[MD] Reet and the Weakest Link

[MarshaV]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <skutvik at online.no>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2008 3:52 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] Reet and the Weakest Link


> Mati and DMB
>
> 1 Aug. DMB said :
>
>> Mati said:
>> ...Bodvar's SOL captures the essence of intellect from the western
>> metaphysical perspective.  Both Bo and I are of the opinion that there
>> is no rival to SOL in the eastern metaphysical tradition that
>> dominated the social level and propelled intellect to what it is.
>> Marsha, before you pounce on this, I will also concede that at this
>> point nobody has been able to approach this question of eastern
>> metaphysical understanding as a context for intellect.  Therefore
>> because it hasn't been thoroughly approached in this manner doesn't
>> mean it is automatically disqualified as intellect, it just means that
>> it hasn't met the muster that Bo has given to SOL as the heavyweight
>> contender.  I would also share that in Pirsig's letter to Paul that he
>> has fallen short of giving us much to move forward on this issue.  My
>> belief that Pirsig has retired on the tremendous accomplishment of MOQ
>> and will let us the next generation to figure out the details.  So we
>> will continue to debate this issue.
>> Let us hope that a small group like minded individuals (about MOQ)
>> are up to the task and can the whole chain as strong as the
>> strongest of links.
>
> SOL is the interpretation of MOQ that says that the 4th. level= S/O
> and Mati means that there is no rival to the MOQ in the Eastern
> Tradition. If we read this part of Pirsig's letter to Paul Turner.
>
>    The argument that Oriental cultures would not be classified
>    as intellectual is avoided by pointing out that the Oriental
>    cultures developed an intellectual level independently of
>    the Greeks during the Upanishadic period of India at about
>    1000 to 600 B.C. (These dates may be off.)
>
> Pirsig points to the Upanishads period. Later Paul told about these
> times as an intense philosophical search for the final ground of
> reality (they did not see the god's realm as "rock bottom") This
> corresponds to the Greek search for eternal principles that ended
> in the SOM. This could have happened in the Orient too, but
> according to Marsha there arrived a thinker (Prasagika) with the a
> Quality-like insight (that there is no ground) so the Oriental SOM
> (or intellectual level) was aborted - stunted at least -  and without a
> full-fledged 4th level the ensuing Buddhism does not have the
> explanatory power of the MOQ.

OMG, I couldn't even finish this post so appalled I was by your "according 
to Marsha".  Marsha is a mental light-weight!!!  She knows NOTHING!!!  She 
is only mightily struggling.  -  I've read Plato and Aristotle.  They seem 
lacking when compared to Nagarjuna.  But for bloody sake, don't quote me. 
Read it yourself.  Are you afraid?

I think of Khoo Hock Aun's talk at the 2005 Conference.  Was nobody 
listening?   (So dazzled by Orpheus' image, and thinking it your own?) 
Intellectually stunted???   In no way stunted!!!  The intellect of the 
Eastern scholars seems boundless and beautiful.  Stunted?  No. No. No.  I am 
reading Ocean of Reasoning by Tsong Khapa, and will be happy with small 
insights.  Do not use me as a source of understanding these Eastern 
philosophers.

ahsram