[MD] Re Proposed solution to SOL/Intellectual level

[skutvik at online.no]

Hi Khoo

21 Jan.u wrote:

> Bo concludes after commenting on the half-baked SOM of the Orient and
> the woolly mess in its wake that: The Western MOQ will be a better
> "Buddhism"! I would certainly like to see this if it were to be so: } 
 
> What are we talking about here: An intellectual pattern better than
> another intellectual pattern...? 

Right, this is NOT what the MOQ is about. It is a metaphysics  that has 
a sub-set called "intellect", and I believe this is what Buddhism/Taoism 
also have realized, namely that "intellect" is the obstacle to Buddha or 
the Tao. 

> A Dynamic aspect better than its Static aspect?  

The Dynamic/Static configuration IS the MOQ and the two are 
interrelated, there can't be one without the other.   

> A better route than another route to Reality?             

A better REALITY!

> Is there a Western MOQ to begin with ? I do not remember Pirsig saying
> as such in either ZAMM or LILA ? 

To begin with ...? The MOQ emerged out of SOM and as such it is 
Western, but in its view the East is understood  and as I pointed out - a 
little tongue-in-cheek - makes for a better "Buddhism". To conquer the 
enormously strong SOM required an equally strong tool and IMO the 
level lay-out is that tool.        

> In what way will it be better?

As mentioned because the Oriental SOM did not grow so strong 
before the "Quality" breakthrough it caused a blurred border between 
intellect and Tao . At least how Westerners interpreted it, I remember 
reading Alan Watts before Pirsig, but being unable to grasp it.    

> The way Muslims say Islam is better ?
> The way Christians says theirs is better ?

No, no forget these low social patterns!! 

> Science says its better, because they seek the Truth,
> Nothing less nothing more.

Now, science - intellect's foremost pattern - is something else. I'ts 
MOQ's highest static level.

> Is this what the Western MOQ is about ? Truth Seeking, Reality Seeking,
> Morally Speaking ? Evolution on to Better State, Or an Ultimate Reality,
> an Ultimate Good ? That is better than the other "Good"s? Always better,
> never lesser. 

"Ultimate Reality" matches best IMO. And apropos this issue, I hope 
you agree with me that there is not a Buddha different from the one 
that Buddhism talks about, which corresponds to the silly Quality/MOQ 
"meta-metaphysics".    

Bodvar