[MD] Thus spoke Lila

[John Carl]

Horse and Platt,

In catching up on past dialogue, this caught my attention:

On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Horse <horse at darkstar.uk.net> wrote:

> Hi Platt
>
> This worries me in that a simple phrase/verb such as "to know" should cause
> a problem in relation to what you have called the 'real' world of mystic
> reality. It makes me think that what you have said has no bearing on what
> you believe, in the sense that mystic reality is devoid of concepts and
> knowing is the creation of concepts.
> Knowledge of, knowledge about or knowledge that etc. X refers to something
> that can be known. The whole point of DQ/Mysticism in the MoQ sense is that
> it can only be experienced and not known.
> Or perhaps I've got it wrong. Anyone else agree or disagree?
>
> Horse
>


 Contemplating  the difference between "experienced" and "known", a faithful
old analogy popped into my mind - A blind man may "experience" an elephant,
but only the sighted can "know" it.  We all experience DQ, but none of us
has eyes that see.  Perhaps some eyesalve then?  (Rev. 3:18)  I'm headed for
the hills where it grows in abundance.  Back in three days.

Yours,

John