Marsha said:

Let's not forget that bullets as patterns are ever-changing, inter-dependent 
and impermanent processes.   imho

Free-will is a static pattern of value, a conventional belief, not something 
ultimately real. So I neither accept 'free-will' nor reject 'free-will'; it is 
irrelevant from a MoQ point-of-view.

Andre:
I have lumped these lines together as they show the brilliant thinking, 
understanding and reasoning by a person called Marsha. She's been dogging this 
discuss for a while and it must be made absolutely clear that her thinking, 
reasoning and understanding has very little to do with Pirsig's MOQ. Rather it 
confuses it and misrepresents it in a most horrific way.

If 'bullets' are what she says they are they would, within the MOQ not be termed 
"bullets". The reason why 'bullets' can be designated as 'bullets' within the 
MOQ is precisely because they are stable inorganic patterns of value. They manifest in 
time. In fact their manifestation in time (and space)is so stable that they can be 
identified and designated as such. It seems very clear that Marsha has never been hit by 
this 'ever-changing' process. In other words she has never experienced it. She speaks 
'theory' and imagines all sorts of weirdo scenarios.

The only positive was her disclaimer: "imho', which, to me indicates that she 
is aware of the bucket she's in,the role she plays and the fun she has.

Marsha also argues that because something is only conventionally real, and not 
ultimately real she doesn't accept it as being relevant FROM A MOQ 
POINT-OF-VIEW!

Now this is serious.

Apart from the 'free-will' discussion that has been going on for a while Marsha 
claims it is irrelevant! Why is it 'irrelevant'? Because it isn't 'ultimately 
real'.

She cites Buddhist insights, Garfield, Nagarjuna and a host of others to 
substantiate her claims and fundamental position (of non-acceptance of 
anything...seemingly).

But my question to Marsha is  "why"? What point are you trying to make? What 
contribution are you trying to make to the MOQ by maintaining this position?

Did Siddharta Gautama, after his enlightenment experience say to the world: "Fuck 
you!" Nothing is ultimately real anyway so I accept nothing anymore? Nothing is 
real. You are all deluding yourself because all is ultimately unreal?

The really huge mistake you are making, my dear is that you imply that there IS 
something ULTIMATELY REAL. To wit: by constantly arguing that there is a notion 
of 'the way things REALLY are' and in this way separating it from 'convention' 
is misrepresenting the MOQ and misrepresenting Nagarjuna. It confirms my 
suspicion that you operate from theory alone (despite your counter that your 
meditative practices lead you to such a position as you hold and argue). I 
think you need a proper teacher!

Your notion and judgement of loads of discussions and references referred to on 
this discuss as reflecting merely 'conventional belief' and therefore 'not 
something ultimately real' is according to the Madhyamika incoherent.

You fail to see the point. As you apparently fail to see that (from your point 
of view 'despite' and from us [mere mortals] point of view 'because') Gautama 
Buddha developed his eight-fold path. Pirsig wrote ZMM and LILA, Christ left 
his legacy, Eckhart, Krishnamurti...there are of course scores of persons 
throughout history doing things with the insight that there is a ground stuff, 
a Quality, a Void, a Nothingness.

But they recognised it and BUILT on it! With compassion, care and dedication. 
They recognised that without sq there is no way of 'knowing' DQ.

YOU my dear nullify, disarm, annihilate and evaporate any well meant discussion 
about anything even remotely relevant. And all imho of course.

Time to have something to eat. 'Cos even though ultimately my food is not real, 
only being an ever changing inter-depending permanent process...it keeps my sq 
going . (See the stupidity of your thinking, reasoning and understanding? !!)






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