Re: Re[8]: MD DYNAMIC PRESSURE (?) II

From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Thu Aug 19 2004 - 12:58:51 BST

  • Next message: Platt Holden: "RE: MD The individual in the MOQ"

    I wrote in last letter:
    > Being open
    > to DQ means experiencing that your static patterns (or, more corretly,
    > "static patterns you are composed of") do not adequately reflect DQ.
    > Consequences of being open to DQ depend on how strongly you cling to
    > your static patterns. If you cling to them deadly strong it produces
    > very high DYNAMIC PRESSURE which can make your life insufferable.
    > But you have very strong, rigid "self", ego.
    > If, on the contrary, you do not cling to static patterns at all, you
    > experience no dynamic pressure at all - you just "swim with the
    > current". BUT YOU ARE NOBODY, you have no self! "Nobody home", as Lila
    > said.

    Mark answered:
    Vac> Mark 17-8-04: Well, now, can you see how coherence may be brought to
    bare at
    Vac> this point? Coherence is a healthy openness to DQ, Incoherence is a
    Vac> pathological openness to DQ.

    Mark, in your last letter you emphasized that "Coherence - Incoherence are
    relationships between static patterns". Why do you bring DQ in the
    definition of coherence now? I don't see your point.

    Mark 18-8-04: I have no wish to define DQ by using the terms
    coherent/incoherent. The postulation is that some static relationships are more open to DQ
    than others.

    Vac> Pirsig suggests towards to end of Lila that what Lila needs
    Vac> is ritual in her life - static patterns within which to find protecting
    Vac> structure for Dynamic pressure?
    Vac> However, the Buddha abandoned any illusion of ego but remained coherent.
    The
    Vac> phrase "swim with the current" is what coherence is saying, but in
    strict MOQ
    Vac> terms.

    Yes. I just don't see how what you are saying contradict with what I wrote
    in the last letter? Remember, Mark, I didn't mention coherence in it at all.
    Not because I wanted to leave this concept, but just because I was saying
    about something else. About openness to DQ and clinging to to static
    patterns that compose you as an individual (either coherent or not,
    either having the illusion of ego or not - it is just not relevant).

    Buddha abandoned the illusion of ego and remained coherent all right.
    It is not interesting to me now. What IS interesting, is did he cling
    to static patterns that composed him? If he did't cling to them at
    all, can we call him personality? Had he any stable set of ideas,
    likes and dislikes, attachments that make a man unique personality?

    I think it's clinging to your static patterns that prevents you from
    "swimming with the current" and that makes you personality. Clinging to
    static patterns results in DINAMIC PRESSURE, that can make your life
    unbearable if you cling to static patterns deadly strong and you are
    very open to DQ. Incoherence can, of course, worsen your predicament
    immeasurably. But coherence itself doesn't mean you will not experience
    dynamic pressure. That's my point.

    Thank you for your help, Mark!

    Best regards,
    Ilya

    Mark 18-8-04: Allow me to use an analogy? Imagine a river full of white water
    rapids. The energy flowing through this system is being dissipated in random
    events; the water hisses and boils violently - balance between structure and
    Dynamic pressure is chaotic.
    Now imagine a fast flowing river with a smooth surface filled with small eddy
    currents and whirlpools. These structures dissipate energy in relationships
    which balance structure and Dynamic pressure.
    Lila is a white water rapid which lacks ritual and structure.
    The Buddha is a smooth river.
    Each dissipate vast Dynamic pressure, but the eddy currents and whirlpools
    soak up additional pressure by incorporating it into a stable patterned
    relationship. The white water rapids dissipate additional pressure by becoming ever
    more chaotic.
    Let us return to Wim's suggestion that we think about being more or less open
    to Dynamic Quality? It looks a bit useless now i feel.

    All the best,
    Mark

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    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 : Thu Aug 19 2004 - 14:38:05 BST