Hi Marsha, OK. Sometimes I get confused when I hear an equation like Quality equals Emptiness. Perhaps it is my scientific training. Since neither are physical things per say, such equality is of course metaphysical. However, having said that, may I ask the following: Is Quality a branch of Emptiness, or the other way around, or neither? If we are looking for metaphysical structure, this may be important. I am not quite sure how people are using the word Reality these days, so I''ll skip over the reality part.
Now, if Value is not assigned to anything, then that is a new one for me. If I seem arrogant or to straightforward with my replies, please forgive me. I am a reactive human given to writing before thinking, otherwise I forget what I was thinking. So my questions are simply to further educate myself. I do yoga as well, mainly to make my body feel better. I have found it hard to get into any meditative discipline because I am too critical. I can only assume that my experiences are one big unfolding meditation, that way I do not have to put in much effort. Cheers, Mark On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 12:06 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Mark, > > There is to deepen one's understanding of both Quality and Emptiness, > both rationally and through experience. I am not a Buddhist. I am an > MoQ'ist. Yet the MoQ has given me insights into Buddhism, and > Buddhism has given me insights into the MoQ. Many paths, remember? > I had a history with yoga and Vedic texts, especially one by Patanjali. > There are also areas in quantum physics that seem to add a new and > important dimension. My quest complete? Heavens no!!! But be it > the MoQ or Buddhism, I do fall back on the fact that the MoQ is Reality > equals Quality(unpatterned experience/patterned experience,) and these > discussions are patterns of value, and ultimately represent not this, not > that. > > > Marsha > > > > > On Oct 6, 2010, at 2:37 PM, 118 wrote: > > > Hi Marsha, > > > > Hard to understand from this distance, I don't even know if you are > real... > > > > By saying that Quality and Emptiness are synonymous, what else is there > to > > say? There is plenty of literature, ritual, and lifestyle based on > > Emptiness. So, I don't think you can get away with an RMP statement that > > easily. If we are talking Buddhism, then you have finished your quest. > Me, > > I will continue building some strange structure. > > > > IMHO > > Mark > > > > On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 8:50 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > >> Mark, > >> > >> I expected that it would be understood to be a response to our posted > >> exchange. You, if I remember correctly brought up the subject of > >> "many paths." (Btw, in Ant's PhD, he(Anthony) mentions that RMP > >> claims that Quality and Emptiness are synonyms.) I really didn't see > >> that there was a more appropriate response to be made. And yes, > >> it was meant "all in good fun." > >> > >> > >> Marsha > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Oct 6, 2010, at 11:30 AM, 118 wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Marsha, > >>> What did you expect? We have some pretty rigorous definitionists > >> patrolling > >>> the posts. For what it's worth, I liked it. All in good fun. > >>> Mark > >>> > >>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 11:22 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Mark, > >>>> > >>>> I thought it just a sweet haiku indicating that each individual has > >>>> their own path. Sorry it became something else. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Marsha > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Oct 6, 2010, at 1:25 AM, 118 wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Yea, I agree DMB, relativity is a pretty useless concept. Now > >>>>> relationalism, that is a whole 'nother story. And I'm not talking > >> about > >>>> the > >>>>> opposite of absolutism, I'm talkin' Quality. > >>>>> > >>>>> I don't have any relatives that are dwarfs, so I can't comment on > >>>> Marsha's > >>>>> giant. > >>>>> > >>>>> Mark > >>>>> > >>>>> On Tue, Oct 5, 2010 at 1:11 PM, david buchanan < > [email protected] > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Marsha said: > >>>>>> RELATIVITY: > >>>>>> the tallest dwarf > >>>>>> meeting the smallest giant > >>>>>> - same size > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> dmb says: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> No, that's not what relativity means. Relativity means there is no > >>>> standard > >>>>>> by which to measure things like truth and moral values. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> What you have above is merely three sets of relations. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The dwarf is tallest in relation to other dwarves. > >>>>>> The giant is the smallest when compared to other giants. > >>>>>> In relation to each other, the dwarf and the giant are the same > size. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> As a practical matter, these relations do not depend on one's > >>>> perspective > >>>>>> or worldview. It just depends on whether or not you can get all the > >>>> dwarfs > >>>>>> and giants to stand next to a measuring tape. That's how you know > >> you've > >>>> got > >>>>>> the tallest dwarf in the first place. That's how you know all other > >>>> giants > >>>>>> are bigger. These are quantifiable facts and all three sets of > >> relations > >>>> are > >>>>>> true at the same time without contradiction. The term "relative" can > >> be > >>>> used > >>>>>> to mean "in relation to" or "by comparison with" but that doesn't > have > >>>>>> anything to do with the objectionable philosophical stance known as > >>>>>> relativism. If we say the dwarf is relatively tall, we don't mean > his > >>>> height > >>>>>> cannot be determined or that his height depends on one's > understanding > >>>> of > >>>>>> the term "tall". > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Words and concepts are relational in a similar way. As I like to > point > >>>> out, > >>>>>> the meaning of the terms "static" and "dynamic" is relational in the > >>>> sense > >>>>>> that "static" means the opposite of dynamic and "Dynamic" means the > >>>> opposite > >>>>>> of static. The meaning of each term is depends on not being the > other, > >>>> the > >>>>>> same way hot and cold or short and tall define each other by > >> opposition. > >>>>>> Words also derive their meaning by virtue of their relation to > context > >>>> in > >>>>>> which the term is being used. "Tall" can mean "highly exaggerated" > >> when > >>>>>> we're talking about tales, it can refer to the shape of a cocktail > >> glass > >>>>>> when talking to a bartender, it can mean "difficult" when we're > >> talking > >>>>>> about tall orders and tall obstacles. It can refer to a proud > posture > >> or > >>>>>> walking style as well as actual height. Many words are very flexible > >> and > >>>>>> have many different meanings depending on the context but again this > >> is > >>>> to > >>>>>> say that meaning is relational, not relative to the user. Words mean > >>>> what > >>>>>> they mean in relation to oth > >>>>>> er words and in relation to the context in which it's being used. In > >>>> other > >>>>>> words, we can't isolate the meaning of a term because it derives > it's > >>>>>> meaning from the whole language system. This is the net of jewels > idea > >>>>>> applied to words. Similarly, some philosophers talk about our "web" > of > >>>>>> beliefs. This image get across the idea that some concepts are more > >>>> central > >>>>>> than others, which is probably true. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Compared to the top of Mount Everest and the tallest short guy, the > >>>> Empire > >>>>>> State Building is shorter and taller at the same time. These are not > >>>>>> relative truths or opposed claims or two different views. It's > merely > >>>> two > >>>>>> different comparisons, two different facts. The building is never > >> going > >>>> to > >>>>>> be taller than the mountain and it'll never be shorter than any > >> person, > >>>> not > >>>>>> even the tallest giant. I don't mean to be some kind of yard-stick > >>>>>> fundamentalist. I'm just saying that relations are just as real as > >>>> anything > >>>>>> else and it's a part of what it means for something to be true and > >>>> right. > >>>>>> This could be called relationalism or relationism or wholism or > >>>>>> contextualism or situationalism. But relativity or relativism is > >>>> something > >>>>>> else entirely. It's the philosophical equivalent of combining > >> halitosis > >>>> with > >>>>>> leprosy. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 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/md/archives.html > >>>>>> > >>>>> 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/md/archives.html > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> ___ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> 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/md/archives.html > >>>> > >>> 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/md/archives.html > >> > >> > >> > >> ___ > >> > >> > >> 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/md/archives.html > >> > > 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/md/archives.html > > > > ___ > > > 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/md/archives.html > 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/md/archives.html
