Print

Print


All the same, I'm sorry for my previous post -- it was decidedly 
  one "false note". I shall be grateful if you [and the List] could 
  expunge it from our discussion and, instead consider this:
   
  Diana, 
   
  Your statement [2] below is an absolute crystallization of 
  the moment of intersection of time and timelessness. This 
  is the moment I have been waiting for in our argument.
  I think we have "arrived" :)
   
  Regards.
   
  ~ CR 
   
  

Diana Manister <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
        Dear CR: My point, not very well-made, was that I don't see that you make a distinction between an experience of the still-point by a disembodied, out-of-time consciousness and as experienced by a living being who is in the body and in time. Eliot does make the distinction. Diana

  
    
---------------------------------
    
From:  cr mittal <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:  "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum." <[log in to unmask]>
To:  [log in to unmask]
Subject:  Re: Four Quartets -- a reading
Date:  Tue, 19 Dec 2006 07:22:25 -0800
  

  Diana, you wrote:
      
     I think by focussing on the phrase "the still point" you are ignoring
     the distinction Eliot clearly draws between
      
      [1]  pure fleshless divine "consciousness" 
      
     and 
      
     [2]  mystical experience available to incarnated humans who are
     not divine, i.e., "we." The Incarnation does not refer only to Christ, 
     but to God's gift of spirit to all of humanity, the possibility of salvation
     by imitating Christ's example of right living and devotion. This is 
     graphically represented by the Holy Ghost descending 
from heaven   
     into the apostles as "tongues of fire" in the New Testament, spirit 
     inhabiting flesh, discoverable by the Christ-like.
      
     Now, as per your elucidation, Eliot's lines on "the still point" say
     what you are saying in point [2] above.  Isn't it?  
      
     But that's how I have explained those lines all along, haven't I ?
      
     [The difference between point [1] and [2] above is all too obvious
     and has no bearing on the exposition of the lines.]
      
     I'm sorry I'll have to look up my earlier posts to see if I said 
     anything different from what you say in [2] above.
      
     ~ CR
      
  
  

 


 __________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com