Hi David, Squad
From: David Buchanan Disagree with FINTAN'S MYSTICISM
>******Lithien and the other moq mystics, I hope you'll see this and
>respond to the issues.
>Did you, like Pirsig, soil yourself during the [mystic] experience?
Are you so trite because you are afraid, or callous?
Have you any empathy for Robert soiling himself in that way?
>I object to your use of a dictionary definition of mysticism [ ]
>because its so inadequate.
>Imagine your best one-sentence definition of Christianity. And then
>imagine showing it to anyone who takes the religion seriously. You think
>it would satisfy a devout Christian?
"Do unto other as you would they unto you". is mysticism in words
>Madness and enlightenment aren't always the same, as you seem to claim.
>There are people with diseased and injured brains.
And most of them are in government and the military. The ones who kill.
>its just that real mystical experiences are sometimes misunderstood
>as disease, especially in the West.
So, You are the arbiter of which is madness and which is enligtenment?
>I disagree with your assertion that the MOQ supports creationism.
>You say that "time is an illusion, therefore creation could have been
>5,000 or 5,000,000,000 years ago". That's just not rational. It's
>non-sense. You shift paradigms in mid-thought. Yes, the mystic sees
>eternity in a single moment and the veil of illusion is lifted to reveal
>infinity, but that doesn't mean that ordinary time can speed up or warp
>out enough to evolve Earth's biosphere in 5000 years.You switch from
>mystic to fundementalist in the middle of the idea!
So I am a fundementalist now. Eh. Gosh, i thought I was an open-minded
scientist. Anyway, the nature of the illusion is reconciled as follows:
The pre-intellectual is the NOW. The NOW is the purest form of reality
we know. Suppose 7,000 years ago the Earth was created- along with
a ready-constructed timeline extending into the past. This would explain
the scientific problem of how the parameters of the big bang had to
be so uncannily exact in order for the Earth to have developed at all.
How? They were retrospectively arrived at as time ran backwards to the
point of origin: the singularity which is- guess what?- DIRECTLY analogous
to the point (singularity) at the centre of the Earth! (down=past)
> And you have "proof" of creationism by "analysis of the physical
>world"? It seems like an impossible amount of analyzing? Oh, and not
>just the physical world, by analysis of the human body too! Haven't lots
>of people been doing that for thousands of years? You are clearly the
>fastest analyzer in the West!
You miss the point. It wasn't just analysis- it was inspiration. Intuition
is far
more efficient than analysis. Analysis takes forever. Instinct is instant.
(As was creation by the way.) The proof follows scientific method. You
should too. How about you wait for the proof before scoffing at it!
>You say the mystical insights come to those who suffer and not to those
>who prepare or cultivate the mind. ( I'm sincerely sorry if you have
>suffered more than most people.) But I think it's just that many people
>who have to endure suffering for a long time often train themselves to
>ignore the pain. They learn to manage their suffering through mental
>discipline. So maybe we only disagree a little on that point.
Suffering breaks the Ego. Mental discipline may just reinforce it.
Never ignore pain- it is a feedback loop. Act on it.
>Also remember that it was Pirsig's real life intellectual journey
>through the history of philosophy that finally lead to ZAAMM and the
>MOQ. Further, the story in ZAAMM is one of a thinking man and his
>enlightenment. Cultivation of the mind, which includes the various
>meditative techniques and intellectual pursuits, is widely recognized
>as a valid path to enlightenment.
Really? Thinking man soiling himself in a mental institution. Methinks you
take from your Hero Pirsig that which supports your wish for how you might
attain illumination. His reality was far different.
>Your final paragraph actually destroyed any hope I had about your
>on-line mystical vision. You say eyelids resemble curtians and so all
>the world's a stage and so you got to have a heart? This is nothing but
>a string of cliches. And badly strung too, it makes no sense at all.
I thought you had no hope of it, but let me restore your hope. The primary
duality is light and dark. It is directly analogous to subject and object.
Or to God and Man. But back to light and dark.
And God said, let there be light.
The moment of creation. And we all re-enact that creation every night, when
we sleep then awake. Dark then light. We also re-enact the creation when we
open our eyes. Dark then light.
The play is as old as the word "catharsis."
The dream of daytime.
In our lives we are players playing in the greatest play ever constructed.
Stage-play is a bracketed reality. Begining-Middle-End.
And the begining is when you open your eyes. Why is the curtain there?
Why have a curtain? Because it symbolises the opening of the eyes.
I am not a fool. Shakespeare was certainly not a fool- but a genius.
Pause a little before you dismiss the words of a genius:
"All the world's a stage, and all the men and women merely players."
I'm working on the full proof.
HORSE>
>>>>true mystic experience is beyond words, beyond ordinary communication,
beyond sense experience and beyond conceptual differentiation. And yet the
most fervent supporters of mysticism on the list at the moment are the most
verbose. Stunning really! The irony seems to be lost on them. Lao Tsu summed
it up perfectly in Tao Te Ching - "The Tao that can be told is not the
Eternal Tao".
So even Lao Tsu uses words to communicate the mystic experience.
See, words are all we have- so that's why we use them.
Lao Tsu and Christ used them to speak the Tao that CAN be told.
love
Fintan
homepage - http://www.moq.org
queries - mailto:moq@moq.org
unsubscribe - mailto:majordomo@moq.org with UNSUBSCRIBE MOQ_DISCUSS in
body of email
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:45 BST