[MD] Defining Dynamic Quality

[david buchanan]

Scott, Ant, Matt and y'all:

Scott offered "another definition of DQ under the name Nirvana":
"Consciousness of absence of objects is Nirvana." (Merrell-Wolff)
"When consciousness of objects is born, then, likewise, consciousness of 
absence of objects arises.
Consciousness of objects is the Universe.
Consciousness of absence of objects is Nirvana.
Within Consciousness-without-an-object lie both the Universe and Nirvana, 
yet to Consciousness-without-an-object these two are the same."

dmb says:
I think that can easily be compared to Pirsig. The "absence of objects" and 
"lack of division" refer to the same undifferentiated experience. I think 
that within the metaphysical system that is the MOQ, the universe of 
"objects" is our static reality, undifferentiated experience is the Dynamic 
ground of that reality, but that ultimately Quality is not divided into 
static and Dynamic, otherwise it wouldn't be about the "One".

"In all of the Oriental religions great value is placed on the Sanskrit 
doctrine of Tat tvam asi, 'Thou art that,' which asserts that everything you 
think you are and everything you think you perceive are undivided. To 
realize fully this lack of division is to become enlightened." ZAMM p.143

Scott said:
...Here I am only pointing out that DQ is defined. Through statements such 
as these, or through a book called LILA, DQ gets defined, much as axioms 
about sets define what a set is in mathematics, even though there is no 
actual definition of a set in the form "A set is defined as such-and-such". 
The problem is not one of definition, rather...

dmb says:
DQ is defined and gets defined in LILA, "even though there is no actual 
definition" and "the problem is not one of definition" anyway? Wow. How DO 
you do it? WHY do you do it? I'd guess that your reason for living is to 
misread everything that passes before your eyes and then spread the 
confusion? Its a bit astonishing, really. OK, if I follow your sweet word 
magic and golden logic, Pirsig defines DQ as beyond definition, which gives 
it a definition, which means it is no longer beyond definition and so we 
should re-define DQ as definable - but rare. Is that the idea? I guess 
there's a certain kind of foolish consistancy there, at least. But 
seriously, I think you're missing the point. Give me a minute to calm 
down...

Aren't you basically trying to say what Pirsig said, that we can describe 
DQ, but not define it. We can say what it is NOT, even if we can't say 
exactly what it is? That we can know it from experience even if we can't pin 
it down with the kind of restrictions that actual definitions would require? 
See, I think you simply have to tie this in with an idea you already 
favorably expressed in this very post, by way of your pal FMW. See, Nirvana 
and/or DQ is described as "consciousness of absence of objects". To describe 
the experience of this type of consciousness, we could just as rightly say 
it is to "realize fully this lack of division". Or, to use Northrop's terms, 
we could also refer to this as an "undifferentiated" experience. They are 
all different ways to say the same thing, the point being that this 
experience is distinctly different than our normal mode of consciousness, 
which is full of distinctions form wall to wall and from floor to ceiling. 
And so it is only consistant to point out that this experience is beyond 
definition for the simple reason that definitions are all about distinctions 
and divisions and differentiations. Its only consistant with the distinction 
between the universe of objects and Nirvana, as you described it. This is 
the point of describing DQ as beyond definitions. I think its fairly obvious 
that we can connect these concepts and see how they all fit together and I'm 
just stunned that you're reading this stuff as if Pirsig, Plotinus, FMW and 
others were in enemy camps when it just ain't so. This is why I get so 
bugged. Based on your reading list, your posts should be a tremendous help 
to the MOQ, but NOOOoooooOOOOOooooOOOOooo.....

What's the deal with that?

dmb

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/