[MD] Where do we all stand in relation to Pirsig's Quality?

[Heather Perella]

Marsha,

     Not to confine the subject to any one direction I
will try to answer your question as to what is the
point of my posting this subject.

     Here are some the main points I am trying to
focus upon taken from the introductory post of this
subject:
  
     "It's like what Marsha said last month in her
opening post to [MD] Ham & Swiss, and what Amirman
said in his opening of [MD] atom bomb and torture.
     The MOQ doesn't come up very much in these
postings, and the fitting of quality into our
discussions would make the applicability of quality
understood more often.  Unless, long ago, many on this
MOQ.org have as follows:  

          (1) given up on MOQ because of its' poor
quality
          (2) because it is difficult and thus out of
our reach intellectually   
               and/or practicality
          (3) people just don't use it for some
reason, they have other 
               motives."

          I will even throw in a fourth one that I did
not post previously.

          (4) people are afraid they will use the MOQ
in a way that changes  
               Pirsig's original intent

     If anybody has others, feel free to add them to
this discussion.
     I also had these as main points as follows:

    "The [MD] strong wind is meant to declare, in my
opinion, the strong wind blowing against the use of
Pirsig's Quality here at times on MOQ.org.  
     The [MD] independence is meant to open our own
personal intellect into freely using itself (even if
Pirsig is used, because Pirsig's Quality has a lot of
room for freedom).  This opening-up follows the wisdom
criteria, that I have professed at times.  This
criteria is wisdom is knowledge put into action. 
Thus, independence is not just used on paper or on the
computer screen.  Independence is to be used in our
ordinary lives day and night.  Yet, I bring into
question on the [MD] independence post the question,
"how much independence are we willing to experience?" 
I sense a lack of independence in this culture, and I
want to know if we really want independence?  Also,
where is there a lacking of independence in this
culture?  I gave some examples from my own experience.
     As to the spherical thinking Khaled discusses, I
found it to be very helpful in understanding any
gestalt shifts or changes in our view that would take
place, especially if we use Pirsig's Quality.  If you
are not familiar with spherical thinking introduced by
Khaled, I believe he describes it in his post of [MD]
independence, or if he wants to define it for us in
this posting, too, I would definitely appreciate it. 
It is an excellent understanding."
     
     I then went on to say the following:

     "This might be a good starting point for us to
see where we all are coming from pertaining to our
interest or competition or any other relational word
one might use to show where we stand with Pirsig's
Quality.  Sure we all have our own individual
interests, and I might need to change some of mine;
but where do we all stand in relation to Pirsig's
Quality is not a too far fetched question for a MOQ
discussion forum, is it?"

     So to answer your question Marsha, after I
clarified the intent of this subject I introduced, I
think you did an excellent job talking about Quality. 
You might even be able to expand upon what you were
talking about referring to the Social Level
transaction with your experience.  
     You (Marsha) also said:  "Personally, I've
adopted the MOQ as my world view.  It fits.  I think
it elegant in its simplicity.  I no longer see
"things" but now see static quality built on patterns
of connection and repetition and process."

     Yes, it does fit for me, too.  It did not
contradict my meditations, my zazen.  These patterns
you talk about, they have been used by some western
philosophers to describe Buddha's No-Self.  I don't
have the books with me so I could provide you with a
philosopher who has tried to describe Buddha's
teachings this way, but I will be moving at the end of
April and all of my books will be coming out of
storage soon.

     You also said:  "I would like the discussions to
be centered on Quality and the MOQ."

     Yes, that was the purpose of the introduction of
this subject.  You are right on.  We are touching upon
universal ground with Quality.  Buddha's teaching,
Zen, Quality, all touching upon something universal. 
I believe Quality is a Way to get out of all the
contradictions, and the kind of thinking in which one
believes they can define everything.  We do have
static quality, but we also have dynamic quality.

     Smith has an excellent question.  Quality all the
Way.

     I hope this helps and makes more sense.  :-)

SA


      

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