[MF] Is the pinnacle of human experience...

[Kevin Perez]

Ted,
   
  I'm sorry for not communicating more clearly.  My comment about your 11 posts
and my 13 posts and the four questions that followed were intended to relate my
feelings about my participation in this forum in general and our communications
  specifically, with Pirsig's failure to develop personal relationships in ZMM.  And I
  wondered whether the latter was an indication of some common ground between
  ZMM, the MOQ and this forum.
   
  Ted, although I value both my participation in this forum and our communications I do
  recognize that, for the most part, both are somewhat impersonal.  Not that it has to be
  that way.  It's just what I observe to be the case, at this time.
   
  The question I'm struggling with is, if Pirsig's Quality really is the "fundamental
constituent of the universe" then why do ZMM, the MOQ and this forum have so
little to say about the quality of personal relationships?
   
  You asked what I "think is the deeper hidden truth that kept Pirsig from discussing
relationships."  I don't know.  But looking at ZMM with one eye on relationships
makes the whole thing look a little odd.  What does it mean to the average Joe?
What does it mean to the single Mom, with a family of 4, working two jobs just to
make ends meet?  Does Pirsig's Quality or Zen for that matter hold any value to
her?
   
  I found the following on pages 286-287 in Mystics and Zen Masters by Thomas
  Merton.  Thich Nhat Hanh was the head of the Institute of Higher Buddhist Studies
in Saigon and, according to Merton, "a militant in the movement for peace and for
the reconstruction of his country."  According to Merton, Nhat Hanh was critical of
traditional and conservative Buddhism.
   
       The basic aim of Buddhism, says Nhat Hanh, arises out of human experience
     itself - the experience of suffering - and it seeks to provide a realistic answer to
     man's most urgent question: how to cope with suffering. The problem of human
     suffering is insoluble as long as men are prevented by their collective and individual
     illusions from getting directly to grips with suffering in its very root within
       themselves.  To set up party, race, nation, or even official religion as absolutes is
       to erect barriers of illusion that stand between man and himself and prevent him
       from facing his own reality in its naked existential factuality. In this case, says
       Nhat Hanh, the various world views, whether religious or political, may concur in
       the error of providing man with a refuge, and with stereotyped formal answers
       which substitute for genuine thought, insight, experience, and love. One must
       break through these illusory forms and come directly to grips with suffering in
       ourselves and in others. The aim of Buddhism is then the creation of an entirely
       new consciousness which is free to deal with life barehanded and without
       pretenses. Piercing the illusions in ourselves which divide us from others, [it] must
       enable man to attain unity and solidarity with his brother through openness and
       compassion, endowed with secret resources of creativity. This love can transform
       the world. Only love can do this. It comes as no surprise to know that Nhat Hanh
       is an intelligent and ardent reader of Camus, as well as of Bonhoeffer.
   
  This helps me see that the problem is not Buddhism.
   
   
  Kevin Perez

		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Photos – Showcase holiday pictures in hardcover
 Photo Books. You design it and we’ll bind it!