[MD] Knots

[118]

Recently I have been suggesting a description of Quality (Q) as "that which
separates".  This is of course an analogy which provides a path to Quality,
or in other words, a finger which is pointing towards it.  Such an
interpretation emphasizes that which separates Static Qualities (SQ), rather
than what they are.  The interpreted separation, which could also be
approximated by Assigned Value (AS), is ever changing, thus creating a
concept of Dynamic Quality (DQ).  When two things are compared, or two
choices are contemplated, it is the difference between the two that is the
intuited concept.

Such a concept converts the objects or subjects themselves, and their
dynamic interaction, to the Quality between.  Approaching the notion of
Quality in this way, provides a shift in view or paradigm, that results in
an evaluation of the cause rather than the product.  The degree of
separation of good and bad concepts would be a function of that which
separates them, or Quality.  This suggests measurement of Quality, but such
a thing can be avoided by stating that such measurement is meaningless since
the objects are not real in themselves but simply a function of Quality, and
as such do not provide inherent characteristics for measurement.   The
nonexistence of the things themselves could be imparted by describing them
as geometric points, which are dimensionless.  Or like the borders of the
combined DQ and SQ which are again without dimensions but only describe the
limits of apparent Quality as it is applied to specific examples.  Personal
or subjective sense of Quality would then become universal since it does not
rely on our opinions of the things themselves.  Quality itself would remain
untouched, as a primary (or absolute) creator.

In a broader sense, one could describe the Chinese concept of Yin and Yang
not as opposing dynamic entities, but rather ones which are separated
through Quality.  Quality viewed in this way would approximate the Tao, but
in a modern rational sense.  It provides a conceptual understanding of a
description of Quality in both its static and dynamic forms, as well as an
ineffable principle of separation.  The difference with Taoism is the
empirical notion of direction, as with Time.  Time itself is a function of
the pressure that (DQ) puts on change.  Such change creates static
dissimilarities which result in preference.  Preference implies choice.
 Such choice is directed by Quality, and could be seen as a vector with
direction.  The vector is not one in dimensional space, but is in the
metaphysical space of Quality.  The concept of betterness could be used as a
description of that direction.  The magnitude of such direction on a time
basis, is a direct result of the accumulation of dynamic quality.  Such
accumulation is a result of harmonic tendencies of Quality's expression.

In terms of the human mind, such separation results in the appearance of SQ,
and the notion of DQ, as a result of the transfer of an infinite amount of
information into simplified neuronal descriptions which appear isolated from
each other.  Such descriptions could be seen as the tendency of Quality
towards its static appearce.  The unifying factor is Quality, which is
missed, because we do not consider this separation, only the descriptions
themselves.  An analogy in physics would be something like a magnetic field.
 If two magnets attract each other, the strength of that attraction would
not be the result of the strengths of each magnet.  Instead, the strengths
of each magnet would be created by the magnetic field as first cause.  This
would be a flip in how the interaction between the two magnets is
conceptualized.  In the same way, colors are different not due to some
inherent property of the colors, but due to an inherent property of what
separates them.  Two things appear differently due to the intrusion of
Quality.  Since the objects themselves do not exist outside of this
separation, Quality encompasses them and becomes the source of everything.
 Another way to look at it is as the spaces between letters on a page.
 Words are created by the white portion of the page, not the black.

This form of description is not difficult to grasp in theory.  The
difficulty comes from trying to conceptualize the world in this way because
our training or education has been based on just the opposite.  Such a
paradigm shift could happen slowly with practice.  One Zen practice is to
stop labeling or naming things one sees, but rather to look between such
things with a more holistic sense.  In the same way, the codependent arising
of things could be simplified into the ebb and flow of DQ, or the tendencies
of Quality.

Just a rough thought, open for discussion if desired.  The intent is to
provide a framework for easy transfer to the beginning student.  I'm sure
there are many problems with it, at least in such a simple description

Cheers,
Mark