[MD] Reality Lies Outside Linear Time

[Khoo Hock Aun]

Hi Platt,

Just one or two quick points to follow up from your questions:

I am in two "minds" here. Sorry for the pun.

There is on one hand, the mind that is continously thinking, generating
thoughts and from these thoughts, concepts. For this mind, these thoughts
are objects, just as concepts are objects. These thoughts and concepts are
"real" and can be reduced and constructed. The mind in this buddhistic sense
is another sense door - the sixth - after the usual five and with these six
sense doors - the conventional reality appears.

This is the world in which subject object metaphysics (SOM) will arise. This
is the world in which linear time as invented is percieved and is as real as
is illusory. IF I am at the level where I can generate thoughts and concepts
with memes as their building blocks, I guess I am an intellectual,
intellectualising, but there is no real experience. Dead end.

There is on the other hand, the unthinking mind. Not mindless. But mindful.
Mindful because it has been stilled, from generating thoughts and concepts
as objects....

Why is it preferable to still the mind so it does not generate objects ?

Because we get to experience Reality as it is, because objects get in the
way of doing so. If this is Pirsig's pure experience prior to concepts, then
it must be this state of mind that sees objects for what they are: machine
code, bits and parts of thought components and patterns generated by the
five senses and their aggregation that is called 'mind'. And by creating
objects, we create ourselves, subjects which observe objects. Its a false
creation. I am only an aggregate of my six sense doors.

That way the Subject Object Metaphysics creates a reality premised on making
permanent patterns which are actually instrinsically changing all the time.
If one might say, at the same time. That way SOM prevents the experience of
a reality devoid of objects and subjects( a truism !) And if the subject is
a false creation; its yardstick of good and bad has no premise.

Values and Morals therefore have to lie outside the SOM; based on what is
real, pure experience. In other words, I can never get to the root of what
is good and bad by breaking down the universe into its percieved little
parts. It should lie in the other direction; outside our constructs of time
and of what holds everything together in the first place.

The Universe is always dynamic. It is always in action. Acting. It is as if
we lapse from pure experience and fall into thinking; the spontaneous
generation of thoughts and of generating concepts. Intellect or concept
forming is a reflex, just as smiling, just as breathing, just as
evaporating. Patterns that have found form and then persist.

Of the two minds, one bound by concepts age and grow old - ONLY because the
mind has attached itself to patterns; time based thoughts, concepts and
objects that can grow old.

The other mind of pure experience, that has transcended patterns has no
attachments and is therefore free of form, perpetually in flux with the
everchanging universe. There was no beginning and there is no end, it can't
therefore grow old.


Khoo Hock Aun



On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 8:45 PM, Platt Holden <plattholden at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Khoo, >
>
> > My physical body may age and be at a certain chronological point.
> > However
> > my mind is eternally youthful, perpetually in the same state the day it
> > saw through the shallow chronocentricity of the world and their attempts
> > to enslave it to time. It as stayed as young as the day it broke free
> > from the shackles of time.
>
> I presume "mind" as you use it here means the same as Pirsig's pure
> experience prior to concepts. Also, it occurred to me while reading the
> above that if the mind is "eternally youthful" doesn't it follow that it
> survives the body's demise? Further, the concept of "breaking free" is the
> heart of DQ. All the great changes that enhanced the evolution of life
> involved "breaking free," whether in art, science or philosophy. Pirsig,
> for example, responding to DQ, freed morals form the shackles of society.
>
> > Religion likewise is a shackle on the mind. The Metaphysics of Quality
> > as
> > described by Pirsig can help you break that shackle. Religion is what
> > ordinary mortals think they need to support their temporary existence
> > here on Earth. If the ordinary mortal can attain the insight to grasp
> > the
> > MOQ, he or she achieves a permanence, and has no more need of religion;
> > shedding it as if it were your old previous skin."
>
> Lest we get too carried away with bashing religion, we should distinguish
> between religious institutions and the religious experience, as Pirsig
> does:
>
> "The Metaphysics of Quality associates religious mysticism with Dynamic
> Quality but it would certainly be a mistake to think that the Metaphysics
> of Quality endorses the static beliefs of any particular religious sect.
> Phaedrus thought sectarian religion was a static social fallout from
> Dynamic Quality and that while some sects had fallen less than others, none
> of them told the whole truth." (Lila, 30)
>
> Thanks, Khoo. Wish you had more time to contribute to the discussion here.
> Your thoughts are always of the highest quality.
>
> Platt
>  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/
>



-- 

khoohockaun at gmail.com
6016-301 4079