On Mar 5, 2009, at 6:12:44 AM, "Michael Poloukhine" <[email protected]> wrote: > MP, > Are you saying that you don't experience the awakening into this > life at birth, and everything subsequently? MP: I don't understand the relevance of the question, but yes, I'd say that; life does not begin at birth, birth is a part of a life already in progress. Birth is only the point at which that life begins to take on the aspects of reason and language with it. Language is learned, and then well after birth. We learn what it means to experience well before birth, and then we learn it without the knowledge of language. Pure experience.
> Language and reason were > created after these mystical experiences to express them, no more. MP: That is what I'm saying too. > The -I believe- is no different than a hot stove which is sat > upon, you live your life accordingly thereafter. MP: Not sure what you're saying here. I am dissecting "I believe" into two parts: the seed moment and what follows. The belief built around the seed moment is based in reason, but the seed moment is not. I find the Q stove example to be lousy, but the concept is the same to what I posited. The reasoning that occurs after jumping off the stove is no longer pure experience; language has come into play. > To think that > reason is more than this negates its very roots. MP: Agreed. > Oh, the reasoning > in Tao is very clear and directive, all it provides is reasoning. MP: It provides language, no doubt, it cannot help it, and I don't (and didn't) pretend it doesn't. But its reasoning is decidedly vague, and in any Western reasoning terms, "irrational"; it's reasoning is all about the suspension of reason as being the only *way* that is the true *way*. How one can ever convey that through language is a mystery, and I think the Tao acknowledges this difficulty in its brevity, simplicity and vagueness of language. But *what* it conveys, albeit necessarily through language, is a far cry from anything that can be called "reasoning" in a Western SOM context. Tell a scientist that the only way she'll learn anything about her field is by ceasing to learn and see how far it gets you! MP ---- "Don't believe everything you think." Maybe I am missing something, but the translations of the Tao Te Ching that I have read recently (five or six) do not have vague language. Lao Tzu provides a clear simple explanation of what the Tao is, and a set of instructions on how to act accordingly (for only by living it, is it fully understood). The Tao is described in a similar way as I believe Quality is (without all the detail), and seems very reasonable to my rational brain. As for brevity, it's not that complicated. It talks nothing about the suspension of reason, on the contrary, it describes how to reason. I do not remember anything about ceasing to learn (and again, learning is through action), but I may be wrong. I am not being contentious, maybe I'm simple minded, but I superficially understand Quality much through my understanding of Tao, which I've stuck with for 30 years. As always, I do appreciate your input, as I may learn something. Willblake2 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/ 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/
