XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, alt.philosophy.zen   
   From: wudao@wuji.net   
      
   dagnabit wrote:   
   > {:-]))) wrote   
   >   
   >> Tang had been quoting Jen as having written:   
   >>   
   >> >> There   
   >> >> are no individuals as such, but simply the process of   
   >> >> consciousness in function.   
   >>   
   >> Why someone who, knowing, such as such,   
   >> in such a state, would ever-speak of such, since,   
   >> there are no individuals, as such, to be speaking to,   
   >> other than cans of consciousness as canned cans,   
   >> being kicked, playing, on the Road, can be   
   >> called a thing spoken of, in TTC 56.   
   >   
   >when you say who can you be speaking to if there   
   >are no individuals and the answer is that there may   
   >not be individuals yet something gains a higher perch   
   >in the awareness arena by knowing that there are no   
   >individuals. nisargadatta maharaj used to say that he   
   >was not speaking to the individual but to the consciousness   
   >itself.   
      
   And, as consciousness itself speaking to itself,   
   one might suppose one was having a good time   
   being had by all that was, was.   
      
   > he said that his words would reach a place deep   
   >within and have their effect regardless of the person   
   >in attendance.   
      
   Seeing as how all there was, in attendance, were the ten   
   dancing at the dance of the one as the one played   
   all feet at once in the dance of at when it was.   
      
   There were twenty feet, all in all.   
      
   And space was provided, by consciousness,   
   for one and all, at the time he spoke, naturally.   
      
   It was a great hall that day my friends, so gather ye   
   and here of how the consciousness itself sang there.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)