(1) Interesting from a historical perspective but doesn't it weaken much of the rest of his entire works when at the start of this book he claims, much as do the Scientologists, that vegetation thinks and feels: "Plants are telepathic" says he
(2) Osho among others claims that Zen is neither a religion nor a philosophy. What is it
(3) Is it possible they're just trying to put it over on us, that Zen is pure nonsense. As with Scientology (and arguably, almost all religion) the individual might gain a feeling of detachment if not fulfilment and happiness purely through a process of autosuggestion
In the latter connection one might also read The Varieties of Religious Experience by William James
Zen is an interesting word. Though an import from Japanese, it is Indo-European and related to English semantic. Japanese 禪 (zen) from Chinese 禪 (chán) 'quiet; silent meditation; Zen' from Pali jhānam from Sanskrit dhyānam 'meditation' from PIE *dhejə- (dhjā-, dhī-) 'to see, show' [Pokorny IEW 243]. (Unicode U-0x79aa.)
Interesting, z. I have often wondered about Zen as well. While I don't know enough about it to even have an opinion, I suppose, I find it hard to consider Zen either a religion (of it's own) or a philosophy. Yet, I don't compare it to Scientology, or the like.
I have been wondering about it myself. Perhaps I should read the book.
When a correspondent suggested that the idea of telepathic plants was not meant to be taken literally, I replied as follows
Osho writes:"...a scientist...sitting with a plant with electrodes fixed. He thought, 'If I cut this plant....Suddenly, the needle...jumped. The plant became afraid of death...recording that the plant was trembling...just a thought and the plant received it....
...think of cutting one plant, all the other plants...become emotionally disturbed...plants...are more sensitive than the human mind"
Thus one gathers that this fellow has revealed himself, like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, as terribly ignorant or immensely credulous and though in other respects it's a beautiful book, he has cast some qualms about Zen
nev, thank you for that link. Out of 127 reviews, 95 were rated as 5-star
Interestingly enough, even though Zen isn't trumpeted as a religion, if you question or criticize it in the present extreme Politically-Correct social environment you'll be called sacreligious
However, as I suggested, I think they're laughing at us, as well they might, since we imagine their approach to be far more complex than it isThis message has been edited. Last edited by: dalehileman,
Interesting word :: sacrilege c.1303, "crime of stealing what is consecrated to God," from O.Fr. sacrilege (12c.), from L. sacrilegium "temple robbery," from sacrilegus "stealer of sacred things," from phrase sacrum legere "to steal sacred things," from sacrum "sacred object (from neuter sing. of sacer "sacred") + legere "take, pick up" (see lecture). Second element is related to lecture, but is not from religion. Transf. sense of "profanation of anything held sacred" is attested from 1390.
Posts: 6708 | Location: Kehena Beach, Hawaii, U.S.A.
Forgive me for bubbling this one back up, I won't make it a habit; but I have been wondering whether anyone with an afterthought might have further comment
Also, meantime I have encountered in Osho several more puzzling if not egregious instances. For example, on page 58 he makes reference to a Zen allegory with an illustration where a bewildered fellow "...sees the back of the ox standing in the thick forest," though the plate itself shows him observing it head-on, and not in a thick forest but across the banks of a stream
In the meantime it has been suggested that Osho's imputed mental ability of plants is merely symbolic. However, he writes:"...a scientist...sitting with a plant with electrodes fixed. He thought, 'If I cut this plant....Suddenly, the needle...jumped. The plant became afraid of death...recording that the plant was trembling...just a thought and the plant received it....
...think of cutting one plant, all the other plants...become emotionally disturbed...plants...are more sensitive than the human mind"
Thus one gathers that this fellow has revealed himself, like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, as terribly ignorant or immensely credulous and though in other respects it's a beautiful book, he has cast some qualms about Zen
I don't know, I wouldn't let the "talk to your plants" bit dissuade you from what makes sense in Osho's writings. He was known for his humor, he loved to say things for effect and for controversy, and he was hardly alone in buying into the consciousness of plants; the experiments to which he refers were everywhere in media and discussed in the halls of academia for at least a few years in the 1970's. Hey, Osho didn't live long enough to see Beckster's polygraph work debunked!
Posts: 2605 | Location: As they say at 101.5FM: Not New York... Not Philadelphia... PROUD TO BE NEW JERSEY!
three: Per zm, I'd be very reluctant to trust the judgment of anyone who would buy into vegetable telepathy even before it had officially been debunked
the experiments to which he refers were everywhere in media and discussed in the halls of academia for at least a few years in the 1970's.
In my Psych 101 class, with about 500 students, at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, we all had to conduct a simple experiment. Mine was to have 2 groups of plants, and keeping everything else equal (light, watering, etc.), I yelled at one group and praised the others, telling them I loved them. I know it sounds stupid, but...hey...I was 18! Anyway, guess what? The group that I said I loved sprung up very tall and were much healthier than the others that looked sickly and were much shorter. There must have been some other intervening variables, but it was a little eerie.
My professor liked my study so much that it was the one that he described to the entire class. Even though he didn't identify me, I was embarrassed! The class laughed hysterically at the thought of my telling the plants I loved them or I hated them.
There must have been some other intervening variables, but it was a little eerie.
Possibly - but I don't think that the idea of plant sensitivity to emotions has been fully researched yet. After all, plants are sensitive to all sorts of other things - heat, light, moisture - so why not emotions? Just because emotions cannot be detected by our present equipment does not mean they are undetectable.
Richard English
Posts: 8038 | Location: Partridge Green, West Sussex, UK
I actually think there are more to plants, too, than we know about.
But I have another perspective on this thread. I had written a limerick using the word zen to mean something like "good state of mind;" in other words, zen-like. Well, we went back and forth on that use of zen (some agreed with me, and some didn't, including my esteemed husband), and finally I changed it to yen to make all the workshoppers, as well as Shu, happy. In all fairness, I couldn't find that use of zen in the dictionaries, either. Have you? It just makes sense to me.
Here was the limerick with the word zen:
When women cohabit and then They say there's no sex — simply zen, It's called Boston marriage; I doubt that the carriage Of concepts like this are for men!
