[MD] Bo’s Western Buddhism (was Intellect's Symposium)

[plattholden at gmail.com]

Hi Bo,

Your phrase "Q-context" suggests to me that all talk about reality suffers
from the same misunderstanding as when a passage excerpted from a
speech or article is said to represent an author's view but really isn't
because the passage was "taken out of context." 

Often you have used the metaphor of an ocean where the peaks and
valleys of the waves represent the mind/matter separation but both 
occur
within the reality "context" of the Quality ocean. Likewise I'm reminded 
of
the metaphor of the fish who when asked, "How do you like being in the 
ocean?" replied, "What ocean?" We are as the fish, largely ignorant of 
the Quality ocean of our existence. Pirsig hints at the same metaphor in 
the following from Lila (30):

"The south wind was stronger here and it cooled him. It was steady, like 
a trade wind. Nothing interfered with its flow toward him over the huge 
ocean. 'Vast emptiness and nothing sacred.' If ever there was a visible 
concrete metaphor for Dynamic Quality this was it."

As you say, the intellectual level -- whose evolution you have nicely 
traced from appearance/reality to illusory/real to subjective/objective to 
mind/matter -- exists within the Q-context. To use intellect's rhetorical 
ingenuity to describe that which brings intellect into being is like the 
proverbial tongue trying to taste itself.

It is through art and beauty that we directly experience the Quality that 
otherwise remains a faint intuition as we go about the daily business of 
fending off the forces of the inorganic, biological and social levels with 
the armaments of intellect. But at day's end, the Quality context makes 
itself known as we settle down at the hearth with a cup of hot buttered 
rum.   

Warm regards,
Platt     



On 4 Feb 2010 at 21:02, skutvik at online.no wrote:

> Hi Khoo
> 
> 3 Feb.
> 
> Bo before:
> > > How I envisage the MOQ as a "western buddhism" I have told many times No
> > > particular enlightenment is required except understanding the MOQ, but
> > > that seems to be the needle eye for the camels.
> 
> Khoo:
> > But how would it work if there is no enlightenment necessary?  Is there
> > a methodology to achieve the understanding of the Metaphysics of
> > Quality ? How would you guide the enquirer/camels through the needle
> > into a proper understanding of the Metaphysics of Quality? Is there an
> > "aha" moment ? Is there a need for a Guide? Or is it a Do-it-Yourself
> > kind of process ? 
> 
> Good (perhaps sarcastic?) questions. Yes i have wondered why 
> Pirsig's ideas in ZAMM hit me so hard, why I in an flash saw the point, 
> but have found that only one so tormented by (what I knew as) the 
> mind/matter abyss as I were  would recognize the immense relief in 
> the prospect  of my tormentor wasn't reality itself but a  "metaphysics" 
> having arrived at some point in time, and will go away the moment the 
> MOQ takes hold. Well, it has taken hold of me so I am free, those poor 
> buggers who don't know they are SOM captives can't be helped.   
> 
> At first in this discussion I thought this was why all people came to this 
> site, but have been forced to realize that most are chatterbugs not 
> having the least interest, wish or need for escaping SOM except 
> seeing their posts "published", some professional "twitters" partaking 
> on several lists simultaneously. But never mind the greatest 
> disappointment was Pirsig himself launching  a travesty of the ZAMM 
> epiphany of  SOM being Quality's creation ... CALLED INTELLECT. 
> This is the hub, kernel,crux of it all. About 3 levels before the 4t. - 
> intellectual - is perfect, but that one must be SOM or the MOQ is just 
> more SOM!      
> 
> And I thought that you - of Oriental origin at least - knew that to 
> achieve enlightenment the "intellect" must be transcended. The silliest 
> of discussers make a great point of me insisting on the MOQ being 
> something beyond the intellectual level, but it the perspective where 
> the "Q-context  is seen. Like the Buddha being the stance from where 
> Buddhism context is seen. To say that the MOQ is an intellectual 
> pattern prevents its release from SOM. OK, all this is what I said in 
> "my string of reasoning", your objecting to it and me trying to bring it 
> across again - will only result in more turns of the screw and I am a bit 
> worn.     
> 
> Bodvar
>