Prompted by my wife, I am forced to write a sequel to my DELUSIONS—Pragmantic Realism. The only fair title that comes to mind is CONCLUSIONS—Pragmatic Realities.
Below the Foreward to the book.
FOREWORD to DELUSIONS
I am reminded of a story about a seeker, a man from the West, coming upon two Buddhist monks. They were sitting in contemplative silence, some distance apart. After waiting for a respectful while, in an attempt to understand the Infinite, the tourist asked the first monk:
“Is there a God?”
The monk opened his eyes, looked with patient tolerance at the traveller and replied, “Of course not.”
The seeker shook his head in deep disappointment. Yet, the scientific part of his brain smiled with satisfaction. On the other hand, having been trained in the scientific method he felt a deep void in his heart. His upbringing and training precluded the existence of the permanent; of something he could fall back on if all else failed, and in science, things changed constantly—even the universe. But, he was a seeker; he refused to give up. After another while, he approached the second monk and repeated the same question,
“Is there a God?”
The second monk opened his eyes, looked at traveller with inherent compassion and replied, “Of course. I am.”
It sounded like a Zen Koan. Or, in Master Hyakujo’s words, “The enlightened man is one with causation.”
The seeker remembered: “The perceiver and the perceived are one.”
Contented, the seeker went on his way.
“Is there a God?”
The monk opened his eyes, looked with patient tolerance at the traveller and replied, “Of course not.”
The seeker shook his head in deep disappointment. Yet, the scientific part of his brain smiled with satisfaction. On the other hand, having been trained in the scientific method he felt a deep void in his heart. His upbringing and training precluded the existence of the permanent; of something he could fall back on if all else failed, and in science, things changed constantly—even the universe. But, he was a seeker; he refused to give up. After another while, he approached the second monk and repeated the same question,
“Is there a God?”
The second monk opened his eyes, looked at traveller with inherent compassion and replied, “Of course. I am.”
It sounded like a Zen Koan. Or, in Master Hyakujo’s words, “The enlightened man is one with causation.”
The seeker remembered: “The perceiver and the perceived are one.”
Contented, the seeker went on his way.
My CONCLUSIONS?
Not much has changed. The Buddhist monks still sit in contemplative silence. They still ponder the Infinite within and without them. Another man from the West asked the same question as his predecessor did some years ago:
“Is there a God?”
The monk turned his dreamy eyes at the tourist.
“Define what you mean by God.”
The tourist was stumped. Didn’t Baruch Spinoza once say that: “To define God is to deny God.” Of course, to define means to limit, and if you limit God then He’d no longer be God. And least, not the Almighty One. 'He', that’s already a limitation. Perhaps He’s a She. Or a hermaphrodite? Or not even human at all.
Well, maybe the Greeks were right. Who could tell what billions of years could evolve? Maybe there are many gods.
“Never mind,” the tourist said. He didn’t want to place limitations on the Unlimited.
The monk smiled knowingly.
No comments:
Post a Comment