[MD] Step One

Sat Oct 16 14:39:58 PDT 2010

Thx for the reply ,Dan, yes i was aware of the refused permission, strange
case, caught my attention.

I will study your answer tomorrow, probably in the evening , the
huntingseason started out here.
I have to go out, shoot some ducks.

2010/10/16 Dan Glover <daneglover at gmail.com>

> Hello everyone
>
> On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 12:15 PM, ADRIE KINTZIGER <parser666 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > ADRIE KINTZIGER aan moq_discuss
> > details weergeven 10:22 (8 uren geleden)
> >
> > Thanks for sharing this one, Dan, so true,----"Dan:
> >
> > This discussion is centered around the MOQ. I write stories myself and
> > share them from time to time with the group but it is my hope that
> > others may see the value there and how it pertains to the MOQ. I am
> > not an autobiographer. And I realize someone reading my stories may
> > not understand that, just as someone reading Robert Pirsig's writings
> > may take a lot of what he writes as truth. I recall Mary getting upset
> > that he would have an affair with a bar lady while he was still
> > married. And yet he told me himself that he was Lila, and the boat,
> > and the rest of the story as well. That's what I am driving at. You
> > are the story. How does your life pertain the MOQ.  You. Not the
> > people or places in your life. Do you see what I mean? I know I am
> > explaining myself poorly but it is a difficult subject."
> >
> >
> > What a pearl,what a force, "you are the story"
> > Yes! perfect.
> > thanks
> >
> > 2010/10/16 Dan Glover <daneglover at gmail.com>
> > - Tekst uit oorspronkelijke bericht weergeven -
> >
> >
> >
> > Coming back for now, this moment , having some more spare time and needed
> to
> > read back the conversations, i came to
> > think of it as this, ..
> > "LILA" is a mirrorimage of ourselves, if we are reading LILA, we are
> looking
> > into the mirror, asking ourselves, do we have
> > quality,? Do i have quality?, so the question is not ' does lila...etc,
> 'no,
> > the question is , do we have...etc.
> > And in this optic, Pirsig and his LILA are teaching quality, dhyana,
> dynamic
> > quality,...by not teaching it at all, the teaching
> > is the part in the mirror, look at yourself to find the answer on the
> > projected question.
> > The mirror is reflecting every one of us, every proces, every value, to
> be
> > examined by ourselves,about ourselves.
> > So he is teaching quality after all, nothing else,by not teaching
> quality,
> > but Virtue, to examine ourselves,...making this our goal.
>
> Hi Adrie
>
> Yes that is a great way of looking at LILA. It is the more difficult
> of Robert Pirsig's 2 books which is why I think this discussion group
> is still going strong after some 13 years. There are so many levels
> within the story and of course a metaphysics must contain everything
> in order to do what it's meant.
>
> >
> > The mirror is showing all our patterns, the value's, the preferences.So
> we
> > can answer the question, does LILA has quality,...
>
> Dan:
>
> I think Mr. Pirsig tells Anthony McWatt that LILA was originally
> conceived as a case study of what is known as Joshu's koan: A monk
> asks: "Does a dog have Buddha nature, or not?" Chao-chou replied: "He
> does not." Yet according to Buddhist teachings, everything has Buddha
> nature. Over the centuries, many scholars have debated why, if all
> insentient and sentient beings have Buddha nature, a dog would not. It
> is the same with LILA. When confronted by Rigel on whether Lila
> Blewitt has quality, Phaedrus automatically says: Yes! So in a sense,
> he is contradicting the given answer to the koan.
>  If you say yes, you are damned. If you say no, then the Buddhist
> belief that everything has Buddha nature is wrong. So throughout LILA,
> Phaedrus argues one way and then another. Yes, Lila has quality. No,
> quality has Lila. And this is the great insight that Mr. Pirsig
> offers, which basically turns the koan on its head and shocks us into
> seeing quality in a different light.
>
>
> >
> > The answer was always there, "we" have quality, "we" have patterns of
> value,
> > "we" are the patterns, the value's, the rocks
> > the water, the ocean's ,the air, we are Dhyana, virtue and value, zen and
> > science at the same time.
>
> Dan:
> The answer is there, yes. We don't have value. Value has us!
>
> >
> > So , in reflection of the letter you presented , Dan, I think my opinion
> is
> > about this.
> > At least some aspects of quality can be teached, framed, captioned, by
> > teaching people to ask the right questions,writinr> the secrets of the
> words, unrevealing their quality, embedded within the
> > question to project at ourselves.
> > But of course, not all aspects of quality can be halted to study, or to
> > study ourselves, its impossible to hold the ocean
> > in the palm of your hand.....or the moon, or gravity, nor they , (the
> > patterns) can be ignored, no matter how hard you ignore the ocean,
> > gravity, or quality, it will not leave,it cannot leave. It can never
> leave
> > us.
>
> Dan:
> Exactly! The Eastern way is to go inward. The Western way is to go
> outward. By marrying the two, the MOQ expands on both the
> irrationality of the East and the rationality of the West.
>
> >
> >
> > To make some reflections on your considerations about LILA'S CHILD, and
> the
> > work you performed on the material that was avaliable
> > -Have to say this, The work, the importance, the biggest importance for
> me
> > is that you did it without contaminating the material,
> > without trailering along with it to induce a widget of your own, a niche,
> a
> > product or a remark, You left everything in its value's
> > At the same time, you studied the availiable material so intensively,
> that
> > you became one with the value's, the projected and embedded virtue....,
> yes
> > , the light my literary friend, you became aware of the light, the light
> of
> > EL GRECO in the painting, he did not need to paint it after all.
> > He expirienced it.
> > He was one with it, as Pirsig is writing.---stunning beauty, framed
> forever.
> > It was there all the time.
>
> Dan:
> Well, in a sense I couldn't do the work without contaminating it. I am
> not sure that I understood that at the time. The founder of the Lila
> Squad became quite furious with me at the time and refused permission
> to use her work. Over the years, I see better now what she was saying
> at the time, even though I still don't agree with her. I think
> Marsha's objection to LILA'S CHILD has merit as well, though again, I
> am not sure how to overcome such a quandary. It is what it is.
>
> >
> >
> >
> > So yes , the letter you shared is of importance, at least some aspects of
> > quality can be teached , by looking into the mirror.
> > Thank for your appearances , Dan.
>
> Dan:
> You are welcome, Adrie. And thank you too. It is always a pleasure to
> read your posts.
>
> Dan
>
> >
> > greetzz, Adrie
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 2010/10/16 ADRIE KINTZIGER <parser666 at gmail.com>
> >
> >> Thanks for sharing this one, Dan, so true,----"Dan:
> >>
> >> This discussion is centered around the MOQ. I write stories myself and
> >> share them from time to time with the group but it is my hope that
> >> others may see the value there and how it pertains to the MOQ. I am
> >> not an autobiographer. And I realize someone reading my stories may
> >> not understand that, just as someone reading Robert Pirsig's writings
> >> may take a lot of what he writes as truth. I recall Mary getting upset
> >> that he would have an affair with a bar lady while he was still
> >> married. And yet he told me himself that he was Lila, and the boat,
> >> and the rest of the story as well. That's what I am driving at. You
> >> are the story. How does your life pertain the MOQ.  You. Not the
> >> people or places in your life. Do you see what I mean? I know I am
> >> explaining myself poorly but it is a difficult subject."
> >>
> >>
> >> What a pearl,what a force, "you are the story"
> >> Yes! perfect.
> >> thanks
> >>
> >> 2010/10/16 Dan Glover <daneglover at gmail.com>
> >>
> >> Hello everyone
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 1:38 PM, John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>> > Hello Everyone,
> >>> >
> >>> > Dan:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Quite possible. But if your style is being a clown, then we have
> very
> >>> >> little to discuss. I tend to suffer fools poorly... that's my style.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> > Understood.  I've been certainly told many times in my life, "we have
> >>> very
> >>> > little to discuss" and I've believed it every time.  Takes two to
> tango
> >>> and
> >>> > some people aren't comfortable with my steps, rhythm or style.  No
> >>> problem.
> >>>
> >>> Dan:
> >>> I enjoy humor so don't get me wrong... but there's a difference
> >>> between being humorous and being a clown. I enjoy our discussions very
> >>> much. Yet there are times when we have to peel back the onion (so to
> >>> speak) to get at a deeper meaning to the MOQ. And I tend to get the
> >>> impression that you're not so much interested in doing that as you
> >>> are... how do I put it... falling back to your own insights rather
> >>> than focusing on the discussion at hand. And I know we've been over
> >>> this before and it didn't go so well. I don't mean to say that I don't
> >>> want your insights. But I would prefer that you presented  them in
> >>> terms common to the MOQ. That way the discussion could move forward.
> >>> Sometimes I get the impression that you are looking to one-up Robert
> >>> Pirsig rather than understand what he is saying. And of course he can
> >>> be wrong. But still, it seems better to develop an understanding of
> >>> the MOQ first, which I cannot see that you have done.
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >> Dan:
> >>> >> No candles needed but a bit of reverence doesn't hurt.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> > I take everything seriously, nothing is sacred; I take nothing
> >>> seriously,
> >>> > everything is sacred.  Trite, but true.
> >>>
> >>> Dan:
> >>> That's fine. But it's also only so much b.s.
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >>   Climbing the mountain is tough enough.
> >>> >> >  Bearing great burdens will not help me climb.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Dan:
> >>> >> I guess that is where we differ. If as you say you're taking a
> serious
> >>> >> risk, then it seems to me it might behoove you to take thngs a bit
> >>> >> more seriously. Write like it's the last thing you will ever do, for
> >>> >> it just might be. Anything less is just cheating yourself, in my
> >>> >> opinion, of course.
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > I appreciate your sharing your opinion, Dan.  Always.  Although, if
> as
> >>> you
> >>> > say, "we have little to discuss" because you don't like my style,
> it's
> >>> hard
> >>> > to figure out how any constructive criticism about my style can
> occur.
> >>>  For
> >>> > constructive criticism you need an open mind, right?
> >>>
> >>> Dan:
> >>> Well, you are the one who clowns around. I don't care for that. So
> >>> yes, the discussion won't go far. I don't mean to criticize you one
> >>> way or the other. I only offer a possible solution to the impasse that
> >>> we seem to come to time and again.
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > And I still don't quite get how anything like I've done, written,
> >>> > communicated, expressed - could be construed as anything BUT serious
> >>> when
> >>> > I'm carving out part of my life, from a whole list of obligations and
> >>> > committments, to empty myself of everything but devotion to this one
> >>> task.
> >>> > If that's not serious, then I have no idea what you mean by the term.
> >>>
> >>> Dan:
> >>> This discussion is centered around the MOQ. I write stories myself and
> >>> share them from time to time with the group but it is my hope that
> >>> others may see the value there and how it pertains to the MOQ. I am
> >>> not an autobiographer. And I realize someone reading my stories may
> >>> not understand that, just as someone reading Robert Pirsig's writings
> >>> may take a lot of what he writes as truth. I recall Mary getting upset
> >>> that he would have an affair with a bar lady while he was still
> >>> married. And yet he told me himself that he was Lila, and the boat,
> >>> and the rest of the story as well. That's what I am driving at. You
> >>> are the story. How does your life pertain the MOQ.  You. Not the
> >>> people or places in your life. Do you see what I mean? I know I am
> >>> explaining myself poorly but it is a difficult subject.
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > On the other hand, if you mean by irreverential, and you're talking
> >>> about my
> >>> > attitude toward holy bob, or whatever, then... got an askance glance
> at
> >>> you
> >>> > out of the corner of my eye, a sad shaking of the head and a slow
> >>> saunter
> >>> > away.  I got my standards too, and neither do I suffer fools or
> >>> foolishness
> >>> > without comment.
> >>> >
> >>> > Well, sometimes I do.  When it seems like a good idea.
> >>>
> >>> Dan:
> >>>
> >>> I don't believe in hero-worship. Still, I don't believe it is right to
> >>> disrespect people either. But that's just me. It is how my father
> >>> raised me.
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >  Dan:
> >>> >> Phaedrus cared enough to take a holy journey but he didn't care
> enough
> >>> >> to realize what it was he was undertaking. That is my point, for
> what
> >>> >> it's worth.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> > I'm not so sure I completely agree with you (and him).  I mean, I
> know
> >>> it
> >>> > sounds silly to argue with the guy's own words on paper, but there
> are
> >>> > shortcut intellectualizations of deeper meanings that we can't or
> don't
> >>> have
> >>> > time to express, in all we do.  And giving up on the mountain has
> many,
> >>> many
> >>> > roots in the decision process.  For instance, some people spend their
> >>> whole
> >>> > lives dwelling in the alluvial plains and save up all their rupees
> for
> >>> just
> >>> > once an opportunity to look down on their own existence.  they value
> >>> > climbing the mountain in one way.
> >>>
> >>> Dan:
> >>>
> >>> I am not sure what you mean by 'shortcut intellectualizations of
> >>> deeper meanings.' But let me try and tell you where I am coming from
> >>> and why I quoted that bit from ZMM on holiness. Take my work on LILA'S
> >>> CHILD as an example. Despite Marsha's sarcasm, I don't think anyone
> >>> who has not been through such an experience can appreciate the deeper
> >>> meaning of setting a goal so high that it is impossible to acheive and
> >>> then going ahead and acheiving it. Like Phaedrus and his holy quest...
> >>> he looked at it as an opportunity for personal growth and experience.
> >>> But that's not what it is about. The holy quest is about giving
> >>> oneself up entirely to something you neither understand nor know the
> >>> outcome. It is like Carlos Castenada jumping into the abyss so dark
> >>> and deep, having to gather the totality of himself without even
> >>> knowing what that is, and just letting go.
> >>>
> >>> There are no shortcuts to such an experience and one never knows when
> >>> such an opportunity will arise. Thinking about it only takes one
> >>> further away, not closer. So we seem to disagree on a very fundamental
> >>> level when it comes it holiness, which a person find a bit surprising
> >>> knowing you are the more religious of the two of us. But the holiness
> >>> that I speak of has nothing to do with religion. Perhaps it is like
> >>> reading about zen and practicing zen... something along those lines.
> >>> It seems many contributors here are well-read when it comes to Eastern
> >>> philosophy but few actually put that knowledge into practice. Zen
> >>> isn't something a person can read about. It just isn't. I don't care
> >>> how many books a person reads, they will never know about zen in an
> >>> intellectual way.
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > But to an old cowboy from the continental divide?  Maybe not so much.
> >>> > Maybe, been there, done that, know what the view is from the top.  A
> lot
> >>> of
> >>> > small ponderings go into any question of why we value or choose what
> we
> >>> do.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > And for Phaerus in that time, the feeling of dislocation, the
> differing
> >>> > social and cultural supports produce a depressive state - the
> opposite
> >>> of
> >>> > "the home team advantage" and you sudden just don't care about
> climbing
> >>> > anymore.  Heck, happens to all of us.
> >>>
> >>> Dan:
> >>> Now see, you don't get it. It wasn't that he didn't care. He did. He
> >>> just didn't care in the right way. That kind of caring isn't something
> >>> one thinks about. One feels it deep down, as if life itself depended
> >>> on it.
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > And some people stop climbing,  because the same value to be found at
> >>> the
> >>> > top of the mountain, can be found in the heart of the moment - no
> effort
> >>> > needed.  So why climb?
> >>>
> >>> Dan:
> >>> That I cannot answer for you. You have to answer that for yourself.
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > What I'm saying is, there are lots of ways of "caring" that mattered
> >>> more
> >>> > than the many anonymous pilgrimages that have gone on for centuries
> and
> >>> made
> >>> > it back to the bottom, and died, and never wrote anything.  Caring
> >>> enough to
> >>> > take a holy journey, means you don't always know in advance where
> it's
> >>> gonna
> >>> > end, or what detours its gonna take.  That is my point, for what it
> is
> >>> > worth.
> >>>
> >>> Dan:
> >>> Life is a holy journey. That is what the pilgrimages are all about. No
> >>> one has to write about it or think about it or be told about it. And
> >>> of course no one knows what is going to happen in advance. That is our
> >>> Western way. The sun rises every day.
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >>  Dan:
> >>> >> Maybe we are speaking past one another. In the quote above, there
> are
> >>> >> 4 'I's' and 2 'me's' so I suspect your hero is ego-climbing too. But
> >>> >> who knows?
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> > Hmmm... ego climbing.  There is a sense in which "ego-climbing" could
> be
> >>> > said to be whole enchilada.  The evolution of consciousness from and
> >>> into
> >>> > the cosmos, assimilating patterns infinitely - an expanding self, the
> >>> ego-
> >>> > climbing to allness of being.
> >>>
> >>> Dan:
> >>> No. Ego-climbing is personal gain. It is me, me, me.
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > Yeah, I can see how that could be a good thing.  But what comes with
> the
> >>> > connotation is social competition - like I'm higher than you so
> neener,
> >>> > neener, neener.  I'm more selfless than you are.  Sometimes, what is
> >>> there
> >>> > to do but laugh?
> >>>
> >>> Dan:
> >>> Exactly. But one doesn't have to tell anyone anything when it comes to
> >>> reverence. That is beyond social and intellectual values into Dynamic
> >>> realms.
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > I'd prefer to think of our endeavors as a good thing.  An evolving
> >>> > understanding of ourselves and our world, where our ego-climb is also
> >>> > boosting those around us.  Not stomping on heads or fingers, but just
> >>> like
> >>> > real serious mountain climbing - roping and pitons and belays and
> >>> teamwork.
> >>>
> >>> Dan:
> >>> As I said, there ain't no school and no one is giving out any grades.
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > But hey, that's me, mr. idealist.
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >> Dan:
> >>> >> No. As he states, he is being logically foolish.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> > I think he's being logically rigorous about the way logic is a
> >>> foolishness
> >>> > that magically produces meaning, like a rabbit from a hat.  But
> >>> admittedly,
> >>> > my background is different, having read a great deal of him.  But it
> >>> comes
> >>> > in handy as a logical defense of foolishness, which I seriously
> thought
> >>> I
> >>> > might need but it's hard to say where this is going.
> >>>
> >>> Dan:
> >>> I would have to read more than just a few quotes, of course, and that
> >>> type of reading doesn't interest me at all. I'd never get through it
> >>> though. I am not a philosopher nor do I read it... unless I have
> >>> trouble sleeping, then it helps lull me.
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > Of course I am not sure... it was merely an observation. No need to
> >>> >> fall on your knife or anything.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> > Well I'm pretty sure its not going there!
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Dan:
> >>> >> Coyote the trickster often ends up tricking only himself, or so I
> >>> >> understand.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> > dude, you nailed it.  so many times and in oh so many different
> ways...
> >>>  but
> >>> > as long as it makes a good story, it's all worth it.  Chuckle and you
> >>> rhyme
> >>> > with the cosmic joke.
> >>>
> >>> Dan:
> >>>
> >>> Well, sure. In a certain context, I agree. But the story has to have
> >>> some value, some meaning. Otherwise it is just so much clowning around
> >>> and the joke is on you... in my opinion, of course,
> >>>
> >>> Thank you,
> >>>
> >>> Dan
> >>>
> >>> >
> >>> > John
> >>> > 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/md/archives.html
> >>> >
> >>> 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/md/archives.html
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> parser
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > parser
> > 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/md/archives.html
> >
> 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/md/archives.html
>

-- 
parser