Pirsig on holy wars

[Guest guest]

I'm rereading Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance after 25 years

and marveling at how on target Pirsig still is. A little of it is

dated, but mostly it is still a great pleasure to read. At one point

he observes that the Eastern paths (Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.) are less

prone to incite holy wars than Western (Christianity, Islam, Judaism)

because the East knows that truth can never be captured in words. I

find this a noble sentiment to aspire to even if it is probably not

true. Holly

[Guest guest]

> hbarrett (Holly N. Barrett, Ph.D.)

>

> I'm rereading Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance after 25 years

> and marveling at how on target Pirsig still is. A little of it is

> dated, but mostly it is still a great pleasure to read. At one point

> he observes that the Eastern paths (Hinduism, Buddhism, etc.) are less

> prone to incite holy wars than Western (Christianity, Islam, Judaism)

> because the East knows that truth can never be captured in words. I

> find this a noble sentiment to aspire to even if it is probably not

> true. Holly

 

One might ask what can be captured in words by trying to describe a sunset

where all shades between red and blue are present, to someone born blind.

After that, it is nice to hear this blind person describe it to other blind

ones and so on.

 

A description never is "the thing itself" and apart from that, no sunset is

the same. Although tasting a mango will evoke the same biochemical reaction

in each human, the interpretation of the taste will be different. So how

about describing the subject of the subject? From all descriptions it will

become clear that nothing is described at all. Stating "I am all" is an

identification, as is the identification "I am the body". Stating in the

neti-neti sense, like "neither am I the body nor the mind nor the senses.."

is the opposite, a no-identification.

 

Experiences that have a start and an end aren't a proper means to describe

something that is supposed to be unchangeable but this is what mystics are

doing. The result is predictable; the mystic describes his/her feelings and

possibly the description will cause a resonance in readers, but not the same

feelings. Only when one underwent a similar experience, one might recognize

something. It is as with the sunset and the mango: without having had the

experience, one can suspect the experience will be liked, but only after

having had the experience a description will make sense. Whatever is

described, it is an experience or the absence of experience, perception(s)

or the absence of (perception(s). One's real nature (subject of subject) is

free from opposites. Truth cannot be captured in words...

 

Jan