[MD] Wisdom

[ADRIE KINTZIGER]

Thanks , Ron, it is not because sometimes we do not find the words to
express
ourselves that they are not out there, they are always out there, displaying
their secrets.
We need to find them, grasp the content, develop it.
If you like a copy , i will gladly send it to you.
greetz, Adrie

2010/10/20 X Acto <xacto at rocketmail.com>

>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> 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/md/archives.html
>



-- 
parser