Greetings Andre,
On Apr 21, 2010, at 12:50 AM, Andre Broersen wrote: Marsha to Andre: > > What was Buddha doing sitting under that Bo Tree? My guess he was > meditating and using his intellect (rationality & scientific observation) to > study the mind. This might also indicate that the Intellectual Level > developed much earlier in the East than it did in the West. The big > difference seems to be that while the West studied an external > reality, the East studied the internal reality. > > Andre: > Hi Marsha, not sure he was doing this. At least, this is not what 'legend' says about his quest. > He was deeply concerned about questions relating to the meaning of life in the process of living it. He wondered what the point of it all was amid the sickness, old age, death and human suffering he saw all around him. > He had been exposed to the various religious and philosophical explanations/views about this and saw (for example)in the Hindu ritualistic religious (soteriological) practices an overemphasis on the determinate (SQ) rather than the indeterminate (DQ)nature of life. Rituals are to 'reveal'/'safeguard' Quality, not obscure it. The Buddha, put simply, saw, and was disillusioned by, this notion that Quality was replaced by static representations of it. (needles to say, all of the 'Western' and 'Middle Eastern' religions have fallen prey to this). > > To quote Northrop:'Thereby, the root insight of Brahmanism, the true nature of the divine,that is,the compassionately moving, indeterminate aesthetic continuum, had been lost'(p380). > > This is what set the Buddha on his path and I doubt very much that he applied his 'rationality' or his 'scientific observation' to 'study the mind'. > > He came to devote his time and energy to 'finding a way to extricate himself from the universal despair that seemed to form the very ground of human existence...And then, while seated under a tree, Gautama experienced enlightenment. At last he thoroughly understood the human problem,its origin, its ramifications, and its solution'. ( Hagan, p6-7). > > To finish with Northrop: ' The important point, however, is that the Buddha, for all his return to and more insistent emphasis upon the primacy of the indeterminate, immediately experienced, all embracing Nirvana, was the starkest of realists. It is precisely because of this realism with respect to, and his fellow feeling for, the immediately experienced pains and sufferings of men and animals and plants that he has attached unto himself and deservedly earned the name of the compassionate Buddha'(ibid). > > It is not difficult to make the link to both James and Pirsig in this regard ( i.e their insistence on pragmatism and radical empiricism) as this appears, to me at least, to point to the essence of the MOQ that Pirsig was talking about and the link to Eastern 'mystical' insights of the indeterminate aesthetic continuum i.e. Quality > > To paraphrase Pirsig: if a metaphysics doesn't in some way seek to improve the world, then forget about it. > > For what it is worth. > Andre > > Marsha: No, I'm sticking to what I wrote. I think I have it exactly right. The question: What was suffering? The realization was form is Emptiness, Emptiness is form. The remedy: individual realization and compassion. Why would you quote Northrop? I'm sure he's very interesting, but I can read translations of the original texts: the sutras, Nagarjuna's MMK, the two-truths debate between Tsongkhapa and Gorampa, etc., etc.. I can hear how, while trying to distinguish between culture and philosophy, Tibetan Buddhism is explained. I can read books reflecting the Dalai Lama's efforts to dialogue with Western scientists. I can study, reflect and meditate on what I've read for myself. I see for myself what meditation shows me about mind. I can practice mindfulness and non-attachment. I can experience joy, a growing compassion and the kind of love to which Margaret spoke, "Living in dynamic quality and in love (with everyone and no one in particular) is where it's at." I would rather see the MoQ relating to Quantum Physics towards an enlightened Philosophy of Science than looking back to James, Northrop and etc., but that would take hard work, not just regurgitation. What the Buddhist discovered by looking inward seems to be reflected by the physicists looking outward. The MoQ is the bridge between the outer intellect of the West and the inner insights of the East; both have used a 'scientific method' and rationality. The SODV was the way to go, imho. To restate: What was Buddha doing sitting under that Bo Tree? My guess he was meditating and using his intellect (rationality & scientific observation) to study the mind. The big difference seems to be that while the West studied an external reality, the East studied the internal reality. For what it's worth, Marsha ___ 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/md/archives.html
