Language of Mysticism

From: John Hughes <nysalor_at_iprimus.com.au>
Date: Sat, 24 May 2003 11:49:48 +1000

> Tantra is not just a Hindu practice, it has a Buddhist definition (and
there
> are more Buddhist trantrists than there are Hindu) while Satori is
associated
> with Zen, not Hinduism.

You're right of course. Tantra is associated with Diamond Vehicle Buddhism and Jainism as well. Each tradition has its different emphases. You didn't understand what I mean by Satori? - the Hindu term is samsara, but were the one who just said to avoid Indianisms.

> Shades of your infamous espousal of etic and emic. I think it better
> to use plainer terms even if they do not conform with anthropological
> theory. Perhaps intelligible and unintelligible.

Hey, lets get personal, it always ads to the quality of the discussion. 'Communicable' and 'non-communicable' would be even better in the circumstances. 'Emic' and 'etic' by the way, was a *joke*, and one that I have quite deliberately furthered and fostered. I'm sorry that you seem to have missed the point.

Apophatic and katophatic, by the way are basic and fairly universal terms in the language of mysticism. Given the recent post on the HW list by Graham, it seems that throwing in analytical terms once in a blue moon constitutes "needing a degree in anthropology or comparitive religion" to understand my Digest posts, and is not a good thing. I've taken the hint. I suspect there's a double standard at work - the biologists and military historians seem to get away with the occasional specialist term, but after eleven years, I'm out of here, saddened but resigned, just as soon as I find out how to unsubscribe. [Graham there's nothing on the web page about unsubscribing].

Good luck with sorting out mysticism.

Cheers

John

--__--__--

Powered by hypermail