Mike, It DOES make a difference. You just haven't realized that it does..
Edgar On May 29, 2013, at 9:22 AM, uerusub...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: > Edgar, > > To be honest, whether you are right or wrong makes no difference to my > practice. Many people realise that the world 'out there' is just a process of > the brain created in the head. BUT that doesn't necessarily lead them to > living an awakened life (just as a scientist specialising quantum mechanics > doesn't become enlightened from the knowledge that solid objects aren't > really solid and are impermanent). For me, it's more a question of how we > recognise that thoughts lead to actions that are either wholesome or > unwholesome. > > Mike > > > Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPad > > From: Edgar Owen <edgaro...@att.net>; > To: <Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com>; > Subject: Re: [Zen] Nature of Illusion > Sent: Wed, May 29, 2013 11:17:37 AM > > > Mike, > > > Correct. > > As I've said over and over, illusion recognized as illusion is reality, but > illusion taken for reality is illusion. > > The thought in your head of "Edgar being a member of a boy band" is a perfect > example. It's a real thought but the thought is illusory. > > Now extend that to the entire world you think you live in and YOU'VE GOT IT! > Because the entire world you think you live in is a construct of your mind. > It exists so it is real, but it is an illusion. > > Edgar > > > On May 29, 2013, at 12:49 AM, uerusub...@yahoo.co.uk wrote: > >> >> Edgar, Bill!, >> >> I don't have much invested in this topic, but just to clarify a few things >> I'd like your feedback. >> When we make our vows at every sit, one of those vows is "The dharmas are >> numberless, I vow to master them". Applying that to this topic, for me, >> means that a thought (a dharma) is real even if the object of that thought >> isn't. For example, if I said Edgar is a 20 year old member of a famous boy >> band, then the thought is real (a dharma) *even though* it is a delusional >> thought. >> >> Mike >> >> >> Sent from Yahoo! Mail for iPad >> >> From: Edgar Owen <edgaro...@att.net>; >> To: <Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com>; >> Subject: [Zen] Nature of Illusion >> Sent: Wed, May 29, 2013 12:53:51 AM >> >> >> Bill, >> >> >> Philosophy and illusion >> [edit] >> >> Just like many other words often used in a different sense in spirituality >> the word "illusion" is used to denote different aspects in Hindu Philosophy >> (Maya). Many Monist philosophies clearly demarcate illusion from truth and >> falsehood. As per Hindu advaita philosophy, Illusion is something which is >> not true and not false. Whereas in general usage it is common to assume that >> illusion is false, Hindu philosophy makes a distinction between Maya >> (illusion) and falsehood. In terms of this philosophy maya is true in itself >> but it is not true in comparison with the truth. As per this philosophy, >> illusion is not the opposite of truth or reality. Based on these assumptions >> Vedas declare that the world as humans normally see is illusion (Maya). It >> does not mean the world is not real. The world is only so much real as the >> image of a person in a mirror. The world is not real/true when compared to >> the reality. But the world is also not false. Falsehood is something which >> does not exist. if we apply this philosophy to the above example, the >> illusion is not actually illusion but is false. This is because in general >> usage people tend to consider lllusion to be the same as falsehood. As per >> adishankar's a guru of monist teachings the world we think is not true but >> is an illusion (not true not false). The truth of the world is something >> which can only be experienced by removing the identity (ego). >> >> Edgar >> >> > > >
