[MD] Mind-body practice

[skutvik at online.no]

Hi Dwai:

31 Dec. you wrote:

> The Taoists, Vedantins all believe that this "reality" is not the
> ultimate reality and further propose this alternate structured
> framework to access the larger reality that exists.

I don't know how versed you are in the MOQ but according to my 
view (of its view) each level represent a reality, and as intellect is 
the highest level its S/O - scientific - view is often regarded as 
reality itself .... in the Western world at least. However there is 
the social reality below intellect and it is dominant in other 
cultures - the Middle East for example. (the "Far East" has 
reached a Q-like stage above intellect) Yet because the Quality 
Reality only is known to this tiny group (and a still tinier fraction 
understands it correctly) intellect is confused. It does not know 
any levels and is at a loss to interpret - for instance - the present 
social value rebounding in the form of terrorism. (this is just me 
lecturing, never mind).        

> If you remember, this discussion was triggered by my initial query
> to the group about their personal practices vis-a-vis MoQ (or
> whatever else one might choose to refer to it as).  And what I
> intended to find out from that query is whether this "Greater
> Reality" can be known by merely intellectual means or does it take a
> combination of energy-work, meditation and intellectual analysis.

The "greater reality" is of course the Quality Reality and it can't 
be "known by intellectual means" (seen from the intellectual 
level) that's the whole point. Intellect is a static level, blind to the 
"greater Quality Reality", this is what I have been banging on for 
years, but most people insist on a "dynamic intellect" that can 
harbour all kinds of ideas included the MOQ. The MOQ applies 
intelligent analysis, but no longer in intellect's service. I don't 
know what meditation is exactly, but I have spent a lot of "energy-
work" on loosening intellect's ties..  

> In response to the "just sit and know" statement, I had to bring
> forth to our attention that the Buddha didn't happen to stumble upon
> this "just sit and know" -- there was a lot of preparation that went
> into taking him there, which involved "Not sitting".

All talk about mysticism, language not reflecting reality, pointing 
to the moon, just sitting ..etc. is Western people's half-baked 
ideas about Oriental wisdom, there surely was a lot of language 
(thinking) and what you call "intellectual analyses" (IMO 
intelligent ...)  to break with intellect's S/O..      

IMO 

Bo