XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.philosophy.zen
From: wudao@wuji.net
On Tue, 11 Oct 2016 10:53:28 -0400, "dagnabit"
wrote:
>
>
>"{:-])))" wrote in message
>news:68hpvbtt1cht940jip812k4inbs2fhfogh@4ax.com...
>
>Ummmmmmm wrote:
>> {:-]))) had enquired:
>>
>>> If your, so-called, living Master dies, are you then up shit creek?
>>
>>Of course not. What the Master has given me, is the ability to access a
>>part of me that I've always had. How could his death take that away from
>>me?
>
>If your living Master wrote a book, but is now dead, hypothetically,
>would you be able to get anything out of that book?
>Seeing as how you have the ability to access
>a part of you that you always had.
>
>>> Does he need to remain alive at all times, physically?
>>
>>I'm sure there is always at least one Master alive on the planet. It
>>would be a cruel world if we were each given a gift at birth, with no
>>means of unwrapping it.
>
>What if you lived to be a thousand years old, hypothetically,
>and your living Master had given you the ability to access a
>part of you that you have always had, and she, or he,
>wrote a book, a thousand years ago, and you
>were able to get, what you always had,
>out of that book, would it be dead?
>To you? For you? All gone?
>
>Would the book, in other words, remain alive, to you?
>
>Or is such a figure of speech anathema?
>
>You seemed to me to be saying all books written by
>living Masters, long since dead, contain nothing.
>Don't look at them. Stay away from them.
>Danger. Danger. Danger.
>
>Since your living Master wrote the words, in the book,
>and she, or he, gave you the ability to access a part
>of you that you've always had, could you see anything
>in the book? Find anything, in the book? She/he wrote?
>
>Hypothetically speaking.
>
>It seems as if, even though you have accessed a part of you
>that you've always had, you can't see it in a book.
>
>Or, you can. But other's can't.
>
>Or, if you are looking for enlightenment, in a book,
>it won't work, because, even though it's in everyone,
>and it's all around, everywhere, it isn't in a book.
>
>Can you see the logical problem there?
>
>What is in the books, since it's all the same thing,
>is able to shine. As the words form inside you.
>Inside that place you've always had.
>As the Sun reflects off the dew.
>It's the same light.
>Always.
>
>Yet you may insist, even if some other living Master
>had given some other person the ability to see
>what is inside of them, or in a book, it isn't possible.
>
>No one can ever see anything pertaining to Tao,
>enlightenment, satori or whatever word is used,
>in a book, written by a living Master, long ago.
>
>Is that what you're saying?
>
>Don't discuss books?
>This isn't some book of the Tao club?
>Even though it's a Taoist newsgroup?
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
>you probably don't really need to help ummmmmmmm
>paint himself into a corner because he seems to do a
>fine job of that himself. probably why he never hangs
>around here for very long.
I like his apprecaition of Sat Chit Ananda.
His logic I find to be a bit less than logical at times.
Wanting to share one's joy is not at all uncommon.
Since he found a great wonder within himself,
he seems to me to want to share that a great deal.
He seems unable to see anyone else has having had
the same experience or experiences as him.
I find that to be remarkable.
So many people here, in these groups, seem to me to be
enlightened in so many ways, no matter how they say it.
It shines through. And I can see that.
How it applies to Taoism is often what I try to see,
through the eyes of others, assuming they do,
try to tie it into Taoism, which they don't,
quite often, it seems to me.
But, then again, crossposts are crossposts.
And Usenet is Usenet. So that's not unexpected.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
