XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, alt.philosophy.zen   
   From: tanghuyen@gmail.com   
      
   On 10/28/2016 4:42 PM, dagnabit wrote:   
      
   > "brian mitchell"   
      
   >> "dagnabit":   
      
   >>> even though the mind may indeed reside in   
   >>> a wordless realm at its essence, so to speak,   
   >>> how are ideas discerned in a wordless   
   >>> configuration?   
      
   >> aren't you an idea.   
      
   > in the scope of concept, all relative manifestation   
   > may only be just a play of its own ideation agenda,   
   > but where ideas originate from is another matter all   
   > together.   
      
   >> are you before words.   
      
   > not "me" per se, not the temporary human disguise,   
   > because it thrives in the world of words, ideas and   
   > concepts, but there is a scope of something which   
   > cannot be described that is indeed prior to words,   
   > ideas and concepts.   
      
   >> how do you know?   
      
   > there is a sort of intuitive apperception, so to speak,   
   > that allows for recognition of that which is prior to   
   > concepts, but of course, any answer given would   
   > still be just a concept anyway.   
      
   This experience is beyond me, but just from my intellectual   
   understanding, the experience of the awakeneds is not   
   filtered through universals, like categories and concepts,   
   norms and standards, structures and frameworks (all of   
   which consist in resistance). It will be totally unique to them,   
   totally individualistic, totally ad hoc, because not fitted into   
   the same straitjackets, namely categories and concepts,   
   norms and standards, structures and frameworks (generally,   
   into universals).   
      
   Two of them, standing right next to each other and looking   
   at the same scene, will experience it in totally different ways,   
   because neither will cut up that wholesome experience and   
   label the parts as "tree", "cat", "cloud", "freedom", "slavery",   
   etc. Almost literally, they have *nothing to share*, with each   
   other and with others, except the freedom, spontaneity and   
   normlessness. The public cases are records of such   
   sharings of freedom, spontaneity and normlessness. On any   
   given case or situation, two acknowledged masters would   
   differ in their judgment, very frequently, and almost   
   inevitably. Otherwise they would be clerks and not masters.   
      
   Tang Huyen   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)