Dear Colleagues,
In an effort to propel this group's important discussions into a
universally more meaningful realm for all of the members globally, I
feel that it is important to poll my colleagues to find out if I am the
only one disturbed by the frequent use of the word "mysticism" and its
derivatives. Since these discussions are meant to be potentially
enlightening, I find it very perturbing to constantly hear a word that
by definition means "other-worldly" or "mysterious" used to describe
practises and beliefs that are anything but other-worldly or mysterious
to its practitioners. Judeo-Christian practises are far more other
worldly than Taoism, Zen, Buddhism, Confucianism ever were. In fact, the
Eastern approaches that I have just listed are among those that are more
integrated with the physical world and everyday life (therefore,
science) than the majority of Western practises. IMHO, Lao Tze would
never have considered himself as a mystic, nor would Confucius, Buddha,
the Dalai Lama, or Krishnamurti, to name a few. For that matter, neither
would Jesus - and his teachings are remarkably similar to those of the
Eastern teachers mentioned. Is not the use of "mysticism" (particularly
when describing eastern belief systems) merely a cultural bias by many
of our members (and yes, by Pirsig too in his writings)?
I encourage all of the participants across the globe to respond to this
poll, and if enough of us find this term less than dynamic and
meaningful, possibly, as a society, we can find a better, less
prejudicial, way to describe these fundamental beliefs and practises.
With all respect,
The Bard
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
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 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:01:58 BST