Objects

[Sashaj]

Say there are no objects, only the senses themselves which we take as our external world and say that sensing is an abstract interpretation of things that we will never truely say to exist in the world, what causes the sense to be activated in the first place? If there is really nothing there then what is being sensed?

or do we say that phenomena is here but we cannot understand the phenomena or know it’s true form because the experience is realised through sensing ?

[GodMonkey]

@Sashaj Maybe there are objects, but their state is indefinite and therefore have an existence that is entirely dependent upon the method used to decipher their meaning. 

[Sashaj]

Objects or phenomena may exist but we are the phenomena (objects for namesake even though object implies observer) since they can’t exist independent of awareness?

[GodMonkey]

We create objects or phenomena by interpreting them into existence. However, we "ourselves" were also interpreted into existence.  Where do you draw the line between anything? Do things need permission to become open to sensory input? No because they already have it. That how you scratch your arm when it itches or become born or die. 

Now to question of whether or not this actually exists. The way i see it, yes and no. A single wave, from my understanding, can be thought of as the summation of an infinite set of other waves. So a single wave is infinite in it's potential and therefore is all there is and all there can be. But wait, what if you take an infinite amount of infinite sets? There is no discernible characteristics of this particular wave. It becomes nothing. 

So this is as real as it gets and is made out of absolutely nothing. How much existence does something really need to satisfy? 

[GodMonkey]

Try to imagine a single wave hitting your eye. It doesn't end there, that's what it becomes. Then it morphs your brain and , in turn,  your entire body.

You are your senses, your senses are the objects, and the objects are nothing onto themselves.