XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, alt.philosophy.zen   
   From: wudao@wuji.net   
      
   brian wrote:   
      
   >The zen anecdote I quoted (and may have misquoted: the term at the end   
   >may have been "the Way", or "the Path of the Buddhas", or something   
   >else) was recorded and preserved because it illustrates a specific   
   >aspect of zen teaching. It is hoped that *that* meaning falls out of   
   >it. To put one's own meaning into it is, in zen terms, to go the wrong   
   >way.   
      
   When you say, *that* meaning, you have a meaning in mind.   
      
   >That said, I did use the anecdote to piggy-back a question of my own   
   >regarding the form and substance of action performed by one that   
   >realizes their true nature. It doesn't seem to be a question that has   
   >caught the interest of anyone else, though.   
      
   The question of what one's true nature is,   
   assuming there exists such a critter to begin with, arises.   
      
   It appears to me that you have a, *that*   
   which is able to be put into words, anecdotally.   
      
   If it is one's true nature to dance in the dining room on a table   
   a Zen Master might do that to show the monks on the one hand   
   clapping and flapping his arms in an unusual Way.   
      
   The table for One, in the middle, may be unreserved.   
      
   Perhaps the Master shouts, enlighten up!   
      
   Get with it. Groove on it. Don't be so sullen, monks.   
   Ummmmmmm might appreciate such a Master.   
      
   Then, some of the monks, who can't handle the energy,   
   leave that monastery because of, *that*   
   which was not that, *that* that they had in mind.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)