RE: MD Self-Evident MoQ Truths

From: Paul Turner (paul@turnerbc.co.uk)
Date: Tue Aug 16 2005 - 17:18:01 BST

  • Next message: Erin: "Re: MD Why Platt, Sam, Matt K, Scott and Erin must go"

    David H,

    >> Paul: I am saying that, in the MOQ, the experience of Dynamic Quality is
    >> privileged over static patterned experience because it is the source of
    >> static improvement i.e., the ongoing expansive force of evolution. If it
    >> were privileged just because it was 'unpatterned nothingness' then I
    >would
    >> think that would be akin to Dynamic Quality being no more than a chosen
    >> object of religious worship.
    >
    >I disagree, I think it is 'no more than a chosen object of religious
    >worship' when it is encaptulated within a concept such as 'I follow DQ only
    >because it improves me' thus becomming a pattern and
    >not DQ.

    Paul: I didn't say anything like 'I follow DQ only because it improves me'.
    I was considering the MOQ moral hierarchy with respect to Dynamic Quality
    being at the top but, anyway, let's take this conversation all the way to
    its end. "DQ" is a static conceptual pattern, "undefined Quality" is a
    conceptual pattern, "nothingness" is a pattern, "Buddha" is a pattern etc.
    Throw away LILA and ZMM and shut down this forum.

    >> If describing Dynamic Quality as the expansive
    >> force of evolution "wraps it up" then so be it. If this is the case,
    >Pirsig
    >> spends most of LILA "wrapping up" Dynamic Quality.
    >
    >I agree, I too think that Pirsig 'wraps up' "undefined Quality" but as soon
    >as he does he distances himself from the concept immediately by creating
    >the very first two divisions, 'defined' (Static)
    >Quality and 'undefined' (Dynamic) Quality.

    Paul: That division is a pattern too. And as I said, throw away LILA
    because the role of Dynamic Quality in the MOQ is described throughout.

    >>>Yes a hit of smack can be considered pure DQ...
    >>
    >>
    >> Perhaps, but I am trying to distinguish the unpatterned degenerate and/or
    >> chaotic from the unpatterned evolutionary experience by saying that
    >Dynamic
    >> Quality precedes, and is the only cause of, static improvement and is not
    >> simply a blissful state of pleasurable nothingness.
    >
    >Since when according to the MOQ was a 'blissful state of pleasurable
    >nothingness' a bad thing?

    Paul: When it is a biological pattern which is destructive to social
    patterns, like heroin can be.

    >> I would generalise that
    >> the experience of heroin tends to be highly biologically addictive,
    >> destructive of social patterns, and therefore degenerate.
    > > However, you are,
    >> of course, at liberty to demonstrate that heroin use constitutes a
    >Dynamic
    >> advance.
    >>
    >
    >To me, that heroin taking is degenerate on the larger scale is another
    >issue entirely, but at the most immediate level, Dynamic Quality is
    >everywhere/nowhere, while doing anything/nothing.

    Paul: Another patterned conceptualisation of Dynamic Quality which would
    have been better off not written.

    >> I think
    >> enlightenment is the awareness of the 'impermanence' or 'emptiness' of
    >> static patterns, including one's own, and this can occur anywhere and can
    >be
    >> brought about in many different ways and at many different 'depths'.
    >With
    >> respect to my own limited 'acquisition' of this awareness, for example, I
    >> feel my experience was 'shallow', but at the time, enough, and it was
    >> certainly unexpected, occurring neither in a Zendo nor anywhere near a
    >> motorcycle. For the record, I don't claim to be an 'awakened one' and my
    >> own development of this awareness would consist in the cultivation of the
    >> ability to perceive Dynamic Quality or static quality at will.
    >>
    >> With respect to my relating Dynamic Quality to the improvement of static
    >> patterns being a supposed infringement on the undivided nothingness of
    >> enlightenment, I think this 'nothingness'** is only the goal of e.g. Zen
    >> Buddhism insofar as it provides an experiential awareness of the lack of
    >> inherent self-existence of all 'things'. I think Zen aims to push past
    >the
    >> 'lip service' which many people pay to this awareness and go deep enough
    >to
    >> put it 'beyond doubt'. However, I don't think this represents an
    >'arrival'
    >> at some place in which static quality has been permanently left behind.
    >
    >I agree.

    Paul: Great.

    Regards

    Paul

    A Monk asked Yun Men, "What are the teachings of a whole lifetime?"
    Yun Men said, "An appropriate statement."

    MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
    Mail Archives:
    Aug '98 - Oct '02 - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
    Nov '02 Onward - http://www.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/summary.html
    MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net

    To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
    http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Aug 16 2005 - 18:15:33 BST