2009.03.03 13:00 - The Times They Are A-changin'

    Table of contents
    No headers

    The Guardian for this meeting was Fefonz Quan. The comments are by Fefonz Quan.

    Scathach Rhiadra: Hello fefonz:)
    Scathach Rhiadra: Hello Pema:)
    Fefonz Quan: Hey Scath :)
    Fefonz Quan: Hey Pema :)
    Pema Pera: Hi Scathach, Fefonz1
    Pema Pera: *!
    Pema Pera: :)
    Fefonz Quan: pema, i guess you know there is a famous nun with that name?
    Pema Pera: ?
    Scathach Rhiadra: :)
    Pema Pera: Fefonz1 ?
    Fefonz Quan: Pema choudron i think is the spelling
    Pema Pera: ah!
    Pema Pera: Yes
    Pema Pera: well, Pema is a rather common Tibetan name
    Scathach Rhiadra: there are a lot of Pemas in Tibet:)
    Pema Pera: means lotus
    Fefonz Quan: Ah, i didn't know that :)
    Pema Pera: padma in Sanskrit
    Pema Pera: Hi Yichard!
    Scathach Rhiadra: Hello Yichard
    Yichard Muni: Vendui
    Fefonz Quan: Hi Yichard
    Fefonz Quan: Padma i knew from Star wars ;-)
    Pema Pera: :)
    Pema Pera: Fefonz and I had a lunch discussion today
    Pema Pera: (we are both in Princeton in RL)
    Pema Pera: about "change"
    Pema Pera: and about what it might mean to say "there is no change"
    Pema Pera: or "change is an illusion"
    Pema Pera: so if nobody minds we would be happy to continue talking about that
    Scathach Rhiadra: please do:)
    Fefonz Quan: should i begin with what bothers me?
    Pema Pera: it came from a suggestion to look at the world in three ways:
    Pema Pera: seeing everything as matter, or as experience, or as appearance
    Pema Pera: drop the identification of experiences with experiences of matter is the first step
    Pema Pera: dropping the notion that what appears appears over time to a self with consciousness is the second step
    Pema Pera: We more or less agreed about the first, but hardly got started with the second . . .
    Pema Pera: Yes, please, Fefonz!
    Fefonz Quan: in fact we touched the second, in the sense that we acknowledged that appearance is mroe basic that the 'I'
    Fefonz Quan: more*
    Pema Pera: Hi Arisia!
    Scathach Rhiadra: Hello Arisia
    Arisia Vita: Hi all, I hope everyone is well and happy
    Fefonz Quan: so in a way it is easy to see that on a phenomenological sense there are appearances, or appearances APPEAR
    Fefonz Quan: that is the basic experience we can count on.
    Wol Euler: hello ari, pema, scath, yichard, fefonz
    Fefonz Quan: Hey Wol :)
    Pema Pera: HI Wol!
    Scathach Rhiadra: Hello Wol:)
    Arisia Vita: welcome Wol
    Yichard Muni: Vendui
    Fefonz Quan: we are discussing the notion of 'change'
    Fefonz Quan: following a talk i had with pema
    Pema Pera: I would like to make a distinction between, on the one hand, experienced phenomena, experiences for short, things that occur in someone's consciousness,
    Pema Pera: and on the other hand what I call appearances
    Pema Pera: that are not seen as arising "within" my consciousness
    Pema Pera: or in any way associated with a subject
    Pema Pera: rather you could say both subject and object appear
    Pema Pera: arise
    Pema Pera: and not necessarily "in time"
    Pema Pera: there is just the presence of appearances
    Arisia Vita: can you always distinguish the two?
    Scathach Rhiadra: would you say your consciousness is an arising or appearance?
    Pema Pera: and we make it into experiences by positing a time in which they appear and a consciousness in which they appear
    Pema Pera: on the level of appearances there is no consciousness -- only the appearance thereof
    Pema Pera: Hi Mick!
    Wol Euler: hello mick
    Arisia Vita: welcome Mick
    Fefonz Quan: i can agree with that, appearance precede consciousness or self
    Scathach Rhiadra: Hello Mick:)
    Pema Pera: Arisia, it is a kind of move like going from the painting to the paint, from a movie to the light
    Mickorod Renard: hiya,,sorry just logged
    Pema Pera: two such moves:
    Pema Pera: from matter to experience and from experience to appearance
    Pema Pera: matter is; experience happens; appearance arises
    Pema Pera: and there is the presence of appearance
    Arisia Vita: and the appearance of presence?
    Fefonz Quan: so appearance is experience without the notion of "me expeience"??
    Scathach Rhiadra: just what is?
    Pema Pera: it is more radical even
    Pema Pera: yes, what is
    Arisia Vita: what place does illusion have in this?
    Pema Pera: beyond time
    Arisia Vita: or even delusion?
    Pema Pera: there is the appearance OF time
    Pema Pera: sure the appearance of delusion
    Arisia Vita: this is a fascinating topic
    Pema Pera: Glad you like it, Arisia :)
    Mickorod Renard: its delusion that i worry about
    Arisia Vita: yes, how to tell delusion from reality
    Pema Pera: on the level of appearance, delusion ultimately doesn't matter . . . .
    Fefonz Quan: but even if time as we know is an illusion, still in order for something toe "apear", to have experiented, HCANGE must occur
    Pema Pera: no
    Pema Pera: and yes
    Fefonz Quan: change*
    Pema Pera: yes, on the level of experience
    Pema Pera: no, on the level of appearance
    Pema Pera: there can be the appearance of change, yes
    Pema Pera: but no change
    Fefonz Quan: the delusion doesn't solve that problem
    Pema Pera: only the presence of the appearance of change
    Fefonz Quan: even the appearance of change, can't appear if all is frozen
    Scathach Rhiadra: if each appearance is just what is at that unique timeless moment, then there is no change..
    Fefonz Quan: but then Scath we get the "next" appearnace
    Pema Pera: yes, Scath
    Fefonz Quan: so the difference between THIS appearance and THAT is chagne
    Pema Pera: no change does not mean frozen
    Pema Pera: appearance of change and appearance of things frozen are two different appearances
    Scathach Rhiadra: mmm, another unique appearance just what is at that timeless moment, and so on
    Pema Pera: neither of them are either changing or frozen
    Arisia Vita: welcome Myna
    Pema Pera: but each moment is all of Being, there is no succession, ultimately . . . .
    Pema Pera: hi Myna!
    Fefonz Quan: but if we agree there are two different appearences (each unique), there was change
    Wol Euler: but surely the apple I ate yesterday is not here today.
    Mickorod Renard: hi myna
    Wol Euler: hello myna
    Fefonz Quan nods to Wol
    Fefonz Quan: (hopefully :))
    Myna Maven: Hi all.
    Scathach Rhiadra: neither is the you that ate the apple Wol:)
    Pema Pera: nor the yesterday . . .
    Wol Euler: fair enough. But I bet taht I remember the apple better than it remembers me
    Scathach Rhiadra: :)
    Myna Maven: Can someone IM the chat thus far? I'd appreciate it.
    Mickorod Renard: can you im the chat to me too please
    Mickorod Renard: i missed a lil
    Myna Maven: Thanks Fefonz.
    Mickorod Renard: I feel close to grasping it,,yet there is a blockage stopping the whole notion unravelling in my head
    Mickorod Renard: thanks scath
    Myna Maven: (Thanks Scath.)
    Fefonz Quan: for me i can grasp letting go of the causality, the continuity, teh regular notion of Time as giong from past to future and all those things
    Fefonz Quan: yet the notion of chagne / difference between appearances seems to me as basic as space itself
    Fefonz Quan: even more basic in a phenomenological way
    Yichard Muni: Hmmm... If I understand well, what you mean by "being" (in play as being) is contemplating the experience of a given moment, in its fullness, without considering its causes or relations with other experiences or moments
    Pema Pera: but then change is also gone, if you drop continuity and causality . . .
    Pema Pera: yes, Yichard that is a first step
    Fefonz Quan: no, i don't agreee peama
    Pema Pera: the second step, the big challenge, is to drop the notion of sequence
    Pema Pera: of succession
    Fefonz Quan: i have event A and event B
    Pema Pera: of a "next"
    Fefonz Quan: they are not sequencial nor causal
    Fefonz Quan: not ordered too
    Fefonz Quan: yet, they are different
    Fefonz Quan: so if i experienced A, somewhere/when/you name it
    Yichard Muni: ... but it is a contemplation, not a science reasoning. We don't ned to drop our science theories or understanding of the physical world, just put it asides during the play?
    Mickorod Renard: are we looking at a snap shot,,at a given chosen moment?
    Fefonz Quan: and i experiencd B
    Pema Pera: yes, Fefonz, I understand your logic
    Fefonz Quan: two different snapshots, yes
    Pema Pera: but we have to somehow go beyond that logic
    Pema Pera: no-time does not mean frozen, and does not mean snapshot
    Pema Pera: Scat, do you want to try?
    Pema Pera: You could say it in a different way, perhaps?
    Scathach Rhiadra: heh
    Pema Pera: sure, Yichard, we can keep everything, but we can see them *as* appearances
    Yichard Muni: okie
    Pema Pera: we are all addicted to "next"
    Pema Pera: if we can drop "next" we have nothing left to worry about . . . .
    Yichard Muni: forbid the next, then :-)
    Pema Pera: . . . no hope no fear . . . .
    Pema Pera: see that there is no next
    Pema Pera: no denial, no suppression
    Pema Pera: So Fefonz, perhaps we can go very very slowly
    Scathach Rhiadra: the perceptions that arise in our mind give us the illusion that they are sequential, maybe..
    Scathach Rhiadra: or dependant..
    Pema Pera: but on the level of appearances there is no mind in which something can arise
    Pema Pera: there is only the appearance of a mind . . .
    Scathach Rhiadra nods
    Pema Pera: it is really really radical !
    Pema Pera: and yes, I agree with the illusion, Scathach
    Mickorod Renard: are we taking out the business of other thoughts,,ie projected and mulling over past..and seeing just what is
    Scathach Rhiadra: we cling to the illusion
    Pema Pera: we are simply trying to see how everything appears, as appearance . . . no other hidden agenda, Mick
    Fefonz Quan: i feel what i asked is more basic, even if we agree on teh illusion (for the sake of conversation)
    Pema Pera: and you can try to tell me why you believe in a next, why you think you have next moments
    Pema Pera: <- Fefonz
    Yichard Muni: just contemplating the appearence, experiencing it
    Pema Pera: So Fefonz, let us go very slowly
    Pema Pera: you tell me why you believe in change or next
    Fefonz Quan: well, i can tell about the next, this is a different issue
    Pema Pera: either way
    Pema Pera: very slowly, so that we can see where our understandings diverge
    Fefonz Quan: in a way, this moment has memories of previous ones
    Pema Pera: no
    Mickorod Renard: next is a perception given from memory?
    Pema Pera: let me rephrase that, if I may
    Fefonz Quan: ok
    Pema Pera: There is the appearance of this moment and the appearance of memories in the moment that appear to refer to a past
    Pema Pera: that's quite different from [13:32] Fefonz Quan: in a way, this moment has memories of previous ones
    Fefonz Quan: ok, agreed
    Pema Pera: I don't accept the existence of "this moment"
    Pema Pera: only the appearance of it
    Pema Pera: (this is fun, to go slowly!)
    Pema Pera: Hi Chiaiu!
    Fefonz Quan: we can add 'the appearance of' to anything we say
    Arisia Vita: welcome Chi
    Mickorod Renard: hi chi
    Scathach Rhiadra: ok, what about there is onle a constant becoming..
    Scathach Rhiadra: only*
    Chiaiu Chiung: Hi all :)
    Fefonz Quan: now, there is the apearance of (TAO) :) this moment and the memories
    Scathach Rhiadra: Hello Chiaiu
    Yichard Muni: Vendui Chiaiu Chiung, please find here what you were not looking for :-)
    Pema Pera: We can use different words, for sure, but the point is to sense what it is, to really see it
    Fefonz Quan: but in a moment there will be TAO another moment with different memories
    Pema Pera: no no
    Pema Pera: that's what I don't agree with, Fef :)
    Fefonz Quan: ok, rephrase:
    Fefonz Quan: there is TAO A, there is TAO B
    Fefonz Quan: A contains the last sentence i wrote
    Fefonz Quan: B contains teh next
    Fefonz Quan: and in B, teh memory of A exist
    Pema Pera: there is the appearance of "A and then B", the presence of that appearance, that is all I want to grant you . . . .
    Mickorod Renard: ok,,without a time
    Fefonz Quan: wops, need to ponder it
    Fefonz Quan: when A appeared, there was no B in it
    Mickorod Renard: is time then,,just a filing system
    Pema Pera: all we can do is compare the present appearance of something with the appearance of a memory that claims that something earlier happened . . . .
    Pema Pera: and *if* we fall for that claim, sure, then we seem to live in time
    Pema Pera: but we don't have to fall
    Fefonz Quan: yes, but this present appearance that we put so high above others, will be a memory in a second
    Pema Pera: we can really appreciate what is as is
    Pema Pera: no
    Yichard Muni: to "fall" in this is what we all usually do
    Pema Pera: Fefonz, you assume a sequence of points
    Fefonz Quan: no
    Wol Euler: my memory tells me that my teacup breaks and splashes tea on my feet wehn I let go of it. Must I try this anew every evening?
    Pema Pera: no?
    Fefonz Quan: i assume 2 different point, that's all
    Wol Euler: (I'm sorry, I am being very dim today, and it is frustrating me)
    Pema Pera: that is already an assumption
    Pema Pera: <- Fefonz
    Pema Pera: Wol, yes, that is how we normally look at life
    Pema Pera: as a sequence in time
    Pema Pera: very natrual
    Pema Pera: natural
    Fefonz Quan: in teh NOW, 13:40 is on my clock - hence one point.
    Pema Pera: but we can try out an alternative . . . .
    Mickorod Renard: assumption based on filed data?
    Pema Pera: the NOW is not a point, necessarily
    Pema Pera: it appears to be a point on a line, *if* we look at it that way
    Fefonz Quan: in the NOW, 13:41 is on my clock - hence event B (with memory of A)
    Scathach Rhiadra: it is always 'now' no other time exists
    Pema Pera: yes, we can compare memories, Fefonz
    Pema Pera: yes, Scat
    Arisia Vita: welcome Licia
    Pema Pera: Hi Licia!
    Fefonz Quan: skip the point notion, it can be a whole world of it's own
    Chiaiu Chiung: hi licia
    Mickorod Renard: hi lika
    Mickorod Renard: licia
    Licia Cisse: ciao
    Pema Pera: welcome back!
    Fefonz Quan: i agree Scath, 13:40 doesn't exist NOW
    Pema Pera: We are talking about something very strange, Licia, about the option we have to look at the world in a different way
    Pema Pera: without time
    Pema Pera: without past-present-future time as in a line
    Mickorod Renard: so we do away with dime and sequence,,and replace it with arising?
    Wol Euler: is arising not movement? is movement not change?
    Fefonz Quan: stilll the change remains Mick
    Scathach Rhiadra: :)
    Fefonz Quan nods to Wol
    Mickorod Renard: not really
    Mickorod Renard: I think i get a feel now
    Mickorod Renard: just a relentless now
    Mickorod Renard: arising
    Fefonz Quan: a relentness now that has movements in it
    Mickorod Renard: appearing
    Mickorod Renard: no
    Mickorod Renard: the movements take time
    Pema Pera: There is something I am trying to talk about, and it doesn't have words in our language, so I use words like "arising" and "presence of appearance" to try to point to it -- I am not trying to argue, and the words could be different
    Fefonz Quan: movements->chnages
    Pema Pera: in my way of using it, the arising of appearance does *not* imply change
    Pema Pera: or movement
    Pema Pera: or sequence or next
    Pema Pera: not relentless either, not at all
    Pema Pera: time is relentless
    Pema Pera: no-time is freedom
    Fefonz Quan: even teh word 'arising' has some motion to it
    Yichard Muni: it is if we say 2+2 appears to make 4
    Licia Cisse: (first of all...i'm sorry for my poor english)...what's the topic here?
    Pema Pera: we are talking about different ways of looking at the world, Licia
    Pema Pera: we can see a cup as a stone object, say
    Pema Pera: or as my experience of the cup
    Pema Pera: or the appearance of my experience
    Pema Pera: . . . but this is a long going topic for us . . .
    Pema Pera: . . . it may be a bit difficulty to see what we are talking about . . .
    Pema Pera: feel free to ask questions, though!
    Licia Cisse: ok...there is no world...there are just maps of the world...
    Licia Cisse: i said that yesterday..i will hear you now
    Mickorod Renard: what i was thinking though,,was to see each now,,as something new, thus removing past and present.
    Pema Pera: yes, Licia, that is all related
    Pema Pera: but today from a somewhat different angle
    Fefonz Quan: yes Mick, that is much easier to comprehend that what pema is refering to
    Pema Pera: yes, Mick
    Wol Euler: I suppose my difficulty is that I want to reconcile that "eternal brand-new" (which I can accept, in a way) with owning a refrigerator and contributing to a pension plan
    Pema Pera: but then after "removing" past and future, the one point of "now" becomes something very different than a point in a line . . . it becomes a kind of eternal now
    Wol Euler: because if there "is" no change, then I do not need either of them
    Mickorod Renard: but you have to do that very quickly?..cos the next now happens
    Pema Pera: all of that is appearing in the eternal now, you could say, Wol, the appearance of all that
    Pema Pera: no need to be quick, Mick
    Fefonz Quan: even Mick's notion of 'new' refer to 'old' :)
    Pema Pera: you can relax, sit back, and remain forever in the now
    Mickorod Renard: yes,,that was what I badly phrased as relentless now
    Scathach Rhiadra: and we can be aware of the eternal and still live in the relative world
    Yichard Muni: when a new "now" appears, we just do it again with this new one
    Pema Pera: no danger you will suddenly find yourself in the past of future -- never happened to me at least :)
    Pema Pera: not relentless though
    Pema Pera: progression of a series can be relentless
    Fefonz Quan found himself in the future any minute ;-)
    Mickorod Renard: he he he
    Pema Pera: but no series then no condition of possibility of it being relentless
    Licia Cisse: time is where you focus your mind...
    Pema Pera: oh yes, Scathach!
    Pema Pera: for sure, there is the appearance of the relative
    Mickorod Renard: my aunt?
    Scathach Rhiadra: :)
    Pema Pera: hehe
    Myna Maven: I think of it as different tiers of relationship.
    Pema Pera: alas, I have to leave now . . .
    Pema Pera: sorry to bring up such a radical topic :)
    Wol Euler raises an eyebrow
    Pema Pera: I know it takes a long time to get some traction with it . . .
    Yichard Muni: That is OK, Pema :-)
    Scathach Rhiadra: it was a great discussion:)
    Yichard Muni: was very interesting
    Pema Pera: but I'm happy to come back to it, any time
    Wol Euler: mmhmm
    Pema Pera: thanks!
    Chiaiu Chiung: (i crashed)
    Wol Euler: bye pema, take care
    Scathach Rhiadra: wb
    Myna Maven: Very interesting.
    Mickorod Renard: I feel like I am getting there,,but still struggle with being able to see it differently..ie a new now will follow..or do I freeze a now to look at it closer?
    Scathach Rhiadra: bye Pema:)
    Mickorod Renard: bye pema
    Chiaiu Chiung: bye pema
    Pema Pera: you see, the reason I am trying to convey this, is that I see this as literally the solution of all our problems . . .
    Pema Pera: very literally
    Pema Pera: it may sound abstract
    Pema Pera: but once it opens up for you
    Pema Pera: and you can let it do real work in your life
    Yichard Muni waits eagerly for the next episode :-)
    Pema Pera: it really is the single solution to everything
    Pema Pera: Sure, be happy too :)
    Pema Pera: see you all soon again
    Myna Maven: Bye.
    Fefonz Quan: Bye Pema, thanks for the conversation :)
    Pema Pera: till next time!
    Mickorod Renard: do you get something really good from it Pema?
    Pema Pera: well, Mick
    Mickorod Renard: sorry,,,bye Pema
    Licia Cisse: ciao Pema...there are no troubles...and there are no solutions...:)
    Pema Pera: it shows you how to see everything as neither good nor bad
    Mickorod Renard: ahha
    Pema Pera: haha, Licia, sure!
    Pema Pera: well, next time more :-)
    Wol Euler: bye myna, take care
    Mickorod Renard: thankyou
    Scathach Rhiadra: bye Myna
    Mickorod Renard: bye myna
    Fefonz Quan: I am sorry to bring it up so late, but CHiau and licia - are you aware that we are recording the chat?
    Chiaiu Chiung: i know, no problem
    Fefonz Quan: (asking because i didnt;t meet you yet)
    Licia Cisse: no problem
    Fefonz Quan: great thanks!
    Licia Cisse: it's my second time here
    Chiaiu Chiung: did not say much anyway, had some technical probs today
    Licia Cisse: (the first one i was searching for a les land...:) )
    Licia Cisse: (serendepity?)
    Fefonz Quan afraid to ask what a les land means
    Yichard Muni: hmmm... and me I have to leave for other friends
    Licia Cisse: lesbian land
    Yichard Muni: Namarie :-)
    Licia Cisse: :)
    Wol Euler: bye yichard, take care
    Scathach Rhiadra: bye Yichard:)
    Fefonz Quan: bye Yichrd
    Chiaiu Chiung: bye richard
    Mickorod Renard: ok folks..I gotta go now
    Scathach Rhiadra: bye Mick:)
    Mickorod Renard: maxines dream session
    Wol Euler: bye mick
    Mickorod Renard: bye
    Fefonz Quan: bye mick
    Chiaiu Chiung: bye mick
    Fefonz Quan: thanks Licia :)
    Licia Cisse: :)
    Wol Euler: I should be moving on too. Even if there is neither time nor change, I believe in the illusion that I have other thigns to do in other places.
    Scathach Rhiadra: bye Wol:)
    Chiaiu Chiung: bye
    Fefonz Quan: bye Wol :)
    Wol Euler: 'night all
    Fefonz Quan: we share that illusion :)
    Scathach Rhiadra: we all do:)
    Licia Cisse: illusion?...no..it's the game caled life
    Licia Cisse: :)
    Scathach Rhiadra: I must be going too, namasé all:)
    Fefonz Quan: me too, bye all :)
    Licia Cisse: oh my god...
    Chiaiu Chiung: me to, bye
    Licia Cisse: :)
    Fefonz Quan: what happened Licia?
    Licia Cisse: i will remain here alone
    Licia Cisse: :)
    Fefonz Quan: regularly we stay longer, but there is a worksho we attend now
    Licia Cisse: ok
    Fefonz Quan: hope to see you next times though :)
    Licia Cisse: see you...in some other present moment (no future, no past...)
    Fefonz Quan: you see, you are getting it so quickly :)
    Licia Cisse: :9
    Licia Cisse: ciao
    Fefonz Quan: bye :)
    Licia Cisse: i will turn off the light
    Tag page (Edit tags)
    • No tags
    You must login to post a comment.
    Powered by MindTouch Core