/lit/ - Literature

>>17697491
>it said that the nature of the Absolute is non dual being-knowledge-bliss. But knowledge of what?
Of itself. It does not need to think/learn, it simply knows what it needs to. The absolute does not need to be told about the nature of life as it is life.It does not need to learn and contemplate good/evil as it is both and yet beyond both ideas.

It is like the simple innocence of beasts. The bird does not need to be told about months and years to feel that winter is coming. Nobody teaches it how to build a nest. It doesn't debate the merits of eating one seed over another. These things are intrinsic and known on a level that does not require "knowledge"

I think people make this idea too convoluted. Taoism states it much clearer and simpler, IMHO:
>The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao.
>The name that can be named is not the eternal name.
>The nameless is the beginning of heaven and earth.
>The named is the mother of ten thousand things.
>Ever desireless, one can see the mystery.
>Ever desiring, one can see the manifestations.
>These two spring from the same source but differ in name;
>this appears as darkness.
>The gate to all mystery.
"Darkness" is sometimes translated as "confusion" or "obfuscation".