Hey-
I like the idea of starting the new discussion from a specific passage of
LILA and would like to suggest one that I think might take this
conversation in whole new direction:
(Starting on p.389--- He is at the Boston Muesum admiring paintings and
notices the halos that appear in them...)
...It seemed to tmean the two religions weren't copying one another or they
would have made the halos the same size. But they were both painting
something they were seeing seperately, which implied that that "something"
they were painting had a real, indepenent source....
"Our culture immunizes us against giving much importance to all this
because the light has no "objective" reality. that means it's just some
"subjective" and therefore unreal phenmenon. In [an MoQ], however, this
light is IMPORTANT because it often appears associated with undefined
auspiciousness, that is, with DQ. It signals a Dynamic intrusion upon a
static situation. When there is a letting go of static patterns the light
occurs."
This is one of those passages that always leaves me with a raised eyebrow
and an unsatisfied feeling. He goes to elaborate on "the light" for a few
pages more. I'd love to hear the Squad's take on "the light". Is it really
out there or has RMP taken a good metaphor one step too far? I say we
seriously question the man on this one.
As long as we leave room for Dynamics
it will all be good.
Rick
MOQ Online - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Jan 17 2002 - 13:08:35 GMT