From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Sun Jan 09 2005 - 20:27:32 GMT
Paul, Mark and all the usual suspects:
Msh said:
I long ago recognized that our perceptions (phenomena) are necessarily
and forever out of spatial and temporal sync with noumena, and that
our glimpses of things-in-themselves are mystical and fleeting.
Paul replied and quoted Pirsig:
That isn't what I, the MOQ, or mystics are saying. There are no
things-in-themselves. The primary 'reality-in-itself' is nothingness.
"Things themselves" is an old subject-object metaphysical presumption.
The MOQ denies there are "things themselves"..."What is meant by Buddhist
"nothingness" is no "thingness" that is, "no objectivity". Since the use of
the undefined term "Quality", denies objectivity without suggesting some
kind of vacuum, it helps to clarify what Buddhist nothingness is."
dmb adds:
I'm with Paul here. This idea of our perceptions being forever out of sync
with the noumena is the source of the problem. Its the idea behind that
existential loneliness of the 20th century, the idea of ourselves as
isolated egos looking out from behind our eyeballs, forever separate from
everything and everybody. In short, its SOM. And it is precisely NOT the
mystical experience, which aims to overcome this kind of subjective self.
"Quality in the MOQ is monistic and thus is not the same as Kant's "thing in
itself" which is the object of a dualism." [Lila's Child p.348]
Msh said:
But if you are saying that the "enlightened ones" have come to understand
that everything exists in the human mind, with no external corresponding
reality, then, yes, this is madness.
Paul replied:
Actually, it's subjective idealism. However, that isn't what I'm saying
either. What I'm saying is that, as with idealism, objects are mental
constructs but that, unlike idealism, mind is a value construct. I am
saying that value is independent of the human mind but that it is not
well described as 'external' because 'external' is a distinction made by
the human mind that only applies to static patterns.
dmb adds:
In the human mind with no external reality. Yes, that's subjective idealism
or, less kindly, that is solipsism and madness. And this is exactly what we
get when the Western mind tries to understand enlightenment in terms of a
subjective experiece, which, again, is exactly what enlightenment is
supposed to overcome. To the Western mind, subjective experience is the only
kind and that's the problem. Thinking about the assertions of philosophical
mysticism in terms of mental subjects existing in a physical world simply
doesn't work. It produces madness and confusion. I mean, forget about
enlightenment for a moment and just think about the logic of trying to
assert such a thing. If we persist in SOM thinking, then the mystic seems to
be asserting that the illusion of subjectivity is overcome by way of a
subjective experience, which is a bit like saying we can overcome lust by
way of pornography.
Msh said:
Furthermore, I'm suggesting that the "enlightened ones" themselves do not
believe this. The Dali Lama wears corrective lenses and sandals, after all.
He must be trying to see SOMETHING clearly; to protect his feet from
hot asphalt and real stones. So... you wanna fight about that?
Paul replied:
Enlightenment is an absence of conceptualised perception, not an absence of
reality. I speculate that the experience of hot asphalt would become
indistinguishable from a sensation of pure negative quality.
dmb adds:
I think the West's misconceptions about mysticism have led lots of people to
the conclusion that the "enlightened ones" hate the world, reject reality,
never have any fun, eat nothing but salad and generally walk around being
all pious and talking in hushed tones. I happen to know that occasionally
the Dali Lama enjoys a juicy steak and has even (gasp) laughed out loud once
or twice. And if all this talk about the undifferentiated aesthetic
continuum makes mysticism seems all highbrow and inaccessible, let me says a
few words about post-enlightenment life, the return to the marketplace, in
terms of Hollywood movies. Think of somebody like Luke Skywalker at the bar.
He's about to set out on the adventure. There is something wrong at home, a
drought, an evil kind who has usurped the throne, a terrible monster who
threatens the village or whatever. And to restore order, Luke must venture
into an unknown land and there encounter the forces of resistance. The bulk
of the story is usually a series of physical challenges for some kind of
warrior, but the adventures that take place in the special world away from
home are metaphors for the obstacles that stand in the way of enlightenment.
Anyway, Luke is sitting at the transport station waiting for those who will
join him and other preparing for the journey. And the bar at the galactic
train station is a kind of transition point. He's not at home in the
everyday world, but he's not yet in the special world of adventure either.
And so this is a threshold where he will be tested to see if he's really
ready and worthy of the adventure. So there will be some fearsome alien
creature at the bar who is half drunk and looking for trouble. He will
challenge the hero before he has even begun. And as the story goes the
threshold gaurdian will prefigure or foreshadow the larger challenges to be
overcome later. Skipping ahead through the series of sword fights and
confidence games, the hero saves the world, brings the rain, slays the
dragon or whatever. This achievement symbolizes enlightenment even if we
don't recognize it as such when we are munching popcorn. And finally this is
where the Dali Lama's contact lenses come back into the picture. Toward the
end of such movies, Luke returns by way of that same transport station and
has another drink at that same bar. And because he has successfully
completed the adventure and saved the world the drunken monster who had
challenged him is gone and replaced by some figure who reminds the hero of
that special world of adventure and lets him know that he has brought some
of it back home with him. With a wink or a nod or some other subtle
affirmation, we know that the hero and his whole world has been transformed
by the experience. And this is the heros gift to the world. In religious
language, the hero is a messenger of the gods. He has traveled to that other
realm, not to escape the world, but tosave it, to tranform it, to give rain
to the crops, to restore balance and peace to life at home by restoring the
just king killing the terrible dragon. See? If the Dali Lama were not
interested in making things better in this life, in this static reality,
then we wouldn't even know his name, but he is very much in the world. In
fact, he owes me twenty bucks from that time we split a meat-lover's pizza
at the pusssycat club.
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 : Sun Jan 09 2005 - 21:02:23 GMT