XPost: alt.philosophy.taoism, alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, alt.philosophy.zen   
   From: wudao@wuji.net   
      
   Tang wrote:   
   >On 11/20/2016 8:17 AM, dagnabit wrote:   
   >   
   >> considering how little we know as humans, and can know,   
   >> to finagle our intellect into areas of supposed intelligence   
   >> to where we think we actually know things, or of things, may   
   >> be only a self deception evidenced by the idea that our base   
   >> of knowledge changes as time passes. what was thought of   
   >> as fact in the past gets readjusted into new facts that may   
   >> change again and again with either new information or a   
   >> reformulation of old information. it's why the yogis term   
   >> our perceptions of this "reality" as *ignorance* and thus   
   >> it may behoove us to possibly take up a position of not   
   >> knowing mind, or don't know mind in order to free up what   
   >> may just be a continual misinterpretation of what we think   
   >> we know. it's what oxtail was always speaking about with   
   >> his don't know mind, but most just thought he was being   
   >> argumentative or deceptive.   
   >   
   >I have much respect for Oxycontin, and defended him a   
   >few times, and once you said that I wanted a stooge   
   >cheque from him. This "not knowing mind" jives with the   
   >Buddha's "What and what they think it, it is otherwise."   
   >The non-doing state of the Buddha and LZ, ZZ is also a   
   >state of not-knowing. In a reasonably modern European   
   >language, it is taught by Madame Guyon and Fénelon, in   
   >three-century-old French.   
   >   
   >It contrasts sharply with the realism and literalism of   
   >Jewish mythology, where the Jewish Yahweh knows and   
   >talks in absolute knowledge and certainty.   
      
   Jews tend to be very aware of not speaking.   
      
   There is a name that cannot be spoken.   
      
   It is not so much that the Tetragrammaton is so sacred   
   but that to speak of it already is to place it in a form   
   of second-level thought.   
      
   I would have thought you would have known that.   
      
   But, then, what do I know of what you know   
   might be similar to what Huizi knew when Zz knew *that*   
   the fish were quite happy swimming near the Hao   
   River Dam, darting about like ninja stars.   
      
   >The funny thing about it as practice is the vicious circle   
   >and virtuous circle. If you are innocent to begin with, you   
   >can practice it with success. if you are not innocent but   
   >harbour ulterior motives, like hiding your self-hatred, then   
   >it merely helps you load up on your defence wall (here,   
   >against knowing your self-hatred) and make it all the   
   >thicker and more robust, which you would want in your   
   >self-defence against knowing yourself.   
      
   Note: no disclaimers provided.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)