The Gate

Yes, classification with one thought. But for example, there is a very clear distinction between smelling and seeing.

The real world is a more concrete world than thoughts and feelings, but I am a person more concentrated in the realm of thought. it inspires me about the outside world.

The real world is a more concrete world than thoughts and feelings, but I am a person more concentrated in the realm of thought. it inspires me about the outside world.

By ‘real world’ do you mean a world made out of physical/material stuff ‘out there’?

If so, what evidence do you have for the existence of such a world?

But is an ‘apple’ actually experienced, or is only colour and a thought ABOUT ‘apple’ experienced? Can ‘apple’ be found in actual experience?

However, is an apple actually known?

The fact that it is currently perceived by the sense organs can be considered as evidence of its existence.

There is a taste, smell and texture recorded in memory with the name apple.

Where is the ‘it’ in addition to the perception of it?

We have a sight/colour/perception called an apple, but where in your actual experience is the so-called physical apple as independent from that?

Can you actually experience it, or only think about it?

Do these four experiences (taste, smell, texture and name/thought) add up to anything physical? Or is the idea of physical a thing just that: an idea?

Where is the ‘it’ in addition to the perception of it?

We have a sight/colour/perception called an apple, but where in your actual experience is the so-called physical apple as independent from that?

Can you actually experience it, or only think about it?

Do these four experiences (taste, smell, texture and name/thought) add up to anything physical? Or is the idea of a physical thing just that: an idea?

Real experiences such as images and sounds are categorized using ideas. Naming reality down to its atoms is sometimes boring, sometimes useful for daily life. For a person drowning in a world of names, it seems comforting to give a single name to such a fragmented experience.

Where is the ‘it’ in addition to the perception of it?

We have a sight/colour/perception called an apple, but where in your actual experience is the so-called physical apple as independent from that?

Can you actually experience it, or only think about it?

Do these four experiences (taste, smell, texture and name/thought) add up to anything physical? Or is the idea of physical a thing just that: an idea?

The concept that there is something physical is an idea, yes. It seems like most explanations, including science, sound like fairy tales. It's a simple thing, but I had a little enlightenment when I thought about it again.

We can say that all explanations are thoughts, after all, they are fairy tales. When we encounter a problem, sometimes the solution given by someone seems very correct. We seem to understand what he is saying, but when we look at it, it is unclear whether the speaker really understands what he is saying.

1. Going just by the tick tock sound, do you find a clock present?

2. Is there any direct/actual experience of a clock in the sound?

3. Does the sound come self-labelled as originating from the clock?

4. Do you find a clock hidden in the sound?

5. Do you find a clock beyond the sound?

6. In your direct/actual experience of the sound, do you find any evidence that the sound is caused by a clock?

Were you able to establish that in your direct/actual experience of the tick tock sound, that there was a clock?

Were you able to find a division between hearing and sound?

Were you able to establish where hearing ended and sound begin, or was there just pure experience labelled as sound?

Can a dividing line be found between the ‘knowing’ (experience) of the sound and the sound (known) itself? Or is there only ‘knowingknown’?

When you hear a sound, the way the clock works comes to mind, but I don't actually know whether the sound is coming from the clock or not. These sentences may seem ridiculous for daily life, but the sound coming from the clock is a belief.

No, it may be coming from the tape recorder. Even if it is not coming from the tape, even science cannot prove that the sound came from the watch.

But is there any such label within the sound itself?

No, it may be coming from the tape recorder. Even if it is not coming from the tape, even science cannot prove that the sound came from the watch.

Does the sound itself say ‘I came from here/there’?

The sound itself has no direction information.

The listener almost realizes that the sound is coming from that side. The sound determines everyone's position and I'm on your right side etc. doesn't say.

Going by hearing alone, do you directly experience a sound apart from your sense of hearing?

Do you experience a sound getting closer to your range of hearing before you actually hear it?

Do you experience a sound after you hear it?

Do you experience an unheard sound of any kind?

Were you able to establish, in your direct experience of hearing, that sounds enter your sense of hearing. In other words, in direct/actual experience is there a hearer AND sound?

I perceive a sound, but there is no sense of hearing.