vThe first truth is that nothing is lost in the universe. Matter turns
into
energy, energy turns into matter. A dead leaf turns into soil. A seed
sprouts and becomes a new plant. Old solar systems disintegrate and turn
into cosmic rays. We are born of our parents, our children are born of us.
We are the same as plants, as trees, as other people, as the rain that
falls. We consist of that which is around us, we are the same as
everything. If we destroy something around us, we destroy ourselves. If we
cheat another, we cheat ourselves. Understanding this truth, the Buddha
and his disciples never killed any animal.
Tak.
+ The imbecilic idiot Joseph McElroy has attempted to peddle
his ego via a brain-construct named 'aunt Polly' + attempting
to present the above as a 'christian believ in Evil and hell'.
Tak + tak.
+ Like most ignorant apes, atempts to use 'laughing at'
+ 'joke' to intimidate _ break another from acting against his
imbecility.
(from three universal truths 'buddhism')
-
Type: discussion
Comments
Did they kill vegetables? How was the line drawn?
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]
Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
> vThe first truth is that nothing is lost in the universe. Matter turns
> into
> energy, energy turns into matter. A dead leaf turns into soil. A seed
> sprouts and becomes a new plant. Old solar systems disintegrate and turn
> into cosmic rays. We are born of our parents, our children are born of us.
> We are the same as plants, as trees, as other people, as the rain that
> falls. We consist of that which is around us, we are the same as
> everything. If we destroy something around us, we destroy ourselves. If we
> cheat another, we cheat ourselves. Understanding this truth, the Buddha
> and his disciples never killed any animal.
>
>
> Tak.
>
> + The imbecilic idiot Joseph McElroy has attempted to peddle
> his ego via a brain-construct named 'aunt Polly' + attempting
> to present the above as a 'christian believ in Evil and hell'.
>
>
> Tak + tak.
>
> + Like most ignorant apes, atempts to use 'laughing at'
> + 'joke' to intimidate _ break another from acting against his
> imbecility.
>
>
> ——————————————————————–
> t h i n g i s t
> message by "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>
> archive at http://bbs.thing.net
> info: send email to [email protected]
> and write "info thingist" in the message body
> ——————————————————————–
On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
> Did they kill vegetables? How was the line drawn?
What do you think Joseph? Or did they attempt to use
'humor' in order to cover up their own stupidity
and abrogate responsibility for their actions?
What do you 'think'?
And do you 'think' they went around ignorantly
mistreating humans in order to 'teach them' about
their true nature?
Do you think they attempted to peddle that as art?
If one used logic (a brain function), one could possibly calculate that there
is little difference between a plant and animal in the definition of a living
thing. Thus choosing to eat plants but not animals is an arbitrary division (a
line). However this is an abstact description and does not necessarily
coorespond to reality.
I am asking how they described the differentiation between plants and animals.
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]
Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
> On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
> > Did they kill vegetables? How was the line drawn?
>
> What do you think Joseph? Or did they attempt to use
> 'humor' in order to cover up their own stupidity
> and abrogate responsibility for their actions?
>
> What do you 'think'?
>
> And do you 'think' they went around ignorantly
> mistreating humans in order to 'teach them' about
> their true nature?
>
> Do you think they attempted to peddle that as art?
We don't "kill" plants. We take the fruits of the plants offered to us, the biological structures intended from the outset to be consumed. Most plants use this technique, modulo overproduction, to spread their seeds with the feces' nutrients of the animals that eat them. If anything, we are actually helping plants–we are even necessary to their existence as they are to ours.
Animals obviously do nothing of the sort.
Vijay
>Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 23:45:54 +0000
> "joseph (yes)" <[email protected]> "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
> RHIZOME_RAW: Re: [thingist] (from three universal truths 'buddhism')Reply-To: "joseph (yes)" <[email protected]>
>
>If one used logic (a brain function), one could possibly calculate that there
>is little difference between a plant and animal in the definition of a living
>thing. Thus choosing to eat plants but not animals is an arbitrary division (a
>line). However this is an abstact description and does not necessarily
>coorespond to reality.
>
>I am asking how they described the differentiation between plants and animals.
>
>joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
>frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
>
>go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
>call me 646 279 2309
>
>SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
>[email protected]
>
>
>
>
>
>Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
>
>> On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>>
>> > Did they kill vegetables? How was the line drawn?
>>
>> What do you think Joseph? Or did they attempt to use
>> 'humor' in order to cover up their own stupidity
>> and abrogate responsibility for their actions?
>>
>> What do you 'think'?
>>
>> And do you 'think' they went around ignorantly
>> mistreating humans in order to 'teach them' about
>> their true nature?
>>
>> Do you think they attempted to peddle that as art?
>+ ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
>-> post: [email protected]
>-> questions: [email protected]
>-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
>-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
>+
>Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
>Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
————————————————————
Get Your Free and Private Junglist E-mail from Junglist.com
Register Online Here -> http://www.junglist.com
———————————————————————
Express yourself with a super cool email address from BigMailBox.com.
Hundreds of choices. It's free!
http://www.bigmailbox.com
———————————————————————
> I am asking how they described the differentiation between plants and animals.
I am sure you are asking that.
But the reply given to you was accurate.
Can you not read?
On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, Vijay Pattisapu wrote:
> We don't "kill" plants. We take the fruits of the plants offered to us,
> the biological structures intended from the outset to be consumed.
Provided that plants are 'naturally' grown.
And evenso, one still requests 'permission' from the plant.
Tak.
One respects all natures. Current 'farming' methods "kill"
plants. Also. One may "take" the fruit of plants only if
the plant is willing to give it. If the plant is not 'willing'
to give, then it reacts with defensove mechanisms.
Such abuse of plants as well as automatic 'pseudo-vegetarianism'
without awareness is simply 'abuse'.
Additionallya pplies to cosmetics + medicinal industries.
Moreso applied to 'spirit' drugs.
That is, 01 plant recognizes the spirit of human ingesting it +
it shall not grant automatic enlightenment even if consumed
against its will. Under such circumstances, laws are triggered
which damage the spirit of the perpetrator.
Tak.
Hence medicinal + 'teaching' drugs are administered by
qualified + qualified 'individuals' only, at the disecretion
of 'laws' apparent to such.
Juzt like with 'teachings'.
Tak + tak.
Actual output of 'art' : plant-like constructz from humans
which feed other 'enttities'. The difference between 'shit'
and 'art' is quite apparent to those who can see.
Unless 01 human allows + gives another itz 'work' : all
else is theft. And even when 'given' the 'receiver' must
accept the rules of the gift.
The difference between some_ humans and plants is that they have
capacity to consciously master the 'laws' working via the human
vehicle, to varied degrees. Certain humans have capacity to
only act as aware vehicles. Certain can achiev various degrees of
co-mastery (knowledge actuel). And certian humans can ahieve
complete mastery.
The above all depends on an 'energetic network' much like plantz
depend on soil.
Humanity (+rhizome +thingist) have so far been engaged in
damaging other humans (instruments) thusly preventing them from
functioning properly (unneccessary happiness) + also what is worse:
destroying 'said' network + also destroying 'teachings' which are to
aid humans + maintain + 'heal' the network.
Which is what religions proper have been.
Every time a human damages another, by physical, energetic,
"other means" one functions against laws of its on function
(self-destructive) + destroys future chances for others to
exist.
Unconscious self-destructive kamikazes.
> Most plants use this technique, modulo overproduction,
> to spread their seeds with the feces' nutrients of the animals that eat
> them. If anything, we are actually helping plants–we are even necessary
> to their existence as they are to ours.
Da. Only if this is done according to proper laws,
with volitional giving from the plant + mutual respect.
Rhizome + others : involved in 'extortion' and 'murder'.
Same applies to the way plants are treated currently
by very very idiotic 'farmers' driven by egotism + greed.
Totally like 01 social sculpture 'wrote' Mark Tribe.
However Mark Tribe is a 'farmer'. + Joseph Beuys wasn't.
> Animals obviously do nothing of the sort.
Da. Humans are, part mineral, part animal, part plant, and part divine,
when fully developed.
On Mon, 9 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
> do you cut down trees to build houses? do you shit in the field? do you eat
> potatoes?
Ultra standard meaningless "questioning" from blind apes
who fancy reality as flat as their myopic perceptions.
Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
>
> > I am asking how they described the differentiation between plants and
> animals.
>
> I am sure you are asking that.
> But the reply given to you was accurate.
> Can you not read?
I would like to read better.
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]
Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
>
> > I am asking how they described the differentiation between plants and
> animals.
>
> I am sure you are asking that.
> But the reply given to you was accurate.
> Can you not read?
Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
> Da. Humans are, part mineral, part animal, part plant, and part divine,
> when fully developed.
Oh Lord won't you buy me a Mercedez Benz.
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]
Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
> On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, Vijay Pattisapu wrote:
>
> > We don't "kill" plants. We take the fruits of the plants offered to us,
> > the biological structures intended from the outset to be consumed.
>
> Provided that plants are 'naturally' grown.
> And evenso, one still requests 'permission' from the plant.
>
> Tak.
>
> One respects all natures. Current 'farming' methods "kill"
> plants. Also. One may "take" the fruit of plants only if
> the plant is willing to give it. If the plant is not 'willing'
> to give, then it reacts with defensove mechanisms.
>
> Such abuse of plants as well as automatic 'pseudo-vegetarianism'
> without awareness is simply 'abuse'.
>
> Additionallya pplies to cosmetics + medicinal industries.
>
> Moreso applied to 'spirit' drugs.
>
> That is, 01 plant recognizes the spirit of human ingesting it +
> it shall not grant automatic enlightenment even if consumed
> against its will. Under such circumstances, laws are triggered
> which damage the spirit of the perpetrator.
>
> Tak.
>
> Hence medicinal + 'teaching' drugs are administered by
> qualified + qualified 'individuals' only, at the disecretion
> of 'laws' apparent to such.
>
> Juzt like with 'teachings'.
>
> Tak + tak.
>
> Actual output of 'art' : plant-like constructz from humans
> which feed other 'enttities'. The difference between 'shit'
> and 'art' is quite apparent to those who can see.
>
> Unless 01 human allows + gives another itz 'work' : all
> else is theft. And even when 'given' the 'receiver' must
> accept the rules of the gift.
>
> The difference between some_ humans and plants is that they have
> capacity to consciously master the 'laws' working via the human
> vehicle, to varied degrees. Certain humans have capacity to
> only act as aware vehicles. Certain can achiev various degrees of
> co-mastery (knowledge actuel). And certian humans can ahieve
> complete mastery.
>
> The above all depends on an 'energetic network' much like plantz
> depend on soil.
>
> Humanity (+rhizome +thingist) have so far been engaged in
> damaging other humans (instruments) thusly preventing them from
> functioning properly (unneccessary happiness) + also what is worse:
> destroying 'said' network + also destroying 'teachings' which are to
> aid humans + maintain + 'heal' the network.
>
> Which is what religions proper have been.
>
> Every time a human damages another, by physical, energetic,
> "other means" one functions against laws of its on function
> (self-destructive) + destroys future chances for others to
> exist.
>
> Unconscious self-destructive kamikazes.
>
>
> > Most plants use this technique, modulo overproduction,
> > to spread their seeds with the feces' nutrients of the animals that eat
> > them. If anything, we are actually helping plants–we are even necessary
> > to their existence as they are to ours.
>
> Da. Only if this is done according to proper laws,
> with volitional giving from the plant + mutual respect.
>
> Rhizome + others : involved in 'extortion' and 'murder'.
>
> Same applies to the way plants are treated currently
> by very very idiotic 'farmers' driven by egotism + greed.
>
> Totally like 01 social sculpture 'wrote' Mark Tribe.
> However Mark Tribe is a 'farmer'. + Joseph Beuys wasn't.
>
> > Animals obviously do nothing of the sort.
>
> Da. Humans are, part mineral, part animal, part plant, and part divine,
> when fully developed.
> > do you cut down trees to build houses? do you shit in the field? do you eat
> > potatoes?
>
> Ultra standard meaningless "questioning" from blind apes
> who fancy reality as flat as their myopic perceptions.
So, um, ok, and this means that I should stop? You want me to stop?
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]
Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
> On Mon, 9 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
> > do you cut down trees to build houses? do you shit in the field? do you eat
> > potatoes?
>
> Ultra standard meaningless "questioning" from blind apes
> who fancy reality as flat as their myopic perceptions.
On Mon, 9 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
> So, um, ok, and this means that I should stop? You want me to stop?
More meaningless projectionist knee-jerks?
You will stop when you CAN stop.
And that's not as easy as running one's brain on empty
with trash data (sound, visual, languij, etc.).
Tak.
Junk food comes in many formz.
On Tue, 10 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
> Oh Lord won't you buy me a Mercedez Benz.
Said joseph as he hit himself over the head being 'clever'.
Quoting Vijay Pattisapu <[email protected]>:
> We don't "kill" plants. We take the fruits of the plants offered to us, the
> biological structures intended from the outset to be consumed. Most plants
> use this technique, modulo overproduction, to spread their seeds with the
> feces' nutrients of the animals that eat them. If anything, we are actually
> helping plants–we are even necessary to their existence as they are to ours.
>
> Animals obviously do nothing of the sort.
do you cut down trees to build houses? do you shit in the field? do you eat
potatoes?
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]
Quoting Vijay Pattisapu <[email protected]>:
> We don't "kill" plants. We take the fruits of the plants offered to us, the
> biological structures intended from the outset to be consumed. Most plants
> use this technique, modulo overproduction, to spread their seeds with the
> feces' nutrients of the animals that eat them. If anything, we are actually
> helping plants–we are even necessary to their existence as they are to ours.
>
> Animals obviously do nothing of the sort.
>
> Vijay
>
> >Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 23:45:54 +0000
> > "joseph (yes)" <[email protected]> "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+"
> <[email protected]>Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
> > RHIZOME_RAW: Re: [thingist] (from three universal truths
> 'buddhism')Reply-To: "joseph (yes)" <[email protected]>
> >
> >If one used logic (a brain function), one could possibly calculate that
> there
> >is little difference between a plant and animal in the definition of a
> living
> >thing. Thus choosing to eat plants but not animals is an arbitrary division
> (a
> >line). However this is an abstact description and does not necessarily
> >coorespond to reality.
> >
> >I am asking how they described the differentiation between plants and
> animals.
> >
> >joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
> >frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
> >
> >go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
> >call me 646 279 2309
> >
> >SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
> >[email protected]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
> >
> >> On Sat, 7 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
> >>
> >> > Did they kill vegetables? How was the line drawn?
> >>
> >> What do you think Joseph? Or did they attempt to use
> >> 'humor' in order to cover up their own stupidity
> >> and abrogate responsibility for their actions?
> >>
> >> What do you 'think'?
> >>
> >> And do you 'think' they went around ignorantly
> >> mistreating humans in order to 'teach them' about
> >> their true nature?
> >>
> >> Do you think they attempted to peddle that as art?
> >+ ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> >-> post: [email protected]
> >-> questions: [email protected]
> >-> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> >-> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> >+
> >Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> >Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
>
>
>
> ————————————————————
> Get Your Free and Private Junglist E-mail from Junglist.com
> Register Online Here -> http://www.junglist.com
>
>
> ———————————————————————
> Express yourself with a super cool email address from BigMailBox.com.
> Hundreds of choices. It's free!
> http://www.bigmailbox.com
> ———————————————————————
Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
> On Tue, 10 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
> > Oh Lord won't you buy me a Mercedez Benz.
>
> Said joseph as he hit himself over the head being 'clever'.
Oh dear, is that what you think I am doing? I have never been clever. You
have proven yourself quite incapable to understand the communication of
superior individuals. It is a shame, since you would be a valuable asset to a
conversation.
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]
On Tue, 10 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
> Yes, of course, like the posts that you provide. They are not nourishing, but
> fun to eat.
No dear. Our posts are not junk food.
Your illiteracy is your own problem.
You will simply not receive anything from us.
Is that not clear to you?
YOU_ will not receive anything.
You're not even capable of rceiving.
Only consummatorial energy sapping.
Un chien idiotik.
On Tue, 10 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
> Oh dear, is that what you think I am doing?
We don't think about what you're doing.
We simply observe.
> I have never been clever.
said the delusional ape.
> You have proven yourself
Reality is not perceivable or subject to 'proofs' illiterate
brain-obsessed ape.
> quite incapable to understand the communication of
> superior individuals.
You're neither superior nor an individual.
You're a simpleton ape who fancies the burble noise it makes
meaningful and communicatory.
> It is a shame, since you would be a valuable asset to a
> conversation.
Yes, <condescension> because <condescension>.
Our value does not revolve around your idiotic attempts at judgement,
narcissistic princessa. Nor are you capable of 'communicating'
or 'perceiving.'
And it shall remain so until you you deal with your ego.
Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
>
> Junk food comes in many formz.
Yes, of course, like the posts that you provide. They are not nourishing, but
fun to eat.
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
[email protected]
Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <[email protected]>:
> On Mon, 9 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
> > So, um, ok, and this means that I should stop? You want me to stop?
>
> More meaningless projectionist knee-jerks?
>
> You will stop when you CAN stop.
>
> And that's not as easy as running one's brain on empty
> with trash data (sound, visual, languij, etc.).
>
> Tak.
>
> Junk food comes in many formz.