[Buddha-l] Religious, But Not Spiritual

[Erik Hoogcarspel]

Joy Vriens schreef:
> Eric (hi) wrote:
>   
>>> Religious, But Not Spiritual: Ken Wilber & Father Thomas Keating 
>>> http://padmakara.zaadz.com/blog 
>>>
>>> Obligatory Buddhist content: found on a Buddhist blog 
>>>       
>
>   
>> Just Platonism for Oprah fans, nothing Buddhist in it at all. Some  
>> advaita though. 
>>     
>
> According to Wilber one can talk about tattva (he uses another word, but I forgot what it was ;-)) from a pre-rational (magical, mythical), rational and trans-rational or integral perspective. You are obviously talking from a (pseudo) rational perspective. What would you tell us from a trans-rational perspective? And is there anything Buddhist in nirvana?
>   
Hi Joy,

this is to complicated for an old simple minded philosopher like me. I 
never succeded in reading any substantial text from Ken (does he come as 
a Barbydoll as well?) because I always fell asleep after three pages. 
Perhaps I should first study 'Isis unveiled' in order to get a grip on 
this trans-thing.
As for your last question: I don't know if I'm a Buddhist, it depends 
hwo asks, and I don't know nirvana, so maybe you're asking the wrong 
person. But if you find out, I'll be very interested to know :-) .

-- 

Erik

Info: www.xs4all.nl/~jehms  
Weblog: http://www.volkskrantblog.nl/pub/blogs/blog.php?uid=2950 
Productie: http://stores.lulu.com/jehmsstudio