What is experience?

[Natasha Tori Maru]

2 hours ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

@UnbornTao 

Start simply from the ground up. Have you experienced anything before you have started experiencing? To actually talk about something we have to ground it first. Before experience there was no experience, and after experience, there is no experience. Experience doesn't start, or ends, it appears infinite to itself.

"humans or sentient beings" is secondary to experience, these are ideas arising within it, and could never occur without it.

 Would you you find the statement 'experience is omnipresent' to summarise this nicely? 

[Anton Rogachevski]

@Natasha Tori Maru

Nice! It's one of the God features Leo is talking about too.

I would say it's Phenomenologically omnipresent. (From the point of view of the perceiver) - therefore it seems as if it is, but it might be not.

I used to get email notifications for comments but stopped getting them for some reason it's a shame really.

Edited Wednesday at 12:43 AM by Anton Rogachevski

[Natasha Tori Maru]

@Anton Rogachevski Not confirmed, but I think that part of the website is broken atm

[UnbornTao]

On 7/15/2025 at 5:59 PM, Anton Rogachevski said:

@UnbornTao 

Start simply from the ground up. Have you experienced anything before you have started experiencing? To actually talk about something we have to ground it first. Before experience there was no experience, and after experience, there is no experience. Experience doesn't start, or ends, it appears infinite to itself.

"humans or sentient beings" is secondary to experience, these are ideas arising within it, and could never occur without it.

I can see what you mean though. If I imagine earth 4.5 billions of years ago when we were all the same floating space dust, this very dust eventually grew conscious somehow, and that's truly when experience (in a basic form) started, at least here on earth.

Yeah, each of us has to sort that out in our own experience.

Just for fun: I'm conscious - that seems to be more fundamental than experience. Not sure if awareness applies here, though. What's clear is that we haven't realized their nature yet.

Edited yesterday at 12:57 AM by UnbornTao

[Anton Rogachevski]

@UnbornTao

❤️

What's the difference between Awareness, consciousness, and experience? 

[UnbornTao]

On 7/15/2025 at 6:23 PM, James123 said:

I am writing to you. 

Exactly. When asked to point to experience, we usually tend to focus first on sensations, bodily feelings, emotions, actions, and so on - not on beliefs or opinions, for instance. We may notice that a thought about something is not the same as our "direct experience" of it.

For example, we might recognize the thought of 'value' as an ancillary activity - produced by us and related to something encountered through the senses. When this mental activity is contrasted with a more raw or immediate encounter with that something, it might become clearer what experience is - or what our concept of experience might actually be pointing to.

"Therefore, Ānanda, you should know that when you say that experience is the creation of attachment with thoughts, you state what is impossible."  

To be fair, I might have misinterpreted your original assertion.

Quote

All there is, is this Moment. Therefore, attention can not be put anywhere, except the present moment.

You can focus on your perception of an object, and on your disgust or affection for it - and we say that all these activities, although different in nature, are happening in the present. They may seem to arise in unison, as if they were inseparable or part of the same process. Don't we tend to think of experiencing as a vague occurrence in which various activities are blurred together?

Where, then, would experience be placed on that list?

Quote

What do you mean?

See above.

Edited 8 hours ago by UnbornTao

[UnbornTao]

13 minutes ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

@UnbornTao

❤️

What's the difference between Awareness, consciousness, and experience? 

oh boy

[cetus]

On 7/15/2025 at 0:59 PM, Anton Rogachevski said:

If I imagine earth 4.5 billions of years ago when we were all the same floating space dust, this very dust eventually grew conscious somehow,

Every speck of space dust throughout the universe is luminous with consciousness.  If we had a space telescope that could see consciousness instead of X-Ray like the James Webb telescope all of the universe would glow brightly with the luminosity of consciousness. Experience on the other hand is a biproduct of consciousness. The SPAM of consciousness.  

 

Edited yesterday at 01:26 AM by cetus

[James123]

20 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Exactly. When asked to point to experience, we usually tend to focus first on sensations, bodily feelings, emotions, actions, and so on - not on beliefs or opinions, for instance. We may notice that a thought about something is not the same as our "direct experience" of it.

For example, we might recognize the thought of 'value' as an ancillary activity - produced by us and related to something encountered through the senses. When this mental activity is contrasted with a more raw or immediate encounter with that something, it might become clearer what experience is - or what our concept of experience might actually be pointing to.

"Hence, Ānanda, know that when you say that experience is the creation of attachment with thoughts, you state what is impossible."  

To be fair, I might have misinterpreted your original assertion and its intended meaning.

You can focus on your perception of an object, and on your disgust or affection for it - and we say that all these activities, although different in nature, are happening in the present. They may seem to arise in unison, as if they were inseparable or part of the same process. Don't we tend to think of experiencing as a vague occurrence in which various activities are blurred together?

Where, then, would experience be placed on that list?

See above.

when you say " I am writing to you" is an "experience", this is actually belongs to attachment because putting meaning on it (effort).

Just, directly, "I am writing to you". That's it 😊 

 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

34 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

oh boy

*trauma intensifies*

[Anton Rogachevski]

@cetus

I'm trying really hard but can't see the difference between consciousness and experience. Are there two things? 

[samijiben]

Experience is what is, but for most people it devolves into another word in the dictionary. 

[samijiben]

5 hours ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

@cetus

I'm trying really hard but can't see the difference between consciousness and experience. Are there two things? 

if you ask me, they are the same, but if you ask the dictionary, there is no answer, because the dictionary is inanimate.

[kbone]

6 hours ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

@cetus

I'm trying really hard but can't see the difference between consciousness and experience. Are there two things? 

Simply working with mind-made definitions can trip up the mind, and peeps get all crazy, contort their minds in arguments, oneupmanship games , and all the rest . So, imo/experience, it is much bettererer to learn experientially, in solitude, taking the time to experiment and see for one's self. The worldly order is so caught up in the levels, definitions, and competition, when in actuality, we're talking about the nuances of waves, layers, subtleties, and self-evident certainty. ALL is NOT TWO, but when using the mind, we can notice and play with DISTINCTIONS. The nuances you speak of can be noticed via meditation, playing with the types of samadhi, referring to the Plotinus model, and contemplating the nuances of the samadhis. This has a twofold effect: it doesn't rely on mind-based stuff to 'verify', so much as to USE the mind to report, leaving it OPEN to notice and explore the 'higher, more subtle' nuances.... CONSCIOUSLY. In the system of samadhis, 'nirvikalpa ' is often considered 'the highest level' with respect to meditation due to its degree of 'emptiness'. Note that this is not Realization per se, since we're talking states here. Hard core meditators seem to like to tinker with these, compare and contrast, and share nuances to play with: savikalpa, sabija, nirbija.... whole bunch of them, but I didn't tinker or experiment with that many of them consciously (just took it on as an interest).

If one is looking at Plotinus' model, one will see that with meditation, folks are typically playing in the existential waves of the SOUL level, shifting back and forth between personal and impersonal consciousness (or a bit higher, up into the higher self/ 'Intellect' (Nous- not to be confused with left-brainish/intellect) on occasion, maybe picking up some of the energetic woweezowees, or some cool, peaceful clarity. Whereas, experience would be more of the physical nature, in which the environment, society, jobs, running errands, etc are interacted with via mind (Note: all this can be a form of meditation, too, mind you). 

Nirvikalpa samadhi is basically just consciously 'emptying' the content of consciousness (mouthful, hehe) to a pinpoint-like state, but again, it is not realization per se. It is more like high-level Nous in Plotinus' model, perhaps even floating up there 'next to' The One, somewhat "consciously knocking on the door", hehe.  The shift into realization of The One is noticeable, but oddly not that 'memorable' in itself (for want of a better word), though the effects are noticeable on the mind, in the quality of grounding in 'experiential life', etc. It was during one of these forays in which the mind was informed that Realization is acausal; "I" can't force 'my' way into The One ('I/me' are not even present). Meditation is more like a 'making oneness prone' to realization. They say prayer is like talking to 'god/The One'; whereas, meditation is like listening.... receptive.

For mind-locked folks trying to figure it out, it can seem paradoxical, and peeps get all worked up for nothing, giving in to unconscious desires to dominate, be right, be the best, knock down others, find more whatever, and all the rest. Tranquiiiiillooooo. However, once it is fully Realized that "form is formlessness, formlessness is form", one has settled the mind into its secondary role. and is in a more-or-less 'normalized', awareness-state of sahaja samadhi type of dealio, one is much more aware of when one has consciously touched/entered mind and via which the dualities are at play. Life is much smoother, even when confronting the vagaries of life (i.e., right HERE, right NOW). As such, nirvikalpa samadhi is seen, not as moot, nor even all that necessary at all, but still nice, especially saaaay, before a long day of interacting with a large group of close family members who may be a bit at odds with each other! On those kinds of day, the waves of existence can get a bit tumultuous, and the tempests are rearing their sirens. Good to notice the potential pattern in advance, fear not, and go in grounded in/as awareness. 

Tranquiiiilooooo... The Peaceth that Passeth ALL Understandingeth.....

 

Edited yesterday at 08:51 AM by kbone

[samijiben]

Its funny how you refer to the great rapturous opening of God as sahaja samadhi "type of dealio" 

[kbone]

15 minutes ago, samijiben said:

Its funny how you refer to the great rapturous opening of God as sahaja samadhi "type of dealio" 

I wouldn't call sahaja 'rapturous', but more like EXTRAordinary... the suchness of existence in/as the unfolding, miraculous Present. Sure, at times it has a glowy, coolio dealio to it though.  Depends on the state... of mind in contexts.

Does that make sense?

Edited yesterday at 08:36 AM by kbone

[UnbornTao]

On 7/17/2025 at 2:25 AM, James123 said:

when you say " I am writing to you" is an "experience", this is actually belongs to attachment because putting meaning on it (effort).

Just, directly, "I am writing to you". That's it 😊 

Not sure I follow you. Why are you bringing up attachment, meaning, and effort? Are you suggesting there's no experience?

Your lived experience (is there a better word for this?) of writing on a computer could simply be called 'experience' - as distinct from thinking, assessing, interpreting, judging - maybe - even though these can also be experienced for themselves. I'm just trying to clarify the distinction for our own sake. You're having some kind of experience right now. What is that about?

On 7/17/2025 at 3:44 AM, Anton Rogachevski said:

@cetus

I'm trying really hard but can't see the difference between consciousness and experience. Are there two things? 

I was joking. It was a good question - one that calls for some insight. That's why I didn't answer it. I could say that experience and awareness are relative and forms of consciousness, the latter being the 'mother' of them - but that just turns into meaningless chatter unless there's a conscious experience of what's actually true in the matter. So, that's the goal.

On 7/17/2025 at 2:27 AM, Natasha Tori Maru said:

*trauma intensifies*

Edited 7 hours ago by UnbornTao

[Anton Rogachevski]

1 hour ago, UnbornTao said:

what's actually true in the matter. So, that's the goal.

Yep we want the Truth here right? What is the relationship between experience and Truth?

How do you define Truth? If we may digress a little.

[James123]

3 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

Not sure I follow you. Why are you bringing up attachment, meaning, and effort? Are you suggesting there's no experience?

Your lived experience (is there a better word for this?) of writing on a computer could simply be called 'experience' - as distinct from thinking, assessing, interpreting, judging - maybe - even though these can also be experienced for themselves. I'm just trying to clarify the distinction for our own sake. You're having some kind of experience right now. What is that about?

I mean is, without past or future beliefs, attachments, thoughts, worries etc... what is really happening now is what we actually experiencing.

I am writing to you. That's it. 😊 

[UnbornTao]

2 hours ago, Anton Rogachevski said:

Yep we want the Truth here right? What is the relationship between experience and Truth?

How do you define Truth? If we may digress a little.

What is - at any level, from what is absolutely true to the nature of emotion, experience, others, relationship, the body, and so on. It is not what we think about something, but what exists in and of itself, both factually and ultimately.