Greetings Platt 4 Feb. : you said to me: > Your phrase "Q-context" suggests to me that all talk about reality > suffers from the same misunderstanding as when a passage excerpted > from a speech or article is said to represent an author's view but > really isn't because the passage was "taken out of context."
> Often you have used the metaphor of an ocean where the peaks and > valleys of the waves represent the mind/matter separation but both > occur within the reality "context" of the Quality ocean. Right, but it was more to visualize the dynamic/static dualism in general: Inorganic value an enormous long ocean swell, biology a lesser, but still gigantic wave on top of that ... with the intellectual wave on top. However still smaller ripples can form on intellect's "surface", yet, making mind/matter such a ripple evokes the impression of the M/M being an intellectual PATTERN, but it's just another variety of the S/O which is intellect itself. I'm hysterical afraid of "heresy" here. I don't think you intended any its just me ;-) > Likewise I'm > reminded of the metaphor of the fish who when asked, "How do you like > being in the ocean?" replied, "What ocean?" We are as the fish, > largely ignorant of the Quality ocean of our existence. Pirsig hints > at the same metaphor in the following from Lila (30): Yes, this metaphor is perfect.. > "The south wind was stronger here and it cooled him. It was steady, > like a trade wind. Nothing interfered with its flow toward him over > the huge ocean. 'Vast emptiness and nothing sacred.' If ever there was > a visible concrete metaphor for Dynamic Quality this was it." > > As you say, the intellectual level -- whose evolution you have nicely > traced from appearance/reality to illusory/real to > subjective/objective to mind/matter -- exists within the Q-context. To > use intellect's rhetorical ingenuity to describe that which brings > intellect into being is like the proverbial tongue trying to taste > itself. Matt did it too - inadvertently - for now he tries to eel out of it. > It is through art and beauty that we directly experience the Quality > that otherwise remains a faint intuition as we go about the daily > business of fending off the forces of the inorganic, biological and > social levels with the armaments of intellect. But at day's end, the > Quality context makes itself known as we settle down at the hearth > with a cup of hot buttered rum. > Warm regards, Agree and thanks, also for your warmth, it's a cold spell over Norway and most of Europe right now, has been so for a long time. It's been cold over much of the USA too and recently I heard that "global warming" has been sustituted by "climate changes" (the cold too) and that's just what we used to call varying weather. Bodvar . > Platt > > > > On 4 Feb 2010 at 21:02, [email protected] wrote: > > > Hi Khoo > > > > 3 Feb. > > > > Bo before: > > > > How I envisage the MOQ as a "western buddhism" I have told many > > > > times No particular enlightenment is required except > > > > understanding the MOQ, but that seems to be the needle eye for > > > > the camels. > > > > Khoo: > > > But how would it work if there is no enlightenment necessary? Is > > > there a methodology to achieve the understanding of the > > > Metaphysics of Quality ? How would you guide the enquirer/camels > > > through the needle into a proper understanding of the Metaphysics > > > of Quality? Is there an "aha" moment ? Is there a need for a > > > Guide? Or is it a Do-it-Yourself kind of process ? > > > > Good (perhaps sarcastic?) questions. Yes i have wondered why > > Pirsig's ideas in ZAMM hit me so hard, why I in an flash saw the > > point, but have found that only one so tormented by (what I knew as) > > the mind/matter abyss as I were would recognize the immense relief > > in the prospect of my tormentor wasn't reality itself but a > > "metaphysics" having arrived at some point in time, and will go away > > the moment the MOQ takes hold. Well, it has taken hold of me so I am > > free, those poor buggers who don't know they are SOM captives can't > > be helped. > > > > At first in this discussion I thought this was why all people came > > to this site, but have been forced to realize that most are > > chatterbugs not having the least interest, wish or need for escaping > > SOM except seeing their posts "published", some professional > > "twitters" partaking on several lists simultaneously. But never mind > > the greatest disappointment was Pirsig himself launching a travesty > > of the ZAMM epiphany of SOM being Quality's creation ... CALLED > > INTELLECT. This is the hub, kernel,crux of it all. About 3 levels > > before the 4t. - intellectual - is perfect, but that one must be SOM > > or the MOQ is just more SOM! > > > > And I thought that you - of Oriental origin at least - knew that to > > achieve enlightenment the "intellect" must be transcended. The > > silliest of discussers make a great point of me insisting on the MOQ > > being something beyond the intellectual level, but it the > > perspective where the "Q-context is seen. Like the Buddha being the > > stance from where Buddhism context is seen. To say that the MOQ is > > an intellectual pattern prevents its release from SOM. OK, all this > > is what I said in "my string of reasoning", your objecting to it and > > me trying to bring it across again - will only result in more turns > > of the screw and I am a bit worn. > > > > Bodvar > > > > 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/
