Hey Khoo, You make a couple of assertions that appear not to be supported by the MOQ and thus cast doubt on your explanation.
First, you say "Morality is served by reducing suffering, either palliatively or removing it forever permanently." In direct contradiction Pirsig says, "If you eliminate suffering from this world you eliminate life. There's no evolution. Those species that don't suffer don't survive. Suffering is the negative face of the Quality that drives the whole process." (Lila,29) Second, you say "It follows that the MOQ also tells you that you can give up choice-making altogether and live in the reality of the dynamic present where there are no static level choices to make." Give up choice-making? Can't be done if you want to live (except temporarily while meditating)..Pirsig writes: "It looks as though Keith is looking for something he can SEE. And he thinks values are not something he can SEE and therefore are not empirical. But if you think values are not empirical, try removing every trace of them from the world as we understand it and see what is left. You can't even get out of bed in the morning without making a value judgement that it is better to do so." (LC, Note 124) So I'm afraid you haven't cleared up your explanation of the original contradiction for me. But I do appreciate the attempt. Perhaps I'm missing something. Best, Platt On 20 Feb 2010 at 18:56, Khoo Hock Aun wrote: > Platt, > > Platt earlier asked: > If Zen is the key to understanding reality and if reality is best understood > as "picking and choosing" among values, a process that Zen avoids, a > contradiction arises. > > Khoo explaiined: > > BTW, Platt, this should also clear up the contradiction you see, > > Pirsig cites the choices for a universal moral order in the context of > > evolution and this is different from the non-choice in a Zen stance > required for personal > > detachment. > > Platt replied: > > > Seems to me that it would be impossible for anyone to have "a Zen > > stance for personal detachment" (or any other stance for that matter) > > without the context of evolution. > > But admitted: > > > But, I could be wrong. > > > Khoo explains again: > > The world, the universe as a moral order is constantly changing in the state > of evolution (or devolution, depending on which part of the universe you are > in and at which period of time). As an individual within this world, this > universe, this moral order, you participate in this evolutionary process. > through your choices: be they biological, social or intellectual. > > The betterness sought (or the purpose of the moral order) with each > improving pattern of value is to provide comfort to the individual, no > matter that its temporary, never permanent or to provide avenues for a > permanent exit - from this world, universe or moral order. Compassion is the > primary driving force here - no matter how good a swim you are having now, > every one suffers sooner or later. Morality is served by reducing suffering, > eiher palliatively or removing it forever permanently. > > As long as you are in this moral order, you make choices and it goes on > without end. It takes a certain perspective to see this happening. And to do > this is to see Reality as it is; through all the patterns around you. And it > takes a definite process to get there. It may be called Zen, it may be > called by many other names. But the moment you decide that this is enough, > you begin to adopt that Zen like stance: to begin the process of personal > detachment and achieve your "satori" moment. This entails not having to > choose at this point and for all time. And this is a dynamic event. > > Life as we know it is all about making choices; and the MOQ provides a > framework for making a better moral choice if you continue to remain part of > evolution by illustrating the various static levels the choices before you > represent. It follows that the MOQ also tells you that you can give up > choice-making altogether and live in the reality of the dynamic present > where there are no static level choices to make. It is not that the static > level choices have stopped presenting themselves; they still do. But you > have made the ultimate choice of Dynamic Quality over static quality and the > illusions of all patterns disappear. > > In a way, you have opted out of evolution. It is a choice of personal > salvation. The Tibetans provide specific methodology for this in their Book > of the Dead. We are presently in the bardo of living. Between the bardo of > dying and the bardo of becoming, your consciousness exits this human plane > enroute to the next birth. Imagine the vector as the force of all the > choices you have made in your recently deceased life (actually preceding > lives as well). > > The summation of these choices now take you across a metaphysical terrain of > choices, patterns beyond and of the intellectual, social or biological that > we know on this plane. The choices in this bardo present themselves as > wombs Your choice of womb depends on what has been driving all your choices > from before. In this sense, deep down inside, you already know all the > choices you are going to make, accepting both the joy and pain they bring. > However, at this crucial point too, if you have prepared your mind and the > circumstances to achieve the Zen"satori", your consciousness would and could > choose not to be born again. And that would be IT. > > I hope this really clears it up for you, Platt. > > Best regards > Khoo Hock Aun > 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/
