RE: MD The MOQ and Mysticism 101

From: Paul Turner (paul@turnerbc.co.uk)
Date: Mon Jan 03 2005 - 12:33:55 GMT

  • Next message: Ian Glendinning: "Re: MD Is the MoQ still in the Kantosphere?"

    Hi Mark

    Msh said:
    I long ago recognized that our perceptions (phenomena) are necessarily
    and forever out of spatial and temporal sync with noumena, and that
    our glimpses of things-in-themselves are mystical and fleeting.

    Paul:
    That isn't what I, the MOQ, or mystics are saying. There are no
    things-in-themselves. The primary 'reality-in-itself' is nothingness.
    These statements from Pirsig (both taken from correspondence with
    Anthony McWatt) may help clarify what I'm saying.

    "Things themselves" is an old subject-object metaphysical presumption.
    The MOQ denies there are "things themselves" that are independent of
    value. On close scientific examination "things themselves" always turn
    out to be a relationship between other things."

    "The characterization of the Buddha's world as "nothingness" has been a
    source of Western confusion, leading some to consider Buddhist nirvana
    as a form of suicide. What is meant by Buddhist "nothingness" is no
    "thingness" that is, "no objectivity". Since the use of the undefined
    term "Quality", denies objectivity without suggesting some kind of
    vacuum, it helps to clarify what Buddhist nothingness is."

    Msh said:
      But
    if you are saying that the "enlightened ones" have come to understand
    that everything exists in the human mind, with no external
    corresponding reality, then, yes, this is madness.

    Paul:
    Actually, it's subjective idealism. However, that isn't what I'm saying
    either. What I'm saying is that, as with idealism, objects are mental
    constructs but that, unlike idealism, mind is a value construct. I am
    saying that value is independent of the human mind but that it is not
    well described as 'external' because 'external' is a distinction made by
    the human mind that only applies to static patterns.

    Msh said:
      Furthermore, I'm
    suggesting that the "enlightened ones" themselves do not believe
    this. The Dali Lama wears corrective lenses and sandals, after all.
    He must be trying to see SOMETHING clearly; to protect his feet from
    hot asphalt and real stones.

    So... you wanna fight about that?

    Paul:
    Not really. Glasses are as real as eyes and hot asphalt is as real as
    burning feet. Enlightenment is an absence of conceptualised perception,
    not an absence of reality. I speculate that the experience of hot
    asphalt would become indistinguishable from a sensation of pure negative
    quality.

    Regards

    Paul

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jan 03 2005 - 13:15:05 GMT