That's fine. Let's continue in a more relaxed way.
Just consider how deep our interpretations go.
Place a cup on the table in front of you and look at it.
What do you see? What are the raw sensory impressions conveyed through sight and touch?
What is added by mental interpretations?
Kind Regards
Daniel
Looking Within
Re: Looking Within
Much better, thank you. :)
I am sitting at my desk so I used a stapler instead of a cup.
When going through my typical process of observing things and taking in information, I see a black and silver object that I immediately recognize and label a stapler. I pick it you and feel that it is a hard, solid object that has a spring loaded mechanism and makes a clicking sound when explelling a staple into a piece of what it is labeled paper.
The raw sensory impressions would be simply an image, colors, sensations to the touch, and sounds.
Those are what I described in the first paragraph; black and silver, stapler, hard, solid, spring loaded, clicking.
Place a cup on the table in front of you and look at it.
I am sitting at my desk so I used a stapler instead of a cup.
What do you see?
When going through my typical process of observing things and taking in information, I see a black and silver object that I immediately recognize and label a stapler. I pick it you and feel that it is a hard, solid object that has a spring loaded mechanism and makes a clicking sound when explelling a staple into a piece of what it is labeled paper.
What are the raw sensory impressions conveyed through sight and touch?
The raw sensory impressions would be simply an image, colors, sensations to the touch, and sounds.
What is added by mental interpretations?
Those are what I described in the first paragraph; black and silver, stapler, hard, solid, spring loaded, clicking.
Re: Looking Within
Good. You have seen through the difference between naked reality and the labels of the mind.
When you pick up the stapler and close your eyes:
Does bare, raw sensation in itself even know that it is currently touching an object?
Or is there simply a completely nameless feeling in the act of pure sensing—with all words, concepts, and meanings emerging only a tiny moment later as thoughts about it?
When you pick up the stapler and close your eyes:
Does bare, raw sensation in itself even know that it is currently touching an object?
Or is there simply a completely nameless feeling in the act of pure sensing—with all words, concepts, and meanings emerging only a tiny moment later as thoughts about it?
Re: Looking Within
When you pick up the stapler and close your eyes:
Does bare, raw sensation in itself even know that it is currently touching an object?
Raw sensation knows something is there or else there would be no awareness of sensing. It wouldn't know it is called a stapler or any other name but there is awareness of something.
Re: Looking Within
You say that perception "knows something is there." That sounds logical. But take a completely unbiased look when touching the stapler:
In that pure sensation, at the very first moment, are there really two separate things—a "knowing/awareness" on the one hand, and the "something" being felt on the other?
Or is there actually just a single, undivided feeling during that pure act of touching? Does the raw sensation itself split into a "feeler" and something "felt"—or is that something only created by the thought that follows?
In that pure sensation, at the very first moment, are there really two separate things—a "knowing/awareness" on the one hand, and the "something" being felt on the other?
Or is there actually just a single, undivided feeling during that pure act of touching? Does the raw sensation itself split into a "feeler" and something "felt"—or is that something only created by the thought that follows?
Re: Looking Within
You asked a variation of this question in the previous post. I am at a loss for how to answer it any differently. I am just not following what you are making the effort to convey to me. Sorry. :(
Re: Looking Within
Hey Harry,
no problem at all!
You absolutely don’t need to apologize. If it feels complicated, then perhaps my question was just a bit too cerebral.
Is a thought aware of a sensation?
Is a sensation aware of a thought?
Is a thought aware of another thought?
Kind Regards
Daniel
no problem at all!
You absolutely don’t need to apologize. If it feels complicated, then perhaps my question was just a bit too cerebral.
So let's shift focus. You said that you are getting better and better at noticing your thoughts. Please look at these questions in your immediate experience.I am becoming increasingly adept at consciously noticing my thoughts in the moment.
Is a thought aware of a sensation?
Is a sensation aware of a thought?
Is a thought aware of another thought?
Kind Regards
Daniel
Re: Looking Within
Is a thought aware of a sensation?
Is a sensation aware of a thought?
Is a thought aware of another thought?
My thinking is that a thought is not aware of a sensation. Awareness is aware of a sensation. The same goes for a sensation, it is not aware of a thought, but it can arise in awareness along with a thought. A thought is not aware of another thought, but one can arise in awareness along with other thoughts, or at least in close proximity to other thoughts.
Re: Looking Within
May I ask how you approached the questions? Are your statements based on logical deduction?
Re: Looking Within
This is getting to be too much for me to figure out, Daniel. I don’t feel as though I am gaining understanding from the guidance. I’m going to remove myself from the process.
Thank you for the time you have spent with me. :)
Thank you for the time you have spent with me. :)
Re: Looking Within
Danb wünsche ich dir alles gute.
Kind Regards
Daniel
Kind Regards
Daniel
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 506 guests

