[MD] Relativism, a definition

[Carl Thames]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "MarshaV" <valkyr at att.net>
To: <moq_discuss at moqtalk.org>
Sent: Wednesday, January 04, 2012 12:38 AM
Subject: Re: [MD] Relativism, a definition


>
> Hello Carl,
>
Marsha:
I can't really say.  I tried very hard to "get" the Hindu philosophy.  I 
read Patanjali so many times, and other texts, until my head began to swim. 
I learned and practiced hatha yoga, breathing techniques and meditation.  I 
spent many weekends going to retreats, and attended a two-week training 
session devoted to becoming a hatha yoga teacher.  But in the end I gave up 
because I couldn't "get it" and went back to university to give Western 
philosophy a try.  I eventually found ZAMM and then LILA.  I knew nothing 
about Buddhism until one day someone posted a few paragraphs of the Platform 
Sutra.  Those few paragraphs compelled me to read the full sutra, and then 
the Heart Sutra and the Diamond Sutra; then I read the MMK and more books on 
emptiness.  Blah, blah, blah...  The point is that I was ready to hear.  I 
was ready to see.  It was my experiences with Hinduism and western 
philosophy that attracted me to the MoQ, and it was the MoQ that pointed 
towards studying Buddhism and that helped me "get it", even to this low 
level.  The Wisdom that Buddhism offers is tremendous, yet its all 
interconnected.
>
> Now, one of my very favorite Hindu books is 'I Am That' by Sri 
> Nisargadatta Maharaj (a recommendation from someone on the MD).  I cannot 
> really separate Hinduism, the MoQ and Buddhism, and, of course and most 
> importantly: meditation/mindfulness.  I suppose if I reread Pantajali and 
> other of those Veda texts today, they would be far more understandable 
> than back in those early days.  Buddha was Hindu.  I suppose the point is 
> that they are pointing to the same moon.


Carl:
The only Hindu philosophy I've read so far has been the Bhagavad Gita.  It's 
18 chapters, taken from the Upanishads.  Supposedly, you can understand the 
chapters on 7 different levels.  I've gotten about 3, most of the time.  The 
surface reading, and from my understanding of the other levels, it basically 
boils down to "Do your duty."  That's easier at some times than others.  I 
think Buddha took that philosphy and boiled it down to a duty to yourself, 
and focused on that.  Buddha himself said that since we are all connected, 
he would not be able to enter Nirvana until everyone did.  I studied 
Buddhism on Okinawa and in Korea, (primarily Zen) and achieved the state it 
references wherein you're not attached to anything.  The problem with that 
was that I wasn't attached to my life either, which from a Buddhist 
perspective is a good thing, but I was being a tourist here.  I really don't 
think that's the point of our existence.  That realization forced me to 
detach myself from my detachment.  In the process, I came to the realization 
that meditation wasn't the destination, it was the vehicle.  As for 
mindfulness, that's also easier said than done.  It's way too easy to slip 
into thinking about upcoming events, or past events that may have had an 
impact on me.  Mindfulness, when done properly, (IMHO) is all about NOW. 
It's about being totally present in the here and now.  Also easier said than 
done.

After that I encountered Shamanism, beginning with the book, "The Way of the 
Shaman" by Michael Harner.  I did a Shamanic journey, had a fantastic 
result, and have been studying Shamanism since.  The basic tenets there is 
that we're all here to learn, to help us grow as a species.  It is 
interesting to me that the more I study Shamanism, the more apparent it is 
that the other religions all came from it.  They took an aspect or two, 
focused on them, and made them the core of their beliefs.  Shamanism 
provided the entire picture, instead of just parts.

As for how that relates to MoQ?  I don't know.  I don't remember Pirsig 
actually mentioning a spiritual context for his philosophy.  It could be 
that he's using the word "quality" to mean our spiritual essense, which 
Hinduism calls that part of ourselves that was never born and will never 
die. It is seperate from ego, and contains both the conscious and the 
unconscious.  I am thinking about that more and more, and still haven't 
arrived at any rational understanding, or at least not enough of an 
understanding that I'm comfortable explaining what I think about it.