Hi Marsha, That is exactly what I do every morning. How did it get on youtube? Where are the hidden cameras? Mark
On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 10:19 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IgCrI4Za-f8&feature=related > > > > > On Oct 27, 2010, at 1:08 PM, 118 wrote: > > > No, no answers, just ideas. I use you guys to help me out. Your posts > are > > like gold. > > > > Mark > > > > On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 8:37 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> It seems like you have all the answers already. Okay. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Oct 27, 2010, at 10:42 AM, 118 wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Marsha, > >>> > >>> You will find me full of surprises, I have to walk on a razor's edge > >>> sometimes. You have noted that physics (Wallace) is providing some > >> support > >>> for Eastern thought through analogies in physics. Physics is an > >> excellent > >>> tool because of its high standing in our current society. It is a > matter > >> of > >>> convincing, and all descriptions are analogies which subscribe to > common > >>> sense. You are correct in the assumptions of truth being held by many > >>> scientific realists. There are many philosophers that point out its > >>> shortcomings. But, if the intention is to return back to a more > >> subjective > >>> appreciation, any tool will do. I am not waiting, I am just watching. > I > >>> have not control over any crowd behavior, I don't think you do either. > >> But > >>> what do I know, you may be stirring your cauldron right now (smiley > >> face). > >>> > >>> I believe we experience DQ through every moment of each day. The > >> reflective > >>> consciousness as discussed in Vedic thought is something that I take to > >> mean > >>> that mirror of the world that is created in a highly structured way by > >> our > >>> brains in order to interact in as simple a way as needed. Reflection > may > >> be > >>> considered one step removed (however it can also be classified as DQ > >> since > >>> it happens in real time, in the present), buy how often are we > >> reflecting? > >>> Out of the thousand of things that we experience every minute, only a > few > >>> of those are contemplated. No effort is needed to obtain first hand > DQ, > >> all > >>> it takes is some discipline in mindfulness to recognize it. This is > the > >> Zen > >>> way. We have discussed this before, and indeed it is discussed in ZMM > >> when > >>> attention is payed to motorcycle maintenance. If we are expecting > >> something > >>> more, then there are always drugs...Once they legalize Mary Jane here > in > >> CA > >>> there may be lots of DQ, right before the car crash. > >>> > >>> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 12:49 AM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Mark, > >>>> > >>>> You surprise me. It sounds like you're going to wait for the Great > >> White > >>>> Scientific Hope, wearing a white hat, to ride up on his white horse, > >>>> Physics, > >>>> to save the day? As best I can figure out, most physicists are still > >>>> scientific > >>>> realists and ignore the quantum enigmas. It's interesting because I > >>>> always > >>>> thought the drive of the MoQ was to experience first-hand DQ, "pure > >>>> experience" or the Undifferentiated Continuum, not just to talk about > >> it. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Marsha > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Oct 26, 2010, at 7:33 PM, 118 wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Hi Marsha, > >>>>> I'll get to that book when I find it in the library, sounds > >> interesting. > >>>> If > >>>>> one were to divide metaphysics into the contemplation of the > subjective > >>>> and > >>>>> contemplation of the objective, I would state that the pendulum has > >> swung > >>>>> very far into the objective. The recent rise of esoteric religions > >> such > >>>> a > >>>>> theosophy and new age dreams are adding weight to bring the pendulum > >> back > >>>>> down the other way. It is indeed dark ages for subjective > >> contemplation, > >>>>> and in that sense, man is at a very low point at this period in time. > >>>>> Sciences such as physics are breaking through however and it is just > a > >>>>> matter of time. The Tao is unchangeable in the end, swinging back > and > >>>>> forth. > >>>>> > >>>>> Mark > >>>>> > >>>>> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 1:20 PM, MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Hi Mark, > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Why wait for some scientific future to come true when there is an > >>>>>> immediate need. There is this twenty-five hundred-year-old > >>>>>> tradition that has been working on just such a science of mind. > >>>>>> From what little I understand they use both rationality and special > >>>>>> introspective techniques. To remind you: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> "Upon first learning of mental states described in traditions > outside > >>>> of > >>>>>> one's, there is a natural tendency to seek counterparts in one's own > >>>>>> background or in the knowledge of one's native culture. For many > >> people > >>>> it > >>>>>> si difficult to acknowledge the possibility that the attainment of > >>>>>> quiescence may have no counterpart in Western civilization, that the > >>>>>> contemplative science of ancient India made advances that the West > has > >>>> not > >>>>>> duplicated. Especially over the past five hundred years, the West > has > >>>> made > >>>>>> tremendous advances in developing physical instruments to aid us in > >>>>>> exploring the world. Such research instruments have enabled us to > >> probe > >>>>>> deeply into the nature of physical phenomena, but they offer no > direct > >>>>>> access to mental events. The mind is the only instrument capable of > >>>>>> examining all types of natural events --- including both the > physical > >>>> and > >>>>>> mental. But in terms of refining human awareness in the development > >> of > >>>>>> stability and clarity as described above, Western civllization has > >> made > >>>> no > >>>>>> progress since the Scientific Revolution. In this field of > >>>> contemplative > >>>>>> science ours is a backward, underdeveloped culture. If we wish to > >>>> explore > >>>>>> these Buddhist theories and practices further, we are well advised > to > >>>>>> proceed not with blink faith, but with our full powers of critical > >>>>>> intelligence. In so doing we follow the advice that the Buddha gave > >> to > >>>> his > >>>>>> monks when he counseled: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> O monks, sages accept my words after examining them well-- > >>>>>> like gold after it has been melted, cut and rubbed--but not out > >>>>>> of devotion [for me]. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> (Wallace, B. Alan, 'Choosing Reality, : A Buddhist View of Physics > and > >>>> the > >>>>>> Mind',2003,pp.198-199) > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Oct 26, 2010, at 12:08 PM, 118 wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> There is some discussion on the use of the subject-object analogy > in > >>>> MOQ > >>>>>>> discuss, and the attributes of Value to such an analogy. This > bears > >>>>>> inquiry > >>>>>>> as it could also be interpreted that such an analogy is at the > heart > >> of > >>>>>> many > >>>>>>> religions. This SO divide brings out the search for the true > >>>> subjective. > >>>>>>> Vedic philosophy can be interpreted to have assigned such > subjective > >>>> the > >>>>>>> “I”. That is the “I” that is witnessing what I appear to be. In > >> such > >>>>>>> philosophy, that subject is compared to a vibration or a hum. > >> Buddhist > >>>>>>> thought which arose from such Eastern tradition, used intelligent > >>>> thought > >>>>>> to > >>>>>>> describe the subjective as not inherently existent, and described > >> such > >>>> a > >>>>>>> concept with a co-dependent arising metaphor. More recently, > >> Christian > >>>>>>> metaphors were interpreted by Kierkegaard, who proposed that the > >>>> ultimate > >>>>>>> union of the subjective and objective could be achieved through > >> extreme > >>>>>>> belief and devotion, requiring a leap. Much existentialist > >>>>>> interpretation > >>>>>>> followed his lead, including Heidegger’s “Being”. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> In terms as what is referred to as Western philosophy, it is the > >>>> opinion > >>>>>> of > >>>>>>> this author that the subject-object analogy was converted to an > >>>>>>> object-object description. That is the comparison of two objects. > >>>> Plato > >>>>>>> provided such description by objectifying the subjective. More > >>>> recently, > >>>>>>> Descartes further congealed the objectification of subjectivity by > >>>>>> defining > >>>>>>> it as thought. The statement “I think, therefore I am” suggests > that > >>>>>>> thinking is the underlying presence of self. Previously, in the > >>>> Eastern > >>>>>>> thought described above, thinking was something that the self > >>>> experienced > >>>>>> as > >>>>>>> an object. The description of the objectified sense of thought as > >> the > >>>>>>> subjective sense of "I" has more recently led to notions by > >> scientific > >>>>>>> materialism that the self can be explained physically through > >>>> appropriate > >>>>>>> investigation into the brain itself. Such studies are ongoing, but > >>>>>>> difficult. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Western considerations of the subject-object confused the subject > >> with > >>>>>> the > >>>>>>> object. The metaphorical root of this transition could arise from > >> the > >>>>>> use > >>>>>>> of language. As a matter of logistics, language must express the > >>>> subject > >>>>>>> object idea as object-object to be useful. Subject-object > >> Metaphysics > >>>>>>> cannot be discussed without the objectifying of the subjective > side. > >>>>>>> Indeed, the conversion of thought into words is a process of > >>>>>>> objectification. Is this notion therefore something that creates > a > >>>>>>> roadblock and cannot be truly discussed due to the structure of > >>>> language, > >>>>>>> and something that we have no control over? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Perhaps, but consider the following thought experiment (science > >> fiction > >>>>>> as a > >>>>>>> metaphor). At some time in the future, the principle of telepathy > >> will > >>>>>> have > >>>>>>> been understood and harnessed. There would be direct communication > >>>>>> between > >>>>>>> brains through some kind of brain-wave harnessing. Would such > >>>>>> communication > >>>>>>> be in the form of words? The answer is no. There would be no need > >> for > >>>>>>> words since entire awareness could be communicated. Words would be > >>>>>> bypassed > >>>>>>> so that entire appreciations could be conveyed such as the sense > one > >>>> gets > >>>>>>> when looking at a painting. This would mean that thoughts as words > >>>> would > >>>>>>> not be necessary, and words would only be used temporarily over > long > >>>>>>> distances if there were no other means of communication. Such > words > >>>>>> would > >>>>>>> be considered primitive communication, like the telegraph is now. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The awareness of how words form our subject-object metaphysics is, > in > >>>> the > >>>>>>> opinion of this author, a fruitful interpretation which is provided > >> as > >>>>>>> analogy. Through the development of such metaphors it is possible > to > >>>>>>> appreciate (or create) some more meaningful underlying principles > (or > >>>>>>> metaphors). > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> The opinions expressed in this post are the author's and do not > >>>>>> necessarily > >>>>>>> represent positions of the MOQ. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Mark > >>>>>>> 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
