On 9/9/09 3:54 PM, "John Carl" <[email protected]> wrote:
> It seems to me that the earliest Zen writings reflected both the prevalence > of subjects and objects as the "official worldview" Subjects and objects maybe. Subjects and Objects as a metaphysical base? I don't know. The only way to tell for sure would be able to read and understand like a native all the various Eastern languages, which I cannot do. I've read a little about Zen in English but translated you can't avoid subjects and predicates. (grin) > and offer enlightened > transcendence of the social and intellectual dilemmas imposed. Agreed. > Thus a clear evolution to SOL and a way of dealing with it. SOL, I believe, is a term that Bo created to illuminate his interpretation of the MoQ. It's been so long since I've read his piece I'm not sure what it means anymore, if I ever really did. > I have a bone to pick with the classification of intellect with words. I > think that there is possible high-quality mind-endeavors such as painting, > composing, architecture (Invented by the Greeks you know, before the Greeks > named it, people didn't even notice what shape their house was) that are > examples of non-verbal intellect. I agree with bone about words. And particularly RMP's contention that the intellect did not emerge anywhere or anyhow until the Greek invented the S/O philosophy and the "name", the Greek word, for it. Violates his own principle of parallel evolution. And common sense. > > But then, I think drumming and dancing are also rational activity so maybe > I'm just crazy. They're definitely a species of good. I have a section of a hollow oak log that I cut out after the spring ice storm, curing for just that purpose. Dave 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/
