[MD] dark night

[MarshaV]

Hi Joe,

It is a beautiful translation, isn't it?   I thought the references to darkness made it particularly poignant.


Marsha 




On Jun 27, 2012, at 12:12 PM, Joseph Maurer wrote:

> Beautiful:
> 
> 
> On 6/26/12 1:17 PM, "MarshaV" <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> 
>> Tao Te Ching
>> 
>> Chapter One
>> 
>> The tao that can be told
>> is not the eternal Tao
>> The name that can be named
>> is not the eternal Name.
>> 
>> The unnamable is the eternally real.
>> Naming is the origin
>> of all particular things.
>> 
>> Free from desire, you realize the mystery.
>> Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations.
>> 
>> Yet mystery and manifestations
>> arise from the same source.
>> This source is called darkness.
>> 
>> Darkness within darkness.
>> The gateway to all understanding.
>> 
>>       (Written by Lao-tzu
>>        From a translation by S. Mitchell)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jun 26, 2012, at 2:58 PM, Joseph  Maurer <jhmau at comcast.net> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi Marsha and All,
>>> 
>>> "Fundamental nature" is a mouthful!  Is it a definition for reality?  I
>>> conceptualize "logic" as being unable to describe evolution in terms of
>>> SQ/DQ, defined/indefinable reality.
>>> 
>>> Indefinable reality is individualized DQ and can only be described in
>>> analogical terms.  The acceptance of indefinable DQ reality reveals
>>> sentience DQ/SQ.
>>> 
>>> In the past S/O was proposed as a logical (metaphysical) base.  This placed
>>> sentience in a horrible bind to define all of reality. This made definition
>>> equal to a mathematical certainty, denying evolution.  Creation was more
>>> acceptable than metaphysics.  Metaphysics is logic beyond mathematics.
>>> Evolution is logical as levels in existence.
>>> 
>>> Pirsig saw that there are indefinable emotions like love.  "Definition" is
>>> not a metaphysical term but a physical term.  Something in our experience
>>> remains indefinable DQ.  I do not like the term "fundamental nature".  I
>>> prefer "evolution" as levels in existence.
>>> 
>>> Joe  
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 6/25/12 1:31 PM, "MarshaV" <valkyr at att.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> But under it all, the fundamental nature of sq is DQ.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 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


 
___