XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, alt.philosophy.zen   
   From: wudao@wuji.net   
      
   noname wrote:   
   > dagnabit wrote:   
   >> noname wrote   
   >>> 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. he said that his words would reach a place deep   
   >>>> within and have their effect regardless of the person   
   >>>> in attendance.   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> Spoke in nothing but ninja-stars, did he?  Where he said he was not   
   >>> speaking to the individual, he must have meant that the egoic mind was   
   >>> being bypassed to reach the consciousness of the individual which is its   
   >>> true self.   
   >>>   
   >>> Lots can get mixed up when you swap the meanings of terms.  The issue of   
   >>> singularity/plurality relates to this methinks.   
   >>>   
   >>> As I see it the individual, the true-self, essential-nature, "spirit" is   
   >>> the singular "i" and it has been wrapped in a cocoon of functional tinfoil   
   >>> called the Self, Me, the Great And Powerful Illusion that is the desires of   
   >>> others, parents, teachers, managers, cops of various sorts who wish to   
   >>> enforce your conformity to their desires.   
      
   It is not uncommon for various people to see, "simply the process of   
   consciousness in function," and then go on to see individuals   
   as being parts of that process in function, apparently.   
      
   Paradigms do vary.   
      
   >>> People do this in ignorance (they know not what they do), and it's the   
   >>> inherent strength of their signal that impresses their desires upon the   
   >>> world, because they are asleep in the important way, they've dozed off and   
   >>> left the microphone on with the transmitter set to full strength, their   
   >>> most subtle fears are being sent out as string desires that something   
   >>> other than their fears occur.   
   >>>   
   >>> Seems like another meaning for "mastery of Desire" if you squint just   
   >>> right.   
   >>>   
   >>> Semantic reinterpretation is a powerful tool, maybe the most important tool   
   >>> I own.  Once you begin collecting falsehoods and keeping track of what is   
   >>> bullshit, it seems that the process then is to take all the facts and find   
   >>> a way to interpret them that removes all the falsehoods, until the facts   
   >>> match the actual view from the place that looks.   
   >>   
   >> maharaj once said that it was the consciousness   
   >> that brought people to his apartment every day.   
   >> he said it was the consciousness itself that   
   >> wanted this knowledge, not the supposed   
   >> individual.   
      
   "It was the consciousness itself that wanted ... ."   
   "The process of consciousness in function ... ."   
      
   As it birfucated, tri-furcated, and 10k-furcated itself   
   processing all the processes of itself, for itself all by itself,   
   as it involved its self as being the Selves of so-called others.   
      
   Instead of an ouroboros, it gurgitated its tail out of its mouth   
   and then regurgitated over and over, until it was completely   
   unconscious of its own consciousness itself, unshedding its elvi   
   as it wanted this knowledge, uplifting the individual.   
      
   >That tends to confirm his use of the word "consciousness" to mean the   
   >true-self/real-i, and the word "individual" to mean the true-self plus its   
   >unnecessary baggage of obligations and considerations for others, which I   
   >call the egoic-self when I'm not calling it something else.  Attempting to   
   >differentiate between the two by means of typographical-case alone is   
   >potentially ambiguous due to being identical in sound and also because of   
   >capitalization rules, not to mention the different renderings in   
   >machine-presented fonts which sometimes make the four characters "iIl1"   
   >look very much the same.   
      
   With some paradigms, pantheism exists.   
   With some world-views panentheism is the most   
   basic operating system in play. With some systems,   
   there is no theism at all, and it's all chemistry and physics.   
      
   And each so-called individual called to order one's own,   
   sees it in each's own unique way. While many project theirs   
   on to all others as if theirs was the one and only Way.   
      
   With eclectic mish-mashing of monsters doing it   
   it was a grave-yard smash. Driven by desires, enslaved   
   by the machine that indoctrinated them in to its cogs   
   as cognitions and recognitions pick nits ionized   
   while plasma torchers torture horses   
   dragged thru the mud of words.   
      
   - at play   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)