Fiction and Reality

a reply to: LesMisanthrope
Body is a concept.
There is just experiencing.........that is as far as can possibly be known.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Body is a concept.
There is just experiencing.........that is as far as can possibly be known.

Well actually, body is concrete. It has a boundary and we can place the label "body" upon it. If we were to do the same with "experiencing", we'd only end up putting that label on the body.

When another dies, their "experiencing" ends, or more importantly, their body ends, yet ours continues. We can watch, take note and know what happens beyond experiencing.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

We can watch, take note and know what happens beyond experiencing.

Watching, taking note and knowing can't happen without experiencing.

"The purpose of literature is to prove that other people exist". Iris Murdoch.

Literature consists of words and concepts.

The world of things consists of concepts. Without concepts which speak of other, there is just this ever present awareness of a continually changing scene.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Watching, taking note and knowing can't happen without experiencing.

But isn’t watching, taking note and knowing…experiencing? It appears as if experiencing can’t happen without these.

Literature consists of words and concepts.

The world of things consists of concepts. Without concepts which speak of other, there is just this ever present awareness of a continually changing scene.

What scene? The idea that something is watching a screen or scene is the foundation of dualism known as the Cartesian theatre.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope

But isn’t watching, taking note and knowing…experiencing? It appears as if experiencing can’t happen without these.

Yes, watching, noticing and knowing are exactly the same as experiencing - they are not different things, each word is pointing to the same - so what is beyond 'experiencing'?

We can watch, take note and know what happens beyond experiencing.

Literature consists of words and concepts.

The world of things consists of concepts. Without concepts which speak of other, there is just this ever present awareness of a continually changing scene.

What scene? The idea that something is watching a screen or scene is the foundation of dualism known as the Cartesian theatre.

The two are one - experiencing/knowing/noticing. The seer and seen are not two - there is no seer that is divided from all that is.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Yes, watching, noticing and knowing are exactly the same as experiencing - they are not different things, each word is pointing to the same - so what is beyond 'experiencing’?

You’re right. They are not different things. They are the same thing, namely, the thing capable of performing these actions. That is the human body.

“Beyond experiencing” is beyond the body. One body can watch another body, another “experiencing”, end. One body, or in your words, one "experiencing", goes beyond another, seeing its end.

The two are one - experiencing/knowing/noticing. The seer and seen are not two - there is no seer that is divided from all that is.

Nothing is divided from “all that is”, which is simply another concept for “the universe” or “reality”. If you mean to say nothing is outside the universe, then yes I agree.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
One body can watch another body, another “experiencing”, end. One body, or in your words, one "experiencing", goes beyond another, seeing its end.

Until what you consider 'your' body disappears you cannot say whether experiencing continues or not - it is an assumption that experiencing ends.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Until what you consider 'your' body disappears you cannot say whether experiencing continues or not - it is an assumption that experiencing ends.

Then what would be experiencing?

a reply to: LesMisanthrope
No-thing is experiencing - there is JUST experiencing.
Experiencing is what there is. Nothing can be known to 'be' besides experiencing.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Show don't tell, itsnowagain. So far You've employed the latter.

Imagine a bouncing ball in an empty white room. If you minus the ball from the equation, is there still bouncing occurring in the room?

Experiencing is not a thing. It is an action. If there is no thing to experience nor to be experienced, there is no experiencing.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Show don't tell, itsnowagain.

Show what exactly?

Imagine a bouncing ball in an empty white room. If you minus the ball from the equation, is there still bouncing occurring in the room?

Experiencing a room with a ball in it or not..... there is still experiencing.

If there is no thing to experience nor to be experienced, there is no experiencing.

Has there ever been a time when this has occurred in your experience?

If you want to understand where I am coming from the video may help.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Experiencing is not a thing. It is an action. If there is no thing to experience nor to be experienced, there is no experiencing.

Subject and object are conceptual - it is the mind which splits 'experiencing' (which is what is happening in the immediacy) into 'experiencer (subject) and 'experienced' (object).
Notice that there is experiencing happening right now...........................and then thought might say 'I experience......object' - this is where the dualism, the divide, the split, the separation begins. 'I' thinks itself separate by assuming there is an experiencer and something other to be experienced. Really there is just experiencing.
Reality is not made of things - it is the assumed subject (experiencer) which is the original sin (misconception) which produces dream (illusory) person living in time. The dream of separation is not bad or wrong, experiencing a world things does seem to happen.
Reality is made of experiencing as far as can possibly be known - experiencing is one, it is non conceptual, not divided, no division - whole.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Show what exactly?

This thread asserts that if imagery regarding any facet of reality is unable to be conjured in the imagination, then it does not exist.

Experiencing a room with a ball in it or not..... there is still experiencing.

I said imagine a room with a ball in it. You are not experiencing a room with a ball in it until your body is in a room with a ball in it.

Subject and object are conceptual - it is the mind which splits 'experiencing' (which is what is happening in the immediacy) into 'experiencer (subject) and 'experienced' (object).
Notice that there is experiencing happening right now...........................and then thought might say 'I am experiencing' - this is where the dualism, the divide, the split, the separation begins. 'I' thinks itself separate by assuming there is an experiencer and something other to be experienced. Really there is just experiencing.
Reality is not made of things - it is the assumed subject (experiencer) which is the original sin (misconception) which produces dream (illusory) person living in time. The dream of separation is not bad or wrong, experiencing a world things does seem to happen.
Reality is made of experiencing as far as can possibly be known - experiencing is one, it is non conceptual, not divided, no division - whole.

Subject is conceptual. Object is at least concrete. I can take the word “object” and place it on any number of things— a banana, you, myself. “Subject” I cannot. “Experiencing” I cannot. Your “experiencing” is yourself as an object in relationship and proximity to other objects. There is no “experience” nor split. There is no monism nor dualism. There is no whole unless you can find its boundary.

Experiencing isn’t happening right now. There isn’t just one thing happening. There is a vast, uncountable array of things happening right now.

Reality is made of many things. What it is not made of is experiencing. I can show you many objects to prove this, and not one of them will be composed of anything called experiencing.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Sorry mate, but your level of intelligence is below the required norm in this thread.
Stop trolling the OP.

a reply to: Necrose

.....but.....I wrote it.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope
I urge you to watch the video and you might start to grasp what is being pointed to.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

I urge you to watch the video and you might start to grasp what is being pointed to.

How can you urge someone to watch a video when you maintain that they and you not exist. Does the video exist? Does sailor Bob exist? Who is he talking to in the video?

Who is it that might start to grasp what is being pointed to?

Just curious.

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Necrose

.....but.....I wrote it.

That's funny.

Be honest, you didn't write it.

No one wrote it.

There is no OP.

a reply to: midicon
The video does not appear to exist outside experiencing.
No separate things exist. What is present appears to exist but it is arising as experiencing.