dmb,
On Sep 27, 2013, at 3:21 PM, david buchanan wrote: > Marsha said to Andre: > Yes, I get that, and I am not using [ unpatterned ] as "nothing there" or as > "all is quiet"; I am using it as stated in the rest of the quote. > > Marsha said to dmb: > Dynamic Quality is not knowable, not definable, not divisible, not bounded, > not patterned, not dualistic, "not this, not that"; there is nothing to > change. > > > dmb says: > > Oh, I see. Sometimes DQ does NOT mean "nothing there" but later, if it's > convenient for you or whatever, DQ does mean "there is nothing". > > Sigh. > > You are totally without credibility, Marsha, and your blatant dishonesty is > an embarrassment. Marsha: I stand by my previous statement that I am not using [unpatterned] as "nothing there" or as "all is quiet". "My most recent statement was "there is nothing to change". That does not exclude, as Kategiri Roshi stated, "Within nothingness there is a great working”. The full statement from the textbook: "It’s worth noting that Pirsig (1997d) also thinks the term ‘patterned’ would suffice as a synonym for ‘static quality’ and ‘unpatterned’ for Dynamic Quality. However, these terms weren’t used for the MOQ because there is a problem of ambiguity with ‘unpatterned’ that is similar to the one of ‘nothingness’: ‘“Unpatterned” might work as well except that “unpatterned” suggests that there is nothing there and all is quiet. There is nothing in the sense of no “thing”, that is, “no object”, and the Buddhists use nothingness in this way, but the term Dynamic is more in keeping within the quotation, “Within nothingness there is a great working”, from the Zen master, Kategiri Roshi.’" See for yourself. Marsha ___ 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
