Bo, Two Eastern philosophers I found to be intellectual giants would be Krishnamurti and Nagarjuna. Krishnamurti cuts through nonsense both Eastern and Western. Nagarjuna's Mulamadhyamakakarika was amazing. But, I bet you'd never, ever consider actually reading either.
Marsha At 04:12 AM 1/2/2008, you wrote: >Hi Dwai: > >31 Dec. you wrote: > > > The Taoists, Vedantins all believe that this "reality" is not the > > ultimate reality and further propose this alternate structured > > framework to access the larger reality that exists. > >I don't know how versed you are in the MOQ but according to my >view (of its view) each level represent a reality, and as intellect is >the highest level its S/O - scientific - view is often regarded as >reality itself .... in the Western world at least. However there is >the social reality below intellect and it is dominant in other >cultures - the Middle East for example. (the "Far East" has >reached a Q-like stage above intellect) Yet because the Quality >Reality only is known to this tiny group (and a still tinier fraction >understands it correctly) intellect is confused. It does not know >any levels and is at a loss to interpret - for instance - the present >social value rebounding in the form of terrorism. (this is just me >lecturing, never mind). > > > If you remember, this discussion was triggered by my initial query > > to the group about their personal practices vis-a-vis MoQ (or > > whatever else one might choose to refer to it as). And what I > > intended to find out from that query is whether this "Greater > > Reality" can be known by merely intellectual means or does it take a > > combination of energy-work, meditation and intellectual analysis. > >The "greater reality" is of course the Quality Reality and it can't >be "known by intellectual means" (seen from the intellectual >level) that's the whole point. Intellect is a static level, blind to the >"greater Quality Reality", this is what I have been banging on for >years, but most people insist on a "dynamic intellect" that can >harbour all kinds of ideas included the MOQ. The MOQ applies >intelligent analysis, but no longer in intellect's service. I don't >know what meditation is exactly, but I have spent a lot of "energy- >work" on loosening intellect's ties.. > > > In response to the "just sit and know" statement, I had to bring > > forth to our attention that the Buddha didn't happen to stumble upon > > this "just sit and know" -- there was a lot of preparation that went > > into taking him there, which involved "Not sitting". > >All talk about mysticism, language not reflecting reality, pointing >to the moon, just sitting ..etc. is Western people's half-baked >ideas about Oriental wisdom, there surely was a lot of language >(thinking) and what you call "intellectual analyses" (IMO >intelligent ...) to break with intellect's S/O.. > >IMO > >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/ Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss, you'll land among the stars... 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/
