XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, alt.philosophy.zen   
   From: invalid@invalid.invalid   
      
   Tang Huyen  wrote:   
   > 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   
   >   
      
   You misspelled "gormlessness".   
      
   --   
   email: noname.1234567.abcdef@gmail.com   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)