From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sat Dec 04 2004 - 23:40:36 GMT
Chin, Dan, Sam and all MOQers:
Sam said:
... I would interpret these (patterns of value which are of a higher level -
commonly called intellectual) as analogous to what the Christian tradition
calls the soul, or what Aristotle calls the Anima - they are what animate
and guide us as unique individuals, and they are the most important elements
of our whole 'person' (which is the composite of all these levels and
patterns).
dmb says:
It seems your interpretation differs so much that we can't rightly call it
an interpretaion. Its more like a direct contradiction. Not only does the
MOQ disagree that the soul is an intellectual level pattern, it denies the
soul's very existence...
Dan found this in the Copleston annotations on Anthony McWatt's website:
"In the MOQ there is no soul, except as a literary expression." (Robert
Pirsig)
dmb continues:
Also Pirsig identifies the small self with all levels of static patterns and
the big Self with Dynamic Quality. If the small self is social and the big
Self is intellectual, then we are right back in the soup again, thinking the
little self is the most important and ultimate self. This is the illusion to
be overcome. This is the prejudice of the West and its no wonder such is the
view of Aristotle, the Church and the dictionary. But this is the very self
image that Pirsig is trying to get us to overcome in the first place, see?
So I don't think this is just some slight variation or addition to the MOQ,
but in fact undermines it by re-inserting that which has already been
defeated and replaced, see?
And Dan found this in the Bible:
Then said Jesus onto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him
deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save
his life will lose it; and whosoever will lose his life for my sake will
find it. (Matthew 16:24,25)
Dan said:
i think it's possible Jesus is talking "Big self, small self" here, but I
also think you'll find Big self pertains to Dynamic Quality, not the
intellectual level, and small self pertains to the person.
dmb says:
Right. And this talk of losing one's life reminds me very much of the idea
expressed in chapters 29 and 30. Lila's case is sad because she's going to
resurrect her old static self through conformity and obedience rather than
saving her real life, her big SELF. She'll be a walking corpse - and I
don't mean that in a good way. See the whole idea of getting in contact with
the big self involves letting go of the ego, of the little self. There is an
idea in Buddhism that the cause of all suffering is fear and desire, but
we're not just talking about cowardice and lust here. We're talking about
the fear of death and the desire to live. We cling to life and ego in such a
way that it blinds us to the immediate reality that is right in front of us
all the time. The patterns of the little self slice and divide reality in
order to live, but this is precisely what we need to let go of in order to
really live. See? Lose your life in order to find it. This death of the
little self is about suicide of course, its about letting go of all those
things we imagine are so central to our identity, the static patterns we
cling to out of fear and desire. Once this little self is transcended, we
don't become pasty faced hermits or otherwise retreat from the world in some
egoless existence. As Wilber says, as person without an ego is not a Saint,
he's a psycotic. The idea here is simply that transcendent experiences help
us loosen the ego's grip. It becomes transparent to its purpose and we no
longer identify with it any more than we identify ourselves with our bodies.
Chin asked:
So the point you are trying to make might be that the 'Self' is not at the
beginning or end, but is within all four levels. ...The Self in the MoQ
equation would be Quality?And, I realize the annotations are not your words,
but since you offered them, do you agree with them?
Lila's Child, Annotation 29:
"The MOQ, as I understand it, denies any existence of a "self" that is
independent of inorganic, biological, social or intellectual patterns. There
is no
"self" that contains these patterns. These patterns contain the self. This
denial agrees with both religious mysticism and scientific knowledge. In
Zen,
there is reference to "big self" and "small self." Small self is the
patterns. Big self is Dynamic Quality."
Lila's Child, Annotation 130:
"The word "I" like the word "self" is one of the trickiest words in any
metaphysics. Sometimes it is an object, a human body; sometimes it is a
subject,
a human mind. I believe there are number of philosophic systems, notably
Ayn
Rand's "Objectivism," that call the "I" or "individual" the central reality.
Buddhists say it is an illusion. So do scientists. The MOQ says it is a
collection of static patterns capable of apprehending Dynamic Quality. I
think
that if you identify the "I" with the intellect and nothing else you are
taking
an unusual position that may need some defending."
dmb says:
I don't mean to ignore the bulk of what you posted on this, Chin, but I
honestly couldn't make any sense of it. As I understand it, Pirsig is saying
the same basic thing that all philosophical mystics say about the self. And
yes, I agree. All my intellectual heroes make this same point; Campbell,
Wilber, Watt's, Thurman, Jung, and a gazillion others. As I understand it,
the self we know from common sense and from the phenomenal world is mistaken
for the ultimate self and this is the illusion to be overcome. The moment of
enlightenment comes when we instead indentify with the ground of all being,
not just the transitory forms which arise from it. And then ultimately there
is no difference between the two so that the little self and the Big self
are finally One. This is where logic and language begin to fail us. That's
another thing all my heroes agree upon, this can only be experienced
directly because it so defies our ability to put it into intellectual
descriptions. That why we get strange little sayings that tell us we must
loose life to find it or that describe a man who went home to a place he's
never been before. The idea is that its right there every day, but then
again we don't see it. The gnostic gospels have Jesus saying that "the
kingdom of heaven is spread out upon the face of the earth, but men do not
see it."
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 : Sat Dec 04 2004 - 23:47:18 GMT