Dead T'angsters

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " sai " <tamborineman@t...> wrote:

> But al, it's not about thing-ness. Rather, it's all about No thing-

> ness.

>

> To cite one of those dead Ch'an guys of the T'ang era:

>

> " From the beginning not a thing is. " (Hui-neng)

>

> This is the whole " thing " in a nutshell.

>

> *******************

>

> Not sure i get you here Baba.

>

> I interpret that quote as saying: form the beginning of time - not

a thing

> is?

> That nothing in creation " is " ...

>

> Words struggle to describe; but before time and creation, that

> no-thing-ness " is..

> and " I Am That " - no?

>

> sai>>

 

Yeah, I shouldn't be quoting dead Ch'an men, that's for sure.

 

I was just trying to illustrate no-thing-ness. I don't think Hui-

neng means that from the beginning of time, not a thing is, but

rather, there are no " things " including time and space as well, since

they too, are mere concepts.

 

But let me not put words into Hui-neng's mouth.

 

If you are saying that " before time and creation " , no-thing-is and

you/I are/am That, I would say, Yes, that's what's so.

 

Again, what I was driving at was that in your effort to get things

clear with toombaru, if you said " I Am That " , he would probably say,

that there is no one to make that claim, that even " I am That " is

merely a conceptual construct and that only the Absolute can be said

to " be " and that no apparent separate entity like " you " or like " me "

can ever be aware of itself as That which is Prior to any appearance

of " I Am " .

 

Not only is the Tao that can be described not the real Tao, but also:

those who know don't say, and those who say don't know.

 

Baba G

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

>

>

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " garyfalk1943 " <falkgw@h...>

wrote:

>

>

> Not only is the Tao that can be described not the real Tao, but

also:

> those who know don't say, and those who say don't know.

>

> Baba G

>

 

 

 

sam: who the heck ever coined this phrase?

I've heard it bantered about so much on this board.

Just another concept invented to perpetuate the endless chase.

What can be said? The tao is impossible to explain likely because

it's impossible to really know. The tao doesn't even know the tao

for pete's sake.....it's forever reinventing itself through little

games such as the earth gig just to figure out what it's capacities

are and what it could be all about. An artist endlessly painting

pictures.

 

Those who say don't know?

Those who say can't possibly know all there is to know because, once

again, that knowing and all the pictures the tao paints, like this

earth gig, is seen by humans as fragmented pieces of a puzzle. Tao

is putting a puzzle together, albeit a fantasy puzzle, because

that's what consciousness is.

I'm going to bonk the next person who uses this phrase.

**note: I wrote bonk Gary, not boink.