XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.philosophy.zen   
   From: wudao@wuji.net   
      
   Ummmmmmm wrote:   
      
   >>   
   >> If you want to talk with me, personally, you might not assume   
   >> whatever it is you are assuming about me.   
   >   
   >I might assume that you're the person who is writing your posts - and   
   >that you mean what you say.   
      
   That would be correct, some times.   
   The second part, that is.   
      
   The first part goes without saying.   
      
   At other times I'm entirely sarcastic and that goes without saying.   
   I don't put emoticons after lots of things I say.   
      
   So it's up to the reader to read into   
   or out of, as the reader reads.   
      
   Yet some people don't get the sarcasm.   
   The irony does not unwrinkle them in any way.   
   I find that amusing, in my own perverse idiocy.   
      
   At many rates, it takes a bit of discerning to be certain   
   that I mean eggs actly w'hat it is. I say, old chap.   
      
   Would you like some scrambled thoughts today.   
   We're serving word-salad, again, for breakfast.   
      
   > Except when you fog things up with homonyms   
   >& weird puns.   
      
   I think you're referring to me.   
   Why you skipped the citation is beyond me.   
      
   I could speculate. Or presume that I know.   
      
   Usually I don't do that. That would be presumptuous of me.   
      
   I might ask, why did you not include an attribution?   
   Were you being emotional at the time?   
   Or was it on purpose? And why crosspost?   
      
   Are you here? Where I am? In a Taoist group?   
      
   >Then I assume you're trying to conceal meaning rather than express it.   
      
   That would be a false assumption.   
      
   Please allow me to attempt to make it more clear to you.   
      
   Usually, when eye uses a pun, it's silly and yet is a double-entendre.   
      
   The idea is not to conceal, as Tang might think esoteric crap is.   
      
   It's m'ore to save on words.   
   It packs more meaning into less words.   
      
   Either it dew oar it does knot.   
      
   It's not to conceal but to reveal   
   how deep words' meanings may well go.   
      
   Yet for those who read or skim only surface meanings,   
   how well deep their wells are might be a mite's bit   
   in a horse's mouth.   
      
   Mixing metaphors can also be pun.   
      
   Those who are only able to see one meaning   
   tend to not see other than one meaning.   
      
   And, for some minds, it takes too much work   
   to try and see what is beneath the surface   
   of the meanings of the words.   
      
   I'm lazy. To spell out in detail a spell   
   being put on by someone who is a put on   
   may take away from a joke being played on   
   what is being put on in a Usenet play.   
      
   I don't know if you're familiar with stereograms.   
   Those pictures with pictures inside them.   
      
   They're not any sort of a secret.   
   Yet they require a different sort of a focus.   
      
   Being able to adjust the focal length is imperative   
   if one cares to see what is in plain sight.   
      
   The pictures are drawn to reveal   
   to those who are drawn to sea   
   what is not hidden at all   
   inside of a picture   
   of a notion.   
      
   Within a picture.   
   In a story. In a tale.   
   Wags the old dog.   
      
   >Or pretending to be Chuang Tzu II.   
      
   I like the book, the Chuang-tzu, very much.   
      
   Why I think I like it is because it speaks to me   
   and reminds me of how I am naturally.   
      
   It remains alive, to me.   
      
   Yet, for you, this appears to be not so.   
   You seem to think it's dead. You get nothing out of it.   
   That's my impression. Based on your words.   
      
   You seem to think books suck. Stories suck.   
      
   And then you go write a story.   
      
   Maybe there's something going on, in that picture.   
      
   I like to joke around, as my father did before me.   
      
   Prior to mine eyes having dug his words, he used to speak   
   of how, in English, there are three words: two, to and too,   
   and then he'd ask us kids, how do you spell the word   
   that means all three?   
      
   >I haven't quite got the knack of interpreting muddle as wisdom.   
      
   I wouldn't call it wisdom, personally.   
   I'l call it a strange way of point at something.   
      
   How words have many meanings. And some don't exist.   
      
   Yet when I say some, it is unclear what the word, some, refers to.   
      
   Some words? Some meanings?   
   How quickly a reader may forget. Or assume.   
      
   Questions arise, in my mind, after words emerge from my fingertips.   
      
   Lots of times they surprise and amuse me.   
      
   And so, with a bit of whatever joy is evoked here,   
   I continue to persist in my own puns for the sake of puns.   
      
   Except when others are annoyed by them.   
   Then I try to refrain from having so much fun.   
      
   >  You seem to forget that I read the posts here for months before I open   
   >my mouth.   
      
   If I never knew that   
   then I didn't forget that.   
      
   >I know you quite well.   
      
   Perhaps some of my wells you may know.   
      
   The word, know, is now involved.   
      
   It is possible that you informed me of your lurking for months   
   before posting anything here. And I did forget.   
      
   In another post you spun some wisdom into a me   
   that you created in a room inside me, but it was a secret from me   
   until you gave me the key, given your own story, you made up.   
      
   Do you do that often?   
      
   If you knew me quite as well as you may say   
   then you would know how my puns work in my own mind,   
   which I know you don't know. I know since you said so.   
      
   Some fish are more happy than others.   
   Some see puns as if they fog something up in a weird way.   
      
   Yet if they knew of the nine whirls, their tilt   
   would go in a bit of a different way two say.   
      
   You appear to be a fish, in a fishy way, to me.   
      
   Quite so. Even so. You are happy. I am happy.   
      
   At least you might know me that well   
   and that well of mine sighs that bubble sup.   
      
   A mite in you may.   
   If you know me that way.   
      
   Quite quiet, today. Still.   
   Just now if you were.   
   Then you would.   
      
   At a nub.   
   As a door has a hinge.   
      
   And it's the emptiness that is of use.   
   At the center. So winging two speak.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)