[MD] The first cut.

[MarshaV]

Mark,

There are hundreds of scholarly tomes and journal articles written by scholars addressing Buddhist philosophy and written in English.  Because you haven't been exposed to them doesn't mean they do not exist.  Buddhism has always been adaptable and accessable, and it has gone global.  

Marsha





Sent from my iPad

On Jan 26, 2012, at 2:12 PM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Marsha,
> For what it is worth, I have a comment (what a surprise).  I do find
> the bridge making to be important to help the spread of MoQ.  MoQ is a
> Western metaphysics since it uses Western concepts which help us to
> discuss it.  None of us are familiar with the Eastern way of seeing
> reality (as far as I know), except perhaps for some strict Buddhists
> who sometimes contribute.
> 
> The translation between East and West is difficult, especially when
> using the Western vernacular.  An example of this, in my opinion, is
> the use of the term Relative.  Those who translate the Eastern word
> into the word relative do not have a philosophical appreciation of
> what the term refers to in Western philosophy.  This confusion is not
> uncommon since there are not many who are fully proficient in both
> (myself included on both counts).  I find Alan Watts to be one such
> person with a foot in both sides, but this took many years of direct
> experience with both, and the ability to provide meaningful analogies.
> 
> Somebody like Hagen may have an appreciation for Eastern Buddhism, but
> he displays a lack of knowledge (in my opinion) of Western philosophy
> with all its intricacies.  I do not blame him for this.  However, when
> quotes of his are used to exemplify an Eastern tradition as is
> consistent with Western thinking I find this to be somewhat naive and
> superficial.  Hagen perhaps has an understanding of Buddhism, but he
> does not have the tools to translate it for serious philosophers into
> Western thinking.  His translations are more "fast food" than anything
> else.  They are "feel good" sentiments for rapid consumption.  Yes, I
> have read three of his books.
> 
> These knots created by presenting quotes from him or Wallace for that
> matter (Wallace is not a physicist, by the way), can be untied through
> discussion.  However, that takes dynamic interpretation from both
> sides of the discussion.  It does not help the revealing of the bridge
> to simply stand firm on one's ground and state that "this is the way I
> see it".
> 
> So my only suggestion is to become involved in the discussion and
> contribute novel modes of presentation as to what you mean.
> 
> Cheers,
> Mark
> 
> On 1/26/12, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>> 
>> On Jan 26, 2012, at 9:04 AM, Horse <horse at darkstar.uk.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> Marsha's explorations do little to advance the MoQ (in my opinion) but I
>>> don't think she is doing harm.
>> 
>> 
>> Greetings Horse,
>> 
>> I am very interested in investigating the MoQ as a bridge between the East
>> and West.  From RMP's initial interest in Northrop's 'Meeting of East and
>> West: An Inquiry Concerning World Understanding' and his recommendation of
>> Steve Hagan's book ‘Buddhism: Plain and Simple’, I think he is quite
>> interested in accommodating both East and West philosophies.  If you think
>> my approach so far has been a dismal failure, maybe you suggest a few
>> strategies more to your liking.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> 
>> Marsha
>> 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
>> 
> 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