Okay.Can you not be okay with being confused for a little bit, but just be okay with seeing that hunger is the AE of sensation...knowing that the confusion will be cleared up?
Right.. in the case with the painting, the substance of the tree is paint.The substance of the tree is paint….right? A tree cannot paint itself, it is made from a substance.
No actual tree is found in the painting because its constituent is really paint.Can a tree actually be found in the paint? Thought appears saying that what is there is a tree. But, what constitutes a tree is actually the paint…right?
The tree does not become paint. Only thought suggests the tree is separate to the paint.Does the paint become a tree, or is the tree simply paint which thought then suggests is a tree and is separate to the paint?
The painted image of the tree does not affect the paint in any way.Does the tree change or affect the paint in any way or does the paint remain as paint?
Paint remains paint no matter what picture is painted with the paint.So the paint SEEMS to be appearing as a tree, but does it become a tree? Or does paint remain as paint, no matter what it is appearing as? No matter what picture it paints? Does the SEEMING tree change the substance of which it was made with…or does paint remain as paint?
It's more clearer now, thank you for clarifying with this exercise.
But earlier you had said "What colour actually is, will unfold as we explore further" ... so when you said this, it gave me the impression that the colour will be further deconstructed into experience itself ?the raw experience of what thought labels as 'paint is simply the raw experience labelled as colour. You cannot deconstruct it any further than just colour.
When it comes to real life, I think I am starting to see, but not 100%.Exactly. If you look out your window now…you will see a myriad of seeming objects which thought labels as tree, grass, dirt, sky, clouds, cars, people etc…however, at the basic level…what is there is simply AE of colour. Can you see this?
But it was very clear to me what you were pointing to with the painting example, since I know the substance is paint/colour.
I am not sure if you are asking about real life or the painting?So, do you need to have objects in defined shapes, sizes and textures in order to be aware of the raw experience of colour itself?
I think this is part of my problem.. I was probably looking for a visual confirmation of "different objects become whole", rather than just a shift in perception.And if you are expecting to be able to literally see this...that what seems to be a view of many different objects becomes a whole, like a painting…then I wouldn’t hold your breath. When you understand this…it becomes a new way of thinking and one day it becomes a realisation.