WokeBloke

Experiences require a subject proof

47 posts in this topic

3 minutes ago, Jonty said:

@WokeBloke Sound IS awareness. There is nothing to sound other than awareness. Not two!

So, like a modulation of a single thing? Like sticking a pole in a stream and seeing it split in two? Awareness being the substance, and appearances being the forms built from that substance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, WokeBloke said:

You still exist during deep sleep or a knockout punch. And there is no experience during those events.

@WokeBloke so, if a person is an experiencer even when not expriencing anything, then a dead person is a subject, yes? 

There needs to be an aware 'you' for there to be 'an experience'.. The two are one in the same, even though they 'seem' separate. There's no inside without outside. 

You might think, other 'experiences' continue, while you don't have an experience, like while you're sleeping, but you have never experienced that. This is an assumption. How sure are you that you're not dreaming right now? You've been lost in dreams before, that seemed so real, you didn't realize it was a dream.. mind is powerful. 

If the 'experiencer' tries to 'experience itself', all it will find is more experience. 

Edited by Mason Riggle

"I could be the walrus. I'd still have to bum rides off people."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Jonty said:

@WokeBloke Sound IS awareness. There is nothing to sound other than awareness. Not two!

I obviously didn't explain myself too well! Hope you get to the bottom of it ?

In order for sounds to be aware they would have to share the abilities of awareness. Since sounds can't see they must not be awareness which can see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@WokeBloke You know I can't figure out whether you're joking! ? 

As I said, I really hope you get to the bottom of it. I can't try to explain any better than I have. I thought it might not have come across very well. Hopefully someone might be able to help?

What I would add though is that direct experience is king. Check out Leo's book list too. Spira has some great videos on YouTube about this very subject that should help clear it up for you.

Edited by Jonty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2022-02-04 at 0:24 AM, WokeBloke said:

1. Experiences happen.

Yeah, experiences happen.

All we experience is thought, feeling, seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling.

On 2022-02-04 at 0:24 AM, WokeBloke said:

-> This is an extremely important point. Your kangaroo is about to serve you your dinner right now. This is unfortunately not happening which means it is not your current experience. In order for you to classify something as an experience it must actually happen.

Yeah, my kangaroo is not serving me dinner right now. It's not what's happening it's a thought.

On 2022-02-04 at 0:24 AM, WokeBloke said:

2. You must be experiencing it. Or, put differently, a subject must be present.

And can you describe the nature of this "you" that is experiencing?

On 2022-02-04 at 0:24 AM, WokeBloke said:

-> This is even more important. Consider two events happening simultaneously.

This is thought.

On 2022-02-04 at 0:24 AM, WokeBloke said:

In the first event you are talking with your friend about experiences.

If that is experienced then what is "you", "your friend" and "about experiences"?

On 2022-02-04 at 0:24 AM, WokeBloke said:

In the second event a computer in an office is running a simulation but no one is watching it.

How do you know that it's occuring if you are not there to experience it? Isn't that a thought?

On 2022-02-04 at 0:24 AM, WokeBloke said:

Both these events are happening but there is a fundamental difference between the two events. In the first event a subject (you) is present. In the second event no subject is present. Thus the second event could not be considered an experience. However, the first event could be considered an experience since it is happening to a subject. 

In the first "event" there is experience happening.

The second "event" is only experienced as a thought so it doesn't actually happen. It's like the kangaroo serving you dinner in your first example.

On 2022-02-04 at 0:24 AM, WokeBloke said:

So essentially experiences are what happen to you. 

What is the nature of this "you" can you describe it?

On 2022-02-04 at 0:24 AM, WokeBloke said:

Experiences do no experience.

Experience is experience. 

Thought

Feeling

Sight

Sound

Smell

Taste

On 2022-02-04 at 0:24 AM, WokeBloke said:

Only the subject which is not an experience has experiences.

And what is the subject?

On 2022-02-04 at 0:24 AM, WokeBloke said:

Thus if you claim that there is an experience then you are asserting that there is a subject.

So by comparing the two events:

Nr 1 which is experienced.

Nr 2 which is only thought.

You draw the conclusion that there is a subject. But that conclusion is only a thought being experienced.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@WokeBloke you do not perceive the experience, you are the experience, and the experience is illusion. there is only apparent experience occurring and a mental construct that identifies as the center of that experience and believes it controls it. if you remove the experience, that center disappears. you can check it with psychedelics, especially with 5 meo. there is nothing, and there is no you, the limits disappear, there is no illusion of the self. Existence still is, but not as a perceiver or experience. this whole business of the ego is about this: the illusion, maya. the appearance that something is happening and that there is a separate you perceiving it. if you want to see this without psychedelics, it's really difficult, I guess for very expert and tenacious meditators

Edited by Breakingthewall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

@WokeBloke you do not perceive the experience, you are the experience, and the experience is illusion. there is only apparent experience occurring and a mental construct that identifies as the center of that experience and believes it controls it. if you remove the experience, that center disappears. you can check it with psychedelics, especially with 5 meo. there is nothing, and there is no you, the limits disappear, there is no illusion of the self. Existence still is, but not as a perceiver or experience. this whole business of the ego is about this: the illusion, maya. the appearance that something is happening and that there is a separate you perceiving it. if you want to see this without psychedelics, it's really difficult, I guess for very expert and tenacious meditators

Why is it not an experience? Can it not just be a self-luminous experience in that it's happening unto itself, with no self in the equation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RMQualtrough said:

Why is it not an experience? Can it not just be a self-luminous experience in that it's happening unto itself, with no self in the equation?

the experience seems to be apparent, but something apparent is. it is like saying that a dream does not exist because it is a dream. exists, and the word dream is just a label. the experience exists, and the word apparent is another label, which tries to express that there is a point of view of non-experience that seems more real, and from that point of view it seems that time and what happens are created, an illusion , in the sense that nothing is limited or defined

but surely there is more to understand

Edited by Breakingthewall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Breakingthewall said:

the experience seems to be apparent, but something apparent is. it is like saying that a dream does not exist because it is a dream. exists, and the word dream is just a label. the experience exists, and the word apparent is another label, which tries to express that there is a point of view of non-experience that seems more real, and from that point of view it seems that time and what happens are created, an illusion , in the sense that nothing is limited or defined

but surely there is more to understand

Not sure I understand but would certainly like to, is there another way of phrasing it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RMQualtrough said:

Not sure I understand but would certainly like to, is there another way of phrasing it?

 

1 hour ago, RMQualtrough said:

 

can't explain it because I'm talking from memory, before meditating I had a moment to understand but not now. too focused on the material lately. totally immersed in the illusion. I know I understood that but I don't understand it now. even so the illusion is much easier to handle having understood that it is illusion

Edited by Breakingthewall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Breakingthewall said:

can't explain it because I'm talking from memory, before meditating I had a moment to understand but not now. too focused on the material lately. totally immersed in the illusion. I know I understood that but I don't understand it now. even so the illusion is much easier to handle having understood that it is illusion

It seems to me, that "awareness" is something self illuminating. I.e. what knows awareness is itself awareness.

If all things which exist are made of that same "substance" which is awareness, then they are merely modulations of awareness which share the self luminosity. Such that the sound does hear itself. Or moreso, reality as a whole is by itself, to itself, known to itself.

No God bullshit in the mix, no self, no I, which is exactly why you are eternal and invincible because you are reality itself and not a being observing it.

I could phrase that as reality experiencing itself. However, I have seen many people say the void is "not an experience" and I hope someone can explain that element.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, RMQualtrough said:

I have seen many people say the void is "not an experience" and I hope someone can explain that element.

Experience is movement. When all movement stops. That which remains is not a movement, that is called the void.

Another way of saying is, existence is sound, sound comes from silence. Silence is the void. Silence is not an experience. Silence is no-experience experience tho. Void is a no-sound sound. It cant be called a sound because sound is a movement and Silence is nonmovement.

That void is the pure formless awareness and the canvas on which existence and sounds play. Only becouse there is silence, sound becomes possible. Void can exist without sounds, but sounds cannot exist without silence. I don't know where I'm going with this. But it's going somewhere deep.

Edited by Salvijus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/4/2022 at 1:11 PM, Salvijus said:

I would probably agree with Woke here. Mainly because of his username haha. 

In a state of cessation there is no experience of sound, sight, taste, feeling, smell, nothing at all. Yet awareness and knowledge that I exist remains. It's called nibbana in buddhism or nirvikalpa samadhi in yoga i think.

That would be a strong argument that the witnessing awareness is beyond manifestation and doesn't depend on experience to exist. Awareness can exist without experience. Experience can't exist without awareness. Both are one, but one is essential another is meh..

In cessation, there is no awareness or knowledge that I exist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/3/2022 at 6:24 PM, WokeBloke said:

Only the subject which is not an experience has experiences.

The subject doesn't have experiences. It IS experiences. Experiences are what the subject appears like to itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, vladorion said:

The subject doesn't have experiences. It IS experiences. Experiences are what the subject appears like to itself.

Take thoughts (a form of experience). The arising and cessation of thoughts does not result in the rising or cessation of the subject.

Edited by WokeBloke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, WokeBloke said:

Take thoughts (a form of experience). The arising and cessation of thoughts does not result in the rising or cessation of the subject.

In the same way as the arising and cessation of ocean waves does not result in the arising or cessation of water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, vladorion said:

In cessation, there is no awareness or knowledge that I exist.

You sure? How do u know? After all awareness is eternal. So how can there be a cessation of awareness? 

I heard once rupert spira share his experience of being under anastesia where he was put into coma. And he reported there was no discontinuation of awareness. All experience dissapeared, yet he was still aware. How would u explain that?  Is that different then buddhist's nibbana state? 

Edit. Even by goenka's definition of cessation he says all sound, sight, smell, touch and all experience dissapeares. Then you experience something which is beyond mind and matter, something that can't be spoken about or described.

Edited by Salvijus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Salvijus said:

You sure? How do u know? After all awareness is eternal. So how can there be a cessation of awareness? 

I heard once rupert spira share his experience of being under anastesia where he was put into coma. And he reported there was no discontinuation of awareness. All experience dissapeared, yet he was still aware. How would u explain that?  Is that different then buddhist's nibbana state? 

Edit. Even by goenka's definition of cessation he says all sound, sight, smell, touch and all experience dissapeares. Then you experience something which is beyond mind and matter, something that can't be spoken about or described.

Rupert means that the gap between being put under and waking is not experienced, thus you just experience counting to 10 (the anaesthetist tells you to do this) then waking in the recovery room. Continuous uninterrupted awareness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@RMQualtrough no, no. I don't think that's what he meant. There are plenty of beings capable of being aware during deep sleep, anesthesia, cessation nibbana nirvikalpa samadhis etc. It’s a well known thing in spirituality.

Awareness is indestructable. Even if all sense organs experience dissapeared (smell, taste, touch, sight, hearing, thinking) there is something that is aware that all experience has dissapeared. That something is pure formless awareness. The Absolute. God self. The bottomless womb of existence. 

Edited by Salvijus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now