RE: MD Life after death?

From: David Buchanan (DBuchanan@ClassicalRadio.org)
Date: Mon Mar 31 2003 - 00:34:36 BST

  • Next message: Valence: "Re: MD Philosophy and Theology"

    Rick, Platt, Matt, Sam and those who will die:

    RICK said:
    I think Pirsig was saying that though the "bulbs" burn out, the light shines
    on.

    DMB says:
    That'll probably be enough to remind you, dear reader, what Rick said about
    life after death. If you'd like to see the Campbell quote he dished up, its
    saved at the bottom of the page. I think it really does help to make sense
    of Pirsig's thoughts about his dead son. I have a copy of the same book and
    would like to pick up where Rick left off. Instead of life after death and
    the afterword in ZAMM, I think it helps make sense of the MOQ's mysticism.

    "The leading aim of all Oriental mystic teaching, consequently, might be
    described as that of enabling us to shift our focus of self-identification
    from, so to say, this light bulb to its light; from this mortal person to
    the consciousness of which our boides are but the vehicles. That, in fact,
    is the whole sense of the famous saying of the Indian Chhandogya Upanishad,
    tat tvam asi, 'Thou art That', 'You yourself are that undifferentiated
    universal ground of all being, all consciousness, and all bliss'. Not,
    however, the 'you' with which one normally identifies: the 'you' that is to
    say, that has been named, numbered, and computerized for the tax collector.
    That is NOT the 'you' that is That, but the condition that makes you a
    separate bulb. It is not easy, however, to shift the accent of one's sense
    of being from the body to its consciousness, and from this consciousness,
    then, to consciousness altogether."

    DMB continues:
    He's not using Pirsig's terms here, but I think you can see the similarities
    nevertheless. This "undifferentiated universal ground of being" sounds quite
    a bit like the phrase Pirsig uses to describe DQ; "the undifferentiated
    aesthetic continuum". And surely the "condition that makes you a separate
    bulb" are all the social and intellectual static patterns with which we
    normally identify. Its interesting to think of this shift in accent, this
    shift of identity, in terms the Dharmakaya light and the Dynamic people that
    are illuminated by it, eh? From the allegory of the cave, to the torch
    celebrated at the author's Victorian private school, light has been a
    metaphor for knowledge as well as divinity. (These are not supposed to be
    contradictory things.)

    I'll close with the quotes that started this lightbulb thing. (Thanks,
    Rick.)

    CAMPBELL (from Myths to Live By, ch7 p 127-129)
        Let us imagine ourselves for a moment in the lecture hall where I
    originally presented the material for this capter. Above, we see the many
    lights. Each bulb is separate from each other. Regarded that way, they are
    so many empirical facts; and the whole universe seen that way is called...,
    "the universe of things."
        But now, let us consider further. Each of those separate bulbs is a
    vehicle of light, and the light is not many but one. The one light, that is
    to say, is being displayed through all those bulbs; and we may think,
    therefore, either of the many bulbs or of the one light. Moreover, if this
    or that bulb went out, it would be replaced by another and we should again
    have the same light. The light, which is one, appears thus through many
    bulbs.
        Analogously, I would be looking out from the lecture platform, seeing
    before me all the people of my audience, and just as each bulb seen aloft is
    vehicle of light, so each of us below is a wehicle of consciousness. But
    the important thing about a bulb is the quality of its light. Likewise, the
    important thing about wach of us is the quality of his consciousness. And
    although wach may tend to identify himself mainly with his separate body and
    its frailties, it is possible also to regard one's body as a mere vehicle of
    consciousness and to think then of conscioussness as the one presence here
    made manifest though us all. These are but two ways of interpreting and
    experiencing that same set of present facts. One way is not truer than the
    other. The are just two ways of interpreting and experienceing; the first,
    in terms of the manifold of separate things; the second, in terms of the one
    thing that is made manifest through this manifold."

    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 : Mon Mar 31 2003 - 00:37:11 BST