Hi Dave, Do I sense a hint of sarcasm here? Perhaps disdain for the spiritual? If we follow the path that Pirsig discusses starting with Plato, this is where we end up. Welcome to the 21st Century in Western civilization. When one attempts to place Truth above Quality, we then create a disdain for the spiritual. Even Nietzsche talks of this. To ask for Truth in God is the same thing as asking for Truth of Quality, they are both nonsense inquiries.
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 7:05 PM, David Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > On 4/6/11 3:23 PM, "118" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Bobhism has been around for a long time, since about 600 AD. > [Dave] > So for you, Bob is Buddha incarnate. Sweet........... Well Dave, if you study Buddhism, you will learn that we are all incarnates of Buddha. We just have to realize that. As you know, Buddha was not his real name, but one given to him as a result of his enlightenment. That we can all achieve Buddhahood is indeed Sweet for many who want to go that way. As you know, Buddha lived about one thousand years before the time I provide above. No, I was referring to the rise of Zen in China. If you are saying that Pirsig is against Zen, then perhaps you are mistaken. Just a guess. > >> The early Zen Buddhists did not want people following scripture, or >> praying to idols or other people. > [Dave] > "Bobhism" is to Buddhism as Mormon is to Christian. Religions one and all > however. [Mark] Just curious, is the word religion being used in a derogatory sense here? I am just trying to understand you intentions with that above. Again, if you are saying that Pirsig does not ascribe to Zen, then you have not read interviews he has given. I am not sure what you mean by religion. Buddhism is a philosophy, how does it become a religion? Is it because people believe in it? If you believe in MoQ, does that make you religious? Or perhaps there is a fine differentiation that you make here. What would that be? Your knowledge of religion seems to be limited to dogma and not any personal experience. I could speak of parachuting in the same way. > >> That was an extreme anathema and >> demonstrated that such deciples were misled and caught up in words. >> Living in Quality has no words, it can't. We do not have enough time >> while we are in the present moment. Having said this, speaking is >> dynamic quality in action. This is not a paradox, it simply points to >> dynamic quality. Dynamic Quality is right now. > [Dave] > Oh, just go on and say it, Bob would've if he could've, "DQ IS GOD!", minus > the fuzzy white beard of course. > An individual personal God that is "just what you like", minus the "just" of > course. All you need is the will to believe. [Mark] Oh, oh, have I been trapped here? What do you believe in Dave? How much of it is will, and how much of it is brainwashing? Do you believe that what Pirsig proposes is good? Again, it would seem that your interpretation of God IS a fuzzy white beard. Go ahead, continue on the Western path and dismiss MoQ, it is all the same to me. It would appear that certain words evoke a reflex in your head. With that understanding, I could refrain from bringing up the word God, and just call it Quality. So, in that effort, I will say that DQ is Quality. Do you have a problem with that? Best! 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
