[MD] Reading & Incomprehension

[skutvik at online.no]

Marsha, Andre.  

16 June. 

Marsha to Andre:
> With MoQ representing Reality = Quality(unpatterned
> experience(DQ)/patterned experience(sq)), there is no 'I' to be hit,
> and no-thing to hit it.   You write gibberish too.
 
When focus is on the "high ground" this applies, however, when it is on 
the static plane - with intellect our preferred abode -  there are 
subjective egos and objective bodies and the whole S/O menagerie.    

Andre:
> Upon first reading I thought this was a very astute observation Marsha
> but a second reading taught me that it is a rather silly one. The MOQ
> is a STATIC representation of reality. It is not Reality itself....

Your words flows so easily - like DMB's about all MOQ-talk taking 
place on "intellect" - you both have the immense weight of the SOM 
behind you, while I desperately try to carve out a foothold for a MOQ 
vocabulary . The notion of everything written or thought are subjective 
"representation" of something NOT subjective and thought, is so firmly 
cemented that you feel a righteous fury if this is questioned. But what 
is revolution if not revolutionary?  

> Bodvar has objectified it and in this little response you have too. He
> loves it, he lives in it. For him it is experience itself!!! but the
> MOQ does NOT contain DQ! It's as dead as a doornail.
 
The SOM glasses are so firmly glued on your nose that if/when I say 
that the the DQ/SQ is reality you say I have "objectified" it. The MOQ is 
out of SOM and to escape it it had to show objectively how its system 
is best. But the moment it is established the S/O premises are limited 
to the static intellectual leve.       

Bodvar