Re: MD Self-Evident MoQ Truths

From: ian glendinning (psybertron@gmail.com)
Date: Sun Aug 07 2005 - 04:50:36 BST

  • Next message: jc: "Re: MD Self-Evident MoQ Truths"

    Phew, well at least I didn't get completely laughed out of court, so
    that's a start ...

    Individual ?
    I was nervous at using the word - "individual IN the world" was the
    best natural language phrase I could come up with. (So Tat Tvam Asi,
    does it for me Scott. DMB "blasphemous" one with "god", but no
    distinct "god", stuff works for me too.)

    Theism / Atheism / Antitheism ?
    This only becomes a battle "against" theism, when theists bring their
    god into their explanations and applications of it, the MoQ. Until
    then it's just not-theistic, just not a "relevant" issue. (See the
    line in the sand below.)

    The Heretics ?
    Sam, again I hope I chose my words carefully, to be clear without
    causing offence. I wouldn't want the heretics to leave, but I would
    want them to recognise a line drawn in the sand in the debating arena
    (toe the line says DMB) - debates about details of the MoQ and its
    progress vs meta-debates about the relationship of MoQ to alternative
    views. Evolution (of the effects of the MoQ in the world) requires
    "nurture" as well as the red tooth and claw of natural selection. And
    as I said if the theists are "right" the MoQ will allow that pattern
    to evolve further. Have faith.:-)

    So, give MoQ a chance was probably all I was really saying (together
    with a definition of what I meant by MoQ when I said it.)

    I'll wait for any more responses, but I'd like to achieve a terse
    "definition" of the "truths", on the MoQ side of that line in the
    sand.

    Ian

    On 8/7/05, Scott Roberts <jse885@cox.net> wrote:
    > DMB,
    >
    > DMB quotes:
    > Pirsig in ZAMM p143:
    > "In all of the Oriental religions great value is placed on the Sanskrit
    > doctrine of Tat tvam asi, "Thou art that," which asserts that everything you
    > think you are and everything you think you perceive are undivided. To
    > realize fully this lack of division is to become enlightened."
    >
    > From Campbell's THOU ART THAT: Transforming Religous Metaphor:
    > "Already in the 8th century B.C., in the Chhandogya Upanisad, the key word
    > to such a meditation is announced; TAT TVAM ASI, "Thou art That", or "You
    > yourself are It!".
    >
    > Scott drags in the Middle Way:
    > One cannot say "thou art That".
    > One cannot say :"thou art not That".
    > One cannot say "thou art both That and not That".
    > One cannot say "thou art neither That nor not That".
    >
    > One cannot say "everything is divided".
    > One cannot say "everything is undivided".
    > One cannot say "everything is both divided and undivided".
    > One cannot say "everything is neither divided nor undivided".
    >
    > - Scott
    >
    >
    >
    > 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



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Aug 07 2005 - 08:40:08 BST