COMMUNICATING THE TSK-VISION

Article published in "Reports from the field" in 1995

by Meindert Gijzen

A practical problem that we are struggling with in Holland, concerning TSK is: How do we attract enough new people into this "TSK-thing", to keep a dedicated and well-motivated nucleus of TSK-practitioners going? This seems to be a difficult point in America as well, as we discovered during the "First Preliminary Teacher Training Program in the West", held in the summer of 1995 at the Nyingma Institute in Berkeley. It was a unique occasion for "TSK-fans" from Europe, the USA and Brasil to meet and one morning we took the opportunity to discuss with a small group the above mentioned question. Nothing really substantial, no ready-made solutions came out of it, but we did confront this question at a thorough level. One of the effects of this is that the question continues to haunt me and so here are some considerations that have come up:

Let's start out with a more basic question: Why, in the first place, should we wish others to become interested into TSK at all? Isn't it enough to be interested and involved ourselves? What is more: Are we not running the risk of becoming evangelical, proclaimors of a "Joyful Message"? Isn't there a hidden element of self-interest somewhere in this urge to attract people to TSK?

Concerning this matter, I think it is useful to clarify a simple and direct point: It is very stimulating and motivating to be able to share this vision with more people than just a few close acquaintances. In any TSK-group that meets on a regular basis, for instance, I think it is good to have at least 8 to 10 people who are dedicated and eager to study. The energy, as well as the intensity of the exchangement in the group is usually higher and there is a heightened sense of involvement and participation. To put it very simply: We can learn more from each other if there's more of us. Another point is that, for those who take the trouble to explore the TSK-vision over a longer period of time, there is usually very little doubt that TSK touches upon our deepest concerns and does produce lasting and profound changes in the way we live, although at a very different level from what we sometimes might expect. The long term benefits that are derived from it are, although subtle and hard to pinpoint, clear and profound. In this context it is only natural to wish to be able to share this vision with others as well.

Presenting the TSK-vision to newcomers seems thus to be largely a problem of communication. A big problem in presenting this vision is that at first glance it seems to be a very dry, abstract kind of affair. The terms "Time, Space and Knowledge" might refer to a physics or astronomy textbook rather than to an inquiry into the human mind. The abbreviation "TSK" is, of course even more uninviting and leaves everyone new to it totally uninterested. I wonder if it would be possible to communicate this vision in a totally different way, as for instance in poetry, painting and other kinds of non-verbal expression. In communicating the vision, I feel we have utilized only a small portion of the possibilities that are there. Also, I believe there is, in our own western culture, an abundance of examples of artworks that do convey a "TSK-like" atmosphere. (At this moment I am, for instance, thinking about the poetry of the 18th century English poet William Blake: read it and see for yourself.)

Finally, I would like to dwell a bit on the question of how it could be that the TSK-vision is, at the same time so powerful in its impact but also so difficult to communicate.

On the one hand, nothing is denied by TSK. If we work with this vision we can still continue our lives as faithful followers of whatever religion or world-view we have, be it Christianity, Buddhism, Scientism, Marxism or whatever it is. TSK only helps us to scrutinize our perceptions more closely, to analyze our positions more thoroughly, to challenge our conclusions more fiercely. But it does not tell us what is right and what is wrong. We ourselves have to decide about that. Maybe, because of TSK, we become more careful and thoughtful in this. Probably TSK widens our perspective. But it does not point out any fixed direction.

So, on the other hand, TSK affirms nothing either. This is where we may start to feel a bit scary inside. In our daily life, we seek to affirm the standpoints and footholds that we have in reality almost constantly. And because of TSK these footholds may become slippery and less dependable. Feelings of uncertainty and a subtle fear may arise. What kind of a teaching is this that does not give us any grip on reality except that "everything is Time, Space and Knowledge"? We usually prefer something that is at least somewhat more juicy, more intriguing, more promising in terms of immediate results. It seems we could only loose things if we committed ourselves to a teaching so abstract, so unpromising, so totally inquiring about everything. Yet, for anyone seriously involved in TSK it has become clear that all we might lose because of it, are our illusory fantasies, our make-believe footholds in an insubstantial reality. So, What we can gain from these teachings seems to me to be among the most worthwhile things in life: a taste of reality, of peaceful clarity. The TSK-vision is actually very kind to us. And the feeling of fear may be, as Tarthang Tulku points out, a pointer in the right direction. Maybe there is no other way to communicate this vision than to live it, to embody it. And that is, to me at least, an immensely fascinating challenge.