Peter’s story about time opening in a story, taking over the role that he planned to play, is inviting. The closing exercises in LOK ask us to put time, space, or knowledge at the center of our stories, instead of ourselves. But sometimes time, space, and knowledge may do that job for us. Perhaps that is what traditions are about: they hold this possibility open.
 I agree with Peter that to work with a group in TSK is important. I think at times we have been able to develop some of that sense in this online group, though of course it is more difficult. But as Peter says, it makes it more lonely.
 I have considered having a group that meets online, in a simulated world called Second Life, where each person is represented by an agent (an avatar). Why? Because some people tell me that the sense of connection in such online groups, where there is at least an imitation of people meeting face to face, can be very strong. But I don’t know if that’s right. Does anyone have experience with this, or know someone who does?
Jack
“Sense-experience”: I remember: “Go on…” But thats my opinion, no certain knowledge. And how to distinguish from each other?
Peter,
The idea with agents is that they appear (and can move around, sit at a table with others, etc.) in an artificial world. I have not quite seen the benefit yet. I was curious to see if others would find this interesting, or perhaps have some experience with it.
In a sense, Second Life is a response to your other comment: by having “Avatars” interact, there is more a sense of being in contact with other persons. But the sense-experience is still missing.
I will answer the other part of your comment in an email.
Noch ein Punkt: mir fällt es sehr schwer, Aussagen von Personen aus dem Internet zu verstehen und richtig einzuordnen. Das geht mir in direktem Kontakt ganz anders, zumal ich dann über meine Sinne viel mehr Informationen über eine Person und ihre Aussagen erhalte.
Lieber Jack,
ich habe Deine Anfrage nicht ganz verstanden. Jeder Teilnehmer am TSK-Programm hat einen Vertreter, die jeweils miteinander diskutieren?
Ich habe mich um Teilnehmer am TSK-Programm bemüht, mit denen ich “privat” diskutieren und üben kann. Das ist sehr schwierig. Ich treffe mich jetzt wieder regelmäßig mit Burkard, der ja nicht mehr am Programm teilnimmt. Das bedauere ich sehr.
Ich finde es sehr schwierig, mit Ideen aus der TSK-Vision mit anderen Menschen in Kontakt zu kommen. Das ist mir sogar mit meinem Bruder so gegangen, mit dem ich kürzlich in Urlaub war.(Wir haben eine sehr ähnliche Sozialisation.) Er war Grundlagen-Forscher in der Zoologie – und ich sehe erschreckend deutlich die Ausführungen von Tarthang Tulku bestätigt.(Bei anderen sieht man manchmal leichter und deutlicher – aber es ist wie ein Spiegelbild meiner selbst.)
Hi Jack,
I passed your note regarding a TSK group that meets online on to Bruce in the event he does not have access to the CCI site anymore. He might have some thoughts and experience. Also, Bruce and I have tried to establish a TSK Pod or community at:
http://pods.zaadz.com/tsk
Zaadz is a public and very popular site, their software is friendly, and each Pod has a ‘live chat’ capability available. Bruce started it and asked me to contribute my practice notes (as a simple TSK student) to help get it going. We only wish other TSK veterans would join in. Maybe it will turn in to another hollow empty chamber, with little of the life of communion we envision. Time will tell.
One of the two main reasons I’m taking this class is because I wanted to feel a sense of TSK community, because it is essentially a lonely undertaking in the sense that I have few people in my life that I can discuss internal explorations. I must keep what I am most interested in to myself to a great degree. The other important reason for taking the class, of course, is to receive guidance from those who have more experience with the vision. Underlying both these reasons is a sincere desire to live the vision.
Best wishes,
David