.
>>>>
>>>> By the way, Buddhism is in the same direction.
>>>>
>>>> Tang Huyen
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> You're entitled to that view, Tang,
>>
>>
>> Entitled by whom?
>>
>>> but...
>>
>>
>> snip.
>>
>> Phew! That's OK then.
>
> Julian, darling! Where have you been?
Here.
Tang Huyen
Noel Friesen wrote:
> "Dave K"
>
> > "jerry":
>
> > > Who showed Buddha the way? :o)
>
> > Sure as shit wasn't Fu!
>
> yeah. it was me you'd think it'd be easier to get someone to eat and then
> after it finally clicks, he's all like check it out I cn touch the sun and
> we're all one and four noble truths, dharma blabla and then back to blissing
> on the sun-touching. he goes on and on like that until *ahem* hey, that's
> really great and all but why don't you go try doing that somewhere else im
> trying to get my planting done you see and then he's like "I go to beat the
> drum of the immortal in the darkness of the world... " which sounds a little
> weird to me but whatever so I says Oh! great. It's just over that way,
> hang a right at the big rock, you can't miss it, your friends are waiting
> for you. which is how is showed buddha the way.
Nah. With the Buddha, everything is an absolute
beginning, and nothing is traceable to anything
prior to it (or even posterior to it). Everything
fully burns out in the very instant and nothing
carries over. It is a cinema, without any
continuation. He hasn't even the time to count to
four. Dharma is in the instant. There is no
transmission. In the instant, one understands, in
a flash, and it is over. The world is created anew,
and one is at creation, not again, but creation
begins anew. Such is revelation.
Tang Huyen
Déjà Flu
...
> Nah. With the Buddha, everything is an absolute
> beginning
Stop right there.
You've got it wrong from the beginning.
Begin again.
Charles E Hardwidge
Wot? Nah?
That's Speed-Dial being hip and cool.
--
Charles E Hardwidge
possum
"Keynes" <Key...@earthlinkspam.net> wrote in message
news:c6p164d9rqaigsoor...@4ax.com...
Splitter!!
>
>
possum
-DaveK
: ) : ) lovely bit of bathos if you don't mind me saying.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhV856sXf3w&feature=related
possum
here's a song in the meantime... : )
jfe...@googlemail.com
> "KittyP" <kittyp2...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:pjf8k.260$py7...@newsfe05.lga...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Ali" <lal...@yayaya.com> wrote in message
> >news:d4t264h22qbog6l3l...@4ax.com...
> >> On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 07:13:20 -0500, Keynes
> >> <Key...@earthlinkspam.net>
> >> wrote:
>
> >>>On Mon, 23 Jun 2008 22:38:45 -0500, "Ned"
>
> >>>>"KittyP" <kittyp2...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
Bloody hell that's dreary...
Look at this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoG4cqmdSU4&NR=1 :)
jerry
-DaveK
You go to hanging around with ev and you start acting just like her......
just joking :o)
If you will permit me, I would like to clarify flu's message to you. Flu has
many good traits, but tact is not among them. It is obvious, you do not know
the answer to the question and is the problem with your practice.
You cannot replace the inner search with exterior distractions. When you
extend the authority of your inner search to an outside source, your
practice stalls here. You attempt to demonize flu, but the demon belongs to
you. Your practice is to search out, find, and understand it is not real.
Dave K
> "Dave K" <dkotsch...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
Hey, thanks for expanding my vocabulary.
-DaveK
Noel Friesen
On Jun 24, 8:34 pm, "Noel Friesen" <noel.frie...@shaw.ca> wrote:
> "Dave K" <dkotsch...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:511f246f-5d21-406e...@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jun 24, 7:16 pm, "jerry" <jroli...@mchsi.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Dave K" <dkotsch...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> >news:8a124f85-7278-478b...@x35g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
Far out.
man, you have NO idea.
norbu....@gmail.com
so much for the theory that Julian was There... :)
altho i thunk the sentiment wuz, "Hey Jules, na-na-na-na-na etc..."
or for another old song:
Said the straight man to the late man
Where have you been
I've been here and I've been there
And Ive been in between.
I talk to the wind
My words are all carried away
I talk to the wind
The wind does not hear
The wind cannot hear.
I'm on the outside looking inside
What do I see
Much confusion, disillusion
All around me.
You don't possess me
Don't impress me
Just upset my mind
Cant instruct me or conduct me
Just use up my time
I talk to the wind
My words are all carried away
I talk to the wind
The wind does not hear
The wind cannot hear.........
- "I Talk To The Wind" - Fripp/Giles/Giles/McDonald/Sinfield/ etc
or maybe just...uhm...what were we taking about?...
oh - Hey, Julian! Kkuul! ( gives glass of lemonaide, lotsa icecubes
anna straw)....
sorta cheap bribe if yu wanna lay in the sun here this summer...
- n. :)
norbu....@gmail.com
> On Jun 23, 2:19 am, Robert Epstein <vze25...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Dave K wrote:
> > > On Jun 22, 2:30 am, Robert Epstein <vze25...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > >>Tang Huyen wrote:
>
> > >>>Charles E Hardwidge wrote:
>
> > >>>>Tara's makes a play at being breezy but it's all shoulders to the cartwheel
> > >>>>when a bee takes lunch in her bonnet. Policy is great but you've got to have
> > >>>>the character to back it up as well. And no, rushing in and waving your dick
> > >>>>around doesn't count, Bob. C'mon, guys. Transcend the cliché.
>
> > >>>Your insults are classy and witty,
> > >>>Chuckie. Let 'er rip, dear.
>
> > >>>Tang Huyen
>
> > >>They may be fun for you, but they are off base. What good is a system
> > >>of retorts that distorts its object to no purpose? It only supports the
> > >>egoic desires of the self-important one who serves them up.
>
> > > funny as hell gets in the way of my better judgement.
>
> > > If it's any consolation though, I immediately reverse course when he
> > > directs his insults at me, for I am admittedly thin skinned.
>
> > > -DaveK
>
> > thanks for being open as usual and encouraging self-revelation.
>
> > and I forgive you for thinking Charles is funny. :)
>
> > I find him a bit of a loser myself.
>
> All the more to laugh it up.
>
> Tang's encouragement of Charles is mischief. Tang's admonition to
> have balance and perspective is ok, but there's no reason go around
> encouraging people to act stupid in order to give yourself something
> to have balanance and perspective about. It's like giving yourself
> more work.
>
> As I said I find Charles funny when I have the outside perspective.
> The trick is to be able to laugh when it's directed at me, which is
> hit and miss in my case. I will admit that I could be laughing more
> than I do.
>
> Somewhat related to this. I've been looking at the mythology of the
> trickster/fool/jester/clown lately. They are all tied up together.
> Can't help thinking of Tang when I read this.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickster
>
> "Many native traditions held clowns and tricksters as essential to any
> contact with the sacred. People could not pray until they had laughed,
> because laughter opens and frees from rigid preconception. Humans had
> to have tricksters within the most sacred ceremonies for fear that
> they forget the sacred comes through upset, reversal, surprise. The
> trickster in most native traditions is essential to creation, to
> birth".[1]"
>
> "The trickster deity breaks the rules of the gods or nature, sometimes
> maliciously (for example, Loki) but usually, albeit unintentionally,
> with ultimately positive effects."
>
> Ok, that's not exactly Tang, becuase I don't think he's intentionally
> malicious, but thinks he's doing us a favor, so it ends up turning out
> bad. But it's something to think about anyway.
>
> -DaveK
i've spent a few decades, time by time, looking into the trickster
ideas - and they are not
all the same at all...Trying to see them all as the same misses how
they are very different...
The Navaho Coyote ends up basically evil, the Norse Loki was
originally positive - a mercurial
god like fire - beneficial or baneful...Under later X-ian influence
Loki was seen as evil, and part of the
X-ian influenced End Of The World, while in Japan we see the fox
(kitsune) and racoon-dogs (tanuki)
as sometimes dangerous, but as an essentially positive force -
ambiguity and change is basically
good. The Kitsu (foxes) are the harbingers of O-Kami Inari, the Great
Sacredness of Harvest...
The Kitsu foxes are little disasters that prevent greater
disasters...the little disasters are messengers
of the Great Sacredness Harvest...they are only recognized as such
some time after the fact
unless a thread from old times is noticed...the paper cords and
knots... Hence Foxes were
seen as mostly positive, the trickster/uncertainty as the harbinger of
the unknown/sacred...
There are shrines to Inari in nearly every neighborhood in japan, and
a pair of foxes guard each
shrine as messengers....
In Indian Buddhism we find this image as Tara/Avalokitesvara...as this
moved into China it
was fused into Kuan-Yin, hence Kan non in Japan.
Lots more info if yu want...
Basic idea is that harvest happens before any notion, then somehow
regard or lack of regard
ends up with what is left......
or something like that...
...that the harvest happen beyond time....
doesn't translate well...
- n.
Dave K
Well I spent all of about 10 minutes when you add it up, so you've got
a bit of a head start on me...
> The Navaho Coyote ends up basically evil, the Norse Loki was
> originally positive - a mercurial
> god like fire - beneficial or baneful...Under later X-ian influence
> Loki was seen as evil, and part of the
> X-ian influenced End Of The World, while in Japan we see the fox
> (kitsune) and racoon-dogs (tanuki)
> as sometimes dangerous, but as an essentially positive force -
> ambiguity and change is basically
> good. The Kitsu (foxes) are the harbingers of O-Kami Inari, the Great
> Sacredness of Harvest...
> The Kitsu foxes are little disasters that prevent greater
> disasters...the little disasters are messengers
> of the Great Sacredness Harvest...they are only recognized as such
> some time after the fact
> unless a thread from old times is noticed...the paper cords and
> knots... Hence Foxes were
> seen as mostly positive, the trickster/uncertainty as the harbinger of
> the unknown/sacred...
> There are shrines to Inari in nearly every neighborhood in japan, and
> a pair of foxes guard each
> shrine as messengers....
>
> In Indian Buddhism we find this image as Tara/Avalokitesvara...as this
> moved into China it
> was fused into Kuan-Yin, hence Kan non in Japan.
Ok, well I don't think I'm *too* mistaken then. My basic idea is that
the Big Mistake is to look at these figures, whether they be Loki,
Till Eulenspiegel (that's my favorite right now) or Tang Huyen, as
something we need to get rid of becuase they are Evil. Or am I being
overly simplistic?
That is to say we need them (Tang, Fu, even Stump..stump....Gawd, I
can't even say it) just as much as anybody else, becuase we need to be
made fools of once and awhile, to be levelled, because Nice
Conversation isn't always Honest Conversation and that which we
perceive as "EVIL!!" could very well just be somebody having a laugh,
as I suspect is often the case with Tang. (Who the artists of my mind
depict as grampa-ish asian guy with a constant imp-like grin and
handlebar mustache. If I ever see what he really looks like I would
probably be disappointed, except for the grin.)
This isn't the same as encouraging it, which is what Evil Tang does,
but trying to put a stop to Tang's antics or manipulate him in any way
doesn't work. (He can be dogmatic, but he is wriggly too.) The fool/
clown/jester figure is almost always doing what is downright
unacceptable and unforgivable, and cant' be controlled.
>
> Lots more info if yu want...
>
> Basic idea is that harvest happens before any notion, then somehow
> regard or lack of regard
> ends up with what is left......
>
> or something like that...
>
> ...that the harvest happen beyond time....
>
> doesn't translate well...
Yeah that's over my head at the moment...
-DaveK
Noel Friesen
So.... now what?
Ali
Charles E Hardwidge
news:x8A8k.51090$gc5.26835@pd7urf2no...
>
> "Tang Huyen" <tanghuyen{delete}@gmail.com[remove]> wrote in message
> news:FtydnaBkr-1hAPzV...@supernews.com...
>>
>> beginning, and nothing is traceable to anything
>> prior to it (or even posterior to it). Everything
>> fully burns out in the very instant and nothing
>> carries over. It is a cinema, without any
>> continuation. He hasn't even the time to count to
>> four. Dharma is in the instant. There is no
>> transmission. In the instant, one understands, in
>> a flash, and it is over. The world is created anew,
>> and one is at creation, not again, but creation
>> begins anew. Such is revelation.
>>
>> Tang Huyen
>
> So.... now what?
Tang needs to get some bigger sleeves and a girl with a pom-pom.
--
Charles E Hardwidge
possum
<jfe...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:1feedf7a-5947-4a2f...@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
ok. hee! try this one. better? : )
http://www.funnyanimalvideos.com/parrot-videos/parrot-makes-baby-sounds/
possum
-DaveK
s'ok.
and my travel tip of the day is always pack a plunger...
unless you know you'll only be going in the woods...
in which case pack a shovel...
and a pope hat...
plenty of honey...
more books...
maybe you should get a mule...?
: )
possum
possum
<norbu....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2be23cec-0bd2-4786...@f24g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
or something like that...
doesn't translate well...
- n.
tell us about the kitsunes, yes please. : )
possum
Tang Huyen
Noel Friesen wrote:
> So.... now what?
Relax and enjoy. Laugh and the universe laughs
with you. Be happy and the universe is happy
with you. Be serene and the universe is serene
with you. Glow and the universe glows with you.
That is a summary of the spiritual contract. It
may or may not work in the material plane, but
it works in the spiritual plane. I know, it is mere
woo-woo, but it works. The spiritual plane itself
is mere woo-woo, without any material substance
to it.
Tang Huyen
^@%>---*=#
"and in the end the love you take
is equal to the love you make."
>the beatles
halfawake
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Loki Was: Re: bye bye frogs.
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2008 22:05:26 -0400
From: halfawake <half...@nonewsisgoodnews.com>
Reply-To: epsteinrob_no unde...@yahoo.com
Newsgroups:
alt.philosophy.zen,alt.zen,talk.religion.buddhism,alt.buddha.short.fat.guy
References:
possum wrote:
I'd walk a mile for a yak.
Robert
- - - - - - - - - - - -
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
Keynes
norbu....@gmail.com
> <norbu.tra...@gmail.com> wrote in message
sorry, reading just before bedtime, but yes, will do in next few
days...Inari's tradition
explains the trickster image better than anything, the light and dark
sides...
In the west we have Bugs Bunny etc as popular images that give the
surface impression
but are severed before they connect to the source of the archetype...
it doesn't reduce to an intellectual square, but it can be pointed
out,
in traditions like Avalokita, Tara, Kuan Yin, Inari, etc there are
living traditions
that can be engaged...a way maybe of seeing life outside our usual
ideas of time,
where we might speak of the future causing the past if we were to try
to
speak in terms of time...
will post in the next few days...
but you know this is just a face glimpsed in passing....
nothing can be said about Inari or the Kitsus that itsn't fiction -
what is past is reduced to misunderstandings and what
is happening doesn't reduce to this that or the other...
but i will try to say something....
there was a person, a children's author who had glimpse of how
messengers are not quite nailed down but glimpsed and related to...
a slightly longish quote, but says mor between the lines than
i could with endless blah blah blah....
...
The Fox and the Little Prince
it was then that the fox appeared.
"good morning" said the fox.
"good morning"
the little prince responded politely
altho when he turned around he saw nothing.
"I am right here" the voice said, "under the apple
tree."
"who are you?" asked the little prince, and added,
"You are very pretty to look at."
"I am a fox", the fox said.
"Come and play with me,"
proposed the little prince, "I am so unhappy."
"I cannot play with you," the fox said,
"I am not tamed."
"AH please excuse me,"said the little prince.
But after some thought, he added:
"what does that mean---'tame'?"
"you do not live here," said the fox,
"what is it you are looking for?"
"I am looking for men," said the little prince.
"What does that mean---tame?"
"Men,"said the fox,
"they have guns, and they hunt.
It is very disturbing.
They also raise chickens.
These are their only interests.
Are you looking for chickens?"
"No," said the little prince.
"I am looking for friends.
What does that mean---tame?"
"It is an act too often neglected,"
said the fox.
"It means to establish ties."
"To establish ties?"
"Just that," said the fox.
"to me, you are still nothing more than
a little boy who is just like
a hundred thousand other little boys.
And I have no need of you.
And you, on your part, have no need of me.
To you I am nothing more
than a fox like a hundred thousand other foxes.
But if you tame me, then we shall need each other.
To me, you will be unique in all the world.
To you, I shall be unique in all the world. . ."
"I am beginning to understand,"
said the little prince.
"There is a flower. . .I think she has tamed me. . ."
"It is possible," said the fox.
"On earth one sees all sorts of things."
"Oh but this is not on the earth!"
said the little prince.
The fox seemed perplexed, and very curious.
"On another planet?"
"Yes"
"Are there hunters on that planet?"
"No"
"Ah that's interesting! Are there chickens?"
"No"
"Nothing is perfect," sighed the fox.
But he came back to his idea.
"My life is very monotonous," he said.
"I hunt chickens; men hunt me.
All chickens are just alike,
and all the men are just alike.
And in consequence, I am a little bored.
But if you tame me,
it will be as if the sun came to shine on my life.
I shall know the sound of a step that will be
different from all the others.
Other steps send me hurrying back
underneath the ground.
Yours will call me, like music out of my burrow.
And then look:
you see the grain-fields down yonder?
I do not eat bread.
Wheat is of no use to me.
The wheat fields have nothing to say to me.
And that is sad.
But you have hair that is the color of gold.
Think how wonderful that will be
when you have tamed me!
The grain, which is also golden,
will bring me back the thought of you.
And I shall love to listen
to the wind in the wheat. . ."
The fox gazed at the little prince,
for a long time.
"Please---tame me!" he said.
"I want to, very much," the little prince replied.
"But I have not much time.
I have friends to discover,
and a great many things to understand."
"One only understands the things that one tames,"
said the fox.
" Men have no more time to understand anything.
They buy things all ready made at the shops.
But there is no shop anywhere
where one can buy friendship,
and so men have no friends any more.
If you want a friend, tame me. . ."
"What must I do, to tame you?
asked the little prince.
"You must be very patient," replied the fox.
First you will sit down
at a little distance from me
-like that-in the grass.
I shall look at you out of the corner of my eye,
and you will say nothing.
Words are the source of misunderstandings.
But you will sit a little closer to me,
every day..."
The next day the little prince came back.
"It would have been better to come back
at the same hour," said the fox.
"If for example, you came at four o'clock
in the afternoon,
then at three o'clock I shall begin to be happy.
I shall feel happier and happier
as the hour advances.
At four o'clock,
I shall be worrying and jumping about.
I shall show you how happy I am!
But if you come at just any time,
I shall never know at what hour
my heart is ready to greet you. . .
One must observe the proper rites. . ."
"What is a rite?" asked the little prince.
"Those also are actions too often neglected,"
said the fox.
"they are what make one day
different from other days,
one hour different from other hours.
There is a rite, for example, among my hunters.
Every Thursday they danse with the village girls.
So Thursday is a wonderful day for me!
I can take a walk as far as the vineyards.
But if the hunters danced at just any time,
every day would be like
every other day,
and I should never have any vacation at all."
So the little prince tamed the fox.
And when the hour of his departure drew near---
"Ah," said the fox, "I shall cry."
"It is your own fault," said the little prince.
"I never wished you any sort of harm;
but you wanted me to tame you. . ."
"Yes that is so", said the fox.
"But now you are going to cry!"
said the little prince.
"Yes that is so" said the fox.
"Then it has done you no good at all!"
"It has done me good," said the fox,
"because of the color of the wheat fields."
And then he added:
"go and look again at the roses.
You will understand now
that yours is unique in all the world.
Then come back to say goodbye to me,
and I will make you a present of a secret."
The little prince went away,
to look again at the roses.
"You are not at all like my rose," he said.
"As yet you are nothing.
No one has tamed you, and you have tamed no one.
You are like my fox when I first knew him.
He was only a fox
like a hundred thousand other foxes.
But I have made a friend,
and now he is unique in all the world."
And the roses were very much embarrassed.
"You are beautiful, but you are empty," he went on.
"One could not die for you.
To be sure, an ordinary passerby would think
that my rose looked just like you
--the rose that belongs to me.
But in herself alone she is more important
than all the hundreds of you
other roses: because it is she that I have watered;
because it is she
that I have put under the glass globe;
because it is for her
that I have killed the caterpillars
(except the two or three we saved
to become butterflies);
because it is she that I have listened to,
when she grumbled,
or boasted,
or even sometimes when she said nothing.
Because she is MY rose."
And he went back to meet the fox.
"Goodbye" he said.
"Goodbye," said the fox.
"And now here is my secret, a very simple secret:
It is only with the heart that one can see rightly;
what is essential is invisible to the eye."
"What is essential is invisible to the eye,"
the little prince repeated,
so that he would be sure to remember.
"It is the time you have wasted for your rose
that makes your rose so important.
"It is the time I have wasted for my rose--
"said the little prince
so he would be sure to remember.
"Men have forgotten this truth," said the fox.
"But you must not forget it.
You become responsible, forever,
for what you have tamed.
You are responsible for your rose. . ."
"I am responsible for my rose,"
the little prince repeated,
so that he would be sure to remember.
From the Little Prince by Antoine de Saint-Exupery
norbu....@gmail.com
just something do between art and love and the dishes...
Yes, that could be true sometimes... Tang, Fu, St..er "he who must not
be named",
etc are actually nice honest conversation from another point of
view...
> (Who the artists of my mind
> depict as grampa-ish asian guy with a constant imp-like grin and
> handlebar mustache.
That's the "Buddhistist" colouring it...try it as just a plain ol
inner voice right or wrong
saying "look at what you are doing" If we are nice or edgy or flat out
rude that is all
any of our posts boil down to -
"look at what you are doing"
we can puff it up with "mindfulness" "sunyata" "eightfold path" etc
etc...
it's just "look at what you are doing" cuz there really isn't a dogma
leading to awakening or non-awakening etc - that's all distraction -
What other folks do is their way of trying to figure it out and we
can't know if they have a jump on us or vice-versa and it really
doesn't matter
.......
Evelyn
Norbu my dear, that was positively exquisite. Reading and posting
through google now. Time Warner has pulled the plug on usenet, so it
is somewhat awkward. But that was a great and lovely tale. So
relevant, so gentle and lovely. I am presently looking to try some
free news servers, but just in case I don't, please know that I thank
you for that.
Love,
Evelyn
Charles E Hardwidge
news:c1d9f836-dc4b-41a9...@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
> Norbu my dear, that was positively exquisite. Reading and posting
> through google now. Time Warner has pulled the plug on usenet, so it
> is somewhat awkward. But that was a great and lovely tale. So
> relevant, so gentle and lovely. I am presently looking to try some
> free news servers, but just in case I don't, please know that I thank
> you for that.
People still need to learn how to snip the fat and create new topics.
The medium is not the message, etcetera.
--
Charles E Hardwidge
jfe...@googlemail.com
> <jfez...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
Nice one :) Funny, it looks like it's body language matches the noise
it's making.
possum
<norbu....@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4c3b6ad5-5095-40f6...@u12g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
...
"To establish ties?"
"Yes"
"No"
"No"
wonderful norbu, thank you.
possum
possum
"Evelyn" <evely...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c1d9f836-dc4b-41a9...@79g2000hsk.googlegroups.com...
Love,
Evelyn
hello ev
wasn't it though? : )
tiscali did the same thing, poo - that was when i switched
to zen.
guess maybe usenet's days are numbered...
love
jan
possum
<jfe...@googlemail.com> wrote in message
news:e28fa8c5-80c3-4cc9...@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
impossible not to laugh. : )
yes, it's funny. the woman's voice was a bit of a pain.
you don't suppose it's a doctored video, do you?
possum
still half asleep
> "Evelyn" <evelyn.r...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> Norbu my dear, that was positively exquisite. Reading and
> posting
> through google now. Time Warner has pulled the plug on
> usenet, so it
> is somewhat awkward. But that was a great and lovely tale.
> So
> relevant, so gentle and lovely. I am presently looking to
> try some
> free news servers, but just in case I don't, please know
> that I thank
> you for that.
>
> Love,
> Evelyn
>
> hello ev
> wasn't it though? : )
>
> tiscali did the same thing, poo - that was when i switched
> to zen.
> guess maybe usenet's days are numbered...
> love
> jan
Wow. Just noticed this aside re. usenet, and I am in the same
position, as Verizon has stopped covering alt groups but is still on
the big eight as they call it, which includes the "talk" heading, eg,
trb. It looks like there has been a pernicious decision reached by
all the Web IPs that they are sidelining usenet. That just makes me
sick. As superfluous as a lot of usenet is, it represents a totally
open, totally free background communication system that doesn't have
the high profile problems of the Web. I wish there were some
effective way to protest this. Usenet should not be allowed to
"wither on the vine." [Newt Gingrich on a similar maneouver re.
social entitlement programs.]
Robert
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
still half asleep
BTW, Evelyn, I am also on Googlegroups right now. I have paid for a
teranet free account and tried to use it through Netscape, Hogwasher
and Thunderbird, but have been having technical difficulties with all
of them. As much as I hate the Googlegroups interface and appearance
and hierarchy of messages, it does actually work, which now seems like
a luxury.
Robert
-----------------------------------------
Julian
There is an effective way to deal with it.
You buy a share in the ISP and raise the issues at their AGM.
If that doesn't work simply buy the majority of the shares
and write a memo. It'll get done.