[MD] DQ and sq

[MarshaV]

John,

Whatever conventionally works for you is fine for you.  I am not here to 
change you.  But time is a static pattern of value.   For me, the past is 
story, the future is projection.  That doesn't make anything less wondrous, 
only less true. 


Marsha 



On Apr 21, 2011, at 1:50 PM, John Carl wrote:

> Past is a static pattern.  As static as they come!  What is more unchanging
> than the past?
> 
> But the future?  We use the word to point to something that brings into
> being, but our imagining is never fully the reality we actually experience.
> The future as an idea is one thing, but the future as a thing is too
> mysterious for words, and just like I've always thought of DQ, in every
> way.  What is evolution but the drive toward the future?  Try it.  Go back
> and substitute the concept of the future, for all references to DQ in Lila,
> and show me one that doesn't fit.
> 
> It even works better with Jamesian pragmatism - what is the test of the
> good?  Future experience.
> 
> John past
> 
> 
> On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 11:15 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Hi John,
>> 
>> Time, past and future, are static patterns.
>> 
>> http://www.quantonics.com/Anthony_McWatts_MoQ_Paper.html
>> 
>> Or try Nagarjuna's MMK.
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Apr 19, 2011, at 4:35 PM, John Carl wrote:
>> 
>>> So, is DQ just another word for the future?  And sq a term for the past?
>> Is
>>> that all there is to it after all this time?
>> 
>> 



 
___