[MD] Static Patterns Rock!

[MarshaV]

Andre,


On Oct 12, 2013, at 1:32 PM, Andre Broersen wrote:

> Andre to Marsha:
> That's not the point Marsha and you know it. I am not making the claims you make!
> When you are constantly trying to undermine the MoQ by appeals to vipassana experiences, seeing bits and pieces of your self floating by, living in the now and repeating again and again that all is emptiness anyway(so why bother) no wonder I find your hypothetical statement about YOUR experience trumping explanation odd, to say the least.
> 
> Your response above is just another cowardly Lucy action.
> 
> Marsha responds:
> Are you trying to articulate between one interested in self liberation and one on the Bodhisattva path,because I am a mere student, have never claimed otherwise, and have no idea of your high-minded complaints.
> 
> Andre:
> A typical Lucy action: denial in innocence. The first bit of the sentence is stupid but the last bit gets tricky because that is a blatant lie. You DO have an idea of my complaints. Of the way your anti-intellectual nihilation of Pirsig's MoQ positions itself every time you write something here.


You have no skill for mind reading, and I have no interest in deciphering you nonsensical opinions.   
 
 
 
 Marsha 


> 
> On Oct 10, 2013, at 6:16 AM, Andre Broersen wrote:
> 
>> Marsha to Andre:
>> Andre, whose guns do you stick to?
>> 
>> Andre:
>> That's not the point Marsha and you know it. I am not making the claims you make!
>> When you are constantly trying to undermine the MoQ by appeals to vipassana experiences, seeing bits and pieces of your self floating by, living in the now and repeating again and again that all is emptiness anyway(so why bother) no wonder I find your hypothetical statement about YOUR experience trumping explanation odd, to say the least.
>> 
>> Your response above is just another cowardly Lucy action.
>> 
>> dmb responded:
>> 
>> There are countless ways to cultivate that of presence of mind and it's clear that Pirsig is recommending a Zen-like identification with the task at hand - but it's weird that Marsha thinks her experience "trumps the explanation". The most obvious reason why this can't be true is that there is no way for anyone to examine Marsha's experience. We can only examine her explanation of that experience. When that explanation is placed next to Pirsig's explanation it's quite easy to see that Marsha has a lot of explaining to do.
>> 
>> Andre:
>> Exactly. And that is what she fails do, over and over again. She suggested in an earlier post she's not interested in Wilber which is a shame because I find his 'model' pertinently applicable here. Especially the part where he suggests that first person (interior) experiences are fine (his 'upper left' quadrant) but there is also the 'lower left quadrant' referring to the cultural-collective (interior) experiences. This involves communication, dialogue with people cultivating similar techniques to achieve similar experiences. It is a safeguard to becoming a culture of one, or becoming grandioze in your understanding of your own experience.
>> 
>> The Buddhists have the sangha of course, the community of people following buddhist practices sharing with eachother their experiences and thoughts. It's a way of reaching a 'higher', a better understanding of one's own first person experiences. A sort of 'transcending' of one's egocentric self-understanding, -interpretation and -explanation.
>> 
>> Tradesmen and professionals wanting to improve their knowledge and skills to work on their respective cycles meet and share information and insights on a daily basis. If I want to improve my cooking skills I do not go to a lawyer. I meet cooks and read books on the subject preferably in the kitchen for immediate application and experimentation.
>> 
>> Needles to say Marsha simply refuses to do this. As matter of fact, she's in the wrong kitchen all together but she simply doesn't realise this either.
>> 
>> dmb:
>> Did somebody say something about missing the point?
>> 
>> Andre:
>> My point exactly.
>> 

> No wonder I get a quirky/unreal feeling everytime you express 'concern' for someone or some situation: you are fake. There is nothing genuine in your writing at all. Nothing carries meaning, nothing is real. All seems to be a challenge (this is ego stuff). There is no heart and there's no intelligence. There's just a pseudo, new agey 'I'd rather hug-a-tree' type thing when you write something.
> 
> It simply says: Fuck off, leave me alone, I'm the best judge of my own experience. I'll even criticise Pirsig for producing a metaphysics that doesn't comply to my experience...and you can say anything you want!!! I will not budge.
> 
> This is a shame because this is a site where we are discussing Pirsig's MoQ and not yours.
> 
> And before you get personal, all this is hypothetically speaking of course.






 
___