MD Pure experience and the Kantian problematic

From: Ant McWatt (antmcwatt@hotmail.co.uk)
Date: Sat Feb 26 2005 - 15:11:14 GMT

  • Next message: Wim Nusselder: "Re: MD Static and dynamic aspects of mysticism and religious experience"

    Scott,

    I'm just going through various points in your previous post (and some others
    before that one). In the meantime, I'd be interested to know what you think
    of Northrop's understanding of the Buddhist dialectic of negation (as
    elucidated in "The Meeting of East & West"). Do you also consider that low
    quality?

    Best wishes,

    Anthony.

    >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, 25 Feb 2005 22:09:55 -0700
    >
    >Ant,
    >
    >Ant said:
    >I don't think it was necessary for Pirsig to elucidate the doctrine of the
    >Buddhist dialectic of negation in LILA as a full and excellent account of
    >it
    >is already given in Northrop's "The Meeting of East & West" (Chapter IX,
    >"Buddhism" sub-heading). As the latter text of Northrop's is emphasised in
    >ZMM, any scholar seriously interested in Pirsig's work would soon realise
    >that the static patterns correspond to forms while Dynamic Quality
    >corresponds to formlessness. Why do you think I keep recommending
    >Northrop's work?
    >
    >Scott:
    >You are missing my point. My concern is with the quality of the metaphysics
    >as given in ZAMM and Lila. My conclusion is that it is low, for various
    >reasons, and I trace that to the presentation of mysticism that Pirsig
    >gives
    >in those books. That presentation is one that corresponds to Nishitani's
    >field of nihility. Now if Pirsig was cognizant of the second movement to
    >the
    >field of emptiness, as he seems to have been, then the *charitable*
    >conclusion to make is that he didn't grasp what that second movement is all
    >about. This is because that second movement *negates* the field of
    >nihility.
    >Hence, if he was aware of it, he knowingly based his metaphysics on
    >something which is to be negated. That's not how metaphysics is supposed to
    >work.
    >
    >Scott said:
    > >But I think it is more likely that he just hasn't quite
    > >grasped the full import of the doctrine. He says (NOT in Lila or ZAMM,
    > >note)
    > >"In Buddhism, form and formlessness, freedom and order, co-exist."
    > >Co-existence is a long way from identity of contradictories.
    >
    >Ant McWatt comments:
    >
    >I think you are underestimating Pirsig's understanding of Buddhist
    >philosophy here. He has certainly stated that freedom and order are
    >contradictory properties even though both are necessary in the ongoing
    >creative dance of the Tao. In the context of form and formlessness, I
    >therefore don't think Pirsig's "co-existence is a long way from identity of
    >contradictories". Only a contrary (and misleading) reading of Pirsig's
    >work
    >would lead one to this conclusion.

    _________________________________________________________________
    It's fast, it's easy and it's free. Get MSN Messenger today!
    http://www.msn.co.uk/messenger

    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 26 2005 - 15:15:29 GMT