[MD] Code of Art: true self: principles?

[Heather Perella]

Hi all,


     The first split of quality is the sq and dq
split.  The first decision, thus moral judgment, is sq
and/or dq.  Is it simply quality?  Or are we sqing or
dqing?  To dq we sq, yet, to practice (key
understanding) dq is not sqing.  All will be static
quality in conversation, unless, we are practicing
dynamic quality.  Thus, code of art:  dynamic
morality, aka, Nothing is moral.  In this statement,
it is all static quality, except in practice.  In
practice it is nothing, nothing at all, that is moral.
 This nothing is given 'being' and is firmed as moral.
 Also, this nothing is 'non-being' and therefore moral
is mute.  So, nothing is moral.  This is not-defining
what moral is, yet, clearly moral is firmed as
existing, and thus, definable:  Moral is.  Also,
nothing is 'being' and 'non-being':  Nothing is.  Yet,
what is nothing?  This is the openness of nothing, of
dynamic quality.  Therefore, from the first split of
quality, moral is firmed, yet, applied as openended,
dq (nothing).  This must be practiced.  It is one
'thing' for me to talk about nothing, but if you focus
only my talking about nothing, and state, well, you're
talking about nothing is not possible, due to my
talking, is (1) not to realize what nothing is
yourself, and (2) this takes practice.  This takes
practice, for on the one hand, it is true that to
simple talk about nothing is not fulfilling what
nothing is.  On the other hand, to realize, which is
to practice nothing on your own, is to experience
nothing, and thus, realize nothing even while I talk.
     This nothing is moral is kin to original mind or
original nature in Zen.  Buddhism may use
words/scriptures, but Zen realizes that true
realization is practiced.  Thus, moral exists, but the
true moral is experienced in this nothing.  When I say
nothing, I'm talking about this openendedness.  I
saying moral is, but what that moral is, well, fill in
the blank - yourself.  This is the true self.  We are
filling in the blank.
     On this principle 'thing'.  I would say we are to
practice, which is to realize quality on our own.  We
are helped by others.  We are hurt by others.  Yet,
for quality to truly mean 'anything', quality must be
realized on our own or else it is an emptiness that is
unsatisfied.  This kind of emptiness is different from
openendedness.  Openendedness is realized, firmed, and
a fulfilling experience that is known and felt.  An
emptiness that is unsatisfied is full of questions
that are confusing, distracting, and craving occurs. 
As to principle, I would say the first principle is
code of art.  This is the first split quality goes
through.  Could quality be first principle?  Sure,
after the split, after we, on our own, fill in the
blank.  Thus, the first principle is static, but when
experienced, and put into practice, it is quality,
thus, includes dq.  Therefore code of art is not
really a code, it is creative, also.  It is dynamic
morality.  Code of art is 'nothing is moral'.  And now
that is what we are doing from the beginning, as in
original mind, or original nature that is Zen.  Code
of art is practiced and realizing is practicing, as so
is walking.  
     The true self is living this principle, that is
not a principle, until lived.  To live this true self
is to fill in the blank, but to realize this will
always be openended.  Art of Code will always be
Nothing is moral, yet,  the firm static patterns are
filling in the blank, as, Nothing is being defined.
     When I said above as follows:  "Could quality be
first principle?  Sure, after the split, after we, on
our own, fill in the blank.  Thus, the first principle
is static, but when experienced, and put into
practice, it is quality, thus, includes dq."
     When I say this, this is also stating what Pirsig
said concerning ZMM is the path to enlightenment, and
Lila is the return home.  The first principle is
quality.  Yet, this is realized when quality is
'split'.  The 'split' is code of art (found in Lila). 
This realizing, due to the 'split', is static quality
that is looking back on itself and this 'itself' is
dynamic quality.  Static quality and dynamic quality
see each other, as this 'split' is the seeing (the
realizing) as themselves which 'themselves' is
quality.    This path I just explained is quality
'then' this code of art, which this code of art is the
'eye' of quality, is an event, a realization, a
practice, a 'split'.  This is how quality realizes
itself, and human beings are the only ones that are
able to experience this realization of quality.
     Thus, quality is first principle, but this is the
quality that is on the path of enlightenment and
returned home, thus, 'split', and 'got' eyes,
realized, practiced itself.

     Any thoughts, agreements, disagreements, 
'anything'...

woods,
SA  

P.S.  Whoever made it this far in the reading, thanks,
and for those that didn't, thanks, and if I get no
responses, thanks, for 'does any of this matter
anyway' is overcoming me and I'm able to just be quiet now.


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
http://new.mail.yahoo.com