[MD] self

[MarshaV]

On Oct 8, 2011, at 1:35 PM, 118 wrote:

> Hi Marsha,
> This is not a question of existence, it is about belief.  Existence as presented is a static concept.  Belief is much deeper than that.

No, it is not a question, it is a tetralemma.   There is Value(Dynamic/static).  I have no idea how you define or assign "deeper than that".?  


> Of course it is appropriate to bring in static concepts such as physics (I do it all the time) as a raft to cross the river.  Once across, the raft is left behind.  Staying on the raft of To Be or Not to Be misses the point, IMO. 

Well, that's interesting...  It's always nice to be served a little Hamlet with a post.  Here "There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.."  


> MoQ is not a bridge between awarenesses, it is awareness in and of itself.  

Steve Hagen's statement reflected the Buddha emphasizing how the Buddha summarized his teaching using the word 'awareness' because you seemed to state it was by using dialectics.  You compared him to Socrates.  The words I find most inspiring from Socrates were the words he got from the Pythia's temple in Delphi, "Know thyself." 


> Drop the static, embrace the dynamic.  Not with words but with actions.  Leave that raft behind and start walking.

I suggest the same for you.  Or as Steve Job stated "Stay hungry, stay foolish."  


> Cheers,
> 
> Mark

Love, 

Marsha 




> 
> On Oct 7, 2011, at 1:06 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> 
>> Greetings Mark,
>> 
>> Indeed, why would one deny existence to what has never been found to exist in the first place?   And so, one cannot say that the self exists;  one cannot say that the self does not exist;  one cannot say that self both exists and does not exist;  one cannot say that the self neither exists nor does not exist.  Yet, statically (conventionally) the self is reified into inherent existence all the time.  It seems a MAJOR habit of thought.  Karma?  
>> 
>> In some schools of Buddhism, there seems to be two types of nirvana.  Maybe Khoo can explain.   
>> 
>> That '"static quality’ refers to anything that can be conceptualised" makes me curious about cognitive science's investigation into consciousness, and its relationship with the conventional notion of self.  What is the relationship between Quality and consciousness?  And what of the suggestions that consciousness be seen as a major force in the Universe?   There are some really interesting questions being raised.  As I am sure you know, Tibetan Buddhism, headed by the Dalai Lama, is involved in dialogues concerning both physics and cognitive science.  By trying to follow these dialogues, I find I learn more about Buddhism, cognitive science and quantum physics.  Since the MoQ is bridge between East and West, this is not only extremely interesting, it also seems the right thing to do.  But bottom line, for me, Reality = Quality(unpatterned experience/patterned experience), there's nothing Ultimately to cling to...     
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Oct 6, 2011, at 6:24 PM, 118 wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Marsha,
>>> Gautama was a philosopher in the same vein as Socrates.  He used dialectics to bring about understanding.  Any writings of his philosophy were written after he was dead,  sometimes a long time.  The same can be said for Jesus and Solomon.  Buddha had a disregard for writing since he knew such words are always misinterpreted and abused.  
>>> 
>>> He was confronted with a self-adsorbed society where the ego was rampant (sound familiar?). People imagined that they were their thoughts.  As was his custom, he professed to those types that the Self does not exist.  Each situation required a different type of approach.  This is a method of dialectics to wake one up.  The end goal of such "bargaining" was to achieve the Middle Way.  He would never say that there was really no Self since that is an attempt at enlightenment through extremes; something that he abandoned.  If one wants to counter ones current thinking with the opposite to achieve the Middle Way, then that is good.  If one truly believes that there is no self, Nirvana cannot be reached.  Nirvana means to breath out.  That is, to not cling to one's breath.  Believing in No-Self is like holding one's breath.
>>> 
>>> Mark
>>> 
>>> On Oct 6, 2011, at 2:49 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Greetings,
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> For others who might be interested in consciousness and are no-self absorbed, I just started reading another book on the subject and would recommend it as excellent: 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 'Self, No Self?: Perspectives from Analytical, Phenomenological, and Indian Traditions', edited by Mark Siderits, Evan Thompson & Dan Zahavi.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0199593809  
>>>> 
>>>> Editorial Review:  
>>>> 
>>>> Self, No-Self? is a welcome product of a rare endeavor: the attempt to bring insights from diverse schools of thought to bear on a question of deep philosophical interest... Drawing upon considerations from various schools of Buddhism, Indian Philosophy, phenomenology, analytic philosophy, and cognitive science, the papers in Self, No-Self? cannot fail to advance both the reader's understanding of the issues at play and her grasp of the history of the non-Western approaches to those issues. Although the self is the main focus of this collection, students of the nature and structure of consciousness will find much food for thought... It is a virtue of this collection that it draws attention to the connection between the study of the self and subjectivity and the issues of the nature of consciousness... Robert J.Howell, Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews. 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 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


 
___