That morning I met Doug when I arrived, and Pia soon joined us.
doug Sosa: morning!
Pema Pera: hi there, Doug!
Pema Pera: Looking forward to meeting you next week in RL, for a change, after all those Qwaq and SL meetings of the last year!
doug Sosa: yes. i just sent another email about time. I saw the movie Wally last night.
doug Sosa: Wally leaves a disorientation, like the wet sand on the beach as the wave receeds.
Pema Pera: Haven’t seen that one
doug Sosa: About a trash collector that remains on earth afte all the rst of life has died out from pollution, and it is a romance and funny.
doug Sosa: so yo can see why it is disorienting.
Pema Pera: I can imagine . . . though for it to be fun must be quite a stretch I guess
doug Sosa: But the amazing part is, because its animated (brilliantly) it is hard to identify with the machine, but the body tries! the result is, muscles are worn out.
doug Sosa: It always amazees me that people think thinking is in the head.
Pema Pera: Hi Pia!
doug Sosa: Hi Pla.
Pia Iger: Hi, Doug, Pema
Pia Iger: what were you talking about, Doug?
doug Sosa: about my reaction to the movie wally i saw last night.
doug Sosa: maybe it was projector homework!
Pia Iger: not seen it yet
Pia Iger: projector homework?
doug Sosa: pema uses the metaphor of the projector, the difference between the dram on screen and the process of getting it there through the projetor lam, the film, the lens..
Pema Pera: :)
doug Sosa: lam “lens”
Pia Iger: yes, I knew that. but not clear your connection with the moive you saw last night.
doug Sosa: ther was a projector, it was a movie. there was the cone of light from the projector booth, and the unseen projectionist.
doug Sosa: and at the end the list of the two hundre d people who made the film.
doug Sosa: what if there were credits i the sky of the two hundred people who made the life we are in!
doug Sosa: “in”
Pema Pera: :-)
Pia Iger: who would be the audience?
I mention my planetarium adventures.
Pema Pera: that reminds me of some time I spent with astronomy colleagues in AMNH, the American Museum for Natural History in New York City
Pema Pera: we were the audience, so to speak :)
doug Sosa: the dead the yet unborn… i used to spend
doug Sosa: days at the natural history as a child drawing the anaimls in the glass panoramas..
doug Sosa: i hated the dark indian rooms..
doug Sosa: and spent many a time in the planaterium loooking at the NY skyline.
Pema Pera: after hours, when the public was gone, we used the planetarium dome as a giant projector screen
Pema Pera: all around and above us, 100 feet in diameter
Pema Pera: using the seven large projectors. And then, at some point, when someone connected a different computer, there were huge letters written in the night sky
Pema Pera: YOU’VE GOT MAIL
doug Sosa: what?
Pia Iger: haha
doug Sosa: ah, mail in the sky.
Pema Pera: yes, from God #1 I guess
doug Sosa: wny #1?
I summarize my conversations with Adams.
Pema Pera: oh, Adams and I have been talking about the relationship between the notions of God and of Being
Pema Pera: and I made comparison between three terms, to see what they might be pointing to:
Pema Pera: 1) a simple traditional God as a man with white beard on a cloud in the sky
Pema Pera: 2) a more abstract God of Christianity, more like what most people nowadays imagine Him to be
Pema Pera: 3) Being as we use the term here
Pema Pera: And then I used the 1) -> 2) transition as a comparison for the kind of 2) -> 3) transition that I had in mind
Pema Pera: For example, in the 2)->3) transition the notion of a “creator God” is dropped
Pema Pera: just like the position of “on a cloud” is dropped in the 1)->2) transition
doug Sosa: the god thing is wonderful. my view: we face a complex nature (as early humans) try to tie it all together, imagine it must have an agency and so we project ourselves into it, get intoa dialog with that god, and through that learn about ourselve, and finally reappropriate it all back to us.
Pema Pera: So in 3) there is no longer to problem question: “if God is all powerful and has created everything, why did he create all this suffering and is he responsible for it?
doug Sosa: i sometimes say, god’s job is to take care of the particles and atoms, and the rest is up to us.
Pema Pera: Yes, that is a nice psychological interpretation, which seems very apt
Pema Pera: certainly for 1), probably also for 2) by and large
doug Sosa: but it leaves a hole where the whole ought to be, and we remain confused about what that whole is.
Pema Pera: The other day, I was trying to point out that for 3) there is no similar psychological explanation, at least as far as I see and understand things
Pema Pera: although experiences with 3), when talked about between individual people, necessarily will be reported in psychological terms
Pema Pera: which then when followed back may seem to point to 2) rather than 3).
Pema Pera: Hi Sky!
Pia Iger: Hi Sky!
Pema Pera: Hi Wol!
doug Sosa: by # you mean when the concept has been dropped but something remains.?
Pema Pera: Nice meeting you!
Wol Euler: good morning everyone, sorry I’m late.
Pema Pera: I believe we haven’t met here yet, but I have read your dialogues on the blog :)
doug Sosa: hi sky and wol.
Pia Iger: Hi Wol!
Pema Pera: and I enjoyed those very much
Sky Szimmer: Hi all.
Sky Szimmer: glad you got here Wol.
Pema Pera: np problem re late: people come and go all the time here
Wol Euler smiles.
We welcome Sky and Wol.
Pema Pera: We are talking about various views of God and Being
Sky Szimmer: great!
Pema Pera: I had numbered them a while ago, when talking with Adams, to get some handles — which Adams now uses in her blog
Wol Euler: mmhmm
Pema Pera: So let me repeat the three here quickly:
Pema Pera: 1) a simple traditional God as a man with white beard on a cloud in the sky
Pema Pera: 2) a more abstract God of Christianity, more like what most people nowadays imagine Him to be
Pema Pera: 3) Being as we use the term here
doug Sosa: robert bly once wrote “ignorance of the soul is the dark side of monotheism.”
Pema Pera: dropping “cloud” from 1 to 2, and dropping “creator God” from 2 to 3
Wol Euler: sorry, you mean by putting “being” as 1?
Pema Pera: sorry, Wol? Being is 3) above
Pema Pera: as in “Play as Being” :)
Wol Euler: then I misunderstood. I thought your last sentence meant to shift the categories down one notch, as it were.
Pema Pera: ah, no, sorry, very quick summary of longer story . . .
Wol Euler reads back.
Pema Pera: Going to abstraction of “God” drops human-form picture ; the going from “God” to “Being” drops more . . ..
Pema Pera: adn what that “more” can be is one of the themes of “Play as Being”
Wol Euler: oh I see now. ok. hankyou.
Wol Euler: +t
Wol Euler: 1 - cloud = 2 and 2 - creator = 3. Yes, I’d agree broadly with that.
Pema Pera: How would you describe 3, or characterize broadly?
Wol Euler: lol
Pema Pera: that sounds like “play” ?
Wol Euler: as in “I’m neither a dieist nor a philosopher but that matches my understanding and gut feeling”
Pema Pera: :-)
Sky Szimmer: Play as God
doug Sosa: doug goes, bye.
Pema Pera: bye Doug
Doug takes off, and Wol turns to Jewish mysticism.
Wol Euler: I read somewhere online a summary of different strands of Kaballah thinking, Jewish mysticism. The definitions of Martin Buber agreee with this idea.
Sky Szimmer: Somehow I like the sound of that. It helps me with your suggestion yesterday if we can imagine we had all the power of Being… but somehow it invokes more imagination for me thinking about the power of God. Maybe it is all the conditioning I’ve absorbed from all the God fearing folks around me.
Wol Euler: “The Kabbalah’s view of G-d includes: G-d exists but is unknowable; the ten sefirot is how G-d manifests Himself in this world; the human body is a microcosm of the universe; G-d is Self-limiting; the world is imperfect; and, man is partners with G-d to help repair the world.”
Wol Euler: “Martin Buber’s view of G-d includes: G-d cannot be defined and G-d’s existence cannot be proven; man enters into a relationship with G-d when man enters into a genuine dialogue with others in man’s daily activities; laws are given by G-d to individuals (there was no on-time revelation at Mount Sinai); and, evil comes about either through G-d withdrawing from man or man’s own lack of decision or direction.”
Wol Euler: http://www.becomingjewish.org/rlife.html
Wol Euler: God is Being. God is us while we really Be.
Pema Pera: .
Wol Euler: I liike the idea of the world being imperfect, and us needing to help perfect it.
Pema Pera: (just wrote several lines that got dropped . . . may appear later?)
Sky Szimmer: why>
Sky Szimmer: why do you like to think the world imperfect?
Wol Euler: mmm, that was uncarefully phrased. It distresses em to see the world’s imperfection (which tends to mean what we have done to he world)
Wol Euler: what I like is the idea of our responsibility and our partnership.
Pema Pera: yes
IM: Wol Euler: do you know, you can recap typd text by CTRL-Up-arrow? maybe you can find the lines that were lost
Pema Pera: but then there are two variations of that
IM: Wol Euler: lol
Pema Pera: in various religions
Pema Pera: one is to take that completely serious as ultimate reality
Pema Pera: with for example a battle between good and evil in the end
Pema Pera: and a real possibility of evil winning
Pema Pera: The other one is to see all as only relatively real
Pema Pera: not absolutely
Pema Pera: and evil as only present in the relative picture in the evil-good dichotomy
Pema Pera: of course this does not mean that responsibility can be dropped
Pema Pera: on the contrary
Wol Euler nods.
Pema Pera: the challenge is to celebrate the relative level
Pema Pera: as in playing a game
Pema Pera: often people are most intensely serious when playing . . . .
Wol Euler: “Playing he stock market”
Pema Pera: lol
Pema Pera: or playing soccer
Wol Euler: mmhmm
Pema Pera: and with the trust in the ultiimate goodness, you can wholeheartedly work for relative goodness
Pema Pera: but ideally not a blind trust
Pema Pera: but a real kind of seeing, or at least a glimpse of that kind of seeing
We exchange ideas about the relative and the ultimate.
Sky Szimmer: I wonder if ultimately nothing happens and everything happens on its own, then relatively speaking, does it matter
Wol Euler: yes and no, I’d say. It matters a great deal to us, here and now, that what we do is worth doing and done well.
Pema Pera: it does matter within the framework of the relative — it doesn’t “matter” outside, but we have to be very careful with what that means, since we, being inside, only are familiar with “matter” in the relative form, while we are talking here as people or as avatars
Wol Euler: yes, exactly
Pema Pera: yes
Pema Pera: :)
Wol Euler: I’m full of quotes today. Mahtma Gandhi: “Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it”
Pema Pera: beautiful
Pema Pera: you should produce a calendar!
Wol Euler: that is the gap between relative and absolute. we have to live and act in the relative, even while we think of the absolute.
Wol Euler: lol
Pema Pera: yes, but it is actually possible to use the absolute as a resource
Sky Szimmer: i don’t know if I agree with this.
Pema Pera: contrary to what most people seem to believe, when hearing all this, since it seems so abstract
Sky Szimmer: this seems to indicate a duality
Pema Pera: The duality is in the relative
Pema Pera: it is all one from the point of view of the absolute
Pema Pera: from the point of view of teh absolute there is no separate relative
Pema Pera: we are now talking with the relative :)
Pema Pera: we are now talking with the relative :)
Sky Szimmer: yes but as a practitioner, I dont’ know if it helps me to think like that
Sky Szimmer: as the goal is to remember oneself as Being and not a separate entity
Pema Pera: let us be very careful, Sky
Pema Pera: and go very slowly
Pema Pera: this is crucial
We talk about the YSBS, “you seeing, Being Seeing” exploration.
Pema Pera: Wol, you may not know this latest practice form
Pema Pera: You seeing Being seeing?
Wol Euler raises an eyebrow. Nope, new to me.
Pia Iger: I understand there are two reference frame: relative and absolute. While we are talking, we sort of move from one to another, make the talk “apparently” not agreeable.
Pia Iger: that is why Sky was confused.
Sky Szimmer: I am not confused Pia. I just disagree
Wol Euler chuckles.
Pia Iger: You disagree because you were not clear what reference point Pema was standing. There was not disagreement.
Sky Szimmer: : )
Pema Pera: I agree with Pia :)
Pema Pera: but let me explain why and how
Pema Pera: and we’ll have to do this very slowly
Pema Pera: a bit tricky in one-line chat bites . . . .
Pema Pera: . . . since it is rather subtle
Pema Pera: but first the YSBS practice:
Pema Pera: The idea is to spend a short time looking around, to see clearly how we normally see — nothing unusual, just make yourself aware of your normal operation of the way of seeing things in front of you in the cone of your vision.
Pema Pera: Then you spend a short time letting Being see. Being sees everything, without point of view, including everything we normally consider inner as well as outer. And it is not a physical seeing.
Pema Pera: So Sky was refering to the second part, yes Sky? When you wrote:
Pema Pera: Sky Szimmer: yes but as a practitioner, I dont’ know if it helps me to think like that [7:48] Sky Szimmer: as the goal is to remember oneself as Being and not a separate entity
Sky Szimmer: yes.
Pema Pera: the “oneself” may be a bit misleading here
Pema Pera: in the second half, you let Being see
Pema Pera: there is no emphasis on oneself being Being
Papillon23 Xue: sorry
Pema Pera: hi Papillon!
Sky Szimmer: As Being, I am the source, there is no need for resource
Papillon23 Xue: oh dear.
Pema Pera: come join us
Papillon23 Xue: i came too late for lessons
Papillon23 Xue: time passed by
Pia Iger: Hi, Papillon.
Wol Euler: hello papillon
Papillion joins us, expecting something quite different than a discussion about reality.
Pema Pera: Sky, in the practice we are not thinking about source or resource, we just let the practice happen
Papillon23 Xue: are you Hermoine’s chinese class’ students
Papillon23 Xue: ?
Sky Szimmer: yes Pema. I was just biting on the one line that you wrote earlier.
Sky Szimmer: I must go I am afraid.
Pema Pera: which line?
Sky Szimmer: using Being as a resource
Pia Iger: no, Papillon. we are not that class.
Pema Pera: 中国語？
Wol Euler: bye sky, thanks for leading me here.
Papillon23 Xue: 日本人のではないだろうか？
Pema Pera: ちごうんです。
Pema Pera: オランダ人
Pema Pera: ：）
Wol Euler raises an eyebrow.
Pia Iger take a rest.
Papillon23 Xue: みな日本語が話せるね
Pema Pera: we switched to Japanese, sorry
Pema Pera: no, papilion, we don’t all speak Japanese
Pema Pera: but somehow a fair fraction of people coming here do
Wol Euler: indeed not.
Papillon23 Xue: 誰か日本語がわかりませんか？
Pema Pera: I am the only one, I think
Wol Euler: konichi wa, Kanadajin des’
Pema Pera: not the only one!
Wol Euler: thats the limit of mine.
Papillon23 Xue: then i will at most use romanji
Pema Pera: :)
Pema Pera: you came for Chinese class?
Papillon23 Xue: i speak japanese, but started learning chinese
Papillon23 Xue: wanted to go to both
Papillon23 Xue: I had been learning chinese using rosetta stone
Papillon23 Xue: but need somebody to tlak to
Papillon23 Xue: are you teaching?
Pema Pera: http://playasbeing.wordpress.com/ is our web site
Pema Pera: we get together here four times a day
Papillon23 Xue: wol euler
Papillon23 Xue: san
Pema Pera: to talk about the nature of reality
Wol Euler: lol
Wol Euler: hello?
Papillon23 Xue: ore wa igirisujin desu
Wol Euler: no, sorry, not at all :-)
Pema Pera: no language lessons
Pema Pera: It should be easier to learn Chinese, knowing Japanese already
Wol Euler: that was the only single sentence-fragment that I remember.
Pema Pera: :)
Papillon23 Xue: : )
Papillon23 Xue: it is
Papillon23 Xue: ridiculously similar
Pema Pera: Well, I have to go
Pema Pera: we’ve been here for an hour
Wol Euler: “It was long ago and in another land.”
Papillon23 Xue: see you everyone
Pema Pera: oh, Papilion:
Wol Euler: thank you all, this was a very good session.
Pema Pera: do you mind if you put our conversation in our blog?
Pema Pera: we ask people permission first
Papillon23 Xue: yes?
Wol Euler: please do :-)
Pema Pera: we normally add everything
Papillon23 Xue: sure
Pema Pera: unless someone prefers not to
Pema Pera: okay, thank you!
Pema Pera: bye for now!
Pia Iger: bye, everyone.
Papillon23 Xue: ciao
We end the session, Papillon takes off, and I was about to talk with Wol, whom we had invited as a new guardian. Wol would like to know more about the role of guardians, and it thought it would be nice for Pia to join our conversation. Right then Adams dropped by as well, and the four of us decided to move to the beach.
Pema Pera: oh, Pia
Pia Iger: yes?
Pema Pera: Wol would like to talk with me about the possibility of becoming a guardian
Pia Iger: oh, I can do it.
Pema Pera: since you are a guardian too, would you like to stay a few minutes?
Pema Pera: we can all three talk then
Pema Pera: let us go somewhere else thoug
Pema Pera: otherwise more people will come here
Wol Euler: ok, TP us?
Pema Pera: oh, hi Adams!
Pia Iger: ok.
Wol Euler: hi adams.
Pema Pera: would you like to join us?
Pema Pera: You have met Wol before?
Pia Iger: let’s go to Adams.
Wol Euler smiles. We’ve met.
Pia Iger: her beach house is nice.
Pema Pera: great idea
Adams Rubble: I am interrupting. I will just say hello
Pema Pera: can you go there and tp us?
Pema Pera: no, Adams
Adams Rubble: Oh you’d like to go to my house?
Pema Pera: we want to talk for a few minutes with Wol
It would turn out to become a very interesting conversation, a few hours rather than minutes . . .
Pema Pera: about her becoming a new guardian, if she accepts
Pema Pera: sure, Adams
Pema Pera: is that near the beach?
Adams Rubble: Great! I have new chairs
Wol Euler smiles.
Adams Rubble: on the beach
Pia Iger: yeah!
Adams Rubble: hang on
Pema Pera: great
Pema Pera: we hang :)
Pema Pera: u c Wol, you get a grand introduction to guardianship :)
Wol Euler: lol
Teleport completed from http://slurl.com/secondlife/Rieul/176/149/75
Adams Rubble: I can’t tp Wol
Wol Euler: ack!
Wol Euler kicks SL.
Pia Iger: she is here.
Wol Euler: yay
Adams Rubble: Hi Wol :)
Pema Pera: Nice place, Adams!
Adams Rubble: Thank you
Giving Campfire PinkRock Sh: Could not find sound ‘wolf_howl++’.
Adams Rubble: That’s a Northern Wei stele there. I made it
Pema Pera: u c Wol, this is a perk of being a guardian, to get a nice place to put up a little house :-)
Wol Euler looks.
Wol Euler: lol
Adams Rubble: :)
Pema Pera: this is on Play as Being land
Wol Euler: I’ve seen Fael’s place, and swum in the lake.
Pema Pera: a good deal: no obligations, only perks :)
Wol Euler: well, that is why I hesitate.
Pema Pera: but of course nice if you’d like to help out — on your own time and only according to your own interests
Pema Pera: the community is key
Pema Pera: and clearly you fit in
Wol Euler: I am knee-deep in obligations at present, and I really do hesitate to take on responsibilities, even mild ones, that I might not be able to fulfil.
Wol Euler smiles. ty.
Pema Pera: just having people like you, and like Pia and Adams, is what makes PaB what it is
Pema Pera: no responsibilities beyond being who you are — seriously
Pema Pera: and if at some point you’d like to do something, fine
Pema Pera: some guardians are quite active
Pema Pera: others are not
Pema Pera: that is perfectly fine
Adams Rubble: If I may, I’d just like to say that we all felt the same way, Wol
Wol Euler: that’s good to know.
Wol Euler: what is actually involved, practically speaking?
Pema Pera: only half the people come to the weekly meetings, for example, but we are all subscribed to a Google email group — so you’ll stay up to date, and can add your voice to the interesting discussions going on there as well — time permitting of course
Wol Euler: oh hang on, rain started, I have to close windows
All four avatars were expressing a lot of body language, moving around in various ways.
Adams Rubble is noticing that four AVs become very active in her chairs
Pema Pera: :)
Pia Iger guess it is from the pose ball of the chairs.
Adams Rubble: Either that or we’re all very impatient
Adams Rubble: :)
Wol Euler: back. Does anone else regret the perpetual LA sunshine of SL?
Pema Pera: nothing is involved, strictly speaking, but if you like, you can attend the weekly meetings, and if you can stand in for someone else, leading a meeting if someone else cannot come — but only if you have time.
Pema Pera: I like rain — I’m from Holland :)
Wol Euler: If I had a sim, I’d make it rain buckets every day like in “Rashomon”
Wol Euler: yay!
Pema Pera: or at least Storm can — have you met him?
Pema Pera: oh, we can make rain in Rieul
Pema Pera: reverse order
Wol Euler: yes, we’ve met.
Pema Pera: ask him!
Pema Pera: he makes rain and thunder
Wol Euler: a well-chosen name thten.
Adams Rubble: :)
Pema Pera enjoys the sound of fire . . . .
Giving Campfire PinkRock Sh: Could not find sound ‘wolf_howl++’.
Wol Euler reads back again.
Adams Rubble: Help yourself to hotdogs, marshmellows or coffee :)
Giving Campfire PinkRock Sh: Could not find sound ‘wolf_howl++’.
Pema Pera realizes that his typist has not head breakfast yet, but frankly, he couldn’t care less
Wol Euler: ty.
Pema Pera: *had
Wol Euler: are you here yet, or somewhere in mid-pacific still?
Wol Euler: it must be an enormous switch.
Pema Pera: in Berkeley, CA
Pema Pera: was in Japan for 2.5 months
Adams Rubble’s typist empathizes with Pema’s typist
Wol Euler: I meant in timesense, jetlag.
Pema Pera: yeah, but used to it
Pema Pera: PaB lag now
Pema Pera: I’m doing the 1 am sessions still - most of them
Pema Pera: but I really should let Pia and Adams speak!
Pia and Adams shared their experiences as guardians with Wol.
Wol Euler: yes, I’d like to hear your experiences and opinions about being a guardian.
Pia Iger: We can answer Wol’s question.
Pia Iger: so far, there was not much challenge. just show up on my slot, introduce to new ppl about PaB, keep and post the log on Wiki.
Adams Rubble: The work is light and this perk is great
Wol Euler: :-)
Adams Rubble: It has brought me closer to the group than I would have been otherwise
Pia Iger: yes. as a guardian, we have more communications besides the meetings
Adams Rubble: yes, the emails
Adams Rubble: lots of things discussed
Wol Euler listens.
Pia Iger: I like PaB and learn so much from it and the group. So naturally, I want to do a little bit help to make this group/meeting sustainable.
Adams Rubble: At the beginning in sessions, it is hard to get to know everyone. The extra comunication helps with that
Adams Rubble: It is made up of a really nice bunch of people
Wol Euler smiles. That seems to be true.
Wol Euler: the part that worries me is simply having to run meetings if somebody else cannot be present. I find myself in the position of a more-or-less believing member of a church congregation who is asked to give a sermon ;-)
Adams Rubble: No sermons :)
Wol Euler: because this interests me greatly, but I don’t know that I *believe* in PaB.
Adams Rubble: Ah, that is NOT a problem
Wol Euler: (whatever “belief” might mean in this context)
Pia Iger: PaB is exploration, not sermon, no dogma.
Adams Rubble: I have been fidgeting with that one
Adams Rubble: yes Pia
Adams Rubble: I sort of stumbled into PaB loking for Buddhism
Adams Rubble: I no longer am looking for Buddhism
Wol Euler nods.
Adams Rubble: We have room to explore lots of paths here
Adams Rubble: sorry lag
Pia Iger: The only drive for me, is to know more about reality.
Adams Rubble: As to runing the meetings, there is lots of help
Adams Rubble: There are almost always other guardians there
Adams Rubble: sometimes the whole group is made up of guardians
Wol Euler laughs
Pia Iger: We can just be there, listen.
Adams Rubble: In any case, I don’t know of anyone who regretted doing it
Adams Rubble: I listen more as guardian than I do other times, I think :)
Wol Euler: Well, this is reassuring, and the offer is kind and flattering.
Wol Euler: If you’d have me under these terms, then I guesss I am glad to had (as it were)
Adams Rubble: :)
Pema Pera: :)
Wol Euler: As long as we are talking about truth and absoluteness and so, there is something I should say.
Adams Rubble: Welcome aboard, Wol
Pia Iger: That is what it is, Wol. Only about truth.
Pema Pera: yes, thanks, Wol.
We continued our conversation for a while, and at some point I refered back to what Wol had asked earlier, using the metaphor of a church.
Pema Pera: So Wol, to respond to your “church?” question
Pema Pera: which is a valid one for sure
Wol Euler: please :-)
Pema Pera: all we do in PaB is to see whether we can explore reality BUT
Pema Pera: the typical problem there is that if I as a person try to explore reality
Pema Pera: I am stuck already from the beginning in a relative realm
Pema Pera: it would be as if a movie character went looking around within the movie looking for the projector
Pema Pera: tough luck
Pema Pera: will never work
Pema Pera: so:
Wol Euler nods.
Pema Pera: instead it makes more sense to start from the other end
Pema Pera: If Being plays us
Pema Pera: then why not let Being acknowledge us
Wol Euler: so being us to us in RL as we in RL are to our SL avs.
Yes, exactly! That parallel had been a major motivation for me to launch PaB in a virtual world in the first place.
Pema Pera: so the way to do that is to first let me play Being playing me
Pema Pera: then drop the first part
Pema Pera: does that make sense?
Pema Pera: (totally independent of any sect, tradition, religion, whatever)
Wol Euler: I’ll have to think about that, but it sounds like it might make sense.
Pema Pera: the one big problem with any approach to “insight”
Pema Pera: or “enlightenment” as it is often called
Pema Pera: is that the idea seems to be, as we hear it, that there is a kind of heroic quest
Pema Pera: hero goes out, searches here and there, finally gets enlightened
Pema Pera: that picture is highly misleading
Pema Pera: the only good part is that it gets people off their butt
Pema Pera: gets them started, a motivator
Pema Pera: the rest of the picture is nonsense
Pema Pera: a person cannot get enlightened
Pema Pera: Being is already enlightened
Pema Pera: a person can stop standing in the way of Being
Pema Pera: letting Being shine through
Pema Pera: and once we learn a bit how to do that
Pema Pera: live ain’t the same ever again
Pema Pera: it is a matter of like finding a muscle you normally don’t use
Pema Pera: a bit like toilet training you could say :)
Pema Pera: not that hard, really
Wol Euler: lol
Pema Pera: first you have to be willing to consider that this makes sense — not blind faith
Pema Pera: but faith that it *might* make sense, enough to be willing to really try
Wol Euler: there’s a great poem by C.P. Cavafy called “Ithaca” (I really am full of quotes today)
Pema Pera: Adams is a nice example of really trying, on her blog
Pema Pera loves Cavafy
Pema Pera: can you quote?
Wol Euler: which is about Odysseus returning to Ithaca, the executive summary would be that the purpose of Ithaca is to get you off your butt. By the time you get there, you will no longer need to get there.
Wol Euler: sorry, too long to quote. I can find a URL though…
Pema Pera: yeah, I now remember reading it.
Pema Pera: Here is a favorit of mine: http://users.hol.gr/~barbanis/cavafy/barbarians.html
Pema Pera: waiting for the barbarians
Wol Euler smiles. I came to Cavafy through the “Alexandria Quartet”.
Wol Euler: ah, yes, also great.
Pema Pera: Http://users.hol.gr/~barbanis/cavafy/ithaca.html
Wol Euler: yes, ty!
Adams Rubble: ty
I love Cavafy. Afterwards, I read his wonderful Ithaca poem. How apt!
Pema Pera: in fact, PaB uses no road or path — “the goal is the path” is a phrase sometimes used
Pema Pera: in that sense like zen
Pema Pera: or dzogchen
Pema Pera: but in other ways quite different
Pema Pera: the idea is that there is no need to go anywhere
Pema Pera: we are already there
Pema Pera: but we are looking through the wrong end of the telescope
Pema Pera: normally
Pema Pera: from us to Being
Pema Pera: and if we can let Being see
Pema Pera: all is well :)
Adams Rubble wonders about her bus
Wol Euler nods.
Pema Pera: hahaha
Wol Euler: eh?
Pema Pera: what about your bus, Adams?
Adams Rubble: I’ve been riding for the past few days checking out destinations
Adams Rubble: no destination?
Wol Euler does that too.
Adams Rubble: Wo, it is a bit long to explain but it is in my blog
Pema Pera: you are already there — but of course you can play the game of going somewhere, if you like that kind of thing :)
Adams Rubble: Some of what Pema said, today I haven’t heard yet (which is not to say he might have said it my presence)
Wol Euler: ah, might I ask you to put that in your Profile, on the “web” page? or what is the URL
Pema Pera: http://rubblebornthoughts.wordpress.com/
Wol Euler: ty!
Pema Pera: Adams, I have never said it before that way
Pema Pera: it is my response to Wol
Pema Pera: each time I talk about it I say it differently
Pema Pera: or much more accurately, something different comes out :)
Pema Pera: I enjoyed listening too :)
Pema Pera: when you learn to step aside, interesting things come out . . . .
Pema Pera: thank you, Wol !
Wol Euler: mmhmm
Wol Euler: my pleasure, Pema.
That is how it feels: whenever I have PaB conversations, I enjoy listening to myself as much as to the others, as a presentation by Being, using our group as a mouth piece or orchestra.
At this point Caledonia joined us, and the conversation moved in various other directions, for more than an hour.