Hi Mark, The first division of the MOQ distinguishes between static quality and Dynamic Quality. Naturally, if it makes a distinction between the two, it says that these two things are fundamentally different. As it is the first division of the MOQ, also one would expect it to be important no? As I've said previously. The MOQ is a guide to life. Metaphysics, is a bunch of ideas that fundamentally describe reality. The MOQ explains reality and does it so beautifully that you can see how things work and then from that; make things better.
If you honestly believe, as you've said previously, that everything is already 'perfect' then I have nothing more to say to you. If someone thinks that everything is perfect then that person is no longer actively following any sort of 'undefined betterness'. In other words, you no longer want to become a better person. Even the most enlightened of people on this planet can't help but do something to change reality and thus move it in a direction for the better or worse. Which are you? > I agree with you in terms of discussion, that is not what I was > pointing at. Yes, when we share things in this way, it is through > static symbolism. There are also ways of sharing things in a dynamic > fashion. One must not confuse the words for what they represent. The > ever present moment is dynamic. Even remembering something happens in > the moment, and different every time. Much as some speak of mysticism > as something strange, the ever present is mysticism in action. This > moment can even be considered to be before the intellectualization, if > that make understanding what I am talking about. However, even the > act of intellectualization is dynamic quality. As I was reading your > post and writing this one, I was in the presence of dynamic quality. > > It may be that some are not tuned to recognize this, and feel they are > a little behind the present. This is impossible, we are never in the > past and never in the future. We are at the leading edge at all > times. I will agree with your sense of "capture" since words are not > what they represent, but analogies of something undefinable. As you > speak with words, the act is dynamic, but the result is static. I > hope this makes sense. Yes, this does make sense however I think that the word dynamic can confuse things where the MOQ brings clarity. If you mean that Dynamic Quality is fundamental and is the source of all things then I agree. Every thing is static quality. Including your reading my posts and my writing this one. All we can say about Dynamic Quality is that it makes things better. How it makes things better we cannot say because if we do then we are defining the undefinable. > [Mark] > If we do not realize that we live in the present, then I would say > that such living may be incomplete. There is nothing we can do about > living in the present, so why not realize it. So, what may be sad is > thinking a present moment as not complete in itself. Of course, sad > is a quality judgement that I can only feel for myself. I cannot > project such a thing, but I can encourage you to wake up. We can imagine that the present moment is complete. But if it is complete then why say anything? Why talk to me now? What do you mean by complete anyway? I think when we say that something isn't 'complete' we mean to say that it has low quality. Things with low quality grate on our conscience. Things with high quality no longer grate. It is only through the perfection of things that we can kill static quality. >> The MOQ is a guide to life. How does saying that every thing is static >> quality improve someone's life? > [Mark] > Absolutely MoQ is about the dynamic present, nothing more than that. > But such a thing is way more than enough as far as I am concerned. > This is why it is appropriate to bring in Zen, since that is all that > is about. The MOQ is more than simply Dynamic Quality. As I find myself constantly saying. Static quality is every thing. Your life, Mark, is static quality. Now that I'm beginning to see your viewpoint more clearly I can imagine you now pointing to Dynamic Quality and saying that it is your life. But Dynamic Quality is not yours or any one else's or any thing at all. Dynamic Quality is nothing. If you say Dynamic Quality is yours then that is saying Dynamic Quality is something static and Dynamic Quality isn't anything. > [Mark] > Yes, the Noble truths you point at are an attempt to drop this > illusion of static-ness. That is all I am point to as well. Of > course Dynamic Quality exists, you are in it as you read this post. > Sufferring is a result of the belief you are proposing that everything > is static. Suffering is static quality. Reading this post is static quality. Zen isn't about ignoring that everything is static quality. It is about facing it, head on, and getting it perfect, so that it no longer grates on ones conscience. > [Mark] > In my opinion, Zen is not about perfection, it is about being in the > present. One can do that by skiing down a slope, or just sitting on a > couch. Often for many, a distraction works the best, which is fine. Zen is all about perfection; being in the present is a result of perfection. If you do anything for the first time your conscience will be talking and mechanically thinking about how to do it and 'very loud'. But over time, if you care about that thing, and if you do that same thing over and over and over again, your mind will quiet down and without even really meaning to at all, you will become that thing. It's at this point someone is said to have perfected something. That is they are 'enlightened'. Ignoring something by doing something else, is not Dynamic Quality and not fine. >> 'Torments of the mind' is of course intellectual suffering and therefore; >> intellectual static quality. What's on your mind right now? I'm sure if you >> sit down in a room quietly your mind will tell you. And the more you sit, >> over time, the quieter your mind becomes. Your mind brings up the same thing >> over and over and over again and you think about the same thing over and >> over and over again. This is the mind 'perfecting' what's in it. >> Eventually, with little to feed it, the mind stops. The mind stopping in >> this way leaves nothing but Dynamic Quality. > > [Mark] > I think I have described my interpretation of dynamic quality, it is > available to anyone whether they like it or not. The only way to stop > the mind is to let it go free. Zen is not about stopping the mind, it > is about listening to the mind. How can you stop something that you > cannot control? Is there a part of the brain that is in full control? > If so, what is controlling that? By not perserverating on stopping > the mind or trying to think differently, one becomes free of the mind. > This is standard Zen as I understand it. It is also Taoism and > Buddhism. Of course all three are related as branches on a tree. Zen isn't about actively 'forcing' the mind to stop. That is called 'doing something'. Zen is about 'doing nothing'. The mind stopping is the result of the mind perfecting whatever is on it as I've described above. > [mark] > I hope I have convinced you otherwise. Don't listen to my words, > listen to what I say. I do. And as much as you or I or anyone else wish otherwise what you are saying is static quality. > [Mark] > Everything that is shared in words is an analogy. I suppose any > symbolism would fit in here, not just words. If I wink as someone, > that is pretty dynamic. Unfortunately, no. Winking is static quality and not Dynamic Quality. > [Mark] > I don't think a personal perspective is static as it is happening. If > I feel fear, that is pretty dynamic to me. There is that dynamic word again. If you mean Dynamic Quality then no, fear is not Dynamic Quality. > [Mark] > I get out of bed for another perfect moment. How about you? To me that seems to be a rather sad existence. To be experiencing just one long monotonous high of perfection your entire life? The highs and lows of life are what makes each just as valuable as the other. 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
