[MD] the MOQ and its environment

[Ron Kulp]

SA,
 One thing has become
 abundantly clear is "certainty" is relative at best.
I would venture that those who point out "mysticism"
Are "eventualists" that they believe that the universe
Will eventully be knowable with certainty(*note faith involved)
 where as us "mystics" are pretty comfortable with the Idea that
"certainty " will never be achieved and choose to focus
Subjectivly rather than get caught up with  objective
certainty.
 MOQ "mysticism" here is embracing the unknowable
Some liken it to "faith" but no matter how you slice it
And no matter what you slice it with there is allways
A degree of "faith" involved with speculation at any level
No one here can argue that at the core of their philosophy
There is'nt at least one point where it rests on the faith
Of the subject.
I mean we are dealing with the term Quality" here folks.
How hard and scientific can you get with it.
We're all "mystics" to some point.
I think we can see past all the fancy
Self important psuedosciencePhilsopho-speak.
That's what gives MOQ it's uniqueness.

-x

I heard a Roshi say this once "zen is like soap, first you wash with it
Then you wash it off" 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org
[mailto:moq_discuss-bounces at moqtalk.org] On Behalf Of Heather Perella
Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 11:59 AM
To: moq_discuss at moqtalk.org
Subject: Re: [MD] the MOQ and its environment

      [Marsha]
> It is stated that Buddhism is a religion of no-religion.  Maybe the 
> MOQ is a metaphysics of no-metaphysics.  But of course, RMP can set 
> the record straight if he chooses.


     I still wonder what religion is, and what spirituality is MoQ
style.  I understand the MoQ is mystical, yet, how does spirituality
'fit' into this toning, this mysticism?  Zen is said to be spiritual,
yet, what does that mean?  I also understand that dynamic quality has
been given much 'credit' for the spiritual undertones in the MOQ, as
well.  Some look at dq and just say its' this New Age crap.  I wouldn't
mind knowing the difference between New Age crap and non-crap true MoQ
mysticism by those that advocate the MoQ has been infected by New Age
crap.  I know these are a lot of questions, and questions themselves
might just re-set the wondering that might be right here in front of me,
but these questions do revolve around current debates that I've seen
come and go on this forum.
     By the way, Marsha, Pirsig did mention the MoQ is a no-metaphysics,
and yet, for the heavy intellectuals (the one gav was in the post you
refer to) don't always like the bone and marrow, the true blood in our
veins being what a living philosophy is (the one gav referred to as the
guy he was talking to; again from the post your referring to).

     Many are very familiar with this quote in Lila (Ch. 5):

     "Quality is indivisible, undefinable and unknowable in the sense
that there is a knower and a known, but a metaphysics can be none of
these things.
A metaphysics must be divisible, definable and knowable, or there isn't
any metaphysics. Since a metaphysics is essentially a kind of
dialectical definition and since Quality is essentially outside
definition, this means that a 'Metaphysics of Quality'
is essentially a contradiction in terms, a logical absurdity."

     Isn't static quality, though, the Metaphysics of the MoQ, and
dynamic quality is the Quality of the MoQ?

thanks.

time to feed the baby,
SA


 
________________________________________________________________________
____________
Have a burning question?  
Go to www.Answers.yahoo.com and get answers from real people who know.
moq_discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/