Marsha: >From 'The Dalai Lama at MIT' and pertaining to why some of the Buddhist tools, like visualization, are necessary. And maybe why I think the 'world as is' could be better without the subject/object point-of-view.
" ... We need to place these efforts in a larger perspective. They are part of a more general goal of achieving a transformation of the way we perceive the phenomenal world as well as the way we conceive of the nature of the perceiver-- the "I", the subject. Why do we need to transform these things? What is wrong with the way in which we ordinarily perceive the world? Usually when we perceive the world, we cannot help but assign to it values and judgments. In some cases, of course, doing so helps us to function in this world. If we know something is very hot, we need to be careful with it. If we know that something is dangerous, we keep our distance. But the process quickly solidifies, and soon we start assigning or imputing characteristics to external objects that we feel are intrinsic to them but are not. We might think this floor is beautiful because we perceive it as such. But very quickly we tend to believe that it is intrinsically beautiful, or ugly. We believe that wounds are intrinsically pleasant or unpleasant, and so, similarly, in the cases of taste, touch, and all our sensory experiences. In fact, there is a deeply interdependent process between outer phenomena and our mind. We perceive things and assign values to them; we try to possess things or discard them based on those judgments; and we start to believe that the characteristics we impute to object actually belong to the objects. In this way, we experience a much stronger compulsion to attract or repulse them. The problem is that our experiences of craving or repulsion are at odds with reality. Things are not intrinsically beautiful or pleasant. A rose might be beautiful to our eyes, but its "beauty" does not mean much to a whale or a bat. Because our perception is at odds with reality, we end up with a sense of frustration, torment, inner conflict, and suffering. Likewise for the perceiver's experience of him- or herself..." This might diminish the morality of Protagoras' "Man is the Measure of all Things", but it does nothing to diminish the morality of Quality. Imho. Marsha, the fool -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Andre Broersen Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 4:54 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [MD] What a wonderful world Marsha to Andre: Interesting thing, I am not Lao Tsu, nor ever claimed to be someone like him. I do claim, though, no matter what I investigate it turns out to be not this, not that. If I seem foolish for saying so, than maybe I am foolish. Andre: Which makes you a wise woman Marsha. Some posts ago there was a suggestion that we lived in a SOM world (or a world dominated by SOM). What a load of crap. The world is. We make it what it is ( a bit like chapter 14 in Lila)and Cat Stevens singing: Love, we make it what it is, love, can seal it with a kiss. There is always this layer of DQ 'underneath' the static stuff Marsha. It never is what you may think it is. You are wonderful and I like your paintings. Andre 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/ 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/
