[MD] the subjective

[Joseph Maurer]

Marsha responds to Joe:

[Joe]
Your emphasis on the term ³emptiness² echoes how I view the undefined
consciousness/self-awareness of the Social level.  In a seven level template
for evolution ³emptiness of emptiness² also echoes the evolution of Subject
only, the 6th higher emotional level.

[Marsha]

I do not understand you seven level musical template.  I do love music,
though.
 
It is because things are _empty_ of inherent existence that there is
creativity and change.  If something was independent and permanent there
would be no possibility for change.
 

Hi Marsha,

IMO To allow for change, there is a structure that welcomes change.
          _
        -  - (my circle didn¹t turn out so well)
         -
I sing do__re__mi_fa__sol__la__si_do (double the vibrations of the first
Œdo¹).  At the mi-fa and si-do intervals the vibrations slow to half, and
extra attention (shock) is required to continue in the same tonality.  If
the shock is not forthcoming the tonality deviates, and I drop a tone from
my original start. As a template for evolution using the octave, shocks are
necessary to keep  going in the same direction since with no shocks it goes
in circles or other forms depending on the fullness of the shock, an analogy
for differing forms in evolution.

Joe



On 8/5/08 3:20 PM, "MarshaV" <marshalz at charter.net> wrote:

> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Joseph Maurer" <jhmau at sbcglobal.net>
> To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2008 5:09 PM
> Subject: Re: [MD] the subjective
> 
> 
> On Tuesday 05 August 2008 1:36 AM Marsha writes to Joe:
> 
> Greetings Joe, Hi Marsha and all;
> 
> [Marsha]
> Yes, the MOQ is beautiful!  But I have always been attracted to Eastern
> philosophy, initally by Krishnamurti's writings. Now I am finding Buddhism
> also beautiful.
> 
> <<<Anybody feel free to correct me if what I am writing is confused or
> downright wrong.>>>
> 
> [Joe]
> 
> When I moved to CA in 1966 I met a building contractor who gave me a job.
> He was interested in The Baghavad Gita and Arjuna¹s discussions.  I have
> tried to become interested in Hinduism and Buddhism but no luck.  I have
> read some, but I have no clear position.  IMO Earth, Water, Air, Fire and
> the structure of Peasant, Merchant, Warrior, Priest became the template for
> Pirsig¹s Inorganic, Organic, Social, Intellectual division of evolution.  I
> prefer the octave of music as the model for evolution from esoteric
> literature.
> 
> [Marsha]
> Within Buddhism there are two truths.  (Not a truth and a falsehood, but two
> truths.)  One of these is the _conventional truth_, which is the ordinary
> empirical truth about the world.  It is "a truth dependent upon tacit
> agreement, an everyday truth, a truth about things as they appear to
> accurate ordinary investigation, as judged by appropriate human standards."
> I equate _conventional truth_ to the static side of quality.
> 
> [Joe]
> This seems to be a good description of the intellectual level SOL.
> 
> Hi Joe,
> 
> Yes it does seem that the subject-object point-of-view is the conventional
> view in the West.  Is it that way for all human beings, I cannot say.  That
> it soley defines intellect?  I cannot accept to be true.  I find the four
> levels within the MOQ perfect.  My disgreement with Bo is that I see no need
> for a new level.  And I disagree that DQ should in any way be contained
> within any kind of structure.  I think RMP got it right.
> 
> 
> 
> [Marsha]
> The other truth is _ultimate truth_.  It is characterized by 'emptiness',
> and further, by the emptiness of emptiness. The ultimate truth is the "way
> things are when they are independent of convention, or to put it another
> way, the way things turn out to be when we subject them to analysis with
> intention of discovering the nature they have from their own side, as
> opposed to the characteristics we impute to them."   I equate _ultimate
> truth_ to Quality (DQ & sq).
> 
> [Joe]
> Your emphasis on the term ³emptiness² echoes how I view the undefined
> consciousness/self-awareness of the Social level.  In a seven level template
> for evolution ³emptiness of emptiness² also echoes the evolution of Subject
> only, the 6th higher emotional level.
> 
> I do not understand you seven level musical template.  I do love music,
> though.
> 
> It is because things are _empty_ of inherent existence that there is
> creativity and change.  If something was independent and permanent there
> would be no possibility for change.
> 
> 
> [Marsha]
> When I wrote, "Conventionally, of course.", I was stating as I investigate
> 'subjectivity' from the conventional, everyday point-of-view.  When I try to
> "grasp", or define subjectivity it disappears.  It becomes objectified. Then
> I might look to see what has objectived it, and again the subjective
> experience becomes the object, etc., etc., etc.
> 
> [Joe]
> I think my confusion comes from me having no understanding of how the 3rd
> (woman) organic level evolves to the emptiness of the social level. Maybe
> the emptiness of the womb became the driving force for a relationship of
> emptiness-not emptiness with the child.  I can¹t envision how the
> ³emptiness² evolves from a mechanical outlook, the third level (woman). I
> guess evolution is a kind of creation. Then emptiness becomes objectified by
> slavery and evolves to the intellectual level, SOL. With your words I see
> that if the social level does not remain empty but becomes objectified then
> the relationship with what is undefined becomes mechanical, a slave, and
> must evolve to an intellectual level to become free.  The relationship
> between what is undefined S and what is defined O becomes intellectual, SOL.
> Slavery is not empty.
> 
> Being a woman is never separate from my experience.  Of all the words in
> LILA, Lila's solioquy was for me the most profound and true.  There is so
> much I'd like to say about being woman and realizing from some far off
> knowledge that there is something vital missing by man's (any man's, all
> men's) definition of experience.  The experience of giving birth is the most
> important one.  But there is more...   Even as I sit here thinking about it
> my throat closes, and it is painful.  It may be that if my throat opens I
> may breathe fire.......   But there is still much to learn, and the time is
> not now.
> 
> 
> [Marsha]
> The _middle way_ in Buddhism would be between things existing as objects and
> things not existing at all.  All entities are dependent arisen.  'Every
> entity depends for its existence on causes and conditions, upon its parts,
> upon wholes to which it belongs, and for its identity on **nominal and
> conceptual imputation and conventions**.'  I equate the _middle way_ with
> the MOQ as a whole; interrelated, ever-changing static patterns of value
> within a ground of Dynamic Quality.
> 
> [Joe]
> I do not know if I agree with that formulation since I do not want to
> objectify Dynamic Quality as ³a ground².  A _middle_ way would be evolution
> of S only to higher emotional or higher intellectual
> Level, enlightenment, an embodiment of consciousness.  It is not s/o, it is
> only s, not conscious/mechanical, only conscious, not influenced by the
> glasses that culture hands us.
> 
> I was not happy with the word 'ground', either.
> 
> One can change those cultural glasses for ones of lesser strength.  It's
> quite possible to do that.  (I think they would be found in mysticism, and
> not science.)
> 
> 
> [Marsha]
> This is my interpretation, augmented by some borrowed text.  I hope I
> haven't confused you more.  It's a bit more than you asked for, but my use
> of 'conventionally' is embedded in my struggle to understand Nagarjuna's
> MMK.  Please ignore if I've made a mess of it.
> 
> [Joe]
> Marsha is beautiful!
> 
> 
> I love you Joe.
> 
> 
> 
> Marsha
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 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/