[MD] Essentialism and the MOQ

[Heather Perella]

Marsha and others,

     I changed the name of the thread, since this
discussions seems to be veering off away from
essentialism.  I hope it's ok.

Another comment below:
 
>      [Marsha]
> > I think that Zen does not say 'ignore sq', but 'do
> > not attach to sq'.
> 
     [SA previously] 
>      A discontinuity exists between dq and sq.  Dq
> will never attach to sq.  Yet, once dq does, then
> static latching occurs.  The dq no longer is dq, in
> this sense.  Dq is now sq.  Therefore, I see how dq
> never attaches to sq.  Only sq can attach to sq.  Dq
> changes sq, but the discontinuity between dq and sq
> is
> quiet, is nothingness, and therefore to make a leap
> between dq and sq is to have to keep the discourse
> clarified as to whether we are talking dq or talking
> sq.  Dq changes sq, refreshes it, so to speak, but
> any
> changes, creativity, art codification, 'refreshing'
> is
> now on the Way of static quality, even though, dq
> was
> involved.  There is that discontinuity.  I can't
> talk
> dq when I truly am talking dq.  
>      I really feel I don't know either, Marsha.  I
> do
> know Zen is intellectual.  The quietness can be
> spoken.  Emptiness can be felt.  Nothingness can be
> touched.  This tiny skull is trying, but I go
> nowhere.


     As to this discontinuity I see this:

          Quality: continuous-not-continuous so maybe
acontinuous or noncontinuous, which is also
continuous-discontinued-not-continuous for quality is
the dq, code of art, and sq 'defined' right here as
follows:

          Dynamic quality:  continuous, thus,
acontinuous/amoral

          code of art:  discontinuous

          Static quality:  not-continuous

     Thus, quality is both continuous and not
continuous.  When quality is defined I see a path of
works, explanations, and pivotal events.  I see the
continuous, undefineable dq codified via art.  At that
moment, a discontinuity where dq 'talk' will no longer
work, unless, one keeps in mind quality, which is both
dq and sq.  Quality can allow both continuity and
discontinuity to occur at once (this is how I see both
amoral and moral decisions made, this is how
everything can be emptiness, but at the same time
individualized with particulars: the focus-field of
the Dao that has been incorporated into Zen when
Buddhism was introduced to China.)  So, once dq is
codified as art dq is left behind as sq patterns
appear.  This discontinuity demarcating dq from sq
would have sq appear totality different on its' own
terms from dq.  Static quality is particular,
not-continuous, and has defineable patterns.  Morality
exists with sq, too.  Dynamic quality is, one might
say, totality opposite of sq.  Yet, they both are
quality.  So, it is quality that is amoral,
acontinuous, and a-everything, as well as, a-nothing.

     ....maybe.

     I don't know.  I'm being influenced by Dogen
right now.  I'm reading Dogen's explanation, with the
help of Masao Abe, of "All beings are the
Buddha-nature".  I, also, have my interpretation, so,
I'm sure this is not the full extent of what happens
in this quietness.

           
woods,
SA


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