Hi Spirit (Krimel mentioned).
On 6 Dec. you wrote:
> Questions and comments for both Bo and Krimel as
> follows:
[Bo]
> > Well, my view is that comparing the MOQ to either Buddhism or Taoism is
> > (not exactly wrong, but) unnecessary, the MOQ transcends SOM in a way
> > that leaves it less "mystical", more suited the Western - um - mind.
> Bo, what is mystical?
First Pirsig in LILA:
The term mystic is sometimes confused with "occult" or
"supernatural" and with magic and witchcraft but in
philosophy it has a different meaning. Some of the most
honored philosophers in history have been mystics:
Plotinus, Swedenborg, Loyola, Shankaracharya and many
others. They share a common belief that the
fundamental nature of reality is outside language; that
language splits things up into parts while the true nature
of reality is undivided. Zen, which is a mystic religion,
argues that the illusion of dividedness can be overcome
by meditation.
As you probably know I am dubious regarding mysticism, such
statements as "the fundamental nature of reality is outside
language" is nonsense. IMO nothing is outside language .. when
we apply language, or outside the paper when we draw
diagrams.. etc. So - as I see it - mystics are people who don't
understand what they talk about.
About Krimel's:
> > Taoism is not part of Buddhism. Taoism is not
> > necessarily mystical. ZMM is
> > clearly rooted in Taoism. Pirsig states this
> > explicitly not only in ZMM but
> > in his letters to Ant.
I just remember from Alan Watts' "The Way of Zen" how he
presented the Confucianism and Taoism relationship in a most
easily understood way.
"Confucianism presides over the socially necessary task
of forcing the original spontaneity of life into the rigid
rules of convention - a task which involves not only
conflict and pain, but also the loss of the peculiar
naturalness and un-consciousness for which little children
are so much loved, and which is sometimes regained by
saints and sages. The function of Taoism is to undo the
inevitable damage of this discipline and not only restore
but also develop the original spontaneity ... ..."
Where Orientalism radically differs from (at least) Old Testament
Christendom, Judaism and Islam is that of NOT identifying the
Absolute with social conventions, a connection that the MOQ also
abolishes (social value is ONE aspect of the overall Goodness) In
that respect I agree with Krimel about MOQ being more like
Taoism than Buddhism. Not that I'm very versed in either. My
hope is that the "Jesuitic" Christendom will fuse with the MOQ
philosophy to get us of a Western kind of "Eastern wisdom".
Bo
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
