Hello Khoo and all, [Khoo Said] The subject-object dichotomy rests on the belief of a permanent "self" and a permanent "edifice" to build social and intellectual patterns around... On what basis does your concept of the permanence of a static level arise anyway ? ... The human "self" itself one of these manifestations, evolved from enfolded and implicate patterns in a universe of interdependent origination, is set on an unconscious course to persistently and ceaselessly recreate itself and in countless manifestations... The "self " referred to in Buddhism is an aggregation of the senses of mind and matter; a thinking "self" capable of generating intellectual concepts and a physical "self" capable of defining a physical identity through its five sense-doors. It would be different if by self-awareness the "self" were aware that it has no "self". The self is a pattern that is also transitory - as with all other patterns - and
[Mary puts emphasis to Khoo's words here] the persistence of the "self" in convincing itself that it is permanent is central to the subject-object divide. But this self has no permanent existence in itself. [Mary comments] The entirety of Western Civilization is founded on the premise that the self is real and that nothing else matters. I tried to express this in a feeble way previously by talking about the Ego, and was met with dead silence in this forum precisely because this is an untouchable subject. The Ego, I am convinced, is/was necessary for survival, and is an artifact of the Biological level. It was commandeered by the Social level at some point, and made to serve different masters, but is unchanged. It is deeply embedded in the human psyche and is the root of all emotion. ALL Western religions are based on the premise of preserving the Ego (the Self). There is no higher calling in the Western world than worshipping and paying homage to the almighty Ego. That "God made Man in his own image", is an enormously Ego affirming idea. My own Southern Baptist grandfather was buried in a sealed metal enclosure containing his casket precisely because he believed he would be coming back on judgment day and that original body must be preserved. But it is a secret. In the Orient, at least, Ego is out in the open, perhaps because it is seen for what it is? Perhaps it does not hold the supreme power is has over here? Orientals have a publically acknowledged concept of "saving face". You would NEVER hear somebody say that out loud in the West. Though we are all totally in service to the care and feeding our individual Egos, we persist in the fiction that it does not exist, or if it does, it should not be discussed in polite company. To admit that you are angered by something because it bruises your Ego is incredibly embarrassing in the West. You will never hear a church discuss Ego, yet every single thing they preach is designed in a round-about way to reassure its followers of the preservation of their unique, individual, personal Ego for eternity. In the West, to even admit out loud that you have one is shameful. I feel a deep resonance with your words from 2003. If you are not a Westerner, you may not realize that Pirsig was really pretty smart. I don't recall his mentioning the word Ego once in his books. If he had, he would have been doomed to ridicule by one and all. He knew better, I think, and that is why I say that the MoQ is his attempt to make Buddhism understandable to the West. By constructing the levels and the static patterns, and by refusing to explain DQ in other than the most cursory way, he gave us Westerners the gift of a little bit of insight without offending our Egos. We would not have stood for that and he knew it. SOM is a construct of the Ego, and I am as rooted in it as anybody else. As a Westerner, I have no idea where to go with this, but I've managed to come to the conclusion that the Ego changed long ago from the life-saving mental construction it originally was needed to be, into the most damaging thing possible when combined with higher-order intelligence. Unfortunately, as I already said, the entirety of Western Civilization is founded upon its care and feeding. Every social, political, corporate, and religious institution we have is founded on it. Pirsig saw this, I feel certain. Thank you, Khoo, for your re-post. Mary [Khoo continues] Static Quality in itself is therefore neutral, neither good nor bad, as patterns go - however the clinging and the desire to persist as patterns is not good in any form. In buddhistic terms the karmic vector of attachment, the driving force of the patterns, does not lead to Good... The manifestation of a "self" distinct and separate from a universe of objects, is brought about by an attachment to inorganic, biological, social and intellectual patterns and this attachment is an immensely powerful, at times overpowering force for the "self" to persist and perpetuate over and over again. ... In Buddhism, the letting go of a pattern, of any pattern, is considered good, and each step in this direction is a step taken towards realising nirvana or in my view, Dynamic Quality. Dynamic Quality here is, as Static Quality is - neutral. The morality of our actions hence is determined by the degree with which we cling on to static quality (patterns of any value) or release a static quality (patterns of any value) of its hold on our imagined "selves". ... The intellectual patterns generated by the mind can extremely addictive - and many "selves" are totally absorbed by them to the detriment of everything else. Intellect may help the "self" to understand reality but can never help the 'self" to achieve a direct experience of reality. As I have mentioned before, I believe intellect to be vicarious knowledge: the mind's idea of reality not a direct experience of reality itself. The intellect may also lead the "self" to imagine it as an individual with inherent rights on the basis of its intellect and consider that the individual is superior to all other patterns beneath it. The intellect generates patterns of Static Quality, but when combined with notions of individuality, becomes an intellectual level separated from Dynamic Quality, a metaphysical dead-end. 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/
