[MD] The Oriental intellect(ual) level

[skutvik at online.no]

Hi Akshay

On 8 Nov. you wrote in response to (Pirsig's) question
 
> 1. In relation to whether Upanishadic philosophy can be classified as
> "intellectual" or not:

> The answer is "to a certain extent". In Hindu tradition, the mind is often
> grouped along with the five senses, and so the (mystic's) goal is to not
> only still the senses but also the mind, which means the very thought
> patterns. However, this absolute inhibition of the senses is a peculiarly
> Hindu idea (or so it seems to me) and this lacuna exists in that the Vedic
> tradition considers the senses and the mind more as a tool rather than an
> enemy. So, the important thing to understand here is that *thought is only
> a tool*, just as sight is a tool, because without the faculty of sight, my
> conceptions of the world would be way different. The ultimate goal is to
> realise Purusha (according to the Samkhya school) or Brahman (according to
> the Vedanta schools).

Since we are here to the discuss Pirsig's Quality Metaphysics the 
question really is whether - in a MOQ context - the Upanishadic can be 
classified as intellectual. If you have noticed my assertion that the 
MIND interpretation of the 4th level is wrong, your will understand that 
your reaction to (questions about intellect) as MIND or THOUGHT 
PATTERNS is irrelevant .. IMO.  

> Hence, if I am permitted to make such an addition to the MoQ, Upanishadic
> philosophy seems to transcend the intellectual patterns of SQ into the
> "spiritual patterns of SQ". In fact, in the Katha Upanishad, five levels
> are mentioned: objects, senses, mind, intellect, self. (
> http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/sbe15/sbe15012.htm).

All this may be interesting for one studying Indian philosophy but it 
becomes - as said - irrelevant regarding the MOQ. 

> 2. Relation between Upanishadic wisdom and Greek thought:
 
> To tell you frankly, the entire Greek tradition of philosophy is directly
> derived from the Vedic tradition. Of course, modern historians like to say
> that it was the Proto-Indo-European religion that is the true mother of
> all religions, however, the more we discover about the Vedic way of life,
> the more we come to agree that it indeed is the true religion (refer to
> works by Subhash Kak, David Frawley, Vivekananda). The first record of the
> speed of light (Sayanacharya's commentary on the Vedas), the best
> meditation and medication system (Ayurveda and Yoga), the first book on
> air transport (Vimana shastra), myriad instances of futuristic thoughts
> (eg., idea of cloning in the Mahabharata)... and this is not even the tip
> of the iceberg. What's Greek thought's greatness compared to that?

It reminds me of the Soviet system where all inventions had a Russian 
counterpart or were anticipated by one. Regarding the Greeks it's not 
so much "greatness" as the birthplace of the idea of TRUTH, that 
there exists an objective, inert, reality independent of what people 
think about it, and I had hoped that you would see some similarity to it 
in the said Upanishads period, instead of claiming that the previous 
Vedic tradition was the origin of modern science. Make one more try ... 
after having read Pirsig's works

Till then thanks

Bo