Moq txtbook version okt 2010 under 5.5 Nagarjuna
"In addition to the Dynamic Quality viewpoint of the moq corresponding to what Nagarjuna terms sunyatta(ie; the indeterminate or the world of the buddhas)(182) the static quality viewpoint of the moq also corresponds to sunyavada(ie, the conditioned component or world of maya)(183) of Nagarjuna. Sunyavada includes all conceptions of reality including metaphysikal views, ideals, religious beliefs, hopes and ambitions; in other words,using moq terminology, static quality patterns(184) Moreover, Nagarjuna shares Pirsig's perception that the indeterminate(or Dynamic) is the fundamental nature of the conditioned(or static) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Given the endconclusion Mc Watt makes,i agree on the above,as he phrases it, but in the endformulation after moreover,.....he left out the term Quality and the train Dynamic Quality, Static Quality, only to conclude with the two bare stripped endterms, Dynamic(as in dynamism, and static, as in statical.) what Ant is performing here is showing the congruence.Pirsig does the same, and both are recognising the hybrid form of reality,But both Pirsig and Mc Watt are very correct in the complete train, ie, recognising the hybrid form,write and recognise the synthesis,and conclude a in correct syntaxis. your point fails on syntaxis, not on the hybrid form or on the synthesis. You do have a point however, if i were in Ant's place i would have written the endsentence(conclusion) like this " Moreover, Nagarjuna shares Pirsig's perception that the indeterminate(or Dynamic) is part!! of the fundamental nature of the conditioned(or static)", . but imho!imho, carefull,i surely don't have Mc Watt's permission to change something Without the correct syntaxis,all word loose their meaning..... So no, i do not agree on your point.Its not monkeyproof. 2011/3/28 MarshaV <[email protected]> > > The full and exact paragraph: > > "Moreover, Nagarjuna (1966, p.251) shares Pirsig’s perception that the > indeterminate (or Dynamic) is the fundamental nature of the conditioned (or > static):" > > > > > > On Mar 28, 2011, at 2:05 PM, ADRIE KINTZIGER wrote: > > > Will check it out. > > > > Tag-team? nope, and i'm not hunting for squirrels. > > Have to download the txtbook again from Finland, my son took it with him. > > > > I can only agree on your point if it is a correct one. > > > > 2011/3/28 MarshaV <[email protected]> > > > >> > >> Adrie, > >> > >> Don't see anything but opinion here. You are entitled to yours, of > course. > >> But don't tell me that it is an argument disproving my statement. > >> > >> Check out page 102 of Anthony's Textbook; third paragraph. It is not > >> comparing the MoQ with Buddhism, but states clearly "Nagarjuna shares > >> Pirsig's perception" that the DQ (the indeterminate) is the fundamental > >> nature of static quality (the conditiioned). (Please note the primary > >> emphasis is on RMP's perception.) > >> > >> And boys, I'm not playing tag-team. > >> > >> > >> Marsha > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Mar 28, 2011, at 1:36 PM, ADRIE KINTZIGER wrote: > >> > >>> Nope, hate the intrusion really Marsha, but Horse is only defining one > of > >>> the main aspects... > >>> So he is correct, Marsha. > >>> > >>> Once Dynamic quality, becomes static fall-out or static Quality,it can > >> never > >>> recreate its own parent, the parent creates the child, the child cannot > >>> create > >>> its parent, only his own child, the progress on the arrow of Quality is > >>> time, > >>> time makes it so,so one of the aspects of Dynamic Quality, is that it > >> cannot > >>> go back to the past. > >>> > >>> A new wave is never a copy of the old one . > >>> > >>> Quality=>Quality=>Quality > >>> Time=>time=> time > >>> > >>> past<=past<=present=>future=>future > >>> > >>> > >>> 2011/3/28 MarshaV <[email protected]> > >>> > >>>> > >>>> Horse, > >>>> > >>>> I might add that stating that 'Dynamic Quality' is undefinable is > >> defining > >>>> it. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Marsha > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Mar 28, 2011, at 12:31 PM, MarshaV wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Horse, > >>>>> > >>>>> Try this: > >>>>> > >>>>> I haven't seen any argument that refutes that the fundamental nature > of > >>>> sq is DQ. > >>>>> > >>>>> Do you want to answer the question: Might you agree that ice is not > >>>> other than water? > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Marsha > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> On Mar 28, 2011, at 11:45 AM, Horse wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Hi Marsha > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 28/03/2011 10:55, MarshaV wrote: > >>>>>>> Stating that "sq is not other than DQ" does not leave sq out; it > >>>> includes both > >>>>>> > >>>>>> It may include both terms but all this statement does is negate "sq > is > >>>> other than DQ" - i.e."it is not the case that SQ is other than DQ" and > >> that > >>>> is what is being disputed! Merely re-stating your previous statement > >> that > >>>> "DQ is sq and sq is DQ" using different words is no improvement > >>>>>> Static patterns are definable - DQ is not definable. Your statement > >> says > >>>> the opposite. Rather that both are definable or both are not. > >>>>>> If something is definable then how is it equivalent to the > >> non-definable > >>>> - or vice-versa? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Horse > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> > >>>>>> "Without music to decorate it, time is just a bunch of boring > >> production > >>>> deadlines or dates by which bills must be paid." > >>>>>> — Frank Zappa > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 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 > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> parser > >>> 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 > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > parser > > 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 > -- parser 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
