[MD] Emptiness & Quantum Mechancics

[Andre Broersen]

  Mary to Dan:

By the time DQ is experienced, it has become a static pattern already. ?Can
you name a static pattern of value? ?If you can, I propose that what you
have really done is objectify it into an object or subject. ?At the point of
awareness it's already too late.

Andre:
Apart from the replies Dan (and Horse) has already provided, Mary, what I think
you are saying is that YOU find it difficult to think yourself out of dualistic thinking.
That you cannot think of experience in a non-S/O way. But value is sensed prior to thought,
which, in turn gives rise to thought. Remember the hot-stove example?
The low value comes first, then the subjective thoughts that include such things as stove and
heat and pain come second. The value is the reality that brings the thoughts to mind.

'It is the primary empirical reality from which such things as stoves and heat and oaths and self
are later intellectually constructed'(LILA, p69)

So now you may say: 'See!! There they are...subjects and objects! POINT PROVEN!!!

But no, in the MOQ there are no subjects or objects. As Dan says, they are a 'shorthand for patterns
of value'. Call them a figure of speech. And, following Paul Turner's comment of long ago, '...if you
deeply and sincerely accept that your thoughts and perceptions are created by it (i.e.value) and that
they can start to form in new ways, you open the door to a new, richer experience of everyday reality'.
Paul Turner is a very clever young man.

This has nothing to do with Horse not wanting you to be here!

(Mary previously to Horse:
I understand that you don't want me here, but when you talk like that you
degrade yourself.  Come on.  You're better than that.)

Nor has it anything to do with gender:

(Mary previously to Marsha:
Ever notice how the majority of women seem to get it while the majority of
men don't?  I'm just sayin'...).

But it has something to do with this:

(Surely you mean the first cut of Quality is into Static and Dynamic
  Quality.
  
[Mary replies]
And what is that?  The same, no?

THAT is your (and Marsha's) confusion, the mixing up of Dynamic Quality and static quality.

And it is wonderfully exemplified in this interaction with Mark:

Mary:
If I have an experience I have to think about it, right?

Andre:
The experience comes first !, the value comes first ! and that (later) gives rise to your thoughts
about it.
And if you keep on 'converting' this experience into (SOM) subjects and objects then, as far as
understanding the MOQ is concerned, you won't get past first base.
So long as you, and Marsha keep on convincing yourself that the intellectual level is SOM you'll stay
hopelessly confused and misguided.

And I am NO authority on the MOQ (in response to Marsha's lame remark).
I just read ZMM and LILA....and I stand corrected.