"The Dynamic Quality viewpoint of the MOQ corresponds to the notion of sunyata or nothingness  as understood by Nagarjuna  (a Mahayana Buddhist philosopher) while the static quality viewpoint (sammuti-sacca)  of the MOQ corresponds to sunyavada (i.e. the conditioned component or world of maya).  Sunyavada describes all the conceptions of reality including metaphysical views, ideals, religious beliefs, hopes and ambitions.  ...
‘Empty’ in the sense of lacking inherent existence i.e. the indeterminate or the world of Buddhas; literally, the realm of understanding or wakefulness. ‘The root-word buddh means to wake up, to know, to understand.’ (Nhat Hanh, 1987, p.13) This viewpoint considers that the nature of reality is fundamentally indeterminate and interconnected. Out of the indeterminate arise the determinate aspects that are usually conceptualised in the West as subjects and objects.
Though scholars now believe the name ‘Nagarjuna’ refers to events that occurred to more than one person, a philosopher of that name definitely existed in the second century C.E. His principal philosophical work was the Madhyamakakarika. Williams (1989, p.55) notes that: ‘Nagarjuna is the first great name in Buddhist thought since the Buddha, and for that reason (among others) he is sometimes referred to as the “second Buddha”.’
The ‘conditioned’ is everything dependent (or caused) by sunyata (which is ‘unconditioned’).
Literally ‘illusion’ but only in the sense that it is illusory to believe that people and the objects of their world are permanent, independent and unchanging.
Real in the sense of being useful conceptualisations but illusory in the sense of having independent or absolute existence. As the eighth century philosopher Shankara related to a student who asked him if you should run if being chased by a mad elephant: ‘Yes, because you’re part of the same illusion!’ (Di Santo & Steele, 1990, p.61)"
> > Ian said to dmb: > I don't find anything oxymoronic in Marsha pointing out that static patterns are themselves ever changing dynamically (evolving I would say). > > > dmb says: > > If you can't grasp difference between stability and constant change, then you have no business discussing anything that requires precision of meaning. > > > That was the reason and here is the evidence... > > > > RMP: > "With the identification of static and Dynamic Quality as the fundamental division of the world, Phaedrus felt that some kind of goal had been reached. ..Life can't exist on Dynamic Quality alone. It has no staying power. To cling to Dynamic Quality alone apart from any static patterns is to cling to chaos." "...static patterns, nevertheless, provide a necessary stabilizing force to protect Dynamic progress from degeneration. Although Dynamic Quality, the Quality of freedom, creates this world in which we live, these patterns of static quality, the quality of order, preserve our world. Neither static nor Dynamic Quality can survive without the other." > > 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