Built into the Language

In the paragraph on page 129 of DTS which begins, “To build the bridge, the mind takes as raw materials ‘points’ as they appear…” Rinpoche talks about the mind bracing what it builds with ‘particles of interaction’ and then goes on to give a list of English words which accomplish this: in, on, of, by, for, from, to, through. These words are all prepositions which itself derives from Lat:  praeponere – to place before or put in front. There is a sense of something already established to create relationship between other ‘already established’ nouns and verbs whose substantiality and location usually goes uninspected.

Caroline

This entry was posted in General TSK Discussions, Spring 2013 TSK Online Course and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Built into the Language

  1. Hayward says:

    Michael
    “Uniqueness without substance” very nice!
    I had a similar a ha when I learned that the table was a surface and not solid. Surface without substance.
    Hayward

  2. Soudabeh says:

    Hi Michael:
    It seems that Rinpoche is using the good old English to point to what you are inquiring about …
    It seems that it is the way one uses the language… the view or the vision of the user of the language that can use it in a way that has that potential that celebrates uniqueness with out claiming underlying substance, and guide towards an openness…
    One who is experiencing that openness can line up or use the ordinary language in a way that points towards openness …as we all can testify by being drawn to the language of TSK in plain English, so creatively used to do so…
    Soudi

  3. michaelg says:

    That’s very interesting, Caroline. Prepositions not only have a position in front of (pre) the nouns for which they establish direction, destination, and relationship. They pre-position (define a position for) an objecteven before we know what is about to be referred to. I wonder what allows connections of the kind we call: intimacy, integration, recognition. The problem with “bridges” doesn’t seem to be that connections are made and communication is facilitated. The problem arises when both the entities and the nature of the proscribed relationship are preordained. Is their a language that celebrates uniqueness without claiming underlying substance, and guides us on a journey whose destination is not on any map? –Michael

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *