[MD] Reading & Incomprehension

[Mary]

Hi Bo,

> 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?
> 
[Mary Replies] 
"the immense weight of the SOM" had its origins in the Biological Level
where discreteness was primary.  This is part and parcel of the evolutionary
arrow of ego as life-preserver, life-sustainer.  SOM is the logical end of
the road for this path and cannot be otherwise, a necessary pattern of value
that obscures Patterns of Value.  There is no other logical conclusion one
can reach without a complete paradigm shift.  The paradigm shift was
Pirsig's achievement, and the enormity of it cannot be appreciated if your
own "metaphysical sock" has not been turned.

Best,
Mary