At 08:31 AM 11/23/2008, you wrote:
Has anyone come across this before ?
Ian,
What? Lila as "divine play"? Divine play, game or dance? Of course!
Marsha
Lila = "divine play" - life as a spontaneous game played by
lighthearted forces beyond our understanding. from Sri Aurobindo in
"The Valley of the False Glimme"
Quoted in an essay on "Inclusionality" by Wendy Ellyat. (I'll dig out
a link or forward a copy if I can't find on-line.)
Regards
Ian
On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 1:33 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andrè and Steve
>
> On 22.:
>
> Steve:
>> I'm still not seeing what you see
>> as a problem. Maybe it would help me understand your point if you
>> explained what an SOMist is to you.
>
> Gentlemen: SOM and "the S/O distinction" must be kept apart. I know
> it's cumbersome to "dissolve metaphysical disputes..." constantly" but
> SOM is the conviction that the s/o split is from eternity to eternity.
> i.e. existence's very base, while the distinction is the said split as a
> static VALUE (for value it is as Andrè says below) having seen trough
> its bluff as a metaphysics. Knowing that the split will start to
> produce paradoxes if taken metaphysically ...and dissolve if pursued
> "scientifically".
>
> Andre:
>> Good question Steve and let me say first of all that we are in full
>> agreement about most things concerning the MoQ.
>
>> I am also reluctant to call anything above the Intellectual level a
>> 'level' in the same way that Pirsig suggested the term 'code' of
>> which he first says it isn't code and then goes on to use the term
>> 'code of Art' (p167) and repeats this on p 307 (Dynamic-static
>> code). To be honest I was even toying with the idea that the MoQ is
>> not a metaphysics at all (!) but I'd rather leave that to the
>> experts.
>
>> First of all, I do not regard SOM as evil. Absolutely not. This
>> rational, scientific approach has guided mankind to do many great
>> things and prevented us from many a disaster. (mind you, it has
>> caused some as well). Anyway, within the context of the MoQ I see
>> SOM (Intell. PoV) as a potential threat for a number of reasons:
>
>> It has pervaded intellectual patterns to such an extent that it has
>> assumed total ownership of our capacity to intellectualise.Both
>> inductively and deductively. That is, not only how to, but also
>> what's in it. All other influences upon our 'intellectualising'
>> (just to be clear because this word also has connotations, I mean
>> just thinking, our mental capacity [whatever that means..arrrgg]),
>> tend to be reduced to subjective (in the negative of
>> objective/scientific) frills. I am talking about intuition etc.
>
> One minor point. Andrè says that SOM have "pervaded intellectual
> patterns", if this means "pervaded the level" I must blow my whistle.
> In retrospect the 4th. level began as the conviction that there were
> an objective reality (eternal principles) beyond the gods' realm, a
> TRUTH that even transcends the gods. Thus the level began as a
> "som",
> it could not have developed as anything less, only the MOQ
> transformed
> it into ITS OWN 4th. level.
>
> Thus I must point out that "...SOM has pervaded intellectual patterns"
> (provided it means the level) is a little misleading, as if people of
> old were "intellecualizing" when pondering their social reality, i.e.
> it equalizes thinking and intellect making the latter identical to
> SOM's "mind" - a mental compartment that can be filled with different
> intellectualizations. Phew! Speak about resolving metaphysical
> disputes at the end of each sentence.
>
> Now, I don't think Andrê really lapses back in SOM, so much of the
> above is from pure MOQ premises, but it's the words' old somish load
> that keeps popping up. Also "thinking" is ambiguous, but enough for
> now.
>
> Bodvar
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>> It doesn' t recognise quality. It doesn't recognise morals.These
>> sort of dangle at the edges somewhere.
>>
>> Perhaps an example is better:
>>
>> Suppose I have written a great song or poem...and suppose my teacher
>> was a pure SOM'ist (I realise they do not come in that way but for
>> the sake of the example) this person can shoot the song or poem down
>> on the basis of not following the grammar rules properly or
>> (ab)using meaning of different words I have put together in a
>> different way.
>>
>> It reminds me of the film Dead Poet's Society with Robin Williams
>> and the scene where the boys are told to tear the pages from their
>> books defining good poetry, how to analyse good poetry and
>> guidelines on how to write good poetry. He has the pages thrown into
>> the rubbish bin.
>>
>> He then has them go outside and through various physical/mental
>> (experiential) activities has each individual student 'find'
>> himself, to find his own idea of what is good or what is not good.
>> One can liken this process to Phaedrus' teaching methods.
>>
>> Pirsig has created a wonderful MoQ, for me it is a 'Code of Art'.
>> And I don't want to see it shot down.
>>
>> In an earlier post I have reasserted the quality of SOM. It can
>> continue to assist us, it can keep us on the straight and narrow.
>> It's just that the MoQ has redefined this straight and shown that
>> this narrow can be as broad as you like.
>>
>> I hope I have clarified it a bit Steve. I am not anti SOM, I just
>> want to restrain its potential influence a bit over this MoQ. I hope
>> I have done this for some of you, and know I have done this at least
>> for myself.
>>
>> Kind regards
>> Andre
>> Moq_Discuss mailing list
>> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
>> Archives:
>> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
>> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>>
>>
>
>
>
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
>
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
.
.
The Universe is uncaused, like a net of jewels in
which each is a reflection of all the others in a
fantastic, interrelated harmony without end.
.
.
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
