Re: MD Coherence and Satori. IIb

From: Valuemetaphysics@aol.com
Date: Sat Jun 26 2004 - 01:55:56 BST

  • Next message: Dan Glover: "Re: MD immoral irony?????"

    Part IIb.

    Mark 25-6-04: Heather is a 'she'! ;)
    Satori is not an MOQ term. 'Sweet spot' is not an MOQ term. I hope
    'coherence' may be regarded as an MOQ term. In other words, coherence is the MOQ way of
    describing satori and the sweet spot.
    You ask a very good question here. The state Heather is describing is what
    the MOQ would say is a Dynamic viewpoint. Heather is using SOM terminology which
    is replaced in the MOQ, because we do not have to talk about Subjects and
    Objects in the MOQ at all if we choose not to. Please allow me to paraphrase
    Heather:
    "a coherent relationship between all static patterns of value."
    The patterns included in this coherent relationship are: Inorganic,
    Biological, Social and Intellectual patterns. For example, let us say you are working
    on a motorcycle? There is a best state for the motorcycle and a best state for
    you. When these states harmonise the sweet spot is hit. Practice long enough
    and the sweet spot can be maintained. If you become enlightened then coherence
    is very exceptionally high. This is what Heather may regard as satori. She is
    using the idiom sweet spot to allow everyday folk who may not be into what Zen
    teaching is trying to say as an in road, just as i have used it as an in road
    to the MOQ.

    and later saying the following:
    "Therefore, the key to living in the "sweet spot," or in satori, is to be
    aware of the mind and to know its true nature. By understanding the mind's
    nature, one can begin to be aware of how thoughts distort our perception of reality
    and how thoughts influence our reaction to it."

    Mark 25-6-04: We can drop the term 'mind.' The key to coherence is to
    understand the relationship between Static Quality and Dynamic Quality. Heather uses
    'mind' because she is sensitive to her audience.

    What exactly is meant by being "aware" of the mind? Who will be aware? of
    what? And the moment, we are saying I have to aware of my mind.. am I not
    bringing in a 'division' here? A mind which is to be made aware of and an 'I' which
    should be aware of the mind?

    Mark 25-6-04: The removal of the term 'mind' makes this question dissolve.
    Experience is primarily of Quality in the MOQ, so it is with Quality that we
    begin. The MOQ divides experience into Dynamic Quality and Static Quality - these
    are the terms we use to enquire into satori or the sweet spot: DQ and SQ.
    Experience is a stream of events which raise and die away from coherence.
    Coherence is the relationship between DQ and SQ. (I will say that for now, but DQ
    cannot actually be talked about as something to be understood - DQ is concept
    free, it is the stream itself.)
    The 'i' is a coherent state imposed upon experience, but the 'i' is not
    primary - it is culturally derived. The real 'i' is, in the MOQ, a patterned
    relationship with DQ.

    I hope this helps?
    Please do not hesitate to ask more,
    All the best,
    Mark

    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 : Sat Jun 26 2004 - 02:46:58 BST