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

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