[MD] the Underground

[Marsha]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Heather Perella" <spiritualadirondack at yahoo.com>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 15, 2008 2:34 PM
Subject: Re: [MD] the Underground


>
> Marsha:
>> Maybe you can explain.  First there is muck, than there is
>> no muck, then
>> there is muck again.  What do you think?
>
> SA:  I think the first muck is bothersome samsara.  I think no muck is the 
> void effort.  It is the effort to live nirvana.  The third muck is the 
> void has been here along and muck or no muck is handled in a void way. 
> Thus, the third muck is:  nirvana is samsara or samsara has been nirvana 
> all along.  The third muck is experienced differently than the first two 
> mucks.
>
>
> all these mucks,
> SA
>

SA,

Sorry for all the mucking around, but sometimes when I talk about the 
emptiness of things, you seem to challenge me with the conventional view. 
And when I'm chattering conventionally, you challenge my previous discussion 
on emptiness.  It's a bit frustrating.

>From the book, Meditation on Emptiness, "These phenomena cannot be found 
under analysis and thus do not inherently exist; they are still accepted as 
validly established conventionally when there is no analysis."   This is how 
I (and I certainly could be incorrect) interpret mountains, no mountains, 
mountains again.  So the second muck would be realizing its emptiness, and 
the third muck is experienced differently than the first two mucks.

I wonder if you understand what I am trying to say.  If you think I am 
wrong, please say so and I can try to get it right or explain it more 
coherently.  That would be a most helpful challenge.

Marsha