Hi David,
Thank you for your response.  Just one comment in this thread below
(long-winded as usual):

On 1/23/12, David Harding <davidjharding@gmai...> wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
>
> I think, as I said earlier, that it's a matter of perspective.
> Fundamentally, we cannot define the universe. We always try and always get
> it wrong.   But that is fundamentally. There are two perspectives.  From the
> perspective of the Mystic, we cannot define anything. From the perspective
> of sq; everything is a definition.  Neither one nor the other is 'right'.
> This is the power of the dichotomy of the MOQ. It says that, in the end, the
> Mystics are right. But we can't avoid this defining so we should define
> things as best we can.

This is good, we can get back to what MoQ has to say about mysticism,
and how we can form a bridge, and I agree with what you say.  Of
course Marsha is a mystic as are we all.  The point is to recognize
that and embrace it.  I am not diminshing or changing the meaning of
mysticism here, as I understand it (intellectually and dynamically).
We cannot say that mysticism and the intellect are mutually exclusive
based on intellectual contemplation.  As we form the intellect in real
time, that is a mystical experience.

I often say (for the sake of argument) that much of our day exists
within the mystical.  That is, we operate as if Unity exists.  Our
bodies are one with everythinng else, for how could they not be.  Our
chemistry is constantly being rejuvenated as a tornado is always
losing and grabbing air.  There is no distinct demarkation between a
tornado and air, except for energy (which is invisible).

Our intellect gives us the perception that we are separate from that
which lies outside.  This is the basis for the logic behind soul, if
one believes in such a thing.  However, this term is overworn and has
a despicable history in the Modern world.  So I will not subscribe to
that word except in passing to say that its orignial intent is much
different from how the church presents it.  Instead I will point to
what we call "Self".  Of course the Self cannot be found through the
intellect, just as DQ cannot be found through sq.  This does not mean
that it doesn't exist (double negative), just like we assume DQ
exists.  Both are convenient terms to progress a conversation.  The
Self exists as much as a tornado does.  And a tornado is very real.
However, what is a tornado without the air?  It is obviously more than
the material no matter how much we seek to embrace it through
"causes".

What we do with the intellect is create a sense of awareness and
belonging.  This involves connecting dots as we do with constellations
and is very important.  Again, this does not mean that what we create
is a fabrication any more than saying a song is a fabrication and
therefore not real.  The development of sq is an expression of the
human variety, like a flower is expressed by a tree.  This intellect
gives us a sense of being part of, but at the same time it gives us an
existential sense of estrangement.  It is a fine balance, and we tend
towards the notion of separateness more and more.  The current
achievement of adulthood is based around being separate.  Our
buildings are not considered "natural", but of course they are
nonetheless.  In short, we loose touch with our mystical nature.  But,
listen to your heart beat, and ask whether that is separate from you
or if it is you.  Our intellect certainly does not have any control
over such a thing.  I believe it is important not to distance
mysticism as if it were a foreign phenomenon.  It requires nurturing.

In my opinion, MoQ seeks to reestablish the mystical awareness that we
have.  That is, it could provide an inroad into a rebalancing act.  In
Zen, the balance between physical maturity and "sense" maturity is
encouraged.  We tend to increase first with the physical, and it is
usually not until later in life that we seek the other side.  It would
appear that some never do, and never grow up.  Through the description
of the distinction between sq and DQ, MoQ may seek just the same thing
(IMO).  It is a sense of caring, and nurturing of the human spirit
(whatever that may mean to you).  And so, we have intellectual
knowledge on one side, and mystical awareness on the other.  We are
all capable of both in unison, but one cannot be "grasped" by the
other.  MoQ provides a dynamic and somewhat logical way to achieve
this.  In this sense, it is no different from Buddhism in its initial
goal.  The difference with Buddhism is the need to "escape".  I
personally do not see anywhere to escape to, and why would I want to.

The conservation of mass and energy, and their constant
interelationship through persiting forces suggests that our personal
awareness cannot be lost.  It can be seen as the apparition of a
tornado.  When a tornado goes away, where does it go?  A good question
to ponder is whether each time a tornado appears it is the same one,
or a different one.  Hard to tell, since  what we see is the
everchanging air.  Perhaps the tornado feels as if it were different
since all it has is the material to base this on.  However, we do
claim that a waterfall is persistent even if there are times when it
is dry.  It is still the same waterfall.

I have done some reading on the fundamental nature of mysticism as
described through the intellect, which is of course just a sign post
providing direction.  I also have some personal experiences of what
could be termed dissociation.  But, I am not a Mystic as the term is
currently being used.  I am no Shaman or Guru.  That was more for me,
since I have to keep reminding myself of that or else my ego will take
over.  I am "nothing much".

I am happy if there is any disagreement here.  For that is a spice of life.

All the best,
Mark


> 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