Experiences don't exist?

[WokeBloke]

I saw the word exist is defined as having objective reality.

Technically speaking I guess it would be inaccurate to say that experiences exist since only the subject knows about them.

If experiences don't exist then what exactly are they?

 

 

 

 

[Eternal Unity]

Subjective experience is the only thing that does exist, in my opinion.

Self is the absolute authority in deciding what is real. Definitions are finite. The Absolute is all there is, in other words, existence.

[Mason Riggle]

Persistent illusions. 

[The0Self]

56 minutes ago, WokeBloke said:

If experiences don't exist then what exactly are they?

Appearances.

[Bazooka Jesus]

Lol. Still chasing after labels, meanings and definitions, eh?

Well, don't let me spoil your fun. Just don't act surprised when it finally dawns on you that all of this mental gymnastics won't ever get you anywhere.

[RMQualtrough]

6 hours ago, Bazooka Jesus said:

Lol. Still chasing after labels, meanings and definitions, eh?

Well, don't let me spoil your fun. Just don't act surprised when it finally dawns on you that all of this mental gymnastics won't ever get you anywhere.

Good for him, spiritual awakening is horrifyingly bad.

[Chris365]

7 hours ago, Bazooka Jesus said:

Lol. Still chasing after labels, meanings and definitions, eh?

Well, don't let me spoil your fun. Just don't act surprised when it finally dawns on you that all of this mental gymnastics won't ever get you anywhere.

Not like there's any choice in the matter... 

[Batman]

There are only perceptions but no one perceives them. Which is the same as saying as there are only appearances, which appear to no one.

If we investigate it analytically, experience is just a function of survival. Organisms perceives their surrounding for survival purposes. There is no other reason for heaving eyes, nose, ears, feeling sensations, taste buds. If we inspect other organisms, such as trees and plants, we see that they lack most of the perceptive faculties that more complex organisms posses, simply because they usually don't need them for their survival. So experience is a mere side effect of the existence of a life form, and the faculties themselves are shaped around the survival mechanics and surroundings of that specific life form.

But this is only how it manifests in our perception. If we inspect perception from within, it is obvious that there is nothing other than perception or appearance, and everything else (experience, experiencer, perceiver, witness, survival, organisms, etc.) are just stories in the mind (which is also only a perception). When the "me" or the "I" thought is created, then perceptions are all organized, interpreted and given value or meaning in the context of "my life story", that perceptions are happening to some entity that is "me" or "I". And so a dualistic illusion is birthed, where the body-mind (which are perceptions/appearances) are thought to be the subject of experience, whereas everything else (the world, others and objects) are thought to be the objects of experience.

[The0Self]

10 hours ago, RMQualtrough said:

Good for him, spiritual awakening is horrifyingly bad.

Only for the me.

[wildflower]

subject and object collapses, your subjective experience is objective absiolute etc etc

[IamYou]

7 hours ago, Batman said:

There are only perceptions but no one perceives them. Which is the same as saying as there are only appearances, which appear to no one.

If we investigate it analytically, experience is just a function of survival. Organisms perceives their surrounding for survival purposes. There is no other reason for heaving eyes, nose, ears, feeling sensations, taste buds. If we inspect other organisms, such as trees and plants, we see that they lack most of the perceptive faculties that more complex organisms posses, simply because they usually don't need them for their survival. So experience is a mere side effect of the existence of a life form, and the faculties themselves are shaped around the survival mechanics and surroundings of that specific life form.

But this is only how it manifests in our perception. If we inspect perception from within, it is obvious that there is nothing other than perception or appearance, and everything else (experience, experiencer, perceiver, witness, survival, organisms, etc.) are just stories in the mind (which is also only a perception). When the "me" or the "I" thought is created, then perceptions are all organized, interpreted and given value or meaning in the context of "my life story", that perceptions are happening to some entity that is "me" or "I". And so a dualistic illusion is birthed, where the body-mind (which are perceptions/appearances) are thought to be the subject of experience, whereas everything else (the world, others and objects) are thought to be the objects of experience.

How can a non-perceiver determine if there is a perceiver. You claim there is no you that perceives which means you don't exist. If you don't exist then you can't talk about existence.

[Batman]

2 hours ago, IamYou said:

How can a non-perceiver determine if there is a perceiver. You claim there is no you that perceives which means you don't exist. If you don't exist then you can't talk about existence.

Exactly. This communication is from no one to no one, and it only describes what is appearing to be the case here.

[Carl-Richard]

22 hours ago, WokeBloke said:

Technically speaking I guess it would be inaccurate to say that experiences exist since only the subject knows about them.

How do you know subjects exist?