From: Valence (valence10@hotmail.com)
Date: Tue May 20 2003 - 20:34:34 BST
Hey Johnny,
I thought I might take a quick crack at your question...
JOHNNY
> We often talk about nearness to DQ when talking about experience, and
> furthest evolved toward DQ when talking about levels. I think I've heard
it
> said that the Intellectual level is the furthest evolved toward DQ. Yet
> when we talk about experience, we often note that the intellect is the
last
> thing to get the direct experience of DQ, the "quality event" is
> pre-intellectual.
>
> Is there anything to this apparent opposite hierarchy of nearness to DQ of
> the the levels versus experience?
RICK
Translating between ZMM and LILA can be a tricky business. But I think the
first problem is an equivocation in the use of the term "intellectual"
between the two. That is, I don't think that the "Intellectual" of ZMM's
pre/post split refers to the same thing as "Intellectual" when used in the
MoQ to refer to the 4th level of static patterns. Take this quote from
ZMM...
PIRSIG (from ZMM)
He'd been speculating about the relationship of Quality to mind and matter
and had identified Quality as the parent of mind and matter, that event
which gives birth to mind and matter. This Copernican inversion of the
relationship of Quality to the objective world could sound mysterious if not
carefully explained, but he didn't mean to be mysterious. He simply meant
that at the cutting edge of time, before an object can be distinguished,
there must be a kind of nonintellectual awareness, which he called awareness
of Quality. You can't be aware that you've seen a tree until after you've
seen the tree, and between the instant of vision and instant of awareness
there must be a time lag..The past exists only in our memories, the future
only in our plans. The present is our only reality. The tree that you are
aware of intellectually, because of that small time lag, is always in the
past and therefore is always unreal. Any intellectually conceived object is
always in the past and therefore unreal. Reality is always the moment of
vision before the intellectualization takes place. There is no other
reality. This preintellectual reality is what Phaedrus felt he had properly
defined as Quality. Since all intellectual identifiable things must emerge
from this preintellectual reality, Quality is the parent, the source of all
subjects and objects.
RICK
Here, Intellectualization refers to the breaking-up of direct experience
into 'Mind and Matter', which in MoQ-jargon would be 'static patterns'. In
LILA, Pirsig suggests that DQ is that which he identified in his first book
as Quality. Which all makes it tempting to translate the passage above to
something like this....
PIRSIG from ZMM "translated" (#1)
He'd been speculating about the relationship of [Dynamic] Quality to [static
quality] and had identified [Dynamic] Quality as the parent of [static
quality], that event which gives birth to [static quality]. This Copernican
inversion of the relationship of [Dynamic] Quality to the [world of static
patterns] could sound mysterious if not carefully explained, but he didn't
mean to be mysterious. He simply meant that at the cutting edge of time,
before [a static pattern] can be distinguished, there must be a kind of
[unpatterned] awareness, which he called awareness of [Dynamic] Quality.
You can't be aware that you've seen a tree until after you've seen the tree,
and between the instant of vision and instant of awareness there must be a
time lag. The past exists only in our memories, the future only in our
plans. The present is our only reality. The [patterned] tree that you are
aware of [statically], because of that small time lag, is always in the past
and therefore is always unreal. Any [static pattern] is always in the past
and therefore unreal. Reality is always the [Dynamic] moment of vision
before [static patterning] takes place. There is no other reality. This
[unpatterned] reality is what Phaedrus felt he had properly defined as
[Dynamic] Quality. Since all [static] things must emerge from this
[unpatterned] reality, [Dynamic] Quality is the parent, the source of all
[static patterns].
RICK
Translations similar to this one maybe akin to what Pirsig sees and have
been accepted by several forum members in the past (including myself).
However, it eventually occurred to me that he's really talking about the
breaking of direct experience into categories of experience. In SOM,
those initial categories were "Mind and Matter (or subject and object)", but
in the MoQ those initial categories are "static and Dynamic". Which means
it
would probably translate more like this....
PIRSIG from ZMM "translated" (#2)
He'd been speculating about the relationship of Quality to [Dynamic & static
quality] and had identified Quality as the parent of [Dynamic & static
quality], that event which gives birth to [Dynamic & static quality]. This
Copernican inversion of the relationship of Quality to the [world of Dynamic
freedom & static patterns] could sound mysterious if not carefully
explained, but he didn't mean to be mysterious. He simply meant that at the
cutting edge of time, before [Dynamic freedom & static patterns] can be
distinguished, there must be a kind of [undivided] awareness, which he
called awareness of Quality. You can't be aware that you've seen a tree
until after you've seen the tree, and between the instant of vision and
instant of awareness there must be a time lag. The [static] past exists only
in our memories, the [Dynamic] future only in our plans. The present is our
only reality. The tree that you are aware of [Dynamically & Statically]
because of that small time lag, is always in the past and therefore is
always unreal. Any [divided experience] is always in the past and therefore
unreal. Reality is always the [undivided] moment of vision before [division]
takes place. There is no other reality. This [undivided] reality is what
Phaedrus felt he had properly defined as Quality. Since all [divisions] must
emerge from this [undivided] reality, Quality is the parent, the source of
all [Dynamic freedom and static patterns].
RICK
So while it is true that the 4th level is the most Dynamic of the patterns,
it is also true that all 4 levels and the 'concept' of Dynamic Quality
itself all exist within human understanding... after the time lag. When we
speak of Quality as immediate, pre-intellectual experience, we are speaking
of the undivided Quality that exists prior to all metaphysical divisions.
From within the context of the MoQ, it is correct to refer to this undivided
Quality, as 'Dynamic Quality' since it is a part of the conceptual unknown
which DQ represents.
Does that make sense? Does it help at all?
take care
rick
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 : Tue May 20 2003 - 20:34:47 BST