2009.03.29 19:00 - "You'll be absolutely free, only if you want to be", Frank Zappa

    Table of contents
    No headers

    The Guardian for this meeting was stevenaia Michinaga. The comments are by stevenaia Michinaga.

    Pila Mulligan greeted me with Trevor Berensohn rezzing in the distance


    Pila Mulligan: hi Steve
    Pila Mulligan: hi Trevor
    stevenaia Michinaga: hello
    Trevor Berensohn: I'm just waiting on the rezz =)
    stevenaia Michinaga: lots of emails
    stevenaia Michinaga: today
    stevenaia Michinaga: hello Mystic
    Trevor Berensohn: Two ppl here? Or will more rezz..
    stevenaia Michinaga: Trevoe, rather
    stevenaia Michinaga: hi pema
    Pila Mulligan: maybe more -- the chat starts at 7 SLT, but not regularly

    Pema Pera arrives


    Pila Mulligan: hi Pema
    Trevor Berensohn: Pema! Hello!
    Pema Pera: Hi TREVOR ! ! ! !
    Pema Pera: How nice to see you again -- been so long ! ! ! !
    Trevor Berensohn: If I knew how to animate myself I'd hug ya!
    Pema Pera: hehehe
    Pema Pera: well, we'll give a virtual virtual hug :-)
    Pema Pera: and hi Pila and Steve!
    stevenaia Michinaga: already did
    Trevor Berensohn: Thank you Steve
    stevenaia Michinaga: I'm packing hugs
    Trevor Berensohn: Hahah
    Pila Mulligan: licensed?
    Pema Pera: Would you like to join our guaridan guild again Trevor?
    Trevor Berensohn: Probably not at present, as I'm only on sporadically
    Pema Pera: okay, as you like, you of course have a standing invitation to return
    Pema Pera: Pila, Trevor is one of the very first guardians
    stevenaia Michinaga: thanks for setting up the Wiki for the new RL retreat info,
    Pema Pera: going back almost a year
    Pila Mulligan: hi Threedee
    Pema Pera: yw, Steve
    Pema Pera: hi Threedee!
    Trevor Berensohn: Oh thank you Pema. This is a wonderful group of ppl
    stevenaia Michinaga: hello Three
    Threedee Shepherd: ho folks
    Pema Pera: we now have close to sixty guardians, believe it or not
    Pila Mulligan: and a lion
    Threedee Shepherd: hio
    Trevor Berensohn: Wow amazing
    Pema Pera: we started with 8 or 9 or so
    Pema Pera: yes, we even have lions to extra guard :-)
    Threedee Shepherd: ^.^
    stevenaia Michinaga: and a bunny or two
    Pila Mulligan: and a tiger
    Pema Pera: and a teddy bear
    stevenaia Michinaga: oh my
    Pila Mulligan: :)
    Trevor Berensohn: Yes there were many creatures when last I visited
    Pema Pera: Moon, you know him, Trevor
    Pema Pera: a dragon
    Trevor Berensohn: whoops I lagged sorry

    Pila brings up a discussion from last night as a continued discussion for tonight

    Pila Mulligan: maybe Pema and Threedee would like to continue the disucssion that was mentioned in Pems'a email
    Pema Pera: Threedee, I have a question about something you said a day ago:
    Pila Mulligan: :)
    Pema Pera: ah, yes, Pila, great minds think alike :)
    Pema Pera: Threedee Shepherd: Pema, it would seem that for someone in (1) the leap to (2) would have no disadvantages--at least logically. Yet, there is a clear feeling within me (at least now) that keeps the muscles from jumping. Not a wish, a sensed embodiment.
    Pila Mulligan: I wish
    Pema Pera: I recognize the feeling you expressed myself
    Pema Pera: and I find it odd myself, that kind of all too human reaction
    Threedee Shepherd: yes...
    Pema Pera: perhaps we can all say something about that, trying to figure it out
    Pema Pera: this afternoon I quoted the great American philosopher Frank Zappa:
    Pema Pera: "you'll be absolutely free, only if you want to be"
    Threedee Shepherd: well, I was thinking about that tonight as I was driving home from dinner out.
    Pila Mulligan: I thought Zappa was Dutch :)
    Pema Pera: wouldn't we wish!
    Trevor Berensohn: Hmmm
    stevenaia Michinaga: smiles
    Pila Mulligan: what were 1 and 2 again, please?
    Pema Pera: just a sec
    Pema Pera: Pema Pera: when we feel/sense moments of timelessness, we have a choice of interpretation -- even if there is no "belief" involved Pema Pera: let us say we have a choice of two hypotheses to follow Threedee Shepherd: ok Pema Pera:
    1) we exist in the world, and for whatever physiological/ psychological reasons, we have that kind of wonderful sensation 

    Pema Pera:
    2) those are moments that show cracks in the too limited belief in a world that exists in space and time, and something wider shines through "out of Plato's cave" so to speak, totally different Pema Pera: I sense that you follow hypothesis 1) and I follow hypothesis 2)

    Pema Pera: and then we talked about that for a few hours :-)
    Pila Mulligan: :)
    Trevor Berensohn: Can't we just choose to revisit the moments of timelessness?
    Pema Pera: so what is holding us back?
    Pila Mulligan: so are we to assume there is a discontinuity between 1 and 2 :)
    Pema Pera: yes, we can and we can walk right through that portal, Trevor, but we are afraid it seems
    Trevor Berensohn: Hmm yes I can relate to that too
    Threedee Shepherd: It seemed to me that the concrete road beneath the wheels of my car, the steering wheel I was grasping, the mountain in the distance, partly snow covered simply WERE, were as in real. Then I said to myself, that works, even with no words. I then wonder what else might BE, in any sense of the word BE.
    Pema Pera: Pila, the emphasis was on "exist"
    Pila Mulligan: how hih is the mountain, how deep is the snow (Pila sings)
    Pema Pera: :)
    Threedee Shepherd: I know that naming is categorizing, yet the experienced aspects required no words, only embodiment to interact with them
    Pema Pera: ah, but as long as thoughts continue, concepts continue, Three
    Trevor Berensohn: Hmmm I never find adequate words or concepts for that, um, experience myself
    Pila Mulligan: sensing a moment of existence that suggests something wider ...
    Pila Mulligan: wider than what seems a fair question
    Threedee Shepherd: Well, in my opinion Descartes got the first part right I thinkl (although I would restate that as "thinking is."
    Pema Pera: footnote: I was delighted that Three and I could find enough common ground to describe similarities and differences, but in no way would I want to suggest that others share the same definitions of 1) and 2), etc -- we probably need many translations, perhaps even for any pair of participants here.
    Threedee Shepherd: very likely true, Pema
    Pema Pera: PaB should have no formulas, definitions, other than talk about play and Being, I think
    stevenaia Michinaga: very
    Pema Pera: but for communication, we can build temporary floating devices :)
    Pila Mulligan: I think a distinction can be found simply in the quality of sensing
    Pema Pera: rafts
    Threedee Shepherd: Ok Pema, what assumptions are already hidden in the word "talk". I think that is important in understanding our varying views
    Pila Mulligan: one day the mountain is just the same old mountain
    Pila Mulligan: one day it is an epiphany
    Pila Mulligan: hi ELiza
    Pema Pera: Hi there Eliza!
    Threedee Shepherd: hi
    Trevor Berensohn: Ha much the same
    Trevor Berensohn: Hello Eliza
    Eliza Madrigal: Hello Pila, Pema, Steven, Three, Trevor :))
    stevenaia Michinaga: hello Eliza
    Pema Pera: yes, Pila, starting close to such phenomena would lead to a different dialogue than Three and I had yesterday
    Pema Pera: equally valid, different starting points
    Pila Mulligan: my first question was really how wouold you and two define the distinctions between 1 and 2, since you seem to have identiifed with thems separately for dialoug purposes
    Pema Pera: Three, do you want to describe those?
    Threedee Shepherd: I'll try
    Threedee Shepherd: (1) takes as an axiom--an accepted reality if you will--that there is a physical world of stuff and forces/energies/essences, whether Ihumans exist or not. more...
    Threedee Shepherd: Caps not intended
    Pila Mulligan: :)
    Pema Pera: but great effect nonetheless :)
    Pila Mulligan: - 30 - ?
    Pila Mulligan: typographers reference :)
    Pila Mulligan: following more ...
    Pila Mulligan: means end?
    Threedee Shepherd: (2) subsumes (1) as just one of many possible ways experience is perceived, not as a "tangible" given. As I understand where Pema and I ended up, he suggests that starting with (1) as an axiom, limits my possible thinking of other than (1), because I already assert a standpoint
    Pila Mulligan: thnaks
    Pema Pera: As for me, I accept Three's definition of 1), and for 2) I could simply say: what the heart sutra says
    Pema Pera: since anything more specific than that dresses 2) up in the clothes of 1) and will likely lead to confusion
    Pema Pera: No ignorance, no end to ignorance; No old age and death, no cessation of old age and death; No suffering, no cause or end to suffering, no path, No wisdom and no gain.
    Pema Pera: and so on
    Threedee Shepherd: remind me of the simple heart sutra statement, please
    Pema Pera: let me get a URL
    Threedee Shepherd: No reality, no happening, I would say
    Pema Pera: just a sec
    Pila Mulligan: so a world wider than that existing in space and time would be Pema's Place, where Threedee dare not tread?
    Threedee Shepherd: no, I would go there FROM here, where HERE is a real instantiation within that wider realm
    Trevor Berensohn: Hmm but can the reality of it even be verified?

    Mangolope Whalen and Riddle Sideways join us

    stevenaia Michinaga: hello Mangalope
    Pila Mulligan: hi Mangolope
    Mangolope Whalen: Hi :))
    stevenaia Michinaga: have a seat
    Mangolope Whalen: thank you
    Pema Pera: I wouldn't say "wider", Pila
    Eliza Madrigal: Hello Mangolope, Riddle
    Pema Pera: nor would I say "going from or to"
    Riddle Sideways: sorry I so late
    Pema Pera: btw, the Heart Sutra is here: http://heartofus.wordpress.com/chants/hannya-shingyo/
    Pema Pera: my favorite translation
    Pema Pera: (there are many)
    Threedee Shepherd: Pila, no it cannot be verified. However, I accept the statement that everything that is verified is true, however, everything that is true cannot necessarily be verified.
    Pila Mulligan: hi Riddle
    Riddle Sideways: Hi Everybody
    Pema Pera: Hi Riddle!
    Trevor Berensohn: Hey newcomers =)
    Mangolope Whalen grins
    Pema Pera: Have you been here before, Mangolope?
    Threedee Shepherd: One way to restate the "form of the Heart Sutra seems to me to be: No X, no Non-X.
    Mangolope Whalen: Nope
    stevenaia Michinaga: I invited her this evening
    Pema Pera: ah, welcome
    Riddle Sideways: can there be false positives
    Mangolope Whalen: thank you
    Pema Pera: sukoshi nihongo mo hanashimasu ka?
    Threedee Shepherd: however I asert that there is some X that is the universe, even when I stop believing in it.
    Mangolope Whalen: nihongo o amari hanashimasen
    Pema Pera: and I would say: there is the presence of the appearance of something that we tend to interpret as the universe
    Pema Pera: :-)
    Threedee Shepherd: There cannot be false positives if the process that is implied by verified is adequately defined (and if there S reality)
    Pema Pera: but the whole logic of 2) is totally different from 1) . . . .
    Pema Pera: and the Heart Sutra is showing that by cutting through
    Threedee Shepherd: Not once, in all my life, has the ground beneath my feet or car wheels suddenly ceased to exist. I count on that (no earthquakes, please, that is shifting only)
    Pila Mulligan: :)
    Pila Mulligan: but beneath your airplane it did
    Pema Pera: what is more, Three, is never has existed, so it CANNOT cease to exist
    Pema Pera: it is always more radical than we *think*

    Eliza Madrigal and aurel Miles arrive...

    Eliza Madrigal: Hello Aurel :)
    Pema Pera: Hi Aurel!
    Threedee Shepherd: Yes, Pema. the logic of (2) is stated as "The Way that can be known is not the Way."
    Pila Mulligan: hi aurel
    aurel Miles: hello
    aurel Miles: Hi everyone
    Pema Pera: yes, Threedee
    aurel Miles: please don't let me interrupt
    Trevor Berensohn waves to aurel
    aurel Miles waves back
    Threedee Shepherd: I find such Koans "mind-expanding" and demanding that I look "sideways" to see MORE, not denials of the reality Philip K. Dick describes
    Riddle Sideways: just repeating "the known is not the way" makes the ground shake and go non-existant
    Pema Pera: the trick is to drop who seems to be doing the looking . . .
    Pema Pera: looking backwards :-)
    Trevor Berensohn: Erm how to do that, Pema
    Threedee Shepherd: I have dropped the "who , who seems to be doing the looking" I have not dropped "the looking is \"
    Riddle Sideways: the most interesting things happen in perphial (sp?) vision
    Pema Pera: we cannot do it, Trevor, no way :)
    Pema Pera: but we can open up for what already is
    Trevor Berensohn: haha well put Pema
    Pema Pera: there are so many levels in dropping that kind of self or I, Threedee: each time I think I have done it, a little later I find a more subtle form
    Pema Pera: there are many many many layers
    Pema Pera: each next one more interesting
    Pema Pera: take the "I" who has dropped the "who" for example
    Threedee Shepherd: *I* is a shorthand for a useful, real spatio-temporal locus in a potentially multidimensional universe, that is the source of doing
    Riddle Sideways: peeling the onion/lotus is sooo much fun
    Pema Pera: who/what is that?
    Pema Pera: that needs to be dropped, yes, Three.
    Trevor Berensohn: lol no such thing
    Pema Pera: the firm belief in such a world
    Pema Pera: or put on hold at least
    Pema Pera: up for grabs
    Threedee Shepherd: Pema is there anything?
    Riddle Sideways: many like keeping one foot on know soil
    Pema Pera: there is the presence of appearance
    Riddle Sideways: which inhibits moving on
    Pema Pera: and Being IS but Being's IS is very difference from our seeming "is" . .
    Threedee Shepherd: how do you know that?
    Threedee Shepherd: that there is a presence of appearance?
    Trevor Berensohn: Um, the experience of it
    Trevor Berensohn: Or wait, is experience & presence.. same thing?
    stevenaia Michinaga: lol
    Pema Pera: (sorry, I followed the 90 seconds silence)
    Threedee Shepherd: what is aware of that presence of experience?
    Trevor Berensohn: Whoops
    Pema Pera: (while the fountain becomes mysty)
    Riddle Sideways: that fountain is amazing
    Trevor Berensohn: Hmmm the awareness itself?
    Pema Pera: a new experiment: 9 sec dropping in RL, 90 sec in SL
    Threedee Shepherd: tautology
    Pema Pera: I don't know it, as much as that I take it as a hypothesis, Three
    Pema Pera: a working hypothesis
    Pema Pera: but all that I have intuited and experienced is in agreement
    Riddle Sideways: if you don't have the awareness, does it mean the presence is not there?
    Pila Mulligan contemplates Plato's Allegory of the Elephant
    Pema Pera: and it certainly makes life a lot easier and also more effective
    Threedee Shepherd: is in agreement with what?
    Pema Pera: in agrement with the working hypothesis that 2) is true
    Eliza Madrigal: So Pema, what we call water, you see as an aspect of being that has appeared as "water"...metaphor....though it seems/is tangible (enough to swim in and have our eyes sting from) from this (in-world) view...?
    Pema Pera: that would still be too concrete, Eliza; rather
    Threedee Shepherd: Nothing i have experienced denies (1) not undermines the possibility of (2) as long as I try to experience and not use words
    Pema Pera: each moment, you could say, Being expresses itself through the given-together-ness
    Threedee Shepherd: nor undermines
    Pema Pera: or all that appears in that moment, and what we interpret then as separate subjects
    Pema Pera: and objects and distances and all that
    Pema Pera: So, Eliza, the way you asked the question already buys into an acceptance of separation and distances
    Pema Pera: that itself has to be dropped
    Pema Pera: it is very very radical, and not easy to find at first how to do that
    Eliza Madrigal: Wouldn't Being have projected it?
    Pema Pera: that is still too much thnking in terms of 1)
    Pema Pera: Being IS in every single aspect of every appearance
    Threedee Shepherd: yes, Pema, a half-hour bus ride from here to there takes a half-hour. That is simply an experience, needing no concepts
    Pema Pera: no projecting, no separation, no distance, no coming, no going
    Pema Pera: not so simple, Threedee :)
    Pema Pera: lots of concepts in there already
    Riddle Sideways: yes, not so simeple
    Pema Pera: does that make sense, Eliza?
    Eliza Madrigal: :) It is....
    Eliza Madrigal: But as for articulating what I see in a wider view...not so easy
    Threedee Shepherd: Ok, I really would appreciate an example, Pema, of howNo projecting/separation/etc. , "certainly makes [Your} life a lot easier and also more effective
    Pema Pera: but good to try, Eliza, to find out "what gives way"
    Pema Pera: anything is an example, Threedee, any worry, need, problem

    Pema explains to clearify....


    Pema Pera: Let me try this:
    Pema Pera: we know about two ways to conquer a knot, like a Gordian knot, a knotty problem too
    Pema Pera: 1) slowly unravel
    Pema Pera: 2) cut through
    Threedee Shepherd: Is that because in 2-logic anything is no-thing
    Pema Pera: 3) see that the knot never existed in the first place
    Trevor Berensohn chuckles again
    Pema Pera: got ya!
    Pema Pera: hehe
    Pema Pera: so I'm talking about 3)
    Pema Pera: and that applies to anything
    Threedee Shepherd: yes, that is what I just asked.
    Pema Pera: a worry about illness
    Pema Pera: a worry about a deadline
    Pema Pera: a worry about mistakes I'm making
    Pema Pera: a remorse or guild
    Pema Pera: or feeling of inferiority
    Pema Pera: a need I perceive to have
    Pema Pera: a willingness to help but seeing my own limitations
    Pema Pera: all of those, Three, take on a completely liberated form in 2)
    Threedee Shepherd: So, if I stop worrying about, thinking about, believing in Type-II diabetes, I can tell my wife to stop nagging me to go to the gym?
    Eliza Madrigal: :)
    Pema Pera: no, that is the 1) logid
    Pema Pera: logic
    Pema Pera: okay, a single example:
    Pema Pera: in the middle ages in Japan there was a samurai handbook
    Pema Pera: telling the samurai: go into battle as if you have died already
    Pema Pera: so you don't have to worry about dying
    Pema Pera: and you can put all your energy in fighting
    Pema Pera: and in fact, surprise, you are more likely to survive
    Pema Pera: not wasting energy in worrying and overly protecting yourself
    Pema Pera: similarly here:
    Trevor Berensohn: O wow
    Threedee Shepherd: makes perfect sense, except that IF you had died already you would not be able to bgo into the battle
    Pema Pera: you can be nicer to your wife if you don't have to protect your own personal history
    Pema Pera: if you accept that that is all an illusion
    Pema Pera: that you can really finally completely freely express yourself
    Threedee Shepherd: If it is all an illusion, why do?
    Pema Pera: ah, that's the rub!
    Pema Pera: true love does, not because of rewards
    Threedee Shepherd: and express "myself' in what linguistic illusion
    Pema Pera: true compassion just is, without needing a belief in "existence" to function
    Pema Pera: a movie being an illusion doesn't mean it is not worth watching
    Pema Pera: a good movie is worth crying over
    Pema Pera: and learning from
    Trevor Berensohn: Hmm Three if you're still experiencing, then might as well go with it
    Trevor Berensohn: Whether it's real or not
    Pila Mulligan: I'd rather be lucky
    Threedee Shepherd: Trevor, Ithat is similar to William James talking about consciousness.
    Riddle Sideways: totally agree, some movies are worth watching
    Riddle Sideways: but know they are still movie life
    Threedee Shepherd: movies are not an illusion, they are a story told in words and pictures that represent some aspect of what the teller has perceived
    Trevor Berensohn: Hmmm guess I'm not familiar with Dick OR James
    Pema Pera: they are and they aren't, Three: the existence of a house in a movie is an illusion -- and a good one, in the story
    Threedee Shepherd: Dick is a SF writer. James was a late 1800s philosopher who laid foundations for pragmatism, among other things
    Trevor Berensohn: Ah
    Pema Pera: Three, this is where Pila may want to come in: if you start with appreciation of what is, the question whether it "exists" is not so relevant
    Pila Mulligan enters
    Pema Pera: and certainly does not act as a backstop or off-stage guarantee of the value of what is
    Eliza Madrigal: :)
    Pema Pera: :-)
    Threedee Shepherd: Pema, I think that is slipping into making this a semantic agrgument, which we have done well in avoiding for the most part, in our conversation
    Pema Pera: no intention whatsoever to make semantic arguments, Three
    Trevor Berensohn: Hmm? It sounds more like just describing apprecitation
    Pema Pera: I'm just trying to include other angles, like Pila, as well
    Pila Mulligan is reminded of Stim's dicussion about View or Approach
    Threedee Shepherd: I know, but it sounds like that, to me
    Pema Pera: how so?
    Pila Mulligan: Pema and Three have finely toned and tuned academic presentations to draw upon in the dialog
    Pila Mulligan: if I do ont misunderstand Stim's comments you each have a View or Approach to reality
    Pila Mulligan: but what about when it comes down to the moent when luck matters?
    Pila Mulligan: luck
    Threedee Shepherd: Pema, IF my "instantianted reality" version of (1) happened to be true, I do not see where it destroys your expanded hypothesis that is (2)
    Pema Pera: you see, Three, we can't get from 1) to 2) by arguing . . . really, that will never work. The best we can do is trying to sketch how different the hypoheses of 1) and 2) are, each in their own way
    Pema Pera: and yes, Pila, I would talk totally different about 2) with a Taoist, for sure!
    Pema Pera: we can do that some day, would love to.
    Pila Mulligan: but I think Threedee has sais that but for the words he sees 2 also
    Pila Mulligan: said*
    Pema Pera: yes, but that is not 2, that is the shadow of 2 projected into 1
    Threedee Shepherd: In answer to my own question, I might reply that accepting (1) is akin to staying I have to start somewhere, whereas (2) denies the meaning of both "start" and "somewhere" and simply ios appearance of perception with no preconditions,
    Pema Pera: in 2 it is not possible for 1 to be true the way Threedee intends it
    Pila Mulligan: why not, Pema
    Pema Pera: let's now go slow again, Three:
    Pema Pera: akin to staying I have to start somewhere
    Pema Pera: is what you said, but that already closes the doors of 2
    Pema Pera: before you start, you have already started by introducing an "I"
    Threedee Shepherd: yes, that was my answer to myself
    Pema Pera: so you are already on your way
    Pema Pera: within 1
    Pema Pera: ah, okay, sorry, now I was too fast :-)
    Pema Pera: hehe
    Trevor Berensohn: Oh dear, First Life calls.. Will hopefully sit in on this agina soon =)
    Pema Pera: so now then the question is what happens when you do not start with an "I"?
    Pila Mulligan: bye Trevor
    Pema Pera: bye Trevor!
    stevenaia Michinaga: I must go, see you soon
    Pema Pera: bye Steve!
    Trevor Berensohn: Pema, you are a gem!
    Pila Mulligan: bye Steve
    Pema Pera: great seeing you again, Trev!
    Eliza Madrigal: Bye Trevor, Bye Steven
    stevenaia Michinaga: bye all, thanks for coming Amngolope, c join us again
    Pema Pera: (2) denies the meaning of both "start" and "somewhere" and simply ios appearance of perception with no preconditions,
    Threedee Shepherd: Well, lets agree that in this discussion I/you/me is a shorthand not a necessary reality.
    Pema Pera: it looses everything, time and space and distance and identities
    Pema Pera: but the crux is there, Threedee
    Pema Pera: that is not a detail, that's the center
    Threedee Shepherd: doing happens
    Pema Pera: in 2 nothing happens
    Pema Pera: it really really is radical
    Threedee Shepherd: therefore nothing is, therefore there is no (2) ^.^
    Pema Pera: heart sutra again:
    Pema Pera: O Sariputra , all things are expressions of emptiness, Not born, not destroyed, not stained, not pure, Neither waxing nor waning. Thus emptiness is not form; Not sensation nor perception, Reaction nor consciousness;
    Pema Pera: nothing exists, and indeed 2) does not exists
    Threedee Shepherd: Not born, ...so where did these words come from, an ongoing being that is always everything, out of which they happen to coalesce?
    Pema Pera: Three, you can't get there from here -- you can't construct an object from its shadows
    Threedee Shepherd: It sounds like (2) has now jumped to (3), and in (3) "WHY?" is not meaningful as an utterance
    Pema Pera: indeed, any why requires a framework to ask the question in
    Pema Pera: there is no framework independent why
    Pema Pera: the Tao is not a framework
    Threedee Shepherd: of course.
    Pema Pera: nor is Buddhist emptiness
    Pema Pera: why questions in 1) don't reach 2)
    Threedee Shepherd: I make an assertion: No feral child could grow up to be Buddah.
    Pema Pera: there is no Buddha in 2) nor a child, of whatever type
    Mangolope Whalen bows in honor
    Mangolope Whalen: Thank you so much for being inviting and kind.
    Threedee Shepherd: But sometime in the next 24 hours it is likely I will have to find the toilet to take a shit
    Pila Mulligan: bye Managlope
    Eliza Madrigal: Mangolope, bye for now :)
    Threedee Shepherd: bye
    Pila Mulligan: a maybe useless idea from Pila: something that bridges the apparent distinction between Approach 1 and Approach 2 is luck
    Pema Pera: bye Mangolope!
    Mangolope Whalen: baibai :)
    Pema Pera: what kind of luck, Pila?
    Pila Mulligan: luck luck :)
    Threedee Shepherd: if luck=chance
    Pila Mulligan: not a joke :|
    Pila Mulligan: good luck bad luck
    Pila Mulligan: personal luck
    Threedee Shepherd: (2-3) The 2-3 that can be know is not the 2-3, in fact nothing can be known because it is already the case that ALL IS
    Pema Pera: so how does that bridge 1 and 2, Pila?
    Pila Mulligan: well, I think Threedee said he sees 2, but he does not buy the words
    Threedee Shepherd: Pema, is a mantra of (2): disbelieve
    Pema Pera: and Three, I know it is frustrating, but arguing against it doesn't help seeing it -- opening up and testing the hypothesis that it might be true is more effective to at least sense what the hypothesis is trying to say
    Pema Pera: so how does luck come in, Pila?
    Pila Mulligan: it defeats the premise that someting is more effective but affirms the premise of 2
    Pema Pera: and luck?
    Pila Mulligan: luck = it in the previous sentence
    Pila Mulligan: it Three is indeed accepting the concept of 2 but nt the words
    Pema Pera: you're beyond me, Pila
    Threedee Shepherd: No, I think it might better be stated as a varient of Avastu's "Everything arises perfectly" by saying "EVERTHING--now you try to live with it."
    Pema Pera: can't follow that so far
    Pema Pera: can we start again, in a simple way?
    Pila Mulligan: Three, didn'y you sayyou have an inkling of what Pema means by 2, wihtout the words?
    Riddle Sideways: Everything is what it is. And the only thing we can change is our attitude towards it
    Threedee Shepherd: yes, AND I say that I have already excluded some regions of potential, BEINGNESS space because of perception, imperfect as it is. Or.
    Pema Pera: can you try again to explain luck, Pila, I don't get it yet
    Threedee Shepherd: to put it another way (2) if (2) shows me that nothing is impossible, all I have is useless chaos because there is no signal and no noise
    Riddle Sideways: Good night all
    Pema Pera: do you, three?
    Eliza Madrigal: Bye Riddle :)
    Pila Mulligan: bye Riddle
    Pema Pera: nite Riddle?
    Pila Mulligan: but you have a sense of the idea of what Pema means in his description of 2?
    Threedee Shepherd: it is as if no-thing==every-thing, which does not tell me any-thing
    Pila Mulligan: I need to look back at the log, just a sec please
    Pila Mulligan: but the next question, Three, have oyu had expereinces of good luck and bad luck?
    Pila Mulligan: sorry, I cannot find the part of the log I was looking for
    Pila Mulligan: so skip to luck, please
    Pila Mulligan: is luck not an expereince in Approach 1?
    Threedee Shepherd: perhaps, Pila. I do accept that what I call effect apparently can arise de-novo without cause (or that such things are simply beyond my understanding, even thoug they are my apparent perception)
    Pila Mulligan: so we can proceed with luck as a viable idea. Three?
    Eliza Madrigal: So interesting, but I need to peel away.... Nite Aurel, Three, Pila, Pema :)
    Pila Mulligan: bye Eliza
    Threedee Shepherd: bye
    Threedee Shepherd: if we mean by luck, randomness
    Pila Mulligan: no, personal luck
    Pila Mulligan: like Jeez, Sam sure is lucky
    Threedee Shepherd: no, I do not accept that kind of luck, if I understand you. there is not a state variable=luck
    Pila Mulligan: okay, then I was mistaken, it doe sont work as a bridge :)
    Pila Mulligan: pardon the digression please :)
    Pema Pera: :-)
    Pema Pera: I probably should get some sleep
    Threedee Shepherd: no, not a digression, a clarification of a layer not there
    Pila Mulligan: :)
    Pema Pera: since I will be up again in four hours, for the next session :)
    Pila Mulligan: have a nice rest Pema
    Pema Pera: but we can continue, Three, we are just beginning to scratch the surface
    Threedee Shepherd: Pema, before you go
    Pema Pera: yes?
    Threedee Shepherd: From (2) no statement but (2) can be true. thus tautology, it seems
    Pema Pera: in 2) the role of statements is different than it is in 1)
    Pema Pera: so if you apply the 1) logic to 2), you wan
    Pema Pera: won't get anywhere
    Threedee Shepherd: OK, in (2) is there ANY meaning to the copmmon word, REALITY
    Pema Pera: I'm not trying to be difficult, that is just the nature of 2)
    Threedee Shepherd: I know you are not trying to be difficult
    Pema Pera: the problem is, once we both have glimpses of 2), we can compare the glimpses and from there on we can try to grope for words
    Pema Pera: and luck will help to get glimpses :-)
    Threedee Shepherd: hehe
    Pema Pera: but we need to start from the experiments to then try to describe whatever theory we would like to argue with
    Pema Pera: we can't produce reality by constructing a clever logical argument
    Pema Pera: in 1) the experience is everyday experience
    Pema Pera: in2) it is something different
    Pema Pera: and believe me, I know how frustrating it is
    Threedee Shepherd: I would say, every time I think I have had a glimpse that might be of (2) the words I grope for always bring me back to it being just another case of (1)
    Pema Pera: I found it frustrating too, and I used to argue just like you are doing now, I know where you are coming from
    Pema Pera: yes, words project it down into the shadows . . .
    Pema Pera: it's delicate
    Pema Pera: at first at least
    Threedee Shepherd: OK, in a sense one cannot get from (1) to (2) because they are orthoganol constructions,
    Pema Pera: You sked for examples, let me give a concrete example.
    Pema Pera: When I was 17, I started to study these things, that was in 1970.
    Pema Pera: Then in April 1994, I remember the day, I suddenly realized that I had reached a point in which all books from all religions made sense to me, recognizable sense
    Pema Pera: like reading a tourist guide of a place you had already visited
    Pema Pera: you might not know every street and building, of course, but you recognize the atmosphere and feel of the place
    Threedee Shepherd: ok
    Pema Pera: Before that, I had not reached that familiarity or depth of insight, whatever you want to call it
    Pema Pera: after that, the journey become so much easier
    Pema Pera: and at the same time, I could also say, at that point the journey was just beginning
    Pema Pera: until then I had been struggling, as if blind
    Pema Pera: I did have my intuitions
    Pema Pera: luck :-)
    Pema Pera: but after that I could proceed in a much more directly guided way
    Threedee Shepherd: the words journey and proceed imply movement
    Pema Pera: so end of story: a concrete phenomenological description of how I began to approach 2).
    Pema Pera: and yes, you are right, I am projecting the story into 1)
    Pema Pera: willingly
    Pema Pera: knowingly making errors to make it fit but ready to backtrack where needed
    Pema Pera: nothing random there
    Threedee Shepherd: ok, an observation, and then I will "let" you go to sleep...
    Pema Pera: so this is just to counter the "but then it would all be chaos" objection
    Pema Pera: yes?
    Threedee Shepherd: I "perceive/feel" at a deep level beyond any words I can use, that our discussion is not about semantics, which thus suggests to me that I must have some "knowing" of 2, or this would seems an empty discussion to me.
    Pema Pera: yes
    Pema Pera: if you didn't you would have left much earlier :-)
    Threedee Shepherd: heheh
    Pila Mulligan: that's what I heard you say earlier 3d but could nt find in the log :)
    Threedee Shepherd: Yes, but here I have said it in a much more useful way--at least useful to me
    Pema Pera: if I may make one last comparison?
    Threedee Shepherd: yes
    Pema Pera: between math and 2)
    Pila Mulligan: but I believe you also saind you were not buying the words Pema was using
    Pila Mulligan: excuse me Pema
    Threedee Shepherd: words are but a scaffold, in the end
    Pema Pera: np, Pila, you can also go first!
    Pila Mulligan: that was it :)
    Pema Pera: :-)

    Stories are always enlightening...

    Pema Pera: Let me tell it as a story
    Pema Pera: Here goes
    Threedee Shepherd nods
    Pema Pera: In 2030 a major crisis happens, and civilization breaks down completely
    Pema Pera: for five hundred years the few survivors keep alive as hunters and gatherers
    Threedee Shepherd: likely, even, though unfortuante in the short run
    Pema Pera: (perhaps fortunate for the planet, could be)
    Pema Pera: now in 2530 someone finds a mathematics book
    Pema Pera: with strange drawings
    Pema Pera: and even stranger sentences
    Pema Pera: with words that seem to have no meaning
    Pema Pera: and many pages of add arguments
    Threedee Shepherd: odd
    Pema Pera: and at the end "what was to be proven" a kind of "so there!"
    Pila Mulligan: maybe add :)
    Pema Pera: Now the kid who finds this book shows it to his friends and elders
    Pema Pera: and everyone concludes that it must be sheer nonsense
    Pema Pera: one of the reasons that the great complex civilization, only knonw through warped legends, came to a fall
    Pema Pera: but somehow the kid has "luck"
    Pema Pera: has this strange intuition, belief, hunch, idea
    Pema Pera: that, you know, there might actually be something to it
    Pema Pera: he has no idea what
    Threedee Shepherd: and woe if he finds out?
    Pema Pera: if he would have tried to argue what it could be, he could have never argued his way into it from scratch
    Pema Pera: instead, he just takes the book
    Pema Pera: and reads it every day
    Pema Pera: again and again
    Pema Pera: and each time it makes just a tiny little bit more sense
    Pema Pera: he begins to see patterns
    Pema Pera: how the words may correlate with the pictures
    Pema Pera: the same kind of sentences keep appearing
    Pema Pera: near the same kind of pictures
    Pema Pera: and slowly slowly over the years, the fog lifts
    Pema Pera: and buy golly. there is sense there
    Pema Pera: and by more golly, the sense is so totally different from anything he could have guessed
    Pema Pera: in the hunter gathere vocabulary counting was there
    Pema Pera: but not algegraic geometry, or topology
    Pila Mulligan: b* :)
    Pema Pera: well, by early April 1994 I felt like that kid
    Pema Pera: in utter amazement, even though I'd be playing with those ideas for 24 years
    Pema Pera: and thought I knew quite a bit already by then
    Pema Pera: end of tale
    Pema Pera: (thanks Pila:)
    Threedee Shepherd nods thoughtfully
    Pila Mulligan: are you going to the August retreat Threedee?
    Threedee Shepherd: I will not keep you from sleep. AND, I want to put on a list that I would like to discuss with you, the word/concept/idea/essence "PATTERNS"
    Threedee Shepherd: No, I am not.
    Pila Mulligan: thnak you :)
    Pema Pera: Ah, let me add one important footnote here
    Pema Pera: I do not claim that I have found the truth, by any means
    Threedee Shepherd: I know you do not
    Pema Pera: but I do claim that what all those books try to say makes internal sense
    Pema Pera: there is something there there, of which I have seen enough glimpses that I stopped trying to wonder whether it would be baseless wishful thinking
    Pema Pera: so no belief or claim, but insight in the worthiness of the hypothesis of 2, as worth pursuing, but potentially still false
    Pema Pera: (complete disclosure :-)
    aurel Miles: i have a lot to digest, and slept very little last night so I hope you'll excuse me - i am going to bow out here
    Pila Mulligan: bye aurel
    aurel Miles: it is always a pleasure
    Pema Pera: thanks for sitting through all this, Aurel :-)
    aurel Miles: goodnight
    Threedee Shepherd: "Suspend both belief and disbelief" and see what happens
    Pema Pera: yes
    Threedee Shepherd: goodnight
    Pema Pera: beyond belief (and disbelief) :-)
    Threedee Shepherd: beyond belief and disbelief, thaer is just IS
    Threedee Shepherd: or BEING to be Played with
    Pema Pera: btw, there is a second milestone for me, which happened eleven years later, in 2005, from which point on luck was no longer necessary to get glimpses of 2 -- that's an altogether different story for another day. From then on I began to find (more and more) ways to open up without waiting for glimpses . . . .
    Threedee Shepherd: another story for another time :)
    Pema Pera: yes, perhaps in four hours, hehehe
    Threedee Shepherd: I will gladly listen
    Pila Mulligan: well, I move we adjourn :)
    Pema Pera: good time for Hawaii perhaps?
    Pema Pera: yes, I second
    Pila Mulligan: any nays?
    Pema Pera: see you all later
    Pema Pera: hehehe
    Threedee Shepherd: done, goodnight, Friends
    Pema Pera: thank you both!
    Pila Mulligan: aloha Pema and Threedee
    Tag page (Edit tags)
    • No tags
    You must login to post a comment.
    Powered by MindTouch Core