[MD] Wisdom

[X Acto]

Adrie said:
Hi, Dan, in reflection of our last conversation i took the effort

to re-read some of huxley's Perennial, to tune in on some things we

spoke of, and thing you coined in the following posts
Made a little comment for you, if you like the perennial to have, i

have the pdf,if you like it for further investigation, it is a

difficult work, very diffracted summarised, but filled with

quality.


Aldous Huxley quoting Chuang Tzu in the perennial philosophy

"Do not ask wether the principle is in this or that; it is in all

beings.It is on this account that we apply to it the epithets of

supreme, universal , total...It has ordained that all things should
be limited, but is itself unlimited, infinite.
As to what pertains to manifestation, the principle causes the

succession of its phases, but is not this succession.
It is the author of causes and effects. It is the author of

condensations and dissipations.
(Birth and death, changes of states), but is not itself
condensations and dissipations. All proceeds from it and is under

its influence.
It is in all things, but is not identical with beings,
for it is neither differentiated nor limited"-end Chuang Tzu.
---------------------------------------------------------------

* does this ring a bell , Dan? it should.(adrie)
---------------------------------------------------------------

But it gets better if you take this in consideration,
Mr Pirsig in the copl' annotations.

quote Pirsig(out of context)
"So It has really been a shock to see how close Bradley is to the

MOQ. Both he and the MOQ are expressing what Aldous Huxley called

"The Perennial Philosophy," which is perennial, I believe, because

it happens to be true. Bradley has given an excellent description

of what the MOQ calls Dynamic Quality and an excellent rational

justification for its intellectual acceptance.  It and the MOQ can

be spliced together with no difficulty into a broader explanation

of the same thing.

*(It and the moq can be spliced together etc, incredibly

important.)Adrie

Chuang Tzu , in his this or that approach, is deviating from the

negative negation, not this , not that-neti-neti, negative

theology.

Tzu is pointing out towards "this, that", "all off it at the same

time"
dynamic quality, neither differentiated nor limited,
he is saying undefinable and infinite definable at the same time

Pirsig did the same, deviating away from the negative negation.
Its all pointing out towards the given fact, that there is no need

for a bridge between the East and West, because there is no gap
between them, not in the moq, in this context.
greetz, Adrie

Ron:
I tend to agree Adrie, a very appropriate post.

This is the very same idea that I was trying to express.