----- Original Message -----
From: "Heather Perella" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 2:34 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] the Underground
Marsha:
Maybe you can explain. First there is muck, than there is
no muck, then
there is muck again. What do you think?
SA: I think the first muck is bothersome samsara. I think no muck is the
void effort. It is the effort to live nirvana. The third muck is the
void has been here along and muck or no muck is handled in a void way.
Thus, the third muck is: nirvana is samsara or samsara has been nirvana
all along. The third muck is experienced differently than the first two
mucks.
all these mucks,
SA
SA,
Sorry for all the mucking around, but sometimes when I talk about the
emptiness of things, you seem to challenge me with the conventional view.
And when I'm chattering conventionally, you challenge my previous discussion
on emptiness. It's a bit frustrating.
From the book, Meditation on Emptiness, "These phenomena cannot be found
under analysis and thus do not inherently exist; they are still accepted as
validly established conventionally when there is no analysis." This is how
I (and I certainly could be incorrect) interpret mountains, no mountains,
mountains again. So the second muck would be realizing its emptiness, and
the third muck is experienced differently than the first two mucks.
I wonder if you understand what I am trying to say. If you think I am
wrong, please say so and I can try to get it right or explain it more
coherently. That would be a most helpful challenge.
Marsha
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/
