From: Elizaphanian (elizaphanian@tiscali.co.uk)
Date: Mon May 05 2003 - 09:08:14 BST
Hi Scott,
I haven't read the Eric Lerner. I have read 'What the Buddha never taught' by Timothy Ward, though.
Is that similar?
In any case, I agree that this example is much more subtle (and more interesting) than the Yorkshire
Ripper example. Can you explain a bit more why you say: "On the other hand, that tradition is more
than tradition in the Western sense, since the teachers knew what the problem was because they had
gone through the same thing. There is, of course, a Western mystical tradition, but it seems to me
that this level of teaching ability is pretty rare, and what there is is still pretty much a
side-show." That hasn't been my experience, but then I've never spent time in a Buddhist monastery,
only Christian ones, so maybe I'm deprived.
I'm familiar with Peter Berger, although I haven't yet read The Heretical Imperative. It seems to me
that if we are to get to the 'high end' of the spiritual path, we must already have gone through a
number of stages (in MoQish, we must at least have learnt to exist as social beings, ie use language
etc, before we can start to operate at the fourth level, and we need to have some competence at the
fourth level before we can really start the solitary journey into DQ). I do not at all disagree that
there comes a time when the tradition must fall silent and say 'now you go on your own'; my concern
is to say that the traditions are the silt/fertile soil thrown up by previous sojourners, and that
we don't need to reinvent the wheel. I could be misunderstanding David, but I think he's denying
that the faith traditions have any role to play, and that it is the cultivation of the 'mystical
experience' which is the be-all and end-all. I think that's a mistake (a mistake with a particular
cultural history).
I would not want to deny that some people seem to be able to simply bypass it all. Yet those people
demonstrate their developed awareness through the high quality of their lives, and so live in
recognisable continuity with the tradition (even if the social authorities don't recognise that
continuity). Either way, unless you're a religious genius, I think you are more likely to be able to
climb your mountain by journeying deeper into a religious tradition than by seeking a particular
experience (which isn't to say that you won't have experiences on the way). I find it interesting
that Eastern thinkers who are honoured in the West (eg Gandhi, Dalai Lama) don't say 'you must take
up Buddhism' (or Hinduism) but 'take up Christianity' ie get acquainted with your own tradition and
see where it gets you. I think the links between Christianity and modernism are profound and largely
ignored, and when moderns try and take up an Eastern religion, whilst it might sometimes seem to
work, there are often deep cultural discontinuities that emerge and cause problems (as with the
Timothy Ward book, possibly with Lerner too?). Of course, such discontinuities could be the source
of the next DQ breakthrough. Orange Catholic Bible anyone?
Sam
"Even to have expressed a false thought boldly and clearly is already to have gained a great deal."
Wittgenstein, 1948
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 : Mon May 05 2003 - 09:22:41 BST