Andre, I didn't state that anatta was the same as 'small self'. I'll leave you with your personal evaluations. There is nothing here I wish to discuss.
Marsha > On Nov 15, 2013, at 5:06 PM, Andre <[email protected]> wrote: > > Marsha to Ron: > Notice the questions to Andre began with "who" and "whom"? The questions are > pertaining to anatta, or small self? > > Andre: > Who the heck do you think you are, on this discuss other than anatta? And, by > the way, you have it wrong. Anatta refers to 'no-self' which is different to > small self. To whom is Ron directing his question other than anatta which you > term 'small self'??? This is the world we live in and what we are!! Sq...we > ARE these patterns. And, oh...Big Self (no-self) has nothing to say. It is > silent...I experience this several times a day. But that is not the one > writing these lines. > > Marsha: > The questions in no way were meant to indicate that "the "right way" means > whatever one wants it to mean." > > Andre: > Marsha, there is something fundamentally wrong with the way you go about this > discuss. I'll refer to your 'apology' earlier today: > > 'There is so much not available in an email communication. I only see words > on a screen without any emotional cues. I tend not to want to make things > personal for that reason. I don't really know you at all. If I misread you > tone, I apologize. I too easily fall into the pattern of using past > experiences.' > > Andre continues: > > Do you not register that a human being types these words? Do you ONLY see > words and nothing else? > > This really confirms my (and some others') idea that you are so suspicious of > the intellectual level (in your mind= SOM)that you do not see or feel or hear > any living patterns behind the written language. Anti-intellectualism to a > sickly extreme. > > Do you think that you, on this forum discussing Pirsig's MoQ, are addressed > as anything other than your 'small self? (Yes, the world and all it's > inhabitants are an illusion...it's analogies all the way down and up and left > and right and centered and below and wherever you want them to be) AND SO ARE > YOU. > So why not behave as part of that illusion if you want to seriously engage in > discussions on this Discuss. > Avoiding discussions and appealing to 'anatta' (i.e. not-self) won't win you > any flavours or favours. It is a sickly way to escape...because that is what > it is. An ESCAPE and NOT a constructive way to creatively move a discussion > along or throw a completely different light on an old topic or simply answer > a question. NO! You use it as a way to wriggle through, to slither your way > out of any and every situation. > > You asked me the other day on your comment that 'If your speech is not useful > and beneficial,...it is better to keep silent.': > > I gave you my view and you answered:Record of what, and interpreted by whom? > Who is at the core of such opinion? > > It is very obvious that the 'record' you are referring to is your own (just > check the archives). Interpreted by many readers and participants of this > discuss. Who or what is at the core of such an opinion? > > I'll tell you Marsha: the one who wrote this is the one who reads this. And > if that is not clear enough: the one who reads this is the one who wrote this. > > Stop hiding and own up! > > > > 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
