[MD] emptiness

Tue Dec 20 22:19:52 PST 2011

Hi Marsha,
I am not griping, I am just talking.  Settle down, I am not out to get
you.  My only point was that non-duality is a word which we give the
idea that there is no "other".

An analogy is when we represent something with a similar thing.
Something that is hard to describe is presented as something that is
similar.

a·nal·o·gy   [uh-nal-uh-jee]
noun, plural -gies.
1.
a similarity between like features of two things, on which a
comparison may be based: the analogy between the heart and a pump.
2.
similarity or comparability: I see no analogy between your problem and mine.

If we say that non-dualism is an analogy, it must have properties that
are similar to what you are trying to describe.  Non-duality is a
concept, not an analogy, in my humble opinion.  If we do not know what
non-duality is like, it is hard to compare it to something.  For
example, what is non-duality similar to?  What are you comparing it
to?

I am not picking on you, I am just trying to establish a meaning to
the word analogy so that we do not confuse each other.

The story told by Plato about the horses is an analogy.  The story
about the cave is an analogy.  In ZAMM, Phaedrus states to the
philosophy professor that the discussion presented by Socrates was an
analogy.  This was to demonstrate that Socrates was not speaking of
Truth.  Of course this stumped the philosophy professor since he had
assumed that Socrates was presenting a Truth.  It was at this point
that Phaedrus "converted" (or flipped) and lost the firm ground that
he was standing on in a Relative world, that is, where everything fits
together as most of us see it.  His new found vision made it hard to
fit things together in the traditional way.  In fact he was free from
Relativism.  I do not suggest you go down that path unless you have
something very firm to believe in.  Something that you know Absolutely
as Real, and not as real relative to something else.  Otherwise it can
get very messy.

Cheers,
Mark

On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 12:53 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> Mark,
>
> Of course, non-dualism is a concept. If we're discussing it, it is an analogue; it is analogues all the way down.  Written concepts are all I have to work with here in this forum.  And yet you gripe when I use them and gripe when I don't.  If you are complaining of my poor ability to articulate these heady subjects, I can only acknowledged this disability.  I do try my best.  I think it is important to try.
>
>
> Marsha
>
>
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Dec 18, 2011, at 11:32 AM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Marsha,
>> I understand.  I guess I find discussing MoQ interesting so please forgive my constant questioning.  Consider perhaps, that non-dualism is a concept and does not exist outside of that.  It is yet another way of encapsulating a way we think.  If something is difficult to discuss it means that the language has not been created, by whomever.  It is nothing more profound than that.  For communicating in complex ways is what we humans do.  We should glorify in that rather that demean it or push it aside as some aberration.
>>
>> Happy Holidays
>>
>> Sent laboriously from an iPhone,
>> Mark
>>
>> On Dec 18, 2011, at 1:32 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> As I wrote yesterday, both Dynamic Quality and Sunyata, are nondualistic and, therefore, difficult to discuss.  And I am but a mere student of both the MoQ and Buddhism.   I use my own words when I think they might contribute something; otherwise, I consider opinions, yours and mine, like little puffy clouds in a big blue sky.  ;-)   If you want endless paraphrasing and fluff, there are others more willing to provide you with what you want.   Rather than offer opinion, I would suggest a meditation practice.
>>>
>>> While I am a decent cook, when it comes to making cookies and tortes, I do use a recipe.  I have one outstanding recipe for a Raspberry Marzipan Torte.  December 22nd is Yule, the Winter Solstice, I will be making cookies today for Thursday's celebration.
>>>
>>> Goddess bles you.
>>>
>>>
>>> Marsha
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 18, 2011, at 1:48 AM, 118 wrote:
>>>
>>>> Marsha,
>>>> You can keep saying this is so, but without an explanation as to why, it seems like you are just walking around with a bullhorn.  If somebody asks you what you are cooking do you run to look for a quote to answer?  Don't you use your own words?  That is all I am asking for.  I am too far away to bite you.
>>>>
>>>> God bless you.
>>>>
>>>> Sent laboriously from an iPhone,
>>>> Mark
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 17, 2011, at 7:50 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Mark,
>>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 17, 2011, at 11:54 AM, 118 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Marsha, how, specifically, does this relate to DQ, sq, and the levels of MoQ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Marsha:
>>>>> It is my opinion that Quality, or DQ, corresponds to Buddhism's Sunyata, or Emptiness, and that relationship has been established in Anthony's PhD and the MoQ Textbook:
>>>>>
>>>>> "The Dynamic Quality viewpoint of the MOQ corresponds to the notion of sunyata or nothingness as understood by Nagarjuna (a Mahayana Buddhist philosopher) while the static quality viewpoint (sammuti-sacca) of the MOQ corresponds to sunyavada (i.e. the conditioned component or world of maya)."
>>>>> (McWatt, Anthony, 'A Critical Analysis of Robert Pirsig’s Metaphysics of Quality')
>>>>>
>>>>> So I find it worth considering what the Buddhist's have to say about Emptiness, and what this particular presentation says about the importance of realizing Emptiness, or Dynamic Quality.  I find it a very thoughtful presentation.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Marsha
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 17, 2011, at 8:42 PM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Marsha,
>>>>>> Was it thoughtful in terms of your understanding of MoQ, or was it not
>>>>>> related to MoQ?  What did you think about?  That is, since it was
>>>>>> thoughtful, what thoughts did it produce?  Or, is that a secret?
>>>>>> Mark
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 11:06 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> Andre,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I found the presentation on Emptiness very thoughtful.  For what it's worth.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Marsha
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>>
>>>
>>> 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
> 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