SA, I think I understand, but I think I do not. Is there a way that you would clarify this point For me? It sounds important yet I'm not sure I'm grasping your meaning.
-Blinding reflective light Ron -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Heather Perella Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 12:35 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [MD] Taoism [Marsha] > I understand what you are saying, and I agree. > BUT, I ask my patterned-self if this book was > written with the gender > of all the characters reversed, would it still be > considered > wisdom? I think not. [SA currently] Maybe it's this general notion that you seem to be portraying, Marsha, where the female gender were to write this same book and "considered wisdom" - "not". Maybe the book might be considered wisdom... I don't know. But I believe I now see your effort here. The next comment you make seems to explain much more than I recently was able to shatter from my mind and understand deeper than I was before. [Marsha] > Not even acceptable science fiction. I > understand the universality of the Tao, but it is > not enough to have > yang address yang. I won't be told not to trouble > my silly little > head with such trivial matters. [SA currently] Ah, I see you have real questions and concerns Marsha. They are not trivial, as your comment I referred to above is coming up. [Marsha] > I am not talking about mere sexual > discrimination. It's not as personal as you seem to > think. [SA currently] And BAM! BINGO! "It's not as personal as you seem to think." As Dwai tried to say to me, "something personal between the chipmunk and me". It's a bit more than that. I'm glad Dwai mentioned "something" which hints at something dynamic for who knows what "something" really is. This statement by you Marsha exclaims the non-self. I like this very much. This truly is "not as personal", which how I see this statement of yours, your removing any stereotypes that may come along with your inquiry and your asking a simple innocent question. Is this true? [Marsha] > My canvases don't at all care if a woman or a man > places paint upon > them. [SA currently] Lovely, simple, innocent canvas - non-self. I would say this is what I was referring to Dwai about when I mentioned "rounded sandstone pebble". What else might a rock be 'thought' to be? Maybe the pebble has a say in this! [Marsha] > Gender is a division more INSIDIOUS than > subject/object. And > I think it was you who suggested that the subtext in > LILA was a sexual one. > To SA: See, I open up and dare to explore, and what > reaction do I > get? Have I forgotten to flutter my eyelashes? [SA currently] Have I forgotten to mention that this world is the spirit world when the chipmunk can speak for chipmunks best for I am just a tiny skull after all. eyelashes... funny! blue, blue, blue, SA ________________________________________________________________________ ____________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/ Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
