Re: MD Pure experience and the Kantian problematic

From: Ron Winchester (phaedruswolff@hotmail.com)
Date: Sat Feb 19 2005 - 01:49:42 GMT

  • Next message: Ron Winchester: "Re: MD Pure experience and the Kantian problematic"

    Ron:
    Bernadette Roberts does not stick to the 'Christian' mystical
    experience. If you are speaking in terms of Christianity evolving, I do
    believe it will, but hasn't yet to accept this idea of 'No-Self'.

    Would you not agree?

    Scott:
    Yes. But the point I am making is that Christian mysticism, from the point
    of view of the Church, is more about the unio mystica than having visions.
    By the way, it also looks to me that she also goes past the mysticism of the
    MOQ. But that is a matter of interpretation. Recall that her second
    "movement" as she calls it, surprised her in that she had thought that her
    first was final, and that the first could be described as "experiencing pure
    DQ" (though she of course described it as an unio mystica).

    Hi Scott,

    Does she not also see the 'second movement' as a continuation of the first?
    In this way, she does not go 'past' the mysticism of MOQ, but only agrees
    with the mysticism of MOQ, as well as mysticism of Zen, or more similar to
    Hindu.

    Pirisg does not limit DQ to mysticism, and Zen does not limit mysticism to
    that of the masters, but offers that there are varying levels of
    enlightenment. You could look at DQ in the same manner in that DQ is not
    only an extreme experience, but everything from a simple 'AHA!' experience
    on. You do not have to go insane to experience DQ, and you do not have to
    live in a cave to experience enlightenment.

    Roberts descriptions of enlightenment, if accepted (if it finds a static
    latch) could go a long way toward Christianity evolving over the limited
    interpretations of 'The Word' of the Bible.

    I would have to agree with what you said about 'Within" and 'Without' if you
    are speaking in these terms, there would be no within/without, as there is
    no mind/body, or mind/matter. There would be no describing where the
    experience from came, as the body, mind, everything is experienced on grand
    unified existence. As long as we are allowed to keep asking the quesitons,
    contemplating, without restrictions, West, East, Spirituality, and Science
    may come together on one unified theory.

    But, is this not what Pirsig is trying to point to with his words?

    - Ron

    >From: "Scott Roberts" <jse885@localnet.com>
    >Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
    >To: <moq_discuss@moq.org>
    >Subject: Re: MD Pure experience and the Kantian problematic
    >Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2005 10:44:42 -0700
    >
    >Ron,
    >
    >Scott said:
    >I disagree. We know a lot about subatomic activity. What we cannot do is
    >visualize it. But the mathematics does allow us to make predictions. Of
    >course the theory may be overthrown and replaced by another, but the
    >predictive ability we have will not go away, same with relativity
    >replacing Newton. NASA still uses Newtonian physics to direct its
    >spacecraft.
    >
    >Ron said:The thing is, we can't predict the movements of electrons. It is
    >more a
    >shell game we are playing with the subatomic particles and waves.
    >
    >Scott:
    >We can't fully predict how a human behaves, but we still know a lot about
    >human beings. The uncertainty principle just tells us that we cannot think
    >of the universe as absolutely deterministic, but no one really can think
    >that anyway -- or at least there is no point in so thinking. The thing is,
    >the subatomic world is very far from being random or chaotic.
    >
    >Ron said:
    >Let's just say that Quantum Physics leads us to think a bit closer
    >toward Eastern philosophy, or what can be termed as spirituality.
    >
    >Scott said:I agree, but there are many books out there which disagree, so
    >this
    >statement can be questioned. Is it a case, for example, that we have
    >read spiritual meanings into QM only because we are inclined to do so
    >because of prior leanings toward the spiritual? (Also, there is plenty
    >of spirituality in Western philosophy as well.)
    >
    >Ron said:
    >I don't see religion and spirituality meaning the same thing.
    >
    >Scott:
    >?? Who mentioned religion?
    >
    >
    >Ron said:
    >The difference between enlightenment and the Christian Mystical
    >Experience is that you know prior to the experience what you are going
    >to experience when you are looking for the Virgin Mary. An Enlightened
    >Mystical Experience is something that comes to you from what I would
    >call 'Within.'
    >
    >Scott said:
    >I would say that saying "Enlightened Mystical Experience is something
    >that comes to you from what I would call 'Within.'" is just as
    >misleading as saying it comes from 'without'. In both cases there is a
    >SOM presupposition: that something gets experienced, for example,
    >knowledge of "how the world is".
    >
    >Ron said:
    >This knowledge simply does not depend on anyone or anything besides
    >yourself.
    >
    >Scott:
    >But the self is a bundle of static patterns of value, according to the MOQ
    >(I disagree, but that is beside the point at the moment). If one has
    >actually reached a stage where nothing is going to shape a mystical event,
    >then one is, I suppose, already a Buddha.
    >
    >Scott continues;
    >I also question your characterization of "Christian Mystical Experience"
    >as if it were all visions. Eckhart, the author of the Cloud of
    >Unknowing, and the contemporary mystic Bernadette Roberts are all
    >counter-examples. And of course, visions occur in all other traditions
    >as well.
    >
    >Ron:
    >Bernadette Roberts does not stick to the 'Christian' mystical
    >experience. If you are speaking in terms of Christianity evolving, I do
    >believe it will, but hasn't yet to accept this idea of 'No-Self'.
    >
    >Would you not agree?
    >
    >Scott:
    >Yes. But the point I am making is that Christian mysticism, from the point
    >of view of the Church, is more about the unio mystica than having visions.
    >By the way, it also looks to me that she also goes past the mysticism of
    >the
    >MOQ. But that is a matter of interpretation. Recall that her second
    >"movement" as she calls it, surprised her in that she had thought that her
    >first was final, and that the first could be described as "experiencing
    >pure
    >DQ" (though she of course described it as an unio mystica).
    >
    >- Scott
    >
    >
    >
    >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
    >

    _________________________________________________________________
    Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
    http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/

    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 Feb 19 2005 - 01:53:44 GMT