On Fri, Sept. 14, 2011 at 5:02 AM, "MarshaV <[email protected]> wrote:
It's a little unfair to label it 'Marsha's argument for the Buddhist
'no-self',
given the following excerpts from the MoQ:
Annotation 29: “The MOQ, as I understand it, denies any existence of a
“self” that is independent of inorganic, biological, social or
intellectual
patterns. There is no “self” that contains these patterns. These patterns
contain the self. This denial agrees with both religious mysticism and
scientific knowledge. In Zen, there is reference to “big self” and “small
self.” Small self is the patterns. Big self is Dynamic Quality."
(RMP, Lila’s Child)
The MOQ, like the Buddhists and the Determinists (odd bedfellows)
says this “autonomous individual” is an illusion.
(RMP, Copleston)
"This Cartesian 'Me,' this autonomous little homunculus who sits behind
our eyeballs looking out through them in order to pass judgment on the
affairs of the world, is just completely ridiculous. This self-appointed
little editor of reality is just an impossible fiction that collapses the
moment
one examines it. This Cartesian 'Me' is a software reality, not a hardware
reality. This body on the left and this body on the right are running
variations of the same program, the same 'Me,' which doesn't belong to
either of them. The 'Me's' are simply a program format.
Talk about aliens from another planet. This program based on 'Me's' and
'We's' is the alien. 'We' has only been here for a few thousand years or
so.
But these bodies that 'We' has taken over were around for ten times that
long before 'We' came along. And the cells - my God, the cells have been
around for thousands of times that long."
(LILA, Chapter 15)
5.6 THE NOTION OF THE SELF
"An example of _sammuti-sacca_ is the concept of self. Pirsig follows
the Buddha's teachings about the 'self' which doesn't recognise that it
has
any real existence and that only 'nothingness' (i.e. Dynamic Quality) is
thought to be real." (McWatt, Anthony, 'AN INTRODUCTION TO
ROBERT PIRSIG’S METAPHYSICS OF QUALITY')
Annotation 77: "It's important to remember that both science and Eastern
religions regard "the individual" as an empty concept. It is literally a
figure
of speech. If you start assigning concrete reality to it, you will find
yourself
in a philosophic quandary".
(RMP, Lila’s Child)
Dear Marsha --
I didn't mean to impugn you personally for having INITIATED the 'no-self'
hypothesis, but rather to offer a caveat to Mark, with whom you've had some
disagreements, that my Essence hypothesis poses some of the same
difficulties in common.
Interesting, isn't it, that the idea of 'selfness' has been attacked by
atheists, nihilists, objectivists, Buddha and Pirsig alike. They all want
to deny themselves any claim to Reality, as if their "souls" would
contaminate it. And yet, they identify their "personhood" as real, are
counted as discrete individuals, and understand that it is they
themselves--who experience the world and interpret it valuistically.
In fact, since it is the self which experiences--and even Pirsig says
"experience is the cutting edge of reality"--there would be no world without
a self. Man's reality is a Self/Other relationship, no matter how you
define these terms. If you read my recent post to Mark, it may have
surprised you that I don't regard the "personal 'I'" as a metaphysical
reality. However, both Sensibility (awareness) and Value (Quality) are
derived from Essence, and the coupling of these attributes creates the Self.
In other words, you and I are essentially "value-sensible agents", and the
freedom with which we are empowered is a result of our autonomy in relation
to the Source.
Our function in existence is PRECISELY "to look out through [our sensory
organs] in order to pass judgment on the affairs of the world" as the
Cartesian 'ME' suggests.
Indeed, why else would we be here?
Try meditating on that point, Marsha. (It could provide the insight you're
looking for.)
Yours in the quest for meaning,
--Ham
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
