[MD] (no subject)

[markhsmit]

Hi Bo,

A possible relationship between MoQ and Buddhism are the teachings
on Nothingness.  This does not mean void, but as has been explained
to me may mean No-Thing.  That is transcendence of the characterization
of things (or objects).  Through SOM we create the objective world,
that is, the world of things.  I think that your understanding of MoQ has
similarities to my understanding of Buddhism.  It's a tough path to follow.

Methods for achieving MoQ dictates are indeed useful discussions.
As I see it the subject/object interface has to be removed.  This can
be done through intellect, but it is also perhaps easier to do through 
ritual.  This is why, imo, Buddhism is not just a hobby (as MoQ may
be at present), but a way of life.

In my opinion, to look at it objectively (like a psychologist) one has
three options.  Either one has to remove the sense of subject, that
is, that the "I" does not exist (or is illusionary), or, one has to remove
the sense of object, that is we are just a brain in a vat, or finally, one
has to assume he is everything.  All these certainly take effort
and could be considered a state of mind (as our current SO may
be) but that is an SOM interpretation.  

However, it seems that it may be the case that to create such
an enlightenment is at the exclusion of all other ways.  So, the question
then is, is the grass greener on the other side?  Buddha thought so.
Because of his upbringing, he was very stricken by the appearance
of suffering.  His method of enlightenment seems to be based on
a perseverance over suffering (clinging).  So he found a way out.
Many of those who followed him also wanted to stop suffering.
Now, if suffering is not part of one's problem, then another path
must be followed.  But in such a case, one has to have a
powerful reason to want to escape (or be released).  I believe that
any reason to want to become enlightened can work, provided one
works at it incessantly.  It is quite possible that all paths lead to
the same place.

If MoQ provides the path to enlightenment, once you get there 
you have to return as a Bodhisattva, in the same way Buddha
did and then explain it.  I do not think it is possible to explain
until you've got there and come back.  Many choose not to
return to explain, this is a decision that Buddha fought with
as well.

Cheers,
Mark


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









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/