Have really enjoyed the zen flavor of recent posts (mystic that i am -
the science chat can be a little too intellectual for me)
Yes, when i said we can never "know" reality - i was implying that
intellectually we can't know it. But I do think we can experience it
fully. That's what meditation is about for me. Connecting to the
"one-ness" of the universe that all these static patterns make seem
like "many-ness."
And part of me believes that we can never fully understand "reality"
- because there is so much of reality that is (and don't flame me if
you disagree) spiritual. And we, being both spiritual and physical
beings are limited by our physical nature in fully understanding the
spiritual.
The idea that DQ is always changing and therefore never changing -
yum.
Loved the house analogy as well.
Shalom
David Lind
Trickster@postmark.net
Paul Marcus wrote:
> First of all let me say very cool site. I had no idea it was here until I
> read Persig's new forward in the new edition of ZZM. I should probably sit
> on the sidelines and review more before jumping in but there's just not
much
> Quality in that for me.
>
> It was stated that dynamic reality is always changing, but one could easily
> say it is never changing...I mean it's really the biggest MU of all isn't
> it?
>
> As far as grasping directy DQ on an intellectual level I agree with those
> who say it can be done on a static basis. Persig himself did quite a good
> job of philosophizing about what reality was, and in my opinion, the best
> job I've seen. However, the entire idea of Quality, and it's beauty I
might
> ad, is based on "pre-intellectual Quality." We know this because we've all
> been there. We've all meditated, or rock climbed, or hiked, or even fixed
a
> motor-cycle when we've entered DQ. It's the most incredible feeling to
just
> realize a oneness with everything. I would definitely call that
> experiencing raw nature or raw DQ. However, you don't realize this until
> after the moment has passed. At the top of the cliff you realize what an
> incredible climb it was, but during the climb itself you had no idea of any
> a priori concept. Time, awareness, even the sense of self are all washed
> away in the process (there's an entire book on this called Flow which I
> highly recommend if you haven't read it yet). That is DQ, such complete
> Quality involvement that everything else washes away. The mind frame of a
> craftsman...or a master....art.
>
> One may be aware of this afterword when intillectual reality is then
grasped
> again and self comes back. But self itself is a static intellectual
> pattern. When in DQ there is simply no psychic energy left for any
> intellectual processes...it all is invovled in the direct experience of the
> moment.
>
> Therefore I have to say (as many others have I'm sure) that DQ can only be
> intuited, hever intellectually grasped. It's like seeing the outside of a
> house when you're stuck inside. You can vision and have ideas of what it's
> all about, but you'll never see it.
>
> have to get back to work now....
>
> Paul Marcus
> Bethesda, MD
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: matt coughlan [mailto:concretebuddha@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 10, 2000 9:24 AM
> To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> Subject: Re: MD Random patterns.
>
>
> This is nuts. I SO enjoy doing this philosophy stuff. Keep going all.
>
>
> Blnktmons says: The human mind applies a priori concepts to Reality that
may
>
> or may not exist.(esp. time, space)
>
> /\
> |
> Coughlan says: What if this version of Reality is just the Inorganic Static
> Pattern? And what if a priori concepts EXIST in their own right? (Within
the
>
> Intellectual Static Pattern)
>
> (I am currently playing with the idea of making an addition to the Four
> SQP's: Dimensional Static Quality. This one goes before Inorganic SQ. The
> new chart would read: Dimensional, Inorg., Bio., Social, Intell.)
>
>
> Blnktmon says: The goal of mystics throughout history has been to attain
> unitive knowledge
> of the divine ground (divine ground = Reality = Quality) through
> self-mutilation and destruction (sometimes, but not necessarily always in
> the
> physical sense).
>
>
> Coughlan says: What if they were actually trying to get to Mu State?
> Theory: All questions can be seen as Y, N and M questions. I theorize that
> there is something called Mu State. This is when all questions (in the
> Static Intellectual Pattern) have been reset to Mu.
>
>
> B: By doing this one could become aware and conscious of all
> which is what they perceive God as being. Buddha is a good example.
> Through
> meditation and the elimination of desires, he was able to transcend samsara
> (cycle of death, rebirth) and the a priori concepts (which we cannot prove
> are real anyway) that imprisoned Reality thereby coming to a unitive
> understanding of Reality.
>
>
> C: What if there are equivalent Mu States in the other three SQP's? Is
there
>
> a state in which Society has neither been accepted nor rejected? Yes. Is
> there a state in which Life neither exists nor doesn't exist? Yes. Is there
> a state in which an electron neither exists nor doesn't exist? Yes.
(Quantum
>
> physics)
> This is the old: if a tree falls on a mime in a forest, would anybody hear
> him? (hehehe)
> What if these mystics are trying to place all of their SQ's in Mu state so
> that they may directly channel DQ? (Without pesky SQ's getting in the way.)
>
>
> B: But on the question of whether or not the mind (not the self, because
> there
> are very important differences between the two) can come to an
understanding
> of Reality, I disagree with him.
>
>
> C: You guys are mincing terms. What do you mean by "understand"? The mind
> (ISQ) can UNDERSTAND (as in interpret and diagram and blah) reality (SQ)
> because this is an intellectual feat. ISQ cannot BE reality. (Look at the
> Heirarchy of Q) Therefore, it will always be incomplete because DQ just
> keeps changing. Once we have a theory (ISQ), DQ will have moved on. ISQ
> cannot map DQ. It can only map SQ. (which is what David was trying to get
> to.)
>
>
> B: Very few people throughout history have claimed
> this knowledge but if we take their word for it, then it can be ascertained
> that knowledge of Reality is possible.
>
> C: I am a typical NT. I will not take anybody's word for anything.
>
> See ya later
>
>
> Sincerely,
> Matt Coughlan
>
> P.S. Look at a Yin-Yang sometime: Make one side equal Yes and the other
side
>
> equal No. There are two dots because whenever you say Yes, No is also
> implied in the decision to lots of other things and vice versa.
>
> The squigly line in the middle is Mu.
>
> Go nuts.
>
> >From: Blnktmons@aol.com
> >Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> >To: moq_discuss@moq.org
> >Subject: Re: MD Random patterns.
> >Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 04:56:14 EST
> >
> >To all listening:
> >
> >I am happy that David made the distinction between Reality and the mind's
> >perception of reality, because it was something that needed to be
> >introduced.
> > But on the question of whether or not the mind (not the self, because
> >there
> >are very important differences between the two) can come to an
> >understanding
> >of Reality, I disagree with him.
> >
> >The human mind applies a priori concepts to Reality that may or may not
> >exist
> >(esp. time, space) and comprehends sensations in terms of those concepts.
> >This creates the mind's perception of reality, which will always be
> >different
> >from another person's mind because we are each on different levels in
terms
> >of understanding the most important a priori concepts. Reality is caged
> >between the concepts our mind applies to it and our own desires thus when
> >perceived it takes on different modes.
> >
> >The goal of mystics throughout history has been to attain unitive
knowledge
> >of the divine ground (divine ground = Reality = Quality) through
> >self-mutilation and destruction (sometimes, but not necessarily always in
> >the
> >physical sense). By doing this one could become aware and conscious of
all
> >which is what they perceive God as being. Buddha is a good example.
> >Through
> >meditation and the elimination of desires, he was able to transcend
samsara
> >(cycle of death, rebirth) and the a priori concepts (which we cannot prove
> >are real anyway) that imprisoned Reality thereby coming to a unitive
> >understanding of Reality. Very few people throughout history have claimed
> >this knowledge but if we take their word for it, then it can be
ascertained
> >that knowledge of Reality is possible.
> >
> >by the way, you all have very interesting things to say about dynamic and
> >static quality and if it means anything, i'd like to thank you for
> >contributing to such a (dare i say?) exciting forum from which the rest of
> >us
> >can come to a deeper understanding of what Mr. Pirsig has to say.
> >
> >justin
> >
> >
> >MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> >Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> >MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
> >
> >To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> >http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
> >
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
>
> MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
> Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
> MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
>
> To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
> http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
>
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@wasted.demon.nl
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:40 BST