From: Elizaphanian (Elizaphanian@members.v21.co.uk)
Date: Mon Nov 04 2002 - 13:21:08 GMT
Hi Davor,
No worries. You could say that I've been surfing on a 'wave of
crystallisation'. Or you could just say I've succumbed to verbal
diarrhoea.....
Sam
www.elizaphanian.v-2-1.net/home.html
----- Original Message -----
From: "Monkeys' tail or" <elkeaapheefteen@hotmail.com>
To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Monday, November 04, 2002 12:41 PM
Subject: RE: MD Sophocles not Socrates
> Sam,
>
> I agree with David on the experience/generator simmilarity you seem to
> reject, I want to reply on your friday post and make a further elaboration
> of the relation between social level and mysticism and a few other
subjects
> you mentioned. But as I am quite a nitwit on this matter I want to take
> caution before posting so hope you do not mind that it will take a few
days.
>
> You have been generating a lot lately thanx for sharing that experience
>
> davor
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: David Buchanan <DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org>
> >Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> >To: "'moq_discuss@moq.org'" <moq_discuss@moq.org>
> >Subject: RE: MD Sophocles not Socrates
> >Date: Sun, 3 Nov 2002 13:09:07 -0700
> >
> >Sam and all mystery lovers:
> >
> >I'm glad you asked me to comment on this one. Its one of my favorite
> >topics.
> >Unfortunately, I deleted those two big paragraphs in the middle, the ones
> >about Christian forms of mysticism. There's enough material to post a fat
> >one. I have a zillion objections and hardly know where to begin. I moved
a
> >little piece of it to the end of this reply and will make some comments
so
> >you at least have a clue or two about those objections. The bulk of this
> >post focuses on your broader comments about mysticism and the mystical
> >experience itself.
> >
> >Sam said:
> >............... see Evelyn Underhill as someone who teaches great
> >distortions, descending from the 17th Century via William James, and
> >concentrating on the mystical as being about an experience, rather than
the
> >generator of higher quality understandings.
> >
> >dmb says:
> >One of the most striking and essential features of the mystical
experience
> >is the sense that you've realized something profound. It has a noetic
> >quality. This is what generates "higher quality understandings". The
trick
> >is making is last, making it latch, such as Pirsig did in writing Lila.
He
> >eventually made a different choice, but the author considered making the
> >peyote ceremony the very center of the book because the MOQ was born
there,
> >so to speak.
> >
> >"...because at one time it looked as though the book would center around
> >this long night's metting of the NAC. The ceremony would be a kind of
spine
> >to hold it all together. From it he would branch out and show in tangent
> >after tangent the analysis of complex realities and transcendental
> >questions
> >that first emerged in his mind there." page 36
> >
> >"The other side, the "good" analytic side, just watched, and before long
it
> >slowly began to spin an enormous symmertical intellectual web, larger and
> >more perfect than any it had ever spun before." page 39
> >
> >My point is only that there is no contradiction between mystical
experience
> >and mystical understanding. They're not mutually exclusive. Quite the
> >opposite. One is a feature of the other.
> >
> >Sam said:
> >My criticism of much contemporary writing about mysticism is broadly that
> >it
> >mistakes the finger for the moon - the intense and dynamic experience of
> >growing from one stage to another becomes a search for intense and
dynamic
> >experiences. To my way of thinking, it is only when the growth is
embedded
> >in a tradition of understanding that it is possible to discriminate
between
> >experiences which are exciting and experiences which actually foster
> >spiritual growth (ie growth in Quality).
> >
> >dmb says:
> >The false dilemma appears here too, but beyond that there is the issue of
> >"tradition". I'd ask you to be more specific. Mainstream Western religion
> >frowns upon mysticism, to say the least. Some churches even associate it
> >with the devil. The experience bears far more fruit if it can be made to
> >last, to have a real effect on one's life and mind. On that I think we
> >agree. But I'm skeptical of your phrase, "embedded in a tradition of
> >understanding". Such traditions seem more likely to thwart and distort,
> >than
> >to be of any help. That's why the bishops get so damn nervous when a
Saint
> >walks in.
> >
> >Sam said:
> >Pirsig suggests that Zen is about seeking 'spontaneous' enlightenment (as
> >well as having some structured paths analagous to the Christian one), so
> >you
> >don't have to have the guidance of a tradition. I don't fully understand
> >this, but I wouldn't want to limit God's freedom. I'm sure it's possible,
> >just unlikely.
> >
> >dmb says:
> >I think the whole point of a mystical experience is to transcend
tradition,
> >to enlarge your view to see your true self and your true place within
that
> >tradition and maybe even to improve upon tradition. Its the obstacle to
be
> >overcome., the thing to be mastered and put to sleep. What you see as
> >unlikely and barely possible, I see as a necessary step. Moving beyond
> >tradition is precisely what the hero does. He ventures out of the
ordinary
> >world, across the threshold and into a world of supernatural wonder.
There,
> >he wins the great treasure, the boon, the secret that will save us all
and
> >returns with it to the ordinary world. In the middle part of the journey,
> >the mystical part, the hero often has to go where there is no path, a
> >dangerous and forbidden road and generally has to go where no body has
ever
> >been and thru which no one is qualified to quide. The hero is totally on
> >his
> >own. This is the perfect dipiction of an encounter with DQ, the great
> >mystery.
> >
> >Sam said:
> >Similarly, the transcendence above the social level, to develop what I
call
> >the
> >'eudaimonic' individual, that was a DQ experience. ... This new 'fourth
> >level'
> >individual - 'free' from the law, justified by faith, living by grace -
is
> >still called to journey deeper into God, ...
> >
> >dmb says:
> >This is a snippet of the deleted paragraphs. I pick it out because it
seems
> >to be the main source of a number of disagreements. OK, maybe its only a
> >half a zillion. I agree with whoever it was that pointed out that your
> >"eudaimonic" individual actually describes the social level excellence,
> >even
> >if it is expressed in rational Aristotelean terms. I should add that the
> >thespians of ancient Greece, like Sophocles?, are also prime examples of
> >the
> >very height of the social level. Eudaimonic individuals are those who
> >approximate heros, no? In any case, I think "free from the law, justified
> >by
> >faith, living by grace" is very far away from an accurate description of
> >the
> >fourth level or mysticism.
> >
> >Thanks for your time,
> >DMB
> >
> >
> >MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> >Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> >MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
> >
> >To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> >http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Surf the Web without missing calls! Get MSN Broadband.
> http://resourcecenter.msn.com/access/plans/freeactivation.asp
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Nov 04 2002 - 13:18:34 GMT