Re: MD 'unmediated experience'

From: Scott R (jse885@spinn.net)
Date: Tue May 06 2003 - 04:03:30 BST

  • Next message: johnny moral: "Re: MD Undeniable Facts"

    Sam,

    > I haven't read the Eric Lerner. I have read 'What the Buddha never taught'
    by Timothy Ward, though.
    > Is that similar?

    It's been a while since I read the Ward book, but as I recall, he was more
    into pointing out the way Buddhism was practiced in Thailand, while the
    Lerner book is more about his personal spiritual growth. So, no, not all
    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.

    Well, my point is that you don't need to spend years in meditation and pass
    the scrutiny that Lerner describes to become a Christian priest or minister
    (n.b., Lerner did not become a "master" or whatever, at least not in the
    book.). Certainly there is a lot of this kind of spiritual activity, but the
    ones who really pursue it are considered "contemplatives", and hide
    themselves away in monasteries and convents, as opposed to being the public
    face of the church. But I acknowledge that this is now starting to change.

    I also acknowledge that practice in Buddhism does not always measure up
    either. I read once that there exist books that give "correct" answers to
    Zen koans, and I'm sure there are many ordained Zen monks who couldn't
    meditate their way out of a paper bag.

    >
    > 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 agree up to a point. Berger's point in The Heretical Imperative is that
    *if* you are a modern, well-educated person then you *have* to question your
    tradition, because there are all these other traditions you have been
    exposed to and who's to say which one is the "right" one. My point is that
    there currently isn't a well-articulated Western theology "fit for
    intellectuals". In part, I find, this is because the leaders feel obliged to
    pander to the social level. So there is a lot of guff about sharing and
    dealing with existential despair, but not about working out (say) the logic
    of DQ and SQ. In my opinion -- and as opposed to Matthew Fox, by the way --
    liberal Christianity needs to reemphasize the fundamental reality of
    Original Sin -- as I interpret it, of course :).

    >
    > 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).

    Again, I agree up to a point. My complaint about Western traditions is that
    it remains difficult to dig deep. Too much chaff with the wheat. (Again, I
    must acknowledge that this is in practice true of Eastern religions as well.
    The irony is that the Westerner looking at Eastern religions has the
    advantage of having most of that chaff removed by the transmitters. D.T.
    Suzuki, by the way, is the main transmitter of Zen to the West. He didn't
    mention those answers-to-koan books :)

     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?).

    Lerner pretty much accepted the culture change. He did return to the U.S.,
    but continued to work in the Vipassana tradition, which is now pretty much
    established here.

    I agree that if you have been raised in a tradition, it is usually best to
    stay in it (unless it is exclusivist, or otherwise Bad). But there are a lot
    like me and, I presume, DMB, who left the tradition well before it started
    to sink in on an intellectual level. So when I do start investigating it has
    to "prove" itself. If I am looking around, now convinced that mysticism is
    where it's at, it is a lot easier to discern it in the transplanted Eastern
    traditions than in the Western. Indeed, it took Barfield and Georg Kuhlewind
    to clue me in that Christianity may have something to say that Buddhism
    doesn't.

    > Of course, such discontinuities could be the source
    > of the next DQ breakthrough. Orange Catholic Bible anyone?

    Not enough, if there are still jihads running rampant through the galaxy :)

    - 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



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 06 2003 - 04:06:55 BST