HI Marsha,

No, not criticisms, just inquiries into values.  Your pondering is as good
as mine.  I learn from it.

Mark

On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 12:00 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> Hi Mark,
>
>
> On Oct 6, 2010, at 7:41 PM, 118 wrote:
>
> > Hi Marsha,
> >
> > OK.  Sometimes I get confused when I hear an equation like Quality equals
> > Emptiness.
>
> I believe I stated that RMP used the word 'synonym' not 'equals.' . -  I
> didn't
> say that he said they were equal.  I might think that both concepts are
> analogies pointing in the same direction.
>
>
> > 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?
>
> The word 'branch' makes no sense to me, so maybe you need to think
> this out for yourself.
>
>
> > 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
>
> I think different people have different ways of pondering, and insights
> don't
> seem to have an absolute procedure for arriving.
>
> What happens if when meditating you just note the criticisms and let them
> drop away?  I may use watching my breath to help me when letting go is
> difficult.  But you probably know this, but even so, there are stressful
> times
> when this is difficult.  There was a time when my mind was so active during
> meditation that it seemed even my eyelids conspired against me.  Quiet
> and peace are good even if is for a few moments.
>
> I'm sorry.  You did not ask me about my meditation.  It's just that it is
> the
> BEST thing I ever did for my peace of mind and I'm not a hard-core
> meditator.
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > 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
>
>
>
> ___
>
>
> 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

Reply via email to