What is the experience of an
Take a tree for instance. When looking at a tree we experience a visual perception. The perception is never only of a tree. The apparent tree is always part of a larger perception that includes, the field, the sky, others trees, etc. And this experience itself is included a larger experience that may contain thoughts, images and sensations as well.
So the idea of a ‘tree,’ refers to ‘something’ that is never experienced, as such. We never experience the tree as it is conceived.
The concept ‘tree’ is an abstraction that is superimposed on the reality of the experience itself, whatever that reality is.
We have no doubt that ‘something,’ which is referred to as the ‘tree,’ is being experienced, but the concept ‘tree’ does not describe that ‘something.’
Divested of the interpretation that the mind superimposes on the experience itself, we are left with a visual perception.
What is not so immediately obvious is that this visual perception itself is also superimposed onto that ‘something’ by the perceiving faculties, the senses, although it is, in a sense, ‘closer’ to it.
Does the ‘tree’ see itself? Does the tree know that it is a tree? Does the tree claim that it is a tree? Who says it is a tree? It is the mind alone that makes this claim.
Does the tree itself have any inherent visual qualities that are independent of the senses? No.
Seeing belongs to the senses, not to the tree. Each of the senses imparts its own characteristics upon the object experienced