Hi Dave, That was Mark, not Matt. I hope you don't mind; I made appropriate changes.
On Jul 3, 2011, at 11:35 AM, David Thomas wrote: > All, > >>> Marsha >>> Page 52, Pirsig’s 2000e e-mail to Anthony: ‘For scientists, the mind of the >>> Buddha and the Mind of God are usually the same, even though the Buddha was >>> an atheist. I think it is extremely important to emphasize that the MOQ is >>> pure empiricism. There is nothing supernatural in it.’ Compare this, later >>> in the thesis, with Northrop’s ‘concepts by intuition’. > >> Mark >> Buddha was not an atheist, he used the current Gods in his >> meditations. Just read about all the gods that visited him under the >> trees that he sat under. . > > [Dave] > I agree with Mak that "Buddha" was not an atheist in the classic sense of > believing "that there are no deities." My understanding is that Buddha's > take was that "God talk" was counter productive, it either did nothing or > increased suffering. So he limited his path to what humans could achieve > divorced from any thought, talk, or action concerning gods. > > As Buddhism developed over time into a fully formed religion with various > schisms and sects "Buddha" in some branches has taken on more and more > godlike attributes. So when RMP says," For scientists [and many Buddhists], > the mind of the Buddha and the Mind of God are usually the same." I > generally agree, except lumping of all scientists [or for that matter all > Buddhists] together is a bit of over generalization. Marsha: You bet it is over-generalization. And very difficult to keep straight in one's mind the different schools and their differences. >> Mark >> When Pirsig says Atheist, he means >> anti-Christian (or Muslem or Jew), he does not mean anti-Gods. > > [Dave] > I disagree, in other places he is clear that he believes there are no > deities regardless of brand name. > >> Ant & RMP: >> From your discussion of how enigmatic Zen appears to Westerners, I am >> reminded >> of Pirsig’s statement in LILA: >> Of the two kinds of hostility to metaphysics he [Phædrus] considered the >> mystics’ hostility the more formidable. Mystics will tell you that once >> you’ve opened the door to metaphysics you can say goodbye to any genuine >> understanding of reality. Thought is not a path to reality. It sets >> obstacles in that path because when you try to use thought to approach >> something that is prior to thought your thinking does not carry you toward >> that something. It carries you away from it. To define something is to >> subordinate it to a tangle of intellectual relationships. And when you do >> that you destroy real understanding. (1991, p.66) > > > [Dave] > RMP states, "that the MOQ is pure empiricism. There is nothing supernatural > in it." But in the next breath he suggests that mystic experience coupled > with intuition is the penultimate path to truly understanding reality. > > In the end is this not ultimately the claim of all religions? Whether its > "natural" or "supernatural" is kind of beside the point. Is coupling mystic > experience and intuition and claiming it to be the best take on reality that > humans can achieve really a good concept to base our life around? Marsha: I just read a wonderful paper 'The Rationalists Tendency in Modern Buddhist Scholarship: A Revaluation' by Sunguaek Cho. He makes some interesting points, "From the Buddhist perspective, all philosophical speculation is based on a meditative experience, which is clearly distinguished from our daily, rational experience." Maybe you would like to read the paper: http://www.thezensite.com/ZenEssays/Philosophical/rationalist_tendencies.pdf I think of living a life based on experience & intuition living a life of mindfulness, and yes that is a good way to conduct one's life, but that isn't in lieu of education. Chop wood, carry water, study quantum physics, and do them all mindfully. I agree, it's a very good concept to base our life around. Do we really need the constant, accompanying mental narrative that gunks up so many experiences and intuition? No. 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
