5th November 2003
"A guru is a person
whose individuality is lost. Only then can he look
deeply into your individuality. If he himself is an individual, he
will be able to interpret you but he will never be able to know you.
For example, if I am here and I say something about you, it is I who
am talking about you. It is not about you; rather it is about me. I
cannot help you because I cannot really know you at all. Whenever I
know you, it is in a roundabout way, by knowing myself. The point of
my being here must disappear. I must be just an absence. Only then can
I go deep inside you without any interpretation. Only then can I know
you as you are, not according to me."
When an absence views what appears to be substance (and thus having issues to be resolved), it really knows (so to say) that the substantive issue is only an appearance, ......as a nuance of the functioning through the "other".
Whether the substance has seen this or not, is really of no issue to the "viewing" absence.
i.e. the non-seeing is also seen to be a mere fragment of that nuance of play.
That is why for an absence, there is no presence to be dissolved, changed, altered or "made enlightened".
The need to abet ,.........dissolution, change, alteration or enable enlightenment, can only be an issue for a presence, isn't it, ...........not to an absence.
As the dude under the Bodhi tree exclaimed, "when I awoke, I saw nobody was asleep, the trees, the struggling ant, the stars in the heaven, man bent with worries, and the happily barking dogs, all were already enlightened."
<paraphrased a little>
Since, every boson ( a sub-atomic particle) is the very Universe, .....
.......an "enlightened boson" is nothing but an "enlightened Universe", .....
......playing different roles, as apparently different bosons, some who are tackling hypocrisy, some prattling over cyber space on bosons and universes.