From: Ron Winchester (phaedruswolff@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue Dec 14 2004 - 17:54:02 GMT
Hi Sam,
--- A quickie - in as few words as you can manage! - what do you mean by
'mystic', when you say that
Socrates is one?
Mystic – beyond the realm of an accepted base for knowledge or wisdom. James
might have defined it best. “Everything real is experienced somewhere.
Everything experienced is real somewhere.” If something is not commonly
accepted are reality, but you have experienced it, then you have had a
mystic experience.
How would that work with what you are calling mystic. Like all terms we use,
it is good to define the term – understand the term between all who are
involved in the discussion.
Thanks for asking.
Chin
>From: "Phaedrus Wolff" <PhaedrusWolff@carolina.rr.com>
>Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
>Subject: Re: MD Is the MoQ still in the Kantosphere?
>Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2004 22:51:10 -0500
>
>dmb says:
>Well, for the sake of clarity and for the sake of MANAGABLE parameters, let
>me just ask you to explain Socrates' mysticism as it compares to what
>Pirsig
>has said about it. I think we agree on this, but it would be nice to see
>somebody make the case just to see what it might look like. I'm thinking
>that Pirsig's lengthy discussion of insanity and mysticism would shed lots
>of light on the divine madness Plato wrote about. At least for starters.
>
>Hi dmb,
>
>I found this, where Mike King is asking the question;
>"Is Socrates a Mystic?"
>http://www.jnani.org/mrking/writings/essays/essaysukc/socmysd.html
>
><snip>
>It is impossible for a soul that has never seen the truth to enter into our
>human shape; it takes a man to understand by the use of universals, and to
>collect out of the multiplicity of sense-impressions a unity arrived at by
>a
>process of reason. Such a process is simply the recollection of the things
>which our soul once perceived when it took its journey with a god, looking
>down from above on the things to which we now ascribe reality and gazing
>upwards towards what is truly real. That is why it is right that the soul
>of
>the philosopher alone should regain its wings; for it is always dwelling in
>memory as best it may upon those things which a god owes his divinity to
>dwelling upon. It is only by the right use of such aids to recollection,
>which form a continual initiation into the perfect mystic vision that a man
>can become perfect in the true sense of the word. Because he stands apart
>from the common objects of human ambition and applies himself to the
>divine,
>he is reproached by most men for being out of his wits; they do not realize
>that he is in fact possessed by a god. [ Plato, Phaedrus and Letters VII
>and
>VIII, Trans.: Walter Hamilton, Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1973, p. 55 ]
></snip>
>
>In the end, he answers the Question;
><snip>
>I believe that this inquiry into the possible mystical status of Socrates
>has brought to light some important further questions for mysticism in the
>West, as outlined above. An examination of Buddhist thought would be useful
>in this context for the fine-grained distinctions between ratiocination (or
>cogitation) and meditation, and the role of thought in preparing the mind
>for silence of the mind. This would help place Western philosophy in
>context. A clearer picture of the Indian view on jnani would be useful, and
>the exploration of Neoplatonism and Gnosticism in terms of the Buddhist and
>Hindu concepts would be valuable. Finally it might be possible to better
>judge the true role of jnani in the development of the West (giving us a
>better understanding of Eckhart for example) and its relationship with
>devotional mysticism.
>
>As I have argued both for a clear distinction between jnani and bhakti and
>for their inseparable intertwining, perhaps one could find a route to the
>devotional for our predominantly lay culture through a better understanding
>of jnani. Our understanding of Socrates is dependent on the distinction
>between jnani and bhakti, and I believe that it is central to all
>understanding of mysticism.
></snip>
>
>What you think?
>
>Chin
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "David Buchanan" <DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org>
>To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
>Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2004 4:33 PM
>Subject: RE: MD Is the MoQ still in the Kantosphere?
>
>
> > Sam, Chin, MSH and all MOQers:
> >
> > Phaedrus Wolff said:
> > Socrates is my favorite mystic. The way he defended himself in the
>Apology,
> > and the way he faced death in Phaedo by themselves show a man who's fear
>was
> > absent from the hear-and-now, prior to any Bibles being written.
>Throughout
> > the stories of Socrates we know he hears divine voices, and he goes into
> > deep trance states, but out of these deep trance states seems to come
> > nothing to add to the dialogues as to the nature of the current
>dialogues.
> > There is no denial that Socrates thoughts came from intuition -- is
>there?
> > Would you not describe intuition as Mystic? (I'm not posing this
>question
>as
> > a statement, but a question) Throughout the dialogues, he spoke of
> > immorality in the form of a soul and reincarnation.
> >
> > dmb says:
> > It entirely depends on what you mean by "intuition". If you were
>refering
>to
> > a hunch or a feeling, I'd say no. But since you're talking about
>mysticism,
> > divine madness, and being the wisest of all for knowing that he didn't
>know
> > anything, then I'd have to say yes....
> >
> > Chin (PW) continued:
> > I think some of our problems with the way we look at the ancients is
>that
>we
> > are looking at them in a Western 'intelligence' mastery as opposed to an
> > Eastern 'spirituality' mastery. If we look at Socrates as a spiritual
>master
> > (midwife), and he himself claims this in some of the dialogues,
>"Theatetus"
> > being one of the strongest, then he is saying that his students
>(disciples
> > or whatever you want to call them) do not learn from him. He says
>something
> > to the nature of their concepts are born into their own minds and not
>from
> > his, through a spiritual awakening from the silence of the mind.
> >
> > dmb replies:
> > Yes! I have been investigating the background of Socrates world for
>reasons
> > unrelated to this forum. (I've been looking into the myth of Orpheus for
> > about four years.) And it seems that the ancient Greeks in that period
> > leading up to the Sophists and Plato and all that Pirsig discusses were
> > positively saturated with mystery cults. They had a highly developed
> > "technology" for spiritual transformation. I learned that the
>Pythagorians
> > were actually mystics who were heavily steeped in Orphic literature.
>Looking
> > back at them we had only seen numbers and geometry, but music, poetry
>and
> > mysticism were just as big in their thinking. If this notion is new to
> > anyone, you're not alone. Its at least partly based on archeological
> > discoveries we simply did not have before and there seems to be a shift
>in
> > the scholarship, as a result or as a co-incidence I do not know.
> >
> > Chin said:
> > I would find it quite difficult not to see Socrates as a mystic, and I
>could
> > carry this argument further if needed, but I feel the answer to the idea
>of
> > Socrates or other mystics might come from Western or Eastern definition
>of
> > 'Mystic' -- or maybe even how we define mystic as dependent on each of
>our
> > different cultures that make up Western or Eastern thought. I think
>maybe
>I
> > am defining mystic as something other than 'sense' intuition which
>confuses
> > intuition as I see it, sense the word 'sense' comes from an already
>defined
> > experience, and may be where Pirsig says Western thought confuses
>intuition.
> > Raw intuition would appear to me to be a form of mysticism as it holds
>no
> > limits to what is taught, or what Socrates called 'Imitative poetry'.
> >
> > dmb says:
> > Well, for the sake of clarity and for the sake of MANAGABLE parameters,
>let
> > me just ask you to explain Socrates' mysticism as it compares to what
>Pirsig
> > has said about it. I think we agree on this, but it would be nice to see
> > somebody make the case just to see what it might look like. I'm thinking
> > that Pirsig's lengthy discussion of insanity and mysticism would shed
>lots
> > of light on the divine madness Plato wrote about. At least for starters.
> >
> >
> > MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> > Mail Archives:
> > Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> > Nov '02 Onward -
>http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
> > MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
> >
> > To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> > http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
> >
>
>
>
>MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
>Mail Archives:
>Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
>Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
>MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
>To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
>http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archives:
Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 14 2004 - 18:20:40 GMT