[MD] emptiness

[MarshaV]

Mark,

Without X, its antidote -X does not exist. 

If you speak from the Ultimate perspective, you would sound like one hand clapping.  But, by golly, you make too much noise. Imho.  


Marsha





Sent from my iPad

On Jan 4, 2012, at 1:03 AM, 118 <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:

> Things do not exist as static patterns of value, that is what we make them.
> 
> Sent laboriously from an iPhone,
> Mark
> 
> On Jan 2, 2012, at 8:54 AM, MarshaV <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Hello Ham,
>> 
>> Sent from my iPad
>> 
>> On Jan 2, 2012, at 2:32 AM, "Ham Priday" <hampday1 at verizon.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Mark, and a Happy New Year to All --
>>> 
>>> On Friday, 12/23/2011 at 1:17 AM, Mark "118" <ununoctiums at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi Ham,
>>>> I am attempting as best I can to not make Marsha feel put upon.
>>>> You know my opinion, so I can understand why you are confused.
>>>> 
>>>> Two things that inherently exist?  How about a dog and a sunflower.
>>>> I can provide more if you want, for example you exist inherently,
>>>> believe it or not.  There is nothing conventional about these things,
>>>> they are all uniquely unconventional.  Show me something
>>>> conventional and I will show you a mistake.  I have been where
>>>> you are and back.  Trust me.
>>> 
>>> Marsha has misconstrued Buddhism as a philosophy founded on nihilism, and this does an injustice to Pirsig's Quality thesis.  I had hoped to see the promised outline of your ontology over the holidays, which is why this response is delayed.
>>> 
>> 
>> Not true.  To be a nihilist, would be to believe things do not exist at all.  Things do conventionally exist; they exist as patterns of value; they exist as useful fiction (as in the tale of Nagasena and King Milinda).
>> 
>> 
>> Marsha
>> 
>>