Is it possible direct experience without ideas?

[RedLine]

Is it possible to contemplate a glass without imposing the idea of "glass" over it?

 

Is it possible to contemplate a glass without contemplating a glass?

 

Do te distinction between ideas vs direct experiencie actually make sense? it looks like reality is always made by ideas/concepts that we LEARNED, even when we directly contemplate it.

[Moksha]

Have you tried? It is a good spiritual practice. Look at anything without needing to label it. Names dissolve into objects which dissolve into attributes which dissolve into nothingness.

[No Self]

Eckhart Tolle discusses this issue in the Power of Now.

When we assign a name to an object, like a glass, we imply that we 'know' it. Just as if you see a person that you know the name of, you might say that you 'know' that individual. But how much to we really know? The answer is: ultimately, nothing.

If the mental activity is controlled, an object can be looked at without being deadened by mental labelling. More like how a young child might look upon the object - with depth, magic, wonderment and appreciation. 

[caspex]

Yeah man it's very much possible. It'll take some practice but you can for starters start to look at the world without linguistics and only in objects. And then that cane be further dissolved into no objects and only appearances and than into awareness only. 

What's the biggest problem is that you try to analyze everything and not just observe. You need to realize the distinction between analyzing and observing, people get it mixed up. 

Also some tips would be that if you are trying to look at the world without linguistics. Start by looking at things or words. You'll see that you automatically read them out or call their names in your mind. Don't resist that and let that happen. Try to however not assign meaning to the words you hear in your mind, just let them be.... something. Eventually you can stop the habit of unconsciously reading out and pointing out everything you see. The key is to not assign any meaning. We assign meaning from mostly assumptions. 

[RedLine]

6 minutes ago, Moksha said:

Have you tried? It is a good spiritual practice. Look at anything without needing to label it. Names dissolve into objects which dissolve into attributes which dissolve into nothingness.

 

2 minutes ago, No Self said:

Eckhart Tolle discusses this issue in the Power of Now.

When we assign a name to an object, like a glass, we imply that we 'know' it. Just as if you see a person that you know the name of, you might say that you 'know' that individual. But how much to we really know? The answer is: ultimately, nothing.

If the mental activity is controlled, an object can be looked at without being deadened by mental labelling. More like how a young child might look upon the object - with depth, magic, wonderment and appreciation. 

1 minute ago, No Self said:

Eckhart Tolle discusses this issue in the Power of Now.

When we assign a name to an object, like a glass, we imply that we 'know' it. Just as if you see a person that you know the name of, you might say that you 'know' that individual. But how much to we really know? The answer is: ultimately, nothing.

If the mental activity is controlled, an object can be looked at without being deadened by mental labelling. More like how a young child might look upon the object - with depth, magic, wonderment and appreciation. 

What is direct experiencie? Is it Nothing/Oblivion? Because whatever object (form) you see, it is a learned object, it is an idea.

 

 

[caspex]

1 minute ago, RedLine said:

 

What is direct experiencie? Is it Nothing/Oblivion? Because whatever object (form) you see, it is a learned object, it is an idea.

 

 

Direct experience is just awareness. 

Now 'objects' ARE an idea. There are no 'Objects'. But there is no point me telling you this. You need to see this for yourself. I kind of explained how in my last reply. 

Now the 'objects' are an idea. But, let's say you look at a glass ye, it's isnt an learned object, what you are seeing isn't an idea itself. What the idea is, is the meaning and labels and memories you aside to the appearance in front of you. For eg. Looking at a glass. You can attach these following learnt assumptions:

1. It's a glass.

2. You may remember the half full - half empty glass thing

3. It's an object in 3d space

4. You may remember some memory regarding glasses.

5. You may remember this reply if you try this out after reading this.

 

So as you can see, you gotta get rid of all your meanings and assumptions. It's hard at first to even identify all your assumptions because you wont know if you have identified all of them. (I probably dont have all of them identified either). But once you stop assuming shit and assigning meaning. It should be pretty clear that there is only this awareness, THAT is direct experience. Now be careful to not think of this as zoning out. You have full focus visually and mentally on that glass, infact, if you do it right, all thought stops, and a natural and almost instinctive inquiry into what that 'object' is begins.

Ofcourse, do take baby steps into reaching here.

[RedLine]

1 minute ago, Swarnim said:

Direct experience is just awareness. 

Now 'objects' ARE an idea. There are no 'Objects'. But there is no point me telling you this. You need to see this for yourself. I kind of explained how in my last reply. 

Now the 'objects' are an idea. But, let's say you look at a glass ye, it's isnt an learned object, what you are seeing isn't an idea itself. What the idea is, is the meaning and labels and memories you aside to the appearance in front of you. For eg. Looking at a glass. You can attach these following learnt assumptions:

1. It's a glass.

2. You may remember the half full - half empty glass thing

3. It's an object in 3d space

4. You may remember some memory regarding glasses.

5. You may remember this reply if you try this out after reading this.

 

So as you can see, you gotta get rid of all your meanings and assumptions. It's hard at first to even identify all your assumptions because you wont know if you have identified all of them. (I probably dont have all of them identified either). But once you stop assuming shit and assigning meaning. It should be pretty clear that there is only this awareness, THAT is direct experience. Now be careful to not think of this as zoning out. You have full focus visually and mentally on that glass, infact, if you do it right, all thought stops, and a natural and almost instinctive inquiry into what that 'object' is begins.

Ofcourse, do take baby steps into reaching here.

I know what you mean. I did the experiment. But there is still a form there, a form of a glass. You are still seeing reality trough your map of meaning that you learned when you were 2 years old or whatever.

 

 

[caspex]

2 minutes ago, RedLine said:

I know what you mean. I did the experiment. But there is still a form there, a form of a glass. You are still seeing reality trough your map of meaning that you learned when you were 2 years old or whatever.

 

 

The vision, colors and all, everything stays the same. Yet, not the same. You look completely differently. Infact, there is not even a You and a World. There is no thinking anymore. And yeah I guess you won't be able to see through the form so easily. imo practicing will yield results.

[RedLine]

3 minutes ago, Swarnim said:

The vision, colors and all, everything stays the same. Yet, not the same. You look completely differently. Infact, there is not even a You and a World. There is no thinking anymore. And yeah I guess you won't be able to see through the form so easily. imo practicing will yield results.

You make a distinction between ideas and forms.

I don't think ideas and form are different. You are still seeing trough ideas in that states you describe. Of course is much more clear that the regular mind noise but still ideas.

Edited November 21, 2020 by RedLine

[RedLine]

Even if you are enlighten you see forms. Here you can take 2 position:

1. You are still seeing reality through ideas.

 

2. You make a distinction between the idea and the object. The idea of the glass and the direct experiencie of glass as object. But then how can you explain where the glass come from?. Isn't it a demarcation you made at some point? Isn't something you are creating rn? So what is the difference regards to toughts/ideas? They have the same properties.

Edited November 21, 2020 by RedLine

[caspex]

3 minutes ago, RedLine said:

Even if you are enlighten you see forms. Here you can take 2 position:

1. You are still seeing reality through ideas.

 

2. You make a distinction between the idea and the object. The idea of the glass and the direct experiencie of glass as object. But then how can you explain where the glass come from?. Isn't it a demarcation you made at some point? Isn't something you are creating rn? So what is the difference regards to toughts/ideas? They have the same properties.

I think you are doing too much speculation here and giving it too much thought. All I can say is that get to the state and this won't be a confusion.

And keep in mind, I haven't reached the deepest level of direct experience in any sense. I have seen my own stuff and I am saying from this experience. 

[Leo Gura]

Yes, just sit and look at it.

[Moksha]

Creation is nothing more than attention being misdirected, with intention. It is willful, pure imagination. The reason you see the form behind the glass is that the form is only that. Your attention is creating the form, just as it creates every form.

[RedLine]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Yes, just sit and look at it.

I am creating everything. Even in deep contemplation I am creating what I am experiencing.

Edited November 21, 2020 by RedLine

[Leo Gura]

@RedLine Just shut up and sit.

[RedLine]

1 minute ago, Leo Gura said:

@RedLine Just shut up and sit.

I meditate 5 hours per day.

So you are the only one who is allowed to deconstruct concepts in your 2 hours parloting videos?

[The0Self]

Tilopa's advice:

1. Don't recall

2. Don't imagine

3. Don't think

4. Don't examine

5. Don't control

6. Rest

[Leo Gura]

1 minute ago, RedLine said:

I meditate 5 hours per day

Then why you asking about glasses?

[RedLine]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

Then why you asking about glasses?

Becuase I still think words/ideas (philosophy) are intincrated with our understanding of reality so it is interesting to deal with them.

Any experience you have you are interpreting it with your ideas and your words so you are manipulating backwards what you have experience. That dicotomy between experience vs thoughts is not accurate.

[Forestluv]

1 hour ago, RedLine said:

Is it possible to contemplate a glass without imposing the idea of "glass" over it?

Sure, contemplate without the idea of "glass"

1 hour ago, RedLine said:

Is it possible to contemplate a glass without contemplating a glass?

Not if you define it as a glass and contemplate your defined glass.