[MD] Indeterminism

[Ian Glendinning]

Not me, Ron.
Ian

On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 2:58 PM, X Acto <xacto at rocketmail.com> wrote:

>
>
> Ian said (i think):
> The assumption in your comment seems to go beyond just using conventional
> (pronouns) language.  Really, which pattern gets it right or wrong?
>
> So again:
>
>
> "While I am thinking about it there is a very good book on Buddhism
> recently out called 'Buddhism, Plain and Simple', by Steve Hagen and
> published by Tuttle Publishing. I recommend you get it because it shows the
> similarities, between the MOQ and Zen Buddhism more clearly than any other I
> have seen."
>
> Pirsig to McWatt, May 6th 1998.
>
> ---
>
>
> "When the Buddha spoke of individuals, he often used a different term
> “stream.”  Imagine a stream flowing --- constantly moving and changing,
> always different from one moment to the next.  Most of us see ourselves as
> corks floating in a stream, persisting things moving along in the stream of
> time.  But this is yet another frozen view.  According to this view.
> everything in the stream changes except the cork.  While we generally admit
> to changes in our body, our mind, our thoughts, our feelings, our
> understandings, and our beliefs, we still believe, “I myself don’t change.
> I’m still me.  I’m an unchanging cork in an ever-changing stream.”  This is
> precisely what we believe the self to be --- something that doesn’t change.
>
> "The fact is, however, that there are no corks in the stream.  There is
> only stream.  What we conceptualize as “cork” is also stream.  We are like
> music.  Music, after all, is a type of stream.  Music exists only in
> constant flow and flux and change.  Once the movement stops, the music is no
> more.  It exists not as a particular thing, but as pure coming and going
> with no thing that comes or goes.
>
>   "Look at this carefully.  If this is true --- how a stream exists, how
> music exists, and how we exist --- see how it is that when we insert the
> notion of “I” we’re posited some little, solid entity that floats along, not
> as stream, but like a cork in a stream.  We see ourselves as solid corks,
> not as the actual stream we are.
>
> "If we are the stream, what is it that experiences the flux, the flow, the
> change?  The Buddha saw that there is no particular thing that is having an
> experience.  There is experience, but no experiencer.  There is perception,
> but no perceiver.  This is consciousness, but no self that can be located or
> identified."
>
>
> (Hagen, Steve, ‘Buddhism: Plain and Simple’, p.128)
>
>
>
> Ron :
> Ian, once we understand this that we are the stream, we can begin to
> understand where Zeno and Parmenides
> were coming from when proposing that change and motion are" illusional" and
> that the prime mover is "immovable"
>
>  changes movement and flux are pedicated on distinctions such as self and
> perciever, change must have a relational
> value, it must rest on conception.
>
> It makes one wonder about the accuracy of the conception of DQ as
> "ever-changing"..
>
>
> ...
> 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
>