[MD] Some historical perspective

[John Carl]

I've never heard or considered such a thing before Ron.  VERY interesting.

Thank you for your courage in once again braving such extreme social
disapproval in the interest of sharing truth.

You give me something to think and discuss today with Garth the chinese
historian and mandarin speaker...

Garth... what a card.  His favorite joke is to go into a chinese restaurant
and say something in chinese and when the waitress's eyes pop out of her
head she always say, "you speak chinese!"  His reply, (in chinese) "I don't
speak Chinese", always cracks 'em up.



On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 6:59 AM, X Acto <xacto at rocketmail.com> wrote:

>
> John, I got a raft of shit for mentioning this before,
> but, here I go again...
>
> Mahayana Buddhism is a cultural syncretism between Hellenistic culture and
> Buddhism.
>




> "developed between the 4th century BCE and the 5th century CE
> in the area covered by modern Afghanistan, Pakistan and north-
> western border regions of modern India namely western portions
> of Jammu and Kashmir. It was a cultural consequence of a long
> chain of interactions begun by Greek forays into India from the
> time of Alexander the Great, carried further by the establishment
> of Indo-Greek rule in the area for some centuries, and extended
> during flourishing of the Hellenized empire of the Kushans"
> -wiki
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhism
>
> I think the Chan or "zen" as they are known in Nippon,
> were influenced by Greek philosophy. I believe, that
> western philosphical questions did not hold as much
> power simply because  Chinese is a pictographic
> language and does not lend to the power of abstractions
> that a semetic language structure seems to do.
>
> however, I do think that certain paradoxes arise in complex languages
> by virtue of the reification of symbol for symbol as, the painting of a
> pipe
> is not a pipe.
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 12:28 AM, Ian Glendinning <
> ian.glendinning at gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
> > Bo said
> > However, what SOM means by "intellect" is totally different by what
> > the MOQ means.
> >
> > Ian says,
> > Hopefully, otherwise we're all wasting our time.
> >
> > Good to see some debunking of the convenient, but simplistic,
> > apocryphal, myth that the Greeks invented SOMism. Clearly the
> > "take-up" of Plato and Aristotle led to SOMism being formalised and
> > embedded in our received wisdom, but reality is more complicated than
> > that. Such details matters to the narrative if not to "what MOQism
> > is". Convenient myths have their uses.
> >
> > Regards
> > Ian
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 25, 2009 at 3:47 PM,  <skutvik at online.no> wrote:
> > > Hi Matt
> > >
> > > 24 Oct.
> > >
> > > Dr. Squonk I presume:
> > Moq_Discuss mailing list
> > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > Archives:
> > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> >
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>
>
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>