[MD] Some Abominable Beliefs-Part 2

[Heather Perella]

Case, dmb, and others,

     I can't say all that Pirsig mentions about
mysticism.   But how I understand it, I do remember
this one question Pirsig had:  "What is quality?"  To
not be able to answer this question without having the
answer change on us (to use your understanding of Lao
Tzu's we can't name the unnamed), is accepting the
dynamics of quality (DQ).  Not being locked into a
static answer of quality, yet, being able to provide
some definition to quality, that it is significant,
has value, etc... is to apply a static definition to
quality, but not locking that definition goes back to
the dynamic aspect of quality.  So here we have the
movement, the rolling back and forth of
static-dynamic-static-dynamic action of the world as
tides in a river near the ocean.  
     By the way, since you mentioned how some have
identified mysticism with infinity this rattled in my
head - Wouldn't ones identification with
infinity/eternity harden and/or trick ones ego into
identifying as 'something' eternal and that would
prevent any changes and/or annihilation as to how we
think about our 'self'?  I think identifying with
eternity would trick and harden our ego into believing
there is an eternal aspect of ones 'self' in this
world.  Thus, an aspect of 'who we are' will NOT
identify as an 'ever redefining self'.  Therefore,
ones orientation will circumnavigate, if you will,
always around this identified axis (to use a term Ian
has defined for me before).  By axis (let me know if I
have this correct Ian), I mean central point, premise,
and/or center.  This identified axis, as eternal, will
always have to stick it out, stay static, and not
allow the dharmakaya light ventilate into ones world
view.  

Just a thought.

SA    

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com