Hello,

Cut flowers will be cut from their lives, seeding and deviting insects from food/nector or cutting from nature's progress.

As such, how cut-flower offering and gifiting can be pleasing, holy and right? Can dead and deviated flowers be givers anyway?

Best wishes.

Might as well give your girlfriend a dead mouse in a pretty glass vase.

That is a alike a whole plant. Any cut part can be alike it.

Is it smoke crack day already? Gee I almost missed it!

That is a alike a whole plant. Any cut part can be alike it.

So a racoon tail in crystal?

So a racoon tail in crystal?

Look like so.;)

Such flowers cal look like as laughing to us, but if we could ask then, if they are laughing or weeping?

Though riped fruits can be valid, Still, some option can be there for offering/gifting flowers--probably a real natural/social initiation. ??

Might as well give your girlfriend a dead mouse in a pretty glass vase.

Is it smoke crack day already? Gee I almost missed it!

OMG!!!
LMFAO!! :roflmao::xctd:

Many flowers remain attractive and usable after pollnation and seprated from plants by itself eg; Nyctanthes arbortristis, jasmine etc..and as such genetic parts are not effected. In some other types, pollination may not be occuring and propagation may be happening by vegetative, tuber or other modes. There may not be any interferance in nature's progress by using such type of flowers. Otherwise potted flowering/franrant plants can also serve this purpose.

Many flowers remain attractive and usable after pollnation and seprated from plants by itself eg; Nyctanthes arbortristis, jasmine etc..and as such genetic parts are not effected. In some other types, pollination may not be occuring and propagation may be happening by vegetative, tuber or other modes. There may not be any interferance in nature's progress by using such type of flowers. Otherwise potted flowering/franrant plants can also serve this purpose.

put it this way - offering a cut flower in an arati certainly plays less havoc on the environment than driving a front end loader through the temple doors

put it this way - offering a cut flower in an arati certainly plays less havoc on the environment than driving a front end loader through the temple doors

Does this sense, make cut flowers valid? Still cut flowers from live.

Two more thoughts can be considered for justifying any act or deed:-

1.Anything is done either for basic need or for greed and luxuary.

2.Supporting or creating Nature's balance.

Whether Cut-flowers are a need or greed or luxuary, we may have to look?

Many other natural substances can be evalued in this way eg; wood from natural dead tree and cut-tree, silk when worms left or by killing, skin when animal naturally died or killed, foods from fruits/leaves or otherwise etc. Though, nature may suggest some prunning & thinning for need and maintain nature's balance, I can't say, life and death is in whose hand?

There can be a basis of full maturity or ripening AND unmaturiry basis of true nature's intentions and giving better effects to us.

Might as well give your girlfriend a dead mouse in a pretty glass vase.

Great idea: I was looking for a gift for that special "someone".
Now all I have to do is get that special someone.

They die for the happiness of man, just as many life forms die for the hunger of man.
Better it be happiness than violence. And death is an integral part of life and evolution.

The real question is, would those flowers be cultivated in the first place if there were no people buying them?

The real question is, would those flowers be cultivated in the first place if there were no people buying them?

I think the real question is, "Would they have to be cultivated?
Flowers grow wild in environments and ecosystems in which they developed and thrive.

Give a potted plant and let it grow with big buds on it! :D

They die for the happiness of man, just as many life forms die for the hunger of man.
Better it be happiness than violence. And death is an integral part of life and evolution.

Killing and death are two aspects. Why human think, other species should die for them?

The real question is, would those flowers be cultivated in the first place if there were no people buying them?

Basis of life giving may not be killing.

I think the real question is, "Would they have to be cultivated?
Flowers grow wild in environments and ecosystems in which they developed and thrive.

That is "nature".

Basis of life giving may not be killing.

Looks like you are in the wrong universe buddy

SB 1.13.47: Those who are devoid of hands are prey for those who have hands; those devoid of legs are prey for the four-legged. The weak are the subsistence of the strong, and the general rule holds that one living being is food for another.

this isn't the realm of eternal preservation, rather the realm of cyclic creation and annihilation (samsara)

Yes, "might is right" is also there. As I told, some such thing can be basic need based, other can be greed/luxuary based. Though killing or interfering in nature's progress can be odd, still such odd can be diluted when basic need based because by doing it, you also prtect yourself..being a part to nature's progress. This also add to yours and nature's health but greed/luxuary basis may not.

Nature's balance:- a perfect harmony between all things and beings.

In these parts
grass also
blossoms.

Things seems a little out of kilter in our world today Kumar.

In these parts
grass also
blossoms.

Things seems a little out of kilter in our world today Kumar.

Then?

Logic and truth is one thing, practicality is another. Something can be true though not practical. We should understand, what is gifted by nature to us and what we snatched?

Hello,

Cut flowers will be cut from their lives, seeding and deviting insects from food/nector or cutting from nature's progress.

As such, how cut-flower offering and gifiting can be pleasing, holy and right? Can dead and deviated flowers be givers anyway?

Best wishes.

:m: A gift of Beauty is pleasing, holy, and right. :m:

Flowers of Flesh and Blood
http://www.kfccinema.com/reviews/horror/guineapigflower/pic08.jpg

I think the real question is, "Would they have to be cultivated?
Flowers grow wild in environments and ecosystems in which they developed and thrive.

I know that flowers grow naturally, but would there be as many? In this capitalist society is hard to find a "conservation area" dedicated to beautiful flowers. I mean, we could be damn well contributing to the very evolution of flowers, because of the "flower business"...

Basis of life giving may not be killing.

I not consider giving flowers as actual "killing"; they were going to live a short period of time anyway, and they were actually cultivated for that business. My wife loves them flowers, and I love to look at her smile when I give her a beautiful set of them, it makes her feel special. So I go and buy her flowers that were specially cultivated for the purpose of making someone happy; if there was no flower business, those flowers wouldn´t be cultivated in the first place. What a man is supposed to do heh?

LadyBird Johnson was a huge proponent of wild flowers. Its why you see so many along/between the highways here. There is also a lot of daffodils and sunflowers planted which grow and spread. Don't even get me started on all the lilies.

LadyBird Johnson was a huge proponent of wild flowers. Its why you see so many along/between the highways here. There is also a lot of daffodils and sunflowers planted which grow and spread. Don't even get me started on all the lilies.

Well thumbs up to Larry Bird. Makes me feel like a very evil person :( giving away dead flowers and stuff...

Well thumbs up to Larry Bird. Makes me feel like a very evil person :( giving away dead flowers and stuff...

LMAO! You're a funny guy.

When you get the flowers
put them in water
and they won't die.

:m: A gift of Beauty is pleasing, holy, and right. :m:

Flowers of Flesh and Blood
http://www.kfccinema.com/reviews/horror/guineapigflower/pic08.jpg

Can dead ones be beautiful to us, GOD, nature? Just head of beutifiul entitities can't be taken or considered as beutiful?

I not consider giving flowers as actual "killing"; they were going to live a short period of time anyway, and they were actually cultivated for that business. My wife loves them flowers, and I love to look at her smile when I give her a beautiful set of them, it makes her feel special. So I go and buy her flowers that were specially cultivated for the purpose of making someone happy; if there was no flower business, those flowers wouldn´t be cultivated in the first place. What a man is supposed to do heh?

Pls try to differenciate between truth and selfish/vested interests.

When you get the flowers
put them in water
and they won't die.

Still those beheded ones are live?

Can dead ones be beautiful to us, GOD, nature?

Certainly. Life doesn't have a monopoly on beauty.
http://www.fotosearch.com/comp/unt/unt234/old-tree-~-u14080252.jpg

Still those beheded ones are live?

Yes, of course they are still alive.
A Bud will open. They still produce scent.
Flowers only live for a short time anyway.
They'll last just as long in a vase.

Yes, of course they are still alive.
A Bud will open. They still produce scent.
Flowers only live for a short time anyway.
They'll last just as long in a vase.

Can they progress normally as on plant? Sandal wood also give good smell but dead.

Certainly. Life doesn't have a monopoly on beauty.
http://www.fotosearch.com/comp/unt/unt234/old-tree-~-u14080252.jpg

That is naturally dead.

Yes, but how dead beauty is our basic need?

Can they progress normally as on plant? Sandal wood also give good smell but dead.

It is the most beautifully scented wood.

Pls try to differenciate between truth and selfish/vested interests.

I saw some cut off flowers being sold in the street, I bought them because they were beautiful and smelled nice; now they are at home, in a water container. They have lived for 4 days and still haven´t died. If I wouldn´t have bought them, they would probably be in a trashcan somewere; instead, they are making a beautiful woman happy, and my home smells all "flowery". Whatever you say, they are still not dead, and they would have been dead if noone would have taken care of them.

We should be more carefull in judging people according to what we consider to be "moral"; cause we are judging ourselves with the same standards.

If we can cut and eat plants as food for the body, why can't we cut flowers and have them be considered food for the soul?

I was having dinner the other night, and a friend told me an interesting story. He was in India for a company project, and he went to a restaurant; he ordered "chicken" because that is the only thing in the meny which looked familiar...
Now, while eating, his guide started making weird faces so my friend asked what was wrong. The guide told him: "Is just that I don´t understand why people kill animals for eating...". Obviously my friend couldn´t enjoy the chicken after that awfull comment.

Who is more wrong? The guy eating the chicken? Or the guy judging the guy eating the chicken?

For me, there is no doubt at all that the one who is wrong is the one doing the judging... I mean, I understand if someone wants to be a vegetarian, that is beautiful. But the moment the dude starts judging people for eating meat, he is demonstrating to be a fake vegetarian, just a repressed meat-eater.

I saw some cut off flowers being sold in the street, I bought them because they were beautiful and smelled nice; now they are at home, in a water container. They have lived for 4 days and still haven´t died. If I wouldn´t have bought them, they would probably be in a trashcan somewere; instead, they are making a beautiful woman happy, and my home smells all "flowery". Whatever you say, they are still not dead, and they would have been dead if noone would have taken care of them.

We should be more carefull in judging people according to what we consider to be "moral"; cause we are judging ourselves with the same standards.

How you say they are live. Can they reproduce or be a genetic source(though pollen can)? If you keep a dead bird in a vase with preserving solution, still look alike, you can't treat it as live. If you base your happiness on killed beauty, it is your choice but that beauty and nector is also given to you by nature on plants for pollination purpose.

It is the most beautifully scented wood.

Dead animals can also have a smell, so the dead flowers after sometimes of their death. But flowers with their mother/plants may never smell.:)

How you say they are live. Can they reproduce or be a genetic source(though pollen can)? If you keep a dead bird in a vase with preserving solution, still look alike, you can't treat it as live. If you base your happiness on killed beauty, it is your choice but that beauty and nector is also given to you by nature on plants for pollination purpose.

How would you explain that the flowers live like 5 times more if you place them in water and put them near sunlight? Wouldn´t that mean that they are actually using the water? How can something "dead" use water to last longer?

Those flowers were of no use for pollination when I bought them.

If we can cut and eat plants as food for the body, why can't we cut flowers and have them be considered food for the soul?

I told about basic need and greed/luxuary. Still killing is killing-- an inteferance in nature progress. Fruits eating, best gift of nature, may not be an interferance in nature's progress, which tree itself offer by making it attractive when riped for a purpose to spread his seeds at distant places to grow better. So the beuty of flowers and nector for pollination purpose.

I was having dinner the other night, and a friend told me an interesting story. He was in India for a company project, and he went to a restaurant; he ordered "chicken" because that is the only thing in the meny which looked familiar...
Now, while eating, his guide started making weird faces so my friend asked what was wrong. The guide told him: "Is just that I don´t understand why people kill animals for eating...". Obviously my friend couldn´t enjoy the chicken after that awfull comment.

Who is more wrong? The guy eating the chicken? Or the guy judging the guy eating the chicken?

For me, there is no doubt at all that the one who is wrong is the one doing the judging... I mean, I understand if someone wants to be a vegetarian, that is beautiful. But the moment the dude starts judging people for eating meat, he is demonstrating to be a fake vegetarian, just a repressed meat-eater.

It is personal choice and personal reactions to any food for basic need for survival as i told earlier about need and greed/luxuary. One can be veg., still killing hundreds of seeds ( substance to natural progress) in one bread.

I told about basic need and greed/luxuary. Still killing is killing-- an inteferance in nature progress. Fruits eating, best gift of nature, may not be an interferance in nature's progress, which tree itself offer by making it attractive when riped for a purpose to spread his seeds at distant places to grow better. So the beuty of flowers and nector for pollination purpose.

Who is to say that we should only satisfy basic needs?

Is posting questions on a website fulfilling any basic need?
No. Yet it is something that you do.

.... Still killing is killing-- an inteferance in nature progress....

Nature is also survival of the fittest. I've never had anyone give me a plant that smells like rotting flesh. I've never been given a crown of thorns plant.

How would you explain that the flowers live like 5 times more if you place them in water and put them near sunlight? Wouldn´t that mean that they are actually using the water? How can something "dead" use water to last longer?

Those flowers were of no use for pollination when I bought them.

Why and for whom a flower shop keeper bring flowers? For you. If you will not buy, he will not bring, other may not cut, other may not grow for this purpose. A person using is a ultimate cause to cut-flowers.

Why and for whom a flower shop keeper bring flowers? For you. If you will not buy, he will not bring, other may not cut, other may not grow for this purpose. A person using is a ultimate cause to cut-flowers.

The business is already there, and I´m contributing, but it also brings a little work to people with real needs; so I´m also contributing a little with people with low resources. I don´t see it as wrong, if you do, then don´t buy flowers; but don´t judge people that do. Thats all I´m saying.

If you think it's wrong, don't do it.
End of story. Must dash.

But flowers you buy in a shop are grown for that purpose. Its unatural anyways since they aren't grown 'free range'.

I don't think there needs to be any justification, though humans have searched for that specific justification and meaning from the time when humanity began.

We live through killing, and that is natural.
The best we can do is to be aware and pay respect to the lives we extinguish.

Killing and death are two aspects. Why human think, other species should die for them?

We do not think, we kill. It's our nature.

"To God all things are good and fair and right,
but men hold some things wrong and some right."
(Heraclitus, fragment 102)

The business is already there, and I´m contributing, but it also brings a little work to people with real needs; so I´m also contributing a little with people with low resources. I don´t see it as wrong, if you do, then don´t buy flowers; but don´t judge people that do. Thats all I´m saying.

That is one's liking or choice, may or may not be right in reality.

But flowers you buy in a shop are grown for that purpose. Its unatural anyways since they aren't grown 'free range'.

That can be a selfish purpose of humans.

I don't think there needs to be any justification, though humans have searched for that specific justification and meaning from the time when humanity began.

We live through killing, and that is natural.
The best we can do is to be aware and pay respect to the lives we extinguish.

As I said, for basic need it can be natural, but for greed or luxuary??

Just say sorry and prey, after killing!!!

We do not think, we kill. It's our nature.

"To God all things are good and fair and right,
but men hold some things wrong and some right."
(Heraclitus, fragment 102)

God given free will. It is our understanding what is right and what is wrong. He might have given few things for our basic need to survive as fruits. But due to our excesses, greed and luxuary, we might be using this free will worngly.

Stiill a rescue;

God/Nature may support, if we are a cause and reason to creating "nature's balance" alike healer reverse a patient to homeostatis even be conentrated chemicals, surgeory etc.

As I said, for basic need it can be natural, but for greed or luxuary??

Just say sorry and prey, after killing!!!

We are a part of nature, everything we do is natural.
At any time when you limit it, it's ethics.

Besides greed is one of the basic human traits, and not only human,
there are other animals which too show greedy behaviour.

Personally I think greed is a terrible trait when it dominates in any amount worth considering,
and when we limit it, then we are changing our nature through ethics - religion or otherwise.

Kumar, you are so fixed up in your "beliefs", that you cannot see the reality in the whole thing. I mean, just stop judging. For me, the feeling of love is far more important than allowing flower to live a few days longer, the flower is happy to serve that purpose. I know, I have been a flower.

We are a part of nature, everything we do is natural.
At any time when you limit it, it's ethics.

Besides greed is one of the basic human traits, and not only human,
there are other animals which too show greedy behaviour.

Personally I think greed is a terrible trait when it dominates in any amount worth considering,
and when we limit it, then we are changing our nature through ethics - religion or otherwise.

Greed: This may not be a trait of our origional constitution, but we might had got afterwords (indicated Adam's and Eve). As per you, we can say getting diabetes2 is also natural.

Natural: Inherited sense of right and wrong. Probably, we can inherit and acqire both right & wrong, good acts and sins.

Kumar, you are so fixed up in your "beliefs", that you cannot see the reality in the whole thing. I mean, just stop judging. For me, the feeling of love is far more important than allowing flower to live a few days longer, the flower is happy to serve that purpose. I know, I have been a flower.

It is not belief but just common logic. Changes in flower after cutting can be physical, mechanical or chemical instead of biological. We can't judge, whether cut-flowers (dead or dying) are happy or weeping? You shown slight love by keeping them in water, can also be your interest of getting happiness from their dying beauty.

Greed: This may not be a trait of our origional constitution, but we might had got afterwords (indicated Adam's and Eve).
That is a mythical event, not historical, hence your argument doesn't hold any ground.
As per you, we can say getting diabetes2 is also natural.
It is.
By the way, degu (octodon degus) is one of the other mammals prone to diabetes.
Natural: Inherited sense of right and wrong.
I didn't mean the christian definition of 'natural', I meant the scientific one, of nature.
Probably, we can inherit and acqire both right & wrong, good acts and sins.
Christian concepts and myths again.

http://img468.imageshack.us/img468/9105/perm024ez3.jpg

This is the latest bouquet of flowers I gave my girl. Only yesterday.
So fleeting, the time in which the flowers live. Before they wilt and wither.
And yet, the beauty is worth it.
As is the joy they bring.

So fleeting, the time in which the flowers live. Before they wilt and wither.
And yet, the beauty is worth it.
As is the joy they bring.
The same can be said about humans. :)

True, that.

That is a mythical event, not historical, hence your argument doesn't hold any ground.

Some real basic/micro aspects can also be shown as example in gross/macro to fit in your eves or brain...prime force as god, good as angels bad as devils balance as god , forces as goddess etc.;)

It is.
By the way, degu (octodon degus) is one of the other mammals prone to diabetes.

I didn't mean the christian definition of 'natural', I meant the scientific one, of nature.

Christian concepts and myths again.

Many aspects can be shown directly or indirectly either in same form or in gross/imaginary form as in an drama, to fit in eyes and brain...can still be correct in real sense.

Cause to any predisposition or deviation from best healthy consitution can be unnatural.

Still, pls tell me your definition of natural. This is Philosophy forum.

This is the latest bouquet of flowers I gave my girl. Only yesterday.
So fleeting, the time in which the flowers live. Before they wilt and wither.
And yet, the beauty is worth it.
As is the joy they bring.

It looks like as you say. Take to a doctor and get examined, live or dead.

If killing for beauty or for joy is our basic need, then it is correct.

http://img468.imageshack.us/img468/9105/perm024ez3.jpg...

Stargazer lilies!! You rock! So much better than roses.

It looks like as you say. Take to a doctor and get examined, live or dead.

If killing for beauty or for joy is our basic need, then it is correct.

How do you know it is incorrect?

Beautiful story:

"Now when Jesus was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper,
There came unto him a woman having an alabaster box of very precious ointment, and poured it on his head, as he sat at meat.
But when his disciples saw it, they had indignation, saying, To what purpose is this waste?
For this ointment might have been sold for much, and given to the poor.
When Jesus understood it, he said unto them, Why trouble ye the woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me.
For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always.
For in that she hath poured this ointment on my body, she did it for my burial.
Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this, that this woman hath done, be told for a memorial of her. "
(Matthew 26:6-13)
(P 14:3-9; J 11:2; 12:1-3)

The story is about love, not death; yet the ointment was made out of "dead plants" and so do all essential oils.
The disciples condemned this, they were just hypocrites, but Jesus did not look at the "dead plants", or at the waist of money; what Jesus encountered far more important is the very act of love showed by Mary...

How do you know it is incorrect?

Because it may not be our basic need.

Beautiful story:

"Now when Jesus was in Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper,
There came unto him a woman having an alabaster box of very precious ointment, and poured it on his head, as he sat at meat.
But when his disciples saw it, they had indignation, saying, To what purpose is this waste?
For this ointment might have been sold for much, and given to the poor.
When Jesus understood it, he said unto them, Why trouble ye the woman? for she hath wrought a good work upon me.
For ye have the poor always with you; but me ye have not always.
For in that she hath poured this ointment on my body, she did it for my burial.
Verily I say unto you, Wheresoever this gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there shall also this, that this woman hath done, be told for a memorial of her. "
(Matthew 26:6-13)
(P 14:3-9; J 11:2; 12:1-3)

The story is about love, not death; yet the ointment was made out of "dead plants" and so do all essential oils.
The disciples condemned this, they were just hypocrites, but Jesus did not look at the "dead plants", or at the waist of money; what Jesus encountered far more important is the very act of love showed by Mary...

Just try to feel, if we were used instead of flowers alike these, then?

Just try to feel, if we were used instead of flowers alike these, then?

If our ultimate purpose in life would be to give a little love to someone, it would be a better world.

I think he's giving all his love to plants. I would actually pay to see that.

I think he's giving all his love to plants.

Loving plants?
Floral sex?

Loving plants?
Floral sex?

Floral sex!!! Priceless!! :bravo::xctd:

If our ultimate purpose in life would be to give a little love to someone, it would be a better world.

Yes that is an emotion, can or can't be correct alike emotion as you previously exampled. But how we can feel, if some of our part/good act is used for greed, luxuary, beauty instead of basic need? Giving happiness can just be need based.

I think he's giving all his love to plants. I would actually pay to see that.

I am Veg.;) But my thoughts can be common to all which are a cause or reason to progress and balancing to nature.:)

I love nature, but those flowers were cultivated to be cut off; I don´t feel bad. I´m just trying to point out the fact that if you condemn people for doing what you think is wrong; then you are not doing the stuff for the wrong purposes.

I am Veg.;) But my thoughts can be common to all which are a cause or reason to progress and balancing to nature.:)

So live on tofu and vitamins. Don't be eating veggies and fruit you find delicious because that's all about your pleasure...right?

I love nature, but those flowers were cultivated to be cut off; I don´t feel bad. I´m just trying to point out the fact that if you condemn people for doing what you think is wrong; then you are not doing the stuff for the wrong purposes.

Yes but emotions can be oriented from wrong and right.

"Beauty with cruelity and without cruelity is possible"

So live on tofu and vitamins. Don't be eating veggies and fruit you find delicious because that's all about your pleasure...right?

Being diabetic, nature has alrady restricted me.

I imagine, someone may justify by that, half pant is more enjoyble that full pant and also take care of our basic need-- covering. :)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4b/Hummingbird_hawkmoth_a.jpg/180px-
Pollination is a classic example of mutualism.

Above looks bit natural and routine, still beauty and basic need without cruelity.

Whether other species cut flowers for beauty?