An Appeal to All Accomplished Beings , All Bodhisattvas, and Mahayana Followers:
May All Beings Benefit Truly, Starting Here and Now.
(An Ongoing Draft).
Many good people are trying to improve the conditions for Life on this planet, but how can we ever know whether any progress towards the ideal is being made at all? People have different ideas of what a better world should look like. All the differences among these ideas are being resolved in real time/space with a waste in energy, resources, and, above all, time. I propose that these differences are resolved in a model instead of in real life, and then, after these differences are resolved in the model much more expediently that they ever would in real life, the resulting "blue print" would be implemented in real time/space. Not only unnecessary waste would be eliminated, but also the model would show a unified and clear portrayal of an ideal world against which any idea meant to improve this world could be checked.
We, our children, our relatives, and our friends will share the future world together with strangers and enemies. Why not strive to dissolve all our differences in a model, before those differences destroy our collective future?
As it is now, we have no way of knowing whether we are getting anywhere near to achieving of a better world, mainly because there is no unified image of what a better world should look. We can hardly get something of which we have only vague notions what it actually should be.
The whole of humanity should become ecologically and socially fully sustainable for the sake of all beings that there are here and now in this world. Unfortunately not all people have any clear idea what "sustainability" should mean. Fortunately, though, it is a safe assumption that, perhaps, all people would like to live in a better world.
Most of people's ideas of what a "better world" should look like, however, are not compatible with each other, and the differences among those ideas get resolved in real life often with disastrous results. Most people would like to have "Peace on Earth", but violent conflicts keep on happening, because everybody would like to live in their own version of peace.
What could help would be that all these diverse ideas would be used to construct a model of what an ideal state of the world should be.
At the start of the modeling not anything would matter more than the willingness of the participants to resolve the differences among themselves with as little violence as possible.
All such ideas could be evaluated in this model as to their viability, compatibility with each other, and with all that is known about the Earth.
All that would matter in this model would be how useful these ideas inputted would be for the construction of a model of an ideal world--the identities, ideologies, and creeds of the people inputting the ideas into the model would be irrelevant! If anyone should not like the developing portrayal of the ideal world, all they would have to do would be to input better ideas, ideas that would be more useful for the construction of the model.
What would matter would be that differences among all the people's disparate ideas would be resolved harmlessly in a model, rather than in real life with mostly unforeseeable results, as the case is mostly now.
I would like to argue that regardless of what ideas people might have about what "sustainable" might mean, eventually the product of the modeling would have to be an image of a, in all aspects, sustainable world, because only a sustainable system could be the most efficient, elegant, parsimonious, and, above all, "transparent" enough for all involved to see what is going on with any components of the system at any time.
In a world that would be sustainable--both ecologically and socially--all the life supporting processes would have to be "transparent"; only "transparent" processes are easy to be understood, and maintained by most. The out-most transparency of all ecological and social processes is a requirement for any fully sustainable system. To paraphrase: Keep it simple, sustainable.
Some could say, perhaps, that there is no need for any "modeling"--all that is needed is that people get along. To this I would like to point out that even if people would be willing to resolve their differences peacefully, nothing much noticeable would have to be happening anyhow without everybody having a clear image of what it is that they want to achieve collectively. We - a lot of people, a great deal of people, are trying to resolve our differences peacefully even right now, today. However--there is no clear idea what it actually is that we are trying to achieve together. We might be cooperating better and better, but the inertia that is responsible for all the wars and misery happening in the world today is constantly taking over--no real gains are visible.
A much greater number of people would be enticed to take a part in working together on building a better world if there would be a clearly observable model of what we are trying to achieve together. All that is observable today is that a lot activities that are meant to improve our lot are happening, but it is unclear, without a clearly observable objective, whether we are making any progress to a better future at all!!
With a model that would be presenting the latest consensual idea of what this world should ideally look like anybody could see how well, or not, we are approaching the ideal, with a way of evaluating all the activities that are meant to get us closer to the ideal. The worth of our activities would be almost immediately "visible".
This model could be started with just a handful of people initially. The usefulness of this model would become apparent when it would become known that anyone would be able to dispute and improve upon any of the features of the modeled world. Once people would see the possibilities of modeling of their own future, ways of reaching the world portrayed would automatically start suggesting themselves.
Eventually a model of the world would start emerging that would be nearing the ideal of a sustainable world.
While many people might not care about others' suffering because of the comfort of their social position in the world, others might not care about their own suffering, perhaps, because they might think that it is impossible to end it.
Even here the model would be useful--the first kind of people could see in the model the eventual consequences of their non-interest in the fate of others (the ensuing terrorism, criminality, wars, etc.), the other could see that a better existence for them is actually a possibility. These two kinds of people both could see in the modeled resolution of the differences among their ideas that they share one world together, and that their well-being depends on the well-being of all who share this world.
Once it would start being seen in the model what an ideal world could look like, people would start taking steps to achieve the ideal.
The model could, of course, never become completed. As it is with any other human enterprise, the modeling process and our knowledge of this world would keep on improving.
Ideally, in a kind of "Heaven on Earth" world, all the differences among the inhabitants would resolve in a space that would exist exactly for that purpose. We do not live in such a world, but perhaps a meditation whose objective would be imagining what an ideal sustainable world should be like would be a start.
There are already people doing this kind of meditation, but the reason that we do not see any substantial changes for better in the world yet might be that all these meditations are not synchronized to produce a unified, universally acceptable vision of an ideal world.
Short of finding good meditators who would be able to "think" a better, sustainable world into existence, perhaps starting modeling the form of an ideal world by whatever means available would be good for now, till a collaborative construction of a model of a better world is possible to do in meditation.
I am hoping by publishing this appeal to all accomplished beings, Buddhas, and Bodhisattvas to find at least an interest in the issues raised, and perhaps an interest in helping to forward the idea in any, no matter how crude, a manner.
Please do not necessarily support the author of this appeal, but rather consider the merits of the idea.
This idea is further explained at http://.www.ModelEarth.Org
Thank you sincerely -
Mr. Jan Hearthstone, truehome at lycos com.