clark (clark@netsites.net)
Wed, 11 Feb 1998 05:06:53 +0100
Keith,
Your discussion of the meaning of Lila in Hindu mythology has, in my
mind, confirmed my interpretation of the meaning of Pirsig's Metaphysics of
Quality.
Since I first read his books, and particularly since I have had the
opportunity to follow the ebb and flow of the squad discussions I have
looked upon the MOQ as an unavoidable, circular process which occurs in all
sentient beings, and I would insist in higher creatures such as dogs, etc.
although I wont start any arguments over this.
To explain my view I will start with the contents of the static levels.
These static levels precondition our mindset, our Dynamic Quality, to
favor certain aspects of our total field of awareness, which consists of
input from our immediate surroundings plus the total content of our minds,
including subconscious prickings, plus any overriding, jarring impressions
which may be present. The gleanings of Dynamic Quality resulting from these
urgings are immediately transferred to our consciousness, our static
quality, where they are subjected to the jury of our static patterns of
value, this new state of SPoV immediately preconditions our Dynamic Quality
again to repeat the process. Our lives are a continuous circle of
adjustment to the gleanings of Dynamic Quality.
Your, or Capra's, explanation of the meaning of Lila in Hindu Mythology
seems to me to be exactly analogous to the MOQ. You will have trouble
convincing me that this pattern is not what Pirsig had in mind when he
wrote the passages which you quote. It seems clear to me that he was
describing how one person fit into this scheme of things and how the
Dynamic Quality (Lila) is an ongoing process which we cannot escape.
Pirsig has made us aware of the operation of Dynamic Quality so that we
can fit the concept into our static patterns of value but it is not
necessary to define, or even understand it. He is not using Moral and Good
in our usual sense but as a metaphor for our drive toward greater levels of
understanding. Everyone is possessed of DQ, even Bonnie and Clyde and King
George the Third :-). We do not have to look very far or very deep into
history to see that the MOQ is working and working pretty well.
The MOQ, in my view, relieves us of the need to agonize over false morals
and requires us to apply just one standard to all decisions. Is it good for
us and for the system which has produced us. My problem with the MOQ from
the beginning has been that the squad seemed to be applying too narrow an
interpretation to it. If it is not good for the system in which we are
embedded then it is not good for us.
Even so, the MOQ will keep operating whether we are asleep or awake. Our
enlightened conscious ponderings will only serve to hasten the path to
higher levels of understanding.
Thanks again for your explanation of Lila. I have "The Tao of Physics" on
my shelves but it has been so long since I read it all I remember is the
title. I will look up your references.
Ken Clark
-- post message - mailto:lilasqd@hkg.com unsubscribe/queries - mailto:diana@asiantravel.com homepage - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/4670
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu May 13 1999 - 16:42:47 CEST