Permanence VS. Change

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Permanence VS. Change

Post  anita on Mon Jun 15, 2009 9:14 pm

Hey everyone! Attending the graduation ceremony last Wednesday really hit me with a scary fact: sophomore year is ending. I could not believe that last year, it was us who were sitting down there, graduating from middle school. Next year, we would be the ones onstage, performing. The year after that, we would be the ones throwing our hats in the air. Shocked Then we would all fly toward different directions. Okay, enough of the future. Let’s pull ourselves back a bit.

In English class, we have learned that America has gone from Puritanism to the Age of Reason, then to Romanticism, then Transcedentalism/Anti-Transcendentalism, then Realism, then Naturalism, and then the modern day. Feelings and attitudes are changing constantly as a result of the events that were going on at the time. For example, after the Civil War, Transcendentalism ideals were not so apparent anymore. Instead, the harsh realities and aftermath of the war gave rise to Realism. Are there any dominant traits that society favors, no matter the time period, that remains somewhat the same?

In addition, things are constantly changing in our lives. Our environment is changing, our schedule is changing, and we ourselves are changing as we go through life. We know that not only are we changing as humankind, but we are also changing as individuals. Do you think change is "always good?" It may seem like nothing in our lives is for forever. So, what is the most permanent thing?

Have fun! I’m excited to hear your thoughts! Very Happy

External Forums:
Perspectives

Unexplained-Mysteries

Philosophy Now

Philosophy Forums


Last edited by anita on Mon Jun 15, 2009 10:36 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
anita
Moderator

Posts : 37
Join date : 2009-05-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  Fermin Liu on Mon Jun 15, 2009 9:24 pm

Anita! Very Happy

First! Laughing

Interesting introduction and question! At first, when you told me your question on msn, my automatic answer was "Essence." But now, after thinking about it more deeply, I would have to say that EVERYTHING lasts forever. Very Happy Like Ms. Kay said many times in class and like Siddartha stated, time and space DO NOT exist. Thus, with infinite potential in the nonlocal domain of pure energy, isn't EVERYTHING always there? At least on the essence level where every possibility is taking place exactly RIGHT NOW, only that they may not be perceived on the physical level. Laughing Thus, with interconnectivity and infinite potential, I would say that in the energy pool of infinite potential, EVERYTHING happens infinitely and thus, EVERYTHING lasts FOREVER. Very Happy
avatar
Fermin Liu

Posts : 88
Join date : 2009-05-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  shawanne on Mon Jun 15, 2009 9:34 pm

The only constant is change - Heraclitus

As humans we are constantly evolving to new memes and revolutionizing our way of life and thought; permanence is what we have craved for centuries and beyond (i.e. people wanting to be immortal, the Philosopher's Stone concept, 秦始皇 sending people out to find elixirs of immortality, etcetc.) Anyways, so what /is/ permanent? The physical domain does not contain this; everything is bound to evolve and change and go beyond what is now--organisms will die, buildings would weather away, the streams would run dry eventually when the Sun, in about another four billion years, engulfs the Earth.

But ideas carry on, as they are not 'physical' but rather mental images and thoughts--this is permanence, that thoughts are universal (the unlimited fountain of creativity that we draw from) because for every 'normal, everyday' thought that we have thought before (i.e. I'm hungry, I'm bored, I want to go play DotA, etc.) a thousand people have thought it before you and another thousand will think of it after you. Ideas can change, but the concept of thought will remain constant regardless of time and age.

Edit: Something I forgot. Change might not always be for good, but through trial-and-error [and possibly other factors?] we are constantly trying to change ourselves and the world around us to make it suit us better, or the other way around. Change is, ultimately, for the purpose of good [I think], but sometimes it might get off-course.

...I hope that made sense, and if I said something weird, correct me please. o_o
avatar
shawanne

Posts : 66
Join date : 2009-05-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  joannneee on Mon Jun 15, 2009 9:41 pm

Hey Anita!

Personally, I don't think there's anything that remains the same - we are everything, but at the same time we're close to nothing. We are made up of everything that has once been and will be, so in return, everything merely changes form, but not what it is made up, if you take up the atom theory.

The only permanence, I would think, would be nothing at all. Our thoughts change with time, our visages change with time - and as Shawanne said, we all seek some sort of continuance and eternity that a human would be unable to find. We will always keep changing, so I suppose we're some sort of a paradox - we are never in the same form, but yet we always remain the same things that make up our universe.

This is the closest I can get for now. xD I suppose I should wait and see.
avatar
joannneee

Posts : 57
Join date : 2009-05-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  Angel on Mon Jun 15, 2009 9:51 pm

Are there any dominant traits that society favors, no matter the time period, that remains somewhat the same?
As we study society’s evolution, the common traits that we see are usually those that are characterized my inevitable change/transformation through the events of “birth,” “destruction,” “frenzy,” etc. Births are discoveries, creations, and the development of new perceptions of the world. Destructions are usually, as we have seen, the aftermath of wars and battles, which also lead to new discoveries. These are disruptions, I think. Disruptions that are both good and bad. The dominant traits of society (or one of the dominant traits of society) can be constant renewal (new thoughts, concepts, ideas, etc.).
We know that not only are we changing as humankind, but we are also changing as individuals. Do you think change is "always good?" It may seem like nothing in our lives is for forever. So, what is the most permanent thing?
I don’t think change is always good … and this immediately makes me think about the Classicist mind. It is characterized by, as we already know, logic, order, and all those other things that allow it to be so functional. The Classicist mind doesn’t favor change. To other minds, change may be favored. So it depends on the “type of mind” one has, I guess?

The most permanent thing … I would like to say goals and dreams, but those may change slightly throughout the course of one’s life. Permanence makes me think about scientific things, like genes and heredity. The genes that one is born with remain the same forever (unless … mutation occurs?) and so are the little habits and tendencies that one has since birth/a young age.
avatar
Angel

Posts : 50
Join date : 2009-05-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  ivy on Mon Jun 15, 2009 11:03 pm

im very materialistic for the moment. diamonds Very Happy
okay, but enough of my retardations. what is permanent? well, friendship is definitely not, sorry for the people who want to remain bff with their current friends; there are many cases of friends drifting apart over the years. however, there are some people who remained true to their friends over the course of time, so i suspect that friendship is the ship that won't sink can happen one in a million.
i am very sarcastic, pessimistic, and cynical for the moment...so i suppose moods are definitely not permanent Razz
is our essence constant though? can our essence be shaped by the supreme being and universal conscious over time?
avatar
ivy

Posts : 50
Join date : 2009-05-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  soph on Tue Jun 16, 2009 12:53 am

heyhey drunken

This is an interesting topic!! ^^

Firstly, I agree that grad ceremony was kinda scary and a reality check in a way because it made me wake up all over again to the realities in which we live in. We are not children anymore and we are growing up and TIME IS FLYING BY.... OMG O.o

Anyways... I think "change is always good" is a phrase that is dependent on many factors. What i mean by that is that our lives our constantly undergoing changes, because we are constantly creating and destroying, and shaping our worlds about us. Every minuet of our lives, something is happening that may be building up to change, or is undergoing change that very moment. I dont think anything in this material world is permanent. Some may say that marriage is supposed to be permanent, but is it really? Look at the statistics on the divorce rates around the world today... Some may say that love is enduring, but what about the attraction and the matching of frequencies between more than two people? Are we supposed to be in control of who our essences connect and feel in touch with?

I think we live in a highly paradoxical world. We are constantly changing, yet we deny those changes and desperately seek ways in which to elongate the changeing time period and the changes in which we undergo. Take beauty products for example. Why are there hundreds and thousands of beauty products brand in the world? Why are some of them so well knowned that their products circle the world and are sold at sky high prices, yet people choose to spend fortunes of money of them nevertheless? Why are brands like Lancome, Elizabeth Arden, Shiseido, Kanebo, Sofina, Bobbi Brown, M.A.C, L'occitane, SKII, Clinique etc.etc.etc. ALL trying to find young beautiful models to champaign for their latest products on how to have revived looking, radiant young skin in your 40s and 50s? Isnt that ironic? Young people naturally have better looking skin than women in their 40s and 50s... we cannot change the fact that gravity and the everyday wearing of the skin on our faces causes it to sag and lose its collagens and therefore become wrinkly and aged. Yet, why are the majority of women seeking and seeking, throwing in tens and hundreds of thousands of nt per year on beauty products to make themselves appear younger looking and more beautiful? (you see what i'm trying to say here?)

***At this point, I dont really think there is anything that is TRULY PERMANENT. However, in order to answer this question, we would also need to define what ABSOLUTE PERMANENCE is?

But then again, like Fermin said, if the soul exists at the nonlocal domain where there is no time or space, shouldnt EVERYTHING be permanent? Or does that only apply to certain aspects of our lives and not all? Sleep
avatar
soph

Posts : 28
Join date : 2009-05-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  Kenny on Tue Jun 16, 2009 1:11 am

I agree with the quote shawanne put up, everything changes, there is no permanent thing acutally. And if you sort of think about it, you can't really have something that's "kind of" permanent, either it stays or it does right? No matter how long it lasts, if it ends or changes, then it isn't permanent.

Oh and like I keep stressing, it's really hard to tell what change is "good" and what is "bad" after all, it depends on who's ideals you're comparing with.

Kenny

Posts : 78
Join date : 2009-05-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  kathy on Tue Jun 16, 2009 3:06 pm

i think change is "good" in the long run no matter if hte change that happened is "good" or "Bad" because all the cahnges added together create growth and development. change and spontaneity are elements needed for intuition. permanence does not lead you to growth, it only allows you to live the way you have always lived -- like a machine.
avatar
kathy

Posts : 33
Join date : 2009-05-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  anita on Tue Jun 16, 2009 8:16 pm

Thanks to those who have replied! Reading through the replies to my own questions is quite exciting Very Happy

Fermin: Are you saying that time and space are simply our illusions? If so, then why did we create these illusions? It may seem like everything is always there, but their forms are not permanent? Energy cannot be created nor destroyed, yet it is still converted and transferred.

Shawanne: Nice quote, Shawanne. Interesting point about the ideas and thought! If things are already pretty bad in the current state, then why do some people are still resistant to change? Let’s say a boy’s girlfriend leaves the boy in order to be with another boy. If the boy is already very heartbroken, why would the boy choose to let everything be the same and continue sulking instead of making some changes?

Joanne: That reminds me of Angela’s WHOLEness or NOTHINGness thread. Razz What you’re saying now is, nothing is permanent? Hmmm, this contrasts with Fermin’s everything is permanent, yet it is still related.

Angel: Oooh, constant renewal. That paints a picture of a cycle for me. You mentioned about the type of mind that one has. But don’t we all have both the Classicism and Romanticism elements incorporated in our mind? Or is it the mind is always more Classicist, while the being is more Romanticist? If a person has the tendency to display more of Classicism, would you say that their being is more suppressed (and vice versa)? You don’t think that the little habits and tendencies since birth would change? This makes me think of “critical period” in biology, which is a time in the early phase of an organism's life when it displays a heightened sensitivity to some outside stimuli, and develops in particular ways due to experiences at this time. It is said that if the organism is not exposed to a certain stimulus during this "critical period", it may be challenging, or even not possible, to develop some functions later in life.

Ivy: Thinking about, “Diamonds are Forever?” Razz Not only do friends drift apart, but lovers aswell … So you’re saying that relationships do not last forever? But then, as Angel mentioned, genes will always be the same, right? No matter how much you dislike your mom, you cannot deny the fact that she is your mother and is the one who has given birth to you. Your moods are not permanent in the sense that they can change from happy to depressed. But we will always have moods? I believe essence is more like, constant transformation.

Soph: What do you mean by constantly creating and destroying? Energy is neither created nor destroyed. Indeed, we do live in a highly paradoxical world. We do not live and enjoy the now as much as we should be. That is ironic. People fear change., and sometimes this fear, with the ego-mind gone overdrive, makes them choose to escape into believing that they would look as good as the 20 year old model. A different attitude should be adapted – instead of trying to cover the wrinkles, one should embrace the wrinkles as a proud sign of wisdom and experience. Not having the courage to adapt to change could lead people to do disastrous things. I think a better way than to treat and cover is to prevent. In other words, it is easier to work on it BEFORE than AFTER it has happened. In this case, exercise or worry less. If people lived in the now and just accepted the change, this situation that you portrayed would not occur as much.

Kenny: Yeah, when it comes to permanence, I guess there is no grey area, we have to be black and white. I guess we need to distinguish if simply the PRESENCE is permanence, or permanence has to be the CURRENT FORM. I see what you're saying, bad and good are only labels that human brand ourselves with. They mean differently to everybody. A more optimistic person might view change as changing for the better, while a more pessimistic person may argue that everything is changing for the worse. Thus, they may only be focused on the one aspect of the changes, magnifying the side that they are more likely to turn to.

Kathy: Indeed, changes + changes + changes = growth and development as even if someone is completely resistant to change, as his surroundings change he is also forced to change somewhat also. Permanence usually does not lead to growth as we grow from experiencing and as we are faced with new challenges.

NOW...

Someone in an another forum has mentioned that, if there is no absolute permanence, then what is something which changes the slowest, or that resists change the best?

In addition, we have mentioned about living in the now. Does living in the now connotates passivity or activeness to you? Is it more of accepting the changes happening, going with the flow, and not fearing? Or is it more stepping out and adapting to the changes?


Thanks guys for accompanying me through my learning journey Very Happy


Last edited by anita on Tue Jun 16, 2009 8:37 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
anita
Moderator

Posts : 37
Join date : 2009-05-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  joyceychen on Tue Jun 16, 2009 8:25 pm

hm...kathy's reply made me think...
is permanence just something the egomind wants so that it can be grounded on something and not feel lost? knowing that something will last forever...wow. that brings out a new perspective, doesnt it?

and i agree, in the long run, change is good. how do you learn if it's good or bad if you dont even try it? with change may come mistakes, but it's ok! arent we supposed to learn from our mistakes so that they dont happen again? how do we get thsoe experiences if we dont try to take a step out into the unknown and change the routine a bit? yes, we all like the comfort of routines, but that could lead to laziness or whatever. arent we supposed to not conform to society? i see the word change in there

-----
in response to your new post, anita
2nd question. i dont think living in teh Now is passive at all. when change occurs in your environment or something, you've got to shift your own self a bit and i dont believe that's passive at all.
avatar
joyceychen

Posts : 83
Join date : 2009-05-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  ivy on Tue Jun 16, 2009 8:50 pm

hmmm. im not really sure what is essence...can its transformation also be constant? as we know, living in the now is the ability to live in changes, so isn't living in the now and accepting the nonexistence of permanence constant, like what shawanne has said?

i think one thing that changes the most gradually is decomposition of plastic. haha. sorry that's not very constructive. well, putting this from a stubborn person's view, i.e. me, i think the mind changes the slowest. even though we might have sudden epiphany, but doesn't the ego mind and the biases prevent us from seeing the other side most clearly? but then again, this isn't really the change that occurs the slowest, because when one is suddenly snapped out of their hallucination or their comfort zone, realization comes the quickest.

as regarding your second question, i think living in the now is to accept not to adapt. when we adapt, there might be something new that has already happened. it's like fashion, just when we start to think polka dots are in, they become out again, and then the plaids are the trendiest things ever. to adapt is getting accustomed to something, thus when we adapt, aren't we falling into the old again? enough said i suppose hehe

living in the now is neither active nor passive. when we are passive, that seem as though we are not trying to be in the now at all. but when we are active, that still seems awkward. i don't know, that's just what i think. when we are active, it appears to be that we are trying too hard. i suppose living in the now is to enjoy the moment. neither to be active nor to be passive. brrr. im confusing myself, but hope this somewhat contributes to the discussion Smile
avatar
ivy

Posts : 50
Join date : 2009-05-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  Steph C on Tue Jun 16, 2009 10:42 pm

Hey Anita, great question!
Good quote by Shawanne up there, too. Though I didn't post here on the first day, I'm going to jump into your follow up questions after having read everyone's answers. I can't really think of anything totally permanent either. So what changes very slowly? In a way, it kind of seems like life does... I know parents always say that their kids are growing up way too fast, and when we look back on our childhoods, we think about how much change has occured. Even looking back on sophomore year, serveral of us are thinking about how fast its gone by.
But thinking of things in the now, the change doesn't seem that sudden after all. I feel like tomorrow, I'm going to be essentially the same person as I am today, and that today, I'm pretty much as I was yesterday. I guess it all depends on how you look at it.
avatar
Steph C

Posts : 51
Join date : 2009-05-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  shawanne on Tue Jun 16, 2009 11:00 pm

o.o Dude, so many posts already, cbf to look too closely atm. XD;

If things are already pretty bad in the current state, then why do some people are still resistant to change? Let’s say a boy’s girlfriend leaves the boy in order to be with another boy. If the boy is already very heartbroken, why would the boy choose to let everything be the same and continue sulking instead of making some changes?

...I'm going to pull from past experience here, so it might not be as accurate as someone else with more objectivity :s. Well...one might keep on sulking 'cause one, it might be a big shock to them [no surprise here], so they're still in the recession stages. Also, here's where wishful thinking comes into play--one keeps thinking about that person, thinking about all the good and bad times they had together, in hopes that the person will come back to him again. I dunno, but this kind of seems like a warped version of the Secret o_o;

Someone in an another forum has mentioned that, if there is no absolute permanence, then what is something which changes the slowest, or that resists change the best?

Hmm. Good question. The paradigms of the world we live in, maybe--but in this 'flat world' more and more cultures are being assimilated into each other, so...that might not be it. Hm. I'll get back to this one.

In addition, we have mentioned about living in the now. Does living in the now connotates passivity or activeness to you? Is it more of accepting the changes happening, going with the flow, and not fearing? Or is it more stepping out and adapting to the changes?

I think it's a mix of both--both stepping out fearlessly and taking what's thrown at you, and accepting whatever consequences may come. Nobody can live your life but you, and whatever choices you make, whether good or bad, would be the ones that affect you the most.
avatar
shawanne

Posts : 66
Join date : 2009-05-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  soph on Wed Jun 17, 2009 12:24 am

hihihi

What i meant was that because we are constantly emitting magnetic powers to attract into our lives, whether they are positive or negative. Therefore, we are always and constantly creating new experiences, things, changes and so on in our lives. Thus, there is really no permanence because we are already continuously shaping our worlds about us every minuet of our lives.

Something that changes the slowest or resists change?...
I think the ego mind is a good example of something that resists change. Because change brings with it new experiences, and unfamiliarity, therefore, it causes a sense of discomfort because we may have to step out of our immediate bubble to experience and face new things that come our way. However, as we ahve said, it is not possible to avoid changes in our lives because every second brings about it more changes in the next. I think we should accept that things are not going to be the same and to try to adapt ourselves to survive in the every changing world today. Especially at this fast fast pace, it is really a challenge for us to be able to get on track in our lives within a short amount of time and to be able to use what we ahve learnt all these years in school in the future. Because things change so fast, our knowledge and what we know may become out of date sooner than we actually have the change to apply and use it.

I dont think living in the now connotates passivity at all. Because being able to live in the now require a lot of courage and bravery to be able to accept things the way they are and the be able to survive in the now takes a lot. It takes a tremendous amount of courage to be able to accept and face with a positive attitude anything that comes into our lives, whether they are positive or negative. And the amount of courage it needs is nothing close to passivity. To be able to accept and face and to try to resolve all the problems that we face is very brave because often times, we like to escape and ignore the core questions and problems just so that we are not so involved into a situation or do not ahve to take responsibility for our own actions. We tend to want to relax and take things easy and not have to think much about action and consequence and the responsibility that comes with everything we do as we enter out into the real world. And to be able to take up all this onto ones shoulders is very courageous and brave, i dont think it is passivity at all.

I think it encompasses accepting what has already come into our lives which will cause us to step out of our comfort zones because every new experiences is like nothing we have ever come across before and therefore, facing these new and unfamiliar things will require us to bring ourselves to another level and in a way, to transcend, the boundaries that we have put up so far to enter into a higher level of conscious where we become more aware because of the experiences that we have gathered.

I hope that made sense... king
avatar
soph

Posts : 28
Join date : 2009-05-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  Fermin Liu on Wed Jun 17, 2009 1:25 am

Are you saying that time and space are simply our illusions? If so, then why did we create these illusions? It may seem like everything is always there, but their forms are not permanent? Energy cannot be created nor destroyed, yet it is still converted and transferred.

Anita, I hadn't really thought of the permanenet and constant changes that each of us go through each day when i wrote my reply to your question, so I guess I wasn't looking at the whole picture. Crying or Very sad Now, to reanswer your question on permanency and change, I think that change may be the only thing that will last forever (besides Essence that it). As many of us have said, change is inevitable--thus nothing is permanent. Even on the quantum level of information and particles, our energy waves continue changing in their frequencies according to our mood, desire, actions, etc. Thus, even in the slightest way, what makes us up--the energy and particles--are constantly and endlessly changing. Very Happy

Yet, in the nonlocal domain, the potential or PURE ENERGY is always there. Very Happy The possibility of everything happening is permanent because in the nonlocal domain or these energy pool of infinite potential, everything is taking place at the same time (meaing right NOW and forever more), which is why everything is possible and can be manifested on the physical plane. Thus, potential or pure energy always remains constant because it is so vast and infinite that it encapsulates everything--every form of quantum energy or physical object--so how can something that is EVERYTHING ever change to be something different? As for the physical domain and the quantum domain, it seems like things are always changing--that physical things either dies or are used up, and the quantum level energy waves and information frequencies are always altering themselves and thus altering the physical as well. Very Happy

I'll come back to reply to your new questions as soon as possible (problably in about an hour). Laughing
avatar
Fermin Liu

Posts : 88
Join date : 2009-05-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  John on Wed Jun 17, 2009 3:23 am

I agree with those concepts.

The question,

What is the most permanent thing?

is our essence. The energy being that we are, which I would describe as love.

The issue of change is, in my view, the way we expand All That Is. The various forms of free choice expression is what makes it all happen.

John
avatar
John

Posts : 32
Join date : 2009-06-11
Age : 74
Location : Lowell, Massachusetts USA

View user profile http://www.telepathyacademy.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  Fermin Liu on Wed Jun 17, 2009 5:17 am

I'm back! Very Happy

Does living in the now connotates passivity or activeness to you? Is it more of accepting the changes happening, going with the flow, and not fearing? Or is it more stepping out and adapting to the changes?


Living in the Now, to me, is one of the most courageous things that anyone can do. Very Happy It is taking control of your own life instead of feeling sorry for yourself due to past events or getting unnecessarily nervous about the future. Thus, living in the now connotates a sort of activeness of taking charge of one's own life at the moment--the time that we can ACTUALLY control--and doing something about it. To live in the NOW would mean to bravely first accept things as they are and then try and change them for the better. It no longer gives us an excuse to feel sad and weak because of what happened to us yesterday or last week, nor does it allow us to fear the future because in the Now, we are not even supposed to worry about the future. Very Happy

In that sense, I think that living in the now is a combination of both accepting the changes happening--not resisting or holding on to the past--and stepping out of one's comfort zone and adapting to the changes. The two are kind of similar. Laughing I have to step out of my comfort zone to accept the changes in my life right now, and adapting to them is the way to truly accept them and flow with life in the NOW. Very Happy

if there is no absolute permanence, then what is something which changes the slowest, or that resists change the best?

I purposely saved this question for last because in my opinion, this is the most complex question to explore and discuss. Thus, I'll be back in another hour to reply with my answer to your very thought-stimulating question after I've thought about it a lot more. Laughing Smile Very Happy
avatar
Fermin Liu

Posts : 88
Join date : 2009-05-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  Nick_A on Wed Jun 17, 2009 11:54 am

It is obvious that life as we know it is continually changing. It seems part of the calling to transcendence is the experience of the "good" that is behind continual change. How many really need to experience it? How many for example need the experience of substantial transcendent truth that is behind eternal change?

Simone Weil experienced it at fourteen. How can we understand this need in someone so young?

The following is an excerpt from a letter she wrote to a friend. She knew she was near death from TB and he wanted to know more about her. She was of course comparing herself to her brother Andre who was three years older and at seventeen considered a math genius.

Excerpts from a letter Simone Weil wrote on May 15, 1942 in Marseilles, France to her close friend Father Perrin:

At fourteen I fell into one of those fits of bottomless despair that come with adolescence, and I seriously thought of dying because of the mediocrity of my natural faculties. The exceptional gifts of my brother, who had a childhood and youth comparable to those of Pascal, brought my own inferiority home to me. I did not mind having no visible successes, but what did grieve me was the idea of being excluded from that transcendent kingdom to which only the truly great have access and wherein truth abides. I preferred to die rather than live without that truth.........................................

How can we better understand these people who need the transcendent truths that express permenance and are willing to sacrifice the attractions of temporal truths to experience it?

Nick_A

Posts : 68
Join date : 2009-05-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  anita on Wed Jun 17, 2009 8:24 pm

Joyce: Change brings the new, which the ego mind will have to learn to adapt to. Ego mind likes to have control – with permanence, it has control since things are the same and it knows what to do and what will happen. Things are predictable. You never know until you have the courage to step out and experience, right? Routines could lead to laziness. Sometimes with routines, we tend to not put in as much effort anymore, since we know what we can expect out of our actions. We know that this teacher is laid-back, therefore eventually we might not try our best anymore when completing his assignments. No matter how much one resist change, one is bound to have to change themselves as a result of the change occurring around them.

Ivy: Realization comes quick, but does adaptation comes quick? One may realize that they’re wrong, but are they willing to accept the fact? Or are they just going to ignore it? Depends on the person huh.

Steph C: Hi! Feel free to jump in Very Happy Yeah I feel like that way as well. Sometimes I think that I really am not changing that much from day to day, which makes me wonder when do the changes take place, since I’m not really aware of it myself. But as I was going through pictures yesterday, I realized that people have changed from last year, both physically and mentally. As said by Calvin from Calvin and Hobbes, “Know what's weird? Day by day, nothing seems to change, but pretty soon...everything's different.”

Shawanne: Ah, relating to the Secret. Are you talking about self-denial in that example? Denying of the reality, since people tend to look at the side that they like more? Indeed, in the end, you will ultimately be the one that is affected by all the choices.

Soph: Thanks for clarifying! I see the term ego-mind! Wink Would you say that a person who is not passive at all may eventually become arrogant, as they choose to not receive, only step out? Would they have too much of the second part of the definition of “to interpret?”, meaning they put too much of themselves into the situation, without stepping back to reflect on what is really going on?

Fermin: Thanks for helping me distinguish between the different domains! So first accept, then try to change for the better. Other people have agreed with you on this. Haha, I see how both accepting and adapting are related now. I look forward toward your answer for the earlier question!

John: By saying that you agree with those concepts, do you mean you’re agreeing with Fermin? So you’re saying change is expanding our unlimited potential, seeing where we can reach? Yes, We can create changes with our own choices. We can make a difference!

Nick: I see that you’re looking things in the long run, instead of the short-term. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, they have led me to think of a new question.

NOW...

Nick’s reply and Fermin’s mentioning of Siddhartha lead me to a new thought. By the end of the story, both Siddhartha and Govinda have achieved the enlightenment that they’ve been trying to find. That leads me to think, will they always have that enlightenment? Or does the enlightenment come and go? Can it be lost?


Moreover, we are changing constantly. John's signature on another forum states that,

"What We Are Never Changes !!
Who We Are Is Always Changing !!!"


(I hope you don't mind me sharing this with everyone Razz But it is totally relevant and fits perfectly here! Thanks in advance for letting me use this!)



Everyday is a new day for change. But how can someone really change, for example, really change a habit that they have done all their lives?

In order to change we must be sick and tired of being sick and tired.
- Author unknown


Do you agree? Or is change much simpler than that?
What are the catalysts and inhibitors of change?
avatar
anita
Moderator

Posts : 37
Join date : 2009-05-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  Fermin Liu on Wed Jun 17, 2009 8:56 pm

if there is no absolute permanence, then what is something which changes the slowest, or that resists change the best?

Even though I'm very tempted to answer "Essence," I think that since Essence is the inhabitant of the nonlocal domain of pure, infinite potential, it does not really count as something that is close to being permanent. Of course, there is also infinite potential and energy frequencies which although they are INFINITE, meaning that even as they change in frequency they are still maintaining their same identity and attribute of having INFINITE POTENTIAL, energy waves are amongst the things that change physically the most and most frequent. Very Happy

Therefore, as I sat in front of my laptop pondering over this question this morninig at 4 o'clock while reading Midnight Sun I love you (which by the way is totally AWESOME Like a Star @ heaven ), I thought "LOVE!" Even though lust and physical attraction may die down very easily as shown in the case of Henry VIII and his many wives, true love is something that is said to last forever. True love is not just mere curiosity or a desire to get to know both mentally and physically another. To me, true love is something like companionship (as Ms. Kay said in class today), it is a dependency on the other person while at the same time a desire to protect that same person. True love is the conscious connecting of two people's being--so strong that they can both feel the interconnectivity between them (if not between everything). True love is what humans would consider 'permanent.' That connection between the two people is always there...until death do us apart...and then even when the other has died. Very Happy

So, the physical manifestation of interconnectivity is, besides infinite potential, true love? True love is what happens when two people have realized their interconnectivity of their being and energy? Very Happy
avatar
Fermin Liu

Posts : 88
Join date : 2009-05-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  shawanne on Wed Jun 17, 2009 9:58 pm

Everyday is a new day for change. But how can someone really change, for example, really change a habit that they have done all their lives?

In Chinese class two years ago my class read a story about a man who walks around his room. There was this rock in his room that he kept tripping over, and one day when the rock disappeared he stepped down, realizing all at once that there was no more rock there for him to trip over, that he had been habituated to having that rock in the room [I /think/ the story went like that...O.o]. So. How does this connect? Most of the time when we are...let's say, accustomed to doing one thing, if we are told to do another thing one day most of us would be like "Huh?" and probably will [at first] be not used to doing that thing. I believe that with determination and the right willpower one can change even the most fundamental tradition one has kept with oneself; it does not mean that it will be easy, but it is do-able.
avatar
shawanne

Posts : 66
Join date : 2009-05-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  Fionaaa :) on Wed Jun 17, 2009 10:31 pm

Hi Anita - I skimmed through everything and now i'll post a quick reply to your question on enlightenment Wink

I don't think enlightenment can be lost.
Once you have it, once you have surpassed that certain level, you are forever there.
As with maturity and wisdom - can these ever be lost? Can you suddenly lose wisdom? I think not.
However, I believe that true enlightenment is nearly impossible to reach. Who on earth can understand life? Can Siddhartha explain all our questions regarding our existence? Probably not. Although there ARE levels of enlightenment. We can slowly enter an understanding of life by going through levels, and once you have gained a level, you won't lose the enlightenment.

Oh and at what point do we realize the change that's happening to us?
avatar
Fionaaa :)

Posts : 47
Join date : 2009-05-11

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  Kenny on Wed Jun 17, 2009 11:51 pm

To your new question...yeah i think that once you reach enlightment it stays with you, once you go beyond any thought, you pretty much won't be coming back down, when you become enlightened, thought no longer has a place, and as such, external stimuli could not induce thought in you.

In order to change we must be sick and tired of being sick and tired.
- Author unknown

Do you agree? Or is change much simpler than that?
What are the catalysts and inhibitors of change?


no idea why but I laughed a little when I saw that, but it was kind of like an "oh, so that's where it was" kind of laugh. The dude who said this has a pretty good idea. lol, cuz now I think about it, I only really ever change when I'm sick of tired of always trying to change and failing xD Take, studying for example, if i get a crap grade, I decide to change my studying habits, and er, yeah, fail. But eventually, its not the grades that give me a motive to change, its the failing at making a change and not being able to score higher.

And lol, love the bio references, brings back memories of enzymes and digestion...as well as the trauma that came along with learning about it -_-

Kenny

Posts : 78
Join date : 2009-05-12

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  Nick_A on Thu Jun 18, 2009 1:58 am

Hi Anita

Nick’s reply and Fermin’s mentioning of Siddhartha lead me to a new thought. By the end of the story, both Siddhartha and Govinda have achieved the enlightenment that they’ve been trying to find. That leads me to think, will they always have that enlightenment? Or does the enlightenment come and go? Can it be lost?


By "enlightenment" I accept the definition by Kusala Bhikshu:

Enlightenment- The Wisdom of Emptiness... The wisdom that arises from the direct experience of all phenomena being empty of independent existence.

Knowing through personal experience (for example, meditation) that all things are interconnected and interdependent. That nothing in this world exists independently. All things are connected and conditional... In other words... All things exist because of other things.

I am here because my parents had lust and I had Karma. If both conditions hadn't come together in a very special way years ago, I wouldn’t be standing here today, but that’s only half the story.

In order for me to live in this world, the Buddha said I need... “Food, Shelter, Clothing, and Medicine.” These are the four major conditions necessary for me to subsist. Some conditions were necessary for me to be born, other conditions are important for me to stay alive.


The whole story is... Certain conditions got me here, other conditions keep me here, and when all the necessary conditions come to an end, so do I. I do not live independent of conditions.

Enlightenment is a result of the direct experience, of conditional and interconnected reality.

Enlightenment is more than an intellectual understanding though, it’s also an intuitive knowing. It is a total transformation of the heart and mind.

We are not enlightened because our intellectual life is caught up in results while enlightenment is experiential knowledge of the process. It requires a quality of consciusness we have to grow towards.

I don't know if enlightenment can be lost but do know it can be tainted and perverted. If that happens the supernatural part of ourselves becomes warped (demonic) which is very difficult to clean. This is the necessity of an oral tradition where new knowledge comes only when a person's being is able to put it into a realistic conscious perspective.

The New Testament refers to cleaning the feet. It wasn't that Jesus had a foot fetish but rather that the feet in the esoteric language of the Bible refers to the outer or ego mind. This is easily cleaned. When we become dirty on the inside, it is much harder to clean. The story of Milarepa refers to how difficult it was to be broken down to the foundation necessary to begin again in order to achieve enlightenment.

IMO a lot of New Age practice like channeling only serves to potentially taint us on the inside. Perhaps it would be better if we could lose enlightenment rather than damage ourselves on the inside from our innocent ignorance. But if this is the human condition, and we are capable of damaging our budding soul, it is better IMO to be very wary of charlatans.

Nick_A

Posts : 68
Join date : 2009-05-31

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Permanence VS. Change

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum