I think a little translation is necessary:
Mu state is defined as "setting all levels of SQ to Mu." Kind of like
setting your hard drive to zeroes.
Dimensional: Mu
Inorganic: Mu
Biological: Mu
Social: Mu
Intellectual: Mu
What does one do when one meditates?
Set everything to Mu.
Why?
To get in touch with DQ.
How?
Drop all SQs.
Equivalent statement:
David: 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."
Next thing:
David says: >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.
Translation (For math people): We can't describe Q with ISQ because Q is
both DQ and SQ and SQ cannot describe DQ.
Sincerely,
Matt Coughlan
P.S. Please read my article in MF. I want to know what you guys think about
Keirsey and the Myers/Briggs Temperment Sorter.
>From: David Lind <Trickster@postmark.net>
>Reply-To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>To: moq_discuss@moq.org
>Subject: RE: MD Random patterns.
>Date: Fri, 10 Mar 2000 19:38:54 +0000
>
>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
>
______________________________________________________
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
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:00:40 BST