--- Horse <horse@wasted.demon.nl> wrote:
>
> The program for August will be:
>
> Explain why the Dynamic is more moral than the static.
> We cannot leave this hanging. For
> example, we could grade morality, ala Ken Wilbur, based
> upon the degree of pattern as a
> whole and as a part. The problem here is that this is
> not just adding to the MOQ, it is
> CHANGING it. However, it solves LOTS of problems!
Hi All,
A brief contribution before heading off back to Lurkerville
for what promises to be a good month...
DQ is more moral than the static ONLY when the static has
been mastered. When we attend to the day to day 'square'
routines- washing the dishes, making the beds, folding
laundry, etc. When we find meditative pleasure in the
loading of the dishwasher- devising a logically structured
system of placement, when we have settled with contentment
on the sequence in which cleaned dishes and utensils are
removed from the dishwasher and returned to their familiar
places, when we have arrived at the place where this
routine is performed with grace, a cultivated habit of
detachment from mind-wa/onderings such as what we will DO
next, silencing for a while the at times persistent inner
voice. Then later, perhaps sitting comfortably at the
piano, warming up with a few scales, arpeggios, then the
eyes, fingers, keys, crotchets and quavers, vibrations
blend into one and this is it! This is J S Bach! Only a few
bars, but tomorrow, after the dishes, after the bedtime
stories, the songs, the hugs, and the kisses, there may be
more where this came from.
Mark
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites.yahoo.com/
MOQ.org - http://www.moq.org
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:03:25 BST