RE: MD Tat Tvam Asi, Campbell and Theosis

From: david buchanan (dmbuchanan@hotmail.com)
Date: Sat Aug 20 2005 - 02:34:27 BST

  • Next message: Mark Steven Heyman: "Re: MD Lila-24"
  • Next message: Platt Holden: "RE: MD WORLDS WORST APOLOGY"
  • Next message: ian glendinning: "Re: MD Sam's Eudaimonia"
  • Next message: Mati Palm-Leis: "RE: MD How do conservative values support DQ and the evolution of SQ?"
  • Next message: David Harding: "Re: MD The MOQ in Hollywood"

    Sam. JC, Marsha and all MOQers:

    Sam said to dmb:
    ...you might just open your mind up and entertain the possibility that
    mysticism isn't what you think it is, and start to explore outside the
    narrow box of SOM dominated descriptions of the religious way.

    dmb replied:
    ...I certainly was operating on the assumption that we are discussing
    mystical experience within an MOQ context. ...Its more than a little bit odd
    to imagine that Pirisg's view of enlightenment is all wrong because of SOM.
    Isn't it SOM's inability to deal with the mystical experience one of
    Pirsig's main objections to SOM? The vision recieved in Native American
    mysticism is neither romantic nor classic, remember? Plus it defies his
    central copernican revolution, remember?

    "This means Quality is not just the result of a collision between subject
    and object. The very existence of subject and object themselves is deduced
    from the Quality event. The Quality event is the cause of the subjects and
    objects, which are then mistakenly presumed to be the cause of the Quality!"
    [ZMM Ch19]

    For the accusation that mystical EXPERIENCE is a Modernist SOM fiction, we
    would have to be talking about a subjective experience. But that's exactly
    what we ARE NOT talking about....

    "In a subject-object metaphysics, this experience is between a preexisting
    object and subject, but in the MOQ, there is no pre-existing subject or
    object....So in the MOQ experience comes first, everything else comes later.
    This is pure empiricism, as opposed to scientific empiricism, which, with
    its pre-existing subjects and objects, is not really so pure." [LILA'S CHILD
    p548]

    dmb now adds:
    Sam, you persist in making the assertion that Pirsig's ideas about mysticism
    are polluted by Modernity and SOM. And yet the quotes that I provided here
    AGAIN, the ones you convieniently ignored in your response show that this
    idea is doesn't even come close to making sense. The only way one could
    assert that SOM influenced Pirsig's view of mysticism would be to explain
    how mysticism is the number one thing that led him to reject SOM. Instead of
    addressing this point you simply posted some old thing from the archives
    that re-asserts this nonsense. That's why we never get anywhere, you know.
    Plus, you still have not shown me anything like mysticism in the church.
    Maybe there is some connection in your mind, but all that talk about souls
    and God as love means nothing to me. If you want to talk about such things
    you're gonna have to do better than that because I don't know what in the
    world you're talking about. We do agree on one thing, this is really getting
    to be a bore. And its moves like this that make it nearly impossible for me
    to take you seriously.

    Elsewhere, Sam said:
    Firstly, for the record, might I state (if anyone had any doubt) that I
    believe in God, I pray to God, I worship God, etc etc. It's the defining
    feature of my life. My relationship with God runs deeper in me than any
    thoughts or perceptions or considerations that might otherwise emerge. I am
    absolutely certain of the reality of God. Indeed, if that certainty were to
    fail, I would check myself in to a psychiatric unit, as I would have no
    other conclusion to reach than that my mind had failed. The reality of God
    is more firmly rooted in me than any sense of self, so if there is a
    conflict, its the sense of self which is suspect.

    dmb says:
    Absoultely certain? Deeper than any thoughts or perception or
    considerations? Then there is no real point in discussing anything with you,
    is there?

    Disappointed but not surprized in the least,
    dmb

    _________________________________________________________________
    Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfeeŽ
    Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963

    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 Aug 20 2005 - 06:10:24 BST