Greetings Arlo, Sure sounds like you're on the right track. I figure you're about the age of my kids, and what you've written makes good sense. I'm grateful that you've taken the time to write. I'm from such a different perspective than you, both from circumstances and choice, that I don't know how to comment. I can see you are much more balanced than me. That seems appropriate to your responsibility. - I still have no idea where Andre's "slightly worried" is directed, especially as it was in response to a post I sent. Do you have any idea? 180-degree Zen and 360-degree Zen seems to be some kind of abstract, symbolic Zen language. Do you think one needs to join a Zen community, to 'get it'? I might have thought so at one time, but I do not anymore.
Thanks so much for writing. I really want to hear what you think. Marsha -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Arlo Bensinger Sent: Tuesday, September 08, 2009 11:28 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MD] The relativity of the MoQ [Marsha] But I would like to know what you think too. What is the message here? [Arlo] I would say the message is "you can't have one without the other". Pirsig has described his books as "the path to enlightenment" (ZMM) and "the path back" (LILA), and I think that any attempt to isolate or even dismiss one as being "unnecessary" or "unimportant" is very problematic. Trying to apply LILA without the understanding (or "enlightenment", as Pirsig calls it) of ZMM is like trying to heal a gunshot wound by covering it with a band-aid; it does not address the root problem. Do I think that simply reading ZMM induces "enlightenment"? While I suppose it *can*, my guess is that its not so machinistically causal. In ZMM, he describes *his* path to enlightenment, and walking that path alongside him may certainly guide others to the same. But like Pirsig later describes about his peyote experience in LILA, one has to be *open* to enlightenment, if one merely walks along blinded by preconceived prejudices, expectations and whatnot, one will likely walk away feeling "enlightened" without really becoming so. There is an evident historical danger to seeing the inscribed tablets of prophets, the words handed down to us by those who have achieved enlightenment, in the misunderstanding and reification of these "words" as containing the "meaning". On a much larger scale, it harkens towards the "spirituality/religion" split, one being the pursuit of enlightenment, the other being the reified words of others who have achieved enlightenment. When we let the latter forgo the former, we are in for a world of trouble, not only in having a "cult-like" deification of another's words, but (as I've suggested) in not understanding the meaning or importance of the words in front of us. Or, if you don't "get" ZMM, you are going to understand LILA from a S/O perspective that renders the framework of LILA not only erroneous, but dangerous, because "applying the MOQ" from that vantage point is, as I suggested, applying a band-aid to a gunshot wound. You have to dig deep to find that bullet. Then extract it. Then, and only then, can you apply dressing to the wound. That's my take, anyway. 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/
