From: ml (mbtlehn@ix.netcom.com)
Date: Tue Oct 26 2004 - 04:22:24 BST
Hello Chuck,
Mark said:
> "ANY religion is different on those two hands.
> Silly, silly social teachings become embedded in formal religious
> structures. Any true or deep practitioner reaches a point where they pass
> beyond the social formalism and into a place where they learn to bite
their
> tongue and not roll their eyes at their own tradition.
>
> Much as I have fun slapping social formalism I would be remiss to not
point
> beyond."
>
> To which Chuck responds:
>
> Why do you need the institution?
>
> By qualifying yourself as a member, aren't you endorsing the social
> formalism and tradition and "silly, silly social teachings?"
>
> Is it possible to be simultaneously beyond an institution and embedded in
> said institution?
>
> All that tongue-biting and eye-rolling must get a little tiresome.
>
mel:
Sorry I wasn't clearer...I was talking about ANY
religion. Not a personalized endorsement,
just an observation to counter the equivocation.
The institution arises, an accomplished fact, and
it is shooting fish in a barrel to whack it, but that
is missing the point. The point is that the internal
experience is literally an unbounded potential. It
may be, in any tradition, not incompatible with MoQ.
As to tongue biting...my lack of suffering such
restraint should be obvious...
As to your question of "Why do you need the
institution", well institutions are social, and I
heard of an obscure metaphysic that
indicates the social evolves as part of levels
of evolution... ;-)
thanks--mel
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 Oct 26 2004 - 04:28:47 BST