No Perceivers in Reality?

[TDW1995]

The thought that reality can exist without perceivers makes no sense to me, yet it makes perfect sense. After really concentrating on the third exercise of Leo’s “List of Enlightenment Exercises” sub-forum, my mind is really baffled.  I’m starting to realize that the thought of “me” cannot perceive anything else, because a thought cannot perceive a sensation in the phenomenal field.  But my mind refuses to accept the possibility that there cannot be a perceiver of reality. 

My mind is opened to the possibility that only one phenomenon can be focused on at a time (ex. My mind can’t focus on a feeling sensation in the feet at the same time as focusing on a sound).  And if this is true, how can “I”, which is just a thought, perceive a feeling in the body, or a sound, or a taste? Not sure if I’m on the right track with this.

[TrynaBeTurquoise]

Its a mindfuck. The thought "there is something behind the scenes perceiving reality" is merely a thought. Just like any other thought, the content or symbolism by the language in the thought is arbitrary. 

All there actually is, is perception. No perceiver or thing being perceived. 

Your direct awareness is prior to all thought, you don't need to think or conceptualize anything through means of symbolism in order to "be" and be directly conscious of the fact you are aware and that all there is is perception. 

Edited February 24, 2020 by TrynaBeTurquoise

[Nahm]

@TDW1995 Nice. I think it’s that in reality part that might be questionable. What if “reality” is in you? What if ‘my computer’ was a calculation on a tablet, which is made of wifi?

[TDW1995]

@TrynaBeTurquoise Quite the mindfuck indeed. Finally, after 24 years of subconsciously believing I'm a point-perceiver, my mind is questioning the obvious.

@Nahm My mind is trying to grasp this, yet maybe this is something the mind can't grasp.

[Leo Gura]

There is nothing but appearances and appearances appear to no one. They exist for themselves.

So imagine the color red existing without anyone preceiving it. Red exists for itself.

[Nahm]

@TDW1995 “My mind” is a thought. 

[TDW1995]

@Leo Gura So, the computer that I'm looking at right now exists for itself, but it sure feels like it relies on a perceiver, otherwise it wouldn't exist (for example, if I left my office). I guess this requires overcoming naive realism, which is something else I'm trying to grasp.

@Nahm Sure is  Damn

[Inliytened1]

There is only Being.

Check out Leo's video "What is Perception"

But it can be discovered directly by being Being.  Or rather, becoming directly conscious that you are Being.  (The two statements mean the same thing)

That's when the real mindfuck happens.

[TDW1995]

@Inliytened1 Yeah, I watched that a couple of months ago, but may need a refresher. That video does seem fitting for this topic.

[Inliytened1]

1 minute ago, TDW1995 said:

@Inliytened1 Yeah, I watched that a couple of months ago, but may need a refresher. That video does seem fitting for this topic.

?

[Forestluv]

43 minutes ago, TDW1995 said:

My mind is opened to the possibility that only one phenomenon can be focused on at a time (ex. My mind can’t focus on a feeling sensation in the feet at the same time as focusing on a sound).  

It depends on how you define "one phenomenon" and "focus". If I was at a concert, the mind can be aware of hundreds of phenomenon simultaneously. Or, we could consider these hundreds of phenomenon to be on singular phenomenon. Right now, I'm focusing on the cold sensations of my foot and the sounds of a song. The mind can do it. I suppose we could consider this as two phenomena or one phenomena (one cold feeling/music sound phenomenon). Now that I think about it, it's much easier to do when I consider both as one ISness. When I separate them as two phenomenon, its more challenging. 

For my mind, only focusing on "one phenomenon" is extremely challenging. One of my meditation exercises is to hyper-focus on a candle flame. Yet there is the flickering movement of the flame, the changing color of the flame, the changing size of the flame etc. It's extremely difficult to solely focus on one point. Although I suppose I could stare at  black dot on the wall. . . 

Regarding perception, there are an infinite number of ways to perceive and interpret what seems to be happening now. Prior to this perception/interpretation is the infinity of Now in which Nothing/Everything is "happening".  

[VeganAwake]

There is a conditioned human body that will turn its head if it's name is called or jump out of the way of a train to survive. It's basically running on conditioned autopilot.

The 'I' illusion comes in after the fact and claims that it's doing it, and that its the human body itself.

But it's not just the human body, it's the most important human body that ever existed. It's all about me me me I I I. 

And then of course this 'I' energy feels separate and lacking and goes on a quest to find completion of itself or Liberation from the constant feelings of lack.

The problem is the separation never occurred and it's all just an Illusion of separation... so the 'I' energy is seeking something that it will never find because it was never separate to begin with.

The Big Cosmic joke...(hey everyone let's go on an exciting never-ending quest to find something that was never missing yay)

When Maya the illusion of self is completely seen through it's almost laughable and I've heard some people do laugh for quite a while. ?

 

 

 

[Red-White-Light]

@Leo Gura What about colour blind people?

[TDW1995]

@Red-White-Light I'm color blind too haha. But I guess what I literally see is true for me. Just like a snake who may just see black and white is true for him. Not sure if there's a "right" way to see reality. 

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, TDW1995 said:

@Leo Gura So, the computer that I'm looking at right now exists for itself, but it sure feels like it relies on a perceiver, otherwise it wouldn't exist (for example, if I left my office). I guess this requires overcoming naive realism, which is something else I'm trying to grasp.

There is no you.

That's what you're missing.

This stuff happening now is not "your life". Ego is usurping appearances to construct "a life."

All appearances ARE the self.

[Forestluv]

Color is a hallucination. From a physical brain pov, different wavelengths of light trigger excite cone cells within the eyes. This sets of impulses that travel through the thalamus and off to the visual cortex (no color yet). A hallucination of color is created in the visual cortex. It's very similar to how psychedelic hallucinations are created.

Humans have three cones (red, blue and green). Dogs only have two cones (blue and yellow). Dogs cannot hallucinate red. The grand champion is the mantis shrimp with a whopping 12 cones. That means the mantis shrimp can hallucinate hundreds of colors humans don't even know exist. 

Imo, the hallucination of colors is the easiest entry point to break down the "real vs imagined" duality.  

The Grand Champion of color hallucination - the beautiful Mantis Shrimp.

[TDW1995]

29 minutes ago, Serotoninluv said:

It depends on how you define "one phenomenon" and "focus". If I was at a concert, the mind can be aware of hundreds of phenomenon simultaneously.

That makes sense that a lot of sensations would happen at the same time (sound, feelings, etc.). But, a thought can't perceive a feeling sensation. So, what I'm getting at is if "I" is a thought, then that thought can't perceive anything because it's a thought.

[Forestluv]

4 minutes ago, TDW1995 said:

That makes sense that a lot of sensations would happen at the same time (sound, feelings, etc.). But, a thought can't perceive a feeling sensation. So, what I'm getting at is if "I" is a thought, then that thought can't perceive anything because it's a thought.

Sure, if I think "my toes are cold", that thought is not the feeling. And that thought is not feeling the cold. And that thought is not the perception of the music.

One nice thing is to let thoughts dissolve and just be - perceiving without thoughts of perceiving. 

[VeganAwake]

There's still a human body here that can hear,speak,feel,taste etc...

Nothing in that regard changes...

The sensations are no longer owned by anyone(they never were, they just felt like they were)... they are just happening.

Personalization is removed from the picture.

[TDW1995]

2 minutes ago, VeganAwake said:

Personalization is removed from the picture.

In order to remove personalization, I guess I need to be clear what I think is the "I."  This enlightenment exercise tells me it can't be a point-perceiver.