[MD] Reifying carrots

Sun Sep 11 21:26:55 PDT 2011

Whatever indeed.  Don't expect me to be consistent,  I change with every moment.  This is the nature of living in DQ.

I enjoy your posts as well.

Over and Out,

Mark

On Sep 10, 2011, at 11:59 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:

> 
> Mark,
> 
> My answer was the Hagen quote.  Don't like it?  Quibble with him.  
> Your posts are always interesting, and I enjoy reading them, but 
> I am not looking for you to tell me how it is.  For instance, 
> first you state that a teacher is a requirement, and then you state 
> a teacher has nothing to teach.  Whatever...  I did post to you Steve 
> Hagen's 'Epilogue:  Be a Light Unto Yourself'.   For me the  key is 
> mindfulness and meditation.   Sorry, but  I don't have answers for 
> you.   
> 
> Marsha 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On Sep 10, 2011, at 2:31 PM, 118 wrote:
> 
>> Gutten morgen Marsha,
>> I am not sure if you are avoiding my questions to be coy, or if you
>> have not yet thought of answers.  So I will wait on those.  In the
>> meantime, I will address your quote below in MoQ terms.
>> 
>> We create conceptual Reality with our intellects.  Such a thing is
>> termed comprehension.  This is what MoQ does, it creates a static view
>> of Reality so that we can share comprehension.   If I look it up on
>> Miriam-Webster, I come up with:  Comprehension --"the act of action of
>> grasping with the intellect".  Such "grasping" is the creation of
>> things with the intellect which happens within our brains and other
>> parts of our bodies.  We therefore comprehend things as long as we
>> intellectualize them, by simple definition.  If comprehension is
>> something other than that for you, I would like to hear how you define
>> comprehension.
>> 
>> To say that we cannot comprehend, means that we cannot
>> intellectualize.  Now, I can certainly do that, and do it all the time
>> with Reality; perhaps Steve Hagen cannot.  His "we" certainly does not
>> speak for me.  Perhaps he is speaking of his group of disciples.  Are
>> you one of those Marsha?
>> 
>> Every explanation of everything is provisional.  Science marches along
>> through the continual re-explanation of things.  Every time I eat a
>> fried egg, I have a new explanation for it.  To say we are done
>> explaining anything is a Flat Earth attitude.  It would seem that
>> Steve Hagen is putting himself on a Hegelian pedestal by claiming to
>> be able to fully explain something.  I would like to see him explain
>> the simplest thing, like a fly landing on his long nose.  I would tear
>> holes in it (the explanation, not the nose) quite easily.  All this
>> would take is some very simple Socratic questioning.
>> 
>> Reality is placed in a conceptual form every time we discuss it.  This
>> is the nature of the social level as it is utilizing the intellectual
>> level (and visa versa).  Perhaps Steve Hagen does not understand the
>> nature of static quality.  Reality does not fit into concepts because
>> it is created by concepts.  A Home does not fit into a house either,
>> so what?  This is pretentious rhetoric at best, and is not very
>> convincing to those of us outside of Steve Hagen's tight little circle
>> of followers.
>> 
>> Anyway, a few more questions for you to avoid discussing with me.  I
>> can only discuss things with you productively if you let me know what
>> you are thinking in terms of MoQ.
>> 
>> Namaste,
>> Your chat biatch,
>> Mark
>> 
>> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 10:39 PM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>  "We can't comprehend Reality with our intellects.  We can't pull it into a static view of some thing.  All our explanations are necessarily provisional.  They're just rigid frames of what is actually motion and fluidity.  In other words, if you think of how Reality is, you can be sure that's how it isn't.  Reality simply cannot be put into conceptual form --- not even through analogy, for there's no;thing like it.  Reality simply doesn't fit into concepts at all.
>>> 
>>> (Hagen, Steve, ‘Buddhism: Plain and Simple’, p.71)
>>> 
>>> _
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Sep 9, 2011, at 1:00 AM, 118 wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hallo M.
>>>> I will again ask, Marsha, if we are part of the illusion, what is it
>>>> an illusion of?  That is, what does it represent?  For example a
>>>> mirage of an oasis is an illusion of something we recognize.  Such an
>>>> illusion is misdirection, like mistaking a rope for a snake.  It is
>>>> what the Vedantins call Maya.  What is the illusion of a tiger and our
>>>> part in it representing in the REAL world?  Thinking about this may
>>>> help you along.
>>>> 
>>>> As the Zen teacher will tell you, he has nothing to teach.  And, he means it!
>>>> 
>>>> All the best,
>>>> Mark
>>>> 
>>>> On Sep 8, 2011, at 12:13 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I love this story...  A student asked his venerated Zen teacher, "If all is an illusion, should I run if a tiger chases me?"  "Yes!", said the teacher, "because you are a part of the illusion."
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Sep 8, 2011, at 2:33 AM, 118 wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Dear Marsha,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I have no idea what is REAL for you and what is PHONY, although I am
>>>>>> sure you do.  If I am driving through a neighborhood and two young
>>>>>> children suddenly appear crossing the street chasing a ball, that is
>>>>>> pretty REAL for me, and I slam on the breaks.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> ...
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 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