From: David MOREY (us@divadeus.freeserve.co.uk)
Date: Mon Dec 22 2003 - 18:58:01 GMT
Hi
Interesting to refer to the self as 'it'
Seems to me that subject-object split says 'it' to objects.
To say 'it' to the self is to draw the line elsewhere.
This would be the same place as for DQ/SQ I would suggest.
To me everything that is past is unchangeable/static and is therefore 'it'.
The future for consciousness is always open/DQ.
When consciousness turns its attention to the past this is also open,
because the past is always open to interpretation (as Sartre says).
Would this relate to why you would say 'it' to the self?
The 'self' seems to imply identity. But identity is a flawed concept.
It can apply only to that which is static, and therefore, I would say, past.
The importance of time is why I think Heidegger has more to say about
how DQ/SQ relate tha Pirsig. But I continue to champion Pirsig for his
more comprehenisble analysis. Heidegger has proved very popular in
China and Japan apparently.
regards
David M
----- Original Message -----
From: "khoo hock aun" <hockaun@pc.jaring.my>
To: "Moq_Discuss@Moq.Org" <moq_discuss@moq.org>
Sent: Monday, December 22, 2003 2:13 PM
Subject: Re: MD Sit on my faith
> Hi Joe and all,
>
> Joe wrote:
> > joe: i love the Christian faith. I love the Work principles based on
> > Gurdjieff. I love the MoQ described by Robert Pirsig. What you wrote,
> > Khoo, aabout Buddhist practice seems so sensible. I would like to
accept
> > that also! At the end your questions are lures: "What does a
> metaphysician
> > see, beyond mind and matter, when they cease? Does he or she see the
> > Metaphysics of Quality?"
> >
> > Never say 'I' to my actions, feelings, or thoughts! Never identify with
> > self! Call the self 'it'! Are conscious labors and intentional
> sufffering
> > 'radical renounces'? I was never taught that in school. Must I immure
> > myself "in one of the strongly built cells, there to receive every
> > twenty-four hours a piece of bread and a small jug of water?" No! I
> choose
> > to participate somewhat on a maliling list with Platt, Bo, Mark, Joe,
> etc.,
> > and accept what I get.
> >
> > I won't leave off! Conscious cannot come from the non-conscious,
organic
> > cannot come from the inorganic, evolution is incomplete! I am broken
and
> > need repair. This is a hell of a place to become a Buddha! (The damn
> word
> > processor I use to make a rough draft insists with a red underline that
> > 'Buddha' be written with a capital 'B')
>
> Khoo:
> Lest a misconception persist, I would like to say a little about the term
> 'radical renounce(r)s" when used to describe buddhists.
> The imagery you conjure that buddhism leads to ascetism - the practise of
> extreme self-denial for religious reasons - is rather superficial. But I
> will grant that it was done so to make a point.
>
> The Buddha attempted ascetism for six years after leaving a life of
comfort
> as a prince - and found that his path to enlightenment lay somewhere in
> between - not in either extreme. The life of buddhist monks today must
> appear like asceticism to a deeply entrenched material culture - but they
> were not so 2500 yrs ago. However, the voluntary acceptance of 227 rules
of
> theravada monkhood is not a walk in the park - only the most determined to
> achieve liberation do so - only because it has been found to favour rapid
> progress towards enligthenment.
>
> For the rest of the buddhist community, their lives are spent in karmic
> preparation, simply put " stay away from evil, do good and purify the
mind".
> But to be born human is a rare opportunity to gain enlightenment which is
> only possible on this human plane. All beings who have progressed through
> the 31 planes of existence and who have achieved candidature for
buddhahood
> after countless lifetimes are born as humans to achieve this final
> liberation. In this sense, every human has the potential to become a
> buddha - on this plane the balance between mind and matter is just right
for
> this to occur. It seems therefore that neither a dog nor a god can achieve
> buddhahood in their own respective lifetimes.
>
> Enlightenment may not come too on this mailing list - but just as you,
> Platt, Bo and Mark, myself and everyone else signed on, there is a keen
> interest to find out what Pirsig's Metaphysics of Quality could be and how
> it could be acheived. However, each and every discussant or lurker is only
> able to appreciate the Metaphysics of Quality at their own level of
> understanding and preparedness. If only someone would write an "MOQ for
> Dummies".
>
> But every now and then we are afforded our occasional metaphysical
insights,
> flashes of dharmakaya light which Pirsig refers to in Lila Chap 26: " It
> signals a Dynamic intrusion upon a static situation...When there is a
> letting go of static patterns the light occurs. ... The light would occur
> during the breakup of the static patterns of the person's intellect as it
> returned into the pure Dynamic Quality from which it emerged in infancy."
>
> It is in this light that one can see that conscious can indeed come from
the
> non-conscious, organic can come from the inorganic, and evolution is
indeed
> incomplete. In this light, we see we are each discrete "selves" broken
away
> from the contiuum of Pirsig's Dyanmic Quality. Buddhism's basic position
is
> that subject-object metaphysics is at the root of all suffering, no matter
> how much
> material progress is achieved in its name. But the middle path, or
> moderation, is taken. The "self" is accepted as a temporary biological and
> social vessel for consciousness, nothing more, balanced against the vista
of
> this "self" as but one in a multitude of zillions, more alike and
> undifferentiated from the other than each could imagine.
>
> Best Regards
> Khoo Hock Aun
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
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 Dec 22 2003 - 19:03:00 GMT