Do you really think existence is an illusion

No holds barred discussion on the Buddhadharma. Argue about rebirth, karma, commentarial interpretations etc. Be nice to each other.

Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby Rael » Wed Mar 09, 2011 7:38 pm

someone said time is an illusion and i said it wasn't...It got me to thinking...
do you think life is an illusion or illusionary..or more exact is existence an illusion...

I make the distinction because though it may appear illusionary it not necessarily is an illusion.

How real is this world to you?
do you think it really is as someone once said in the Buddhist community "like a dream within a dream"
Love Love Love
User avatar
Rael
 
Posts: 477
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 8:36 pm

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby ground » Wed Mar 09, 2011 7:43 pm

But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html


Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 1782
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:31 am

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby Rael » Wed Mar 09, 2011 8:07 pm

TMingyur wrote:
But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html


Kind regards


from the "Kaccayanagotta Sutta: To Kaccayana Gotta (on Right View)"

As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One: "Lord, 'Right view, right view,' it is said. To what extent is there right view?"

to which Our lord replies:
"By & large, Kaccayana, this world is in bondage to attachments, clingings (sustenances), & biases.


and then goes on to give us a way with dealing with this world in the rest of the sutta and the right view of it..

from the site;
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html



what i'm trying to find out is do you feel or think that this is all an illusion....not real....or do you think it is reality..

I am going somewhere with this....lol....but for now i gotta ask the question...


it's one thing to teach us how to deal with the reality we dwell in ...it's another to define it...yes no....

the sutta given doesn't really address the reality of it all..but how to deal with it with right view in order to evolve....


from the sutta;
"'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle:

I feel this is teaching for seeing the nature of existence and then dealing with it...kinda like that cute lil sign some parks put up"leave nothing but your footprints, take nothing but the joy in the experience"...
Love Love Love
User avatar
Rael
 
Posts: 477
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 8:36 pm

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby ground » Wed Mar 09, 2011 8:12 pm

Rael wrote:what i'm trying to find out is do you feel or think that this is all an illusion....not real....or do you think it is reality..

Invalid papanca.

Rael wrote:the sutta given doesn't really address the reality of it all..but how to deal with it with right view in order to evolve....

This is your impression because you cling to the thought/view "reality" and are fabricating what might be beyond direct perception.



Rael wrote:from the sutta;
"'Everything exists': That is one extreme. 'Everything doesn't exist': That is a second extreme. Avoiding these two extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle:

I feel this is teaching for seeing the nature of existence and then dealing with it...

The thought "existence" occurs to you. Why? Because you don't see "the origination and the cessation with right discernment".

What you don't seem to understand is that even contacting the thought "existence" or the thought "non-existence" is invalid papanca.

Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 1782
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:31 am

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby ground » Wed Mar 09, 2011 8:17 pm

Then, Bahiya, you should train yourself thus: In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen. In reference to the heard, only the heard. In reference to the sensed, only the sensed. In reference to the cognized, only the cognized. That is how you should train yourself.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html


"In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen." What does that mean?

Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 1782
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:31 am

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby Tilopa » Thu Mar 10, 2011 1:44 am

Rael wrote:someone said time is an illusion and i said it wasn't...It got me to thinking...
do you think life is an illusion or illusionary..or more exact is existence an illusion...

I make the distinction because though it may appear illusionary it not necessarily is an illusion.

How real is this world to you?
do you think it really is as someone once said in the Buddhist community "like a dream within a dream"


Dream-like definitely. Illusory in so far as it doesn't exist the way it appears to our ordinary mind - yes. An illusion - very interesting question and I'm not 100% sure of the answer. Probably yes except it implies a cittamatrin type view in which there are no externally existent phenomena at all so we need to be careful lest the partisans of Chandrakirti take exception. :tongue:
User avatar
Tilopa
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 3:53 am

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby Sherab » Thu Mar 10, 2011 3:07 am

When existence is an illusion, then one can understand why the Buddha said 'existence' and 'non-existence' as not occurring to him.
When existence is an illusion, then one can understand that dharmas/things/phenomena are neither conditioned nor unconditioned.
When existence is an illusion, then one can understand why "samsara" and "nirvana" is neither same nor different.
When existence is an illusion, then one can understand the progression from the first to the third turning and therefore no contradictions in the Dharma.
When existence is an illusion, then one can make sense of all the paradoxical statements found in the sutras.
When existence is an illusion, then one can make sense of tantric practices.
That is how it seems to me.
User avatar
Sherab
 
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby retrofuturist » Thu Mar 10, 2011 3:57 am

Greetings TMingyur,

TMingyur wrote:"In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen." What does that mean?

It means without any conceptual overlay or active arresting/categorisation of experience as discrete dhammas (things).

Maitri,
Retro. :)
Live in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, blending like milk and water, viewing each other with kindly eyes

Dhamma Wheel (Theravada forum) * Here Comes Trouble
User avatar
retrofuturist
Founding Member
 
Posts: 1254
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 11:54 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby ground » Thu Mar 10, 2011 4:29 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings TMingyur,

TMingyur wrote:"In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen." What does that mean?

It means without any conceptual overlay or active arresting/categorisation of experience as discrete dhammas (things).

Maitri,
Retro. :)


Thanks.

Sherab wrote:When existence is an illusion, then one can understand why the Buddha said 'existence' and 'non-existence' as not occurring to him.
When existence is an illusion, then one can understand that dharmas/things/phenomena are neither conditioned nor unconditioned.
When existence is an illusion, then one can understand why "samsara" and "nirvana" is neither same nor different.
When existence is an illusion, then one can understand the progression from the first to the third turning and therefore no contradictions in the Dharma.
When existence is an illusion, then one can make sense of all the paradoxical statements found in the sutras.
When existence is an illusion, then one can make sense of tantric practices.
That is how it seems to me.


There appears to be much of conceptual overlay. Why? Because "existence" is "contacted" and fabrication occurs. The mere thought "existence" entails another mere thought "illusion". Mere thought serves as legitimation for mere thought. That is fabrication, isn't it?

Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 1782
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:31 am

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby ground » Thu Mar 10, 2011 4:58 am

retrofuturist wrote:Greetings TMingyur,

TMingyur wrote:"In reference to the seen, there will be only the seen." What does that mean?

It means without any conceptual overlay or active arresting/categorisation of experience as discrete dhammas (things).

Maitri,
Retro. :)


Retro

I find it even more tricky in the context of "In reference to the cognized, only the cognized."
Because "cognition" appears to be readily associated with "re-cognition" which may be discerned as "conceptual overlay".

What's your view?

Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 1782
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:31 am

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby Sherab » Thu Mar 10, 2011 5:34 am

TMingyur wrote:There appears to be much of conceptual overlay. Why? Because "existence" is "contacted" and fabrication occurs. The mere thought "existence" entails another mere thought "illusion". Mere thought serves as legitimation for mere thought. That is fabrication, isn't it?

Of course from your point of view, there is much conceptual overlay because you are unable to distinguish between the finger that is pointing at the moon and the actual moon itself.
User avatar
Sherab
 
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby ground » Thu Mar 10, 2011 5:43 am

Sherab wrote:
TMingyur wrote:There appears to be much of conceptual overlay. Why? Because "existence" is "contacted" and fabrication occurs. The mere thought "existence" entails another mere thought "illusion". Mere thought serves as legitimation for mere thought. That is fabrication, isn't it?

Of course from your point of view, there is much conceptual overlay because you are unable to distinguish between the finger that is pointing at the moon and the actual moon itself.

I would say "not compromising the moon through the finger" because "finger" is indirect and multiple but "moon" is direct and singular. Through application of "finger" and "contacting finger" there is arising of obsession with "finger" (clinging to views) and losing sight of "moon".

Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 1782
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:31 am

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby Sherab » Thu Mar 10, 2011 5:54 am

TMingyur wrote:I would say "not compromising the moon through the finger" because "finger" is indirect and multiple but "moon" is direct and singular. Through application of "finger" and "contacting finger" there is arising of obsession with "finger" (clinging to views) and losing sight of "moon".

Then you agree that you still need the finger to point to the moon. If so, it is of no benefit to tell people to ignore the finger when the purpose of the finger is to point to the moon. Of course, when the moon has been shown, you can then tell people to ignore the finger but not before then.
User avatar
Sherab
 
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby ground » Thu Mar 10, 2011 6:02 am

Sherab wrote:
TMingyur wrote:I would say "not compromising the moon through the finger" because "finger" is indirect and multiple but "moon" is direct and singular. Through application of "finger" and "contacting finger" there is arising of obsession with "finger" (clinging to views) and losing sight of "moon".

Then you agree that you still need the finger to point to the moon. If so, it is of no benefit to tell people to ignore the finger when the purpose of the finger is to point to the moon. Of course, when the moon has been shown, you can then tell people to ignore the finger but not before then.


Hmh ...

maybe ...

maybe not ...

maybe you are just devising your legitimation for clinging to views like these:

"... dharmas/things/phenomena are neither conditioned nor unconditioned"
"... "samsara" and "nirvana" is neither same nor different"
"... there is a progression from the first to the third turning and therefore no contradictions in the Dharma"
"... tantric practices make "sense" "


Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 1782
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:31 am

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby Sherab » Thu Mar 10, 2011 6:10 am

TMingyur wrote:Hmh ...

maybe ...

maybe not ...

maybe you are just devising your legitimation for clinging to views like these:

"... dharmas/things/phenomena are neither conditioned nor unconditioned"
"... "samsara" and "nirvana" is neither same nor different"
"... there is a progression from the first to the third turning and therefore no contradictions in the Dharma"
"... tantric practices make "sense" "

.. sticks and stones may break my bones but you can't take away my rock and roll ..
User avatar
Sherab
 
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 6:28 am

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby KeithBC » Thu Mar 10, 2011 6:37 am

Rael wrote:someone said time is an illusion and i said it wasn't...It got me to thinking...
do you think life is an illusion or illusionary..or more exact is existence an illusion...

I make the distinction because though it may appear illusionary it not necessarily is an illusion.

How real is this world to you?
do you think it really is as someone once said in the Buddhist community "like a dream within a dream"

It would be a mistake to think that nothing exists, because that would be nihilism. But anything we can say about it (or, more exactly, any concept we can form about it) is incomplete and imprecise and therefore delusional. The idea that we can say anything meaningful about reality is an illusion.
though it may appear illusionary it not necessarily is an illusion

Perhaps that statement is logically consistent, but it misses the point. The essence of illusion is that it does not appear illusory. It appears true when it is not.

Om mani padme hum
Keith
User avatar
KeithBC
 
Posts: 377
Joined: Tue Apr 07, 2009 5:22 pm
Location: East Coast of Canada

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby ground » Thu Mar 10, 2011 6:44 am

KeithBC wrote:The essence of illusion is that it does not appear illusory. It appears true when it is not.

That is nicely put. However ... honestly ... there is no appearance at all that appears as if true or illusory. "true" or "illusory" are synthesized "on top of" appearances.


Kind regards
User avatar
ground
 
Posts: 1782
Joined: Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:31 am

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby Tilopa » Thu Mar 10, 2011 6:56 am

Sherab wrote:.. sticks and stones may break my bones but you can't take away my rock and roll ..


ooohh I just new this was gonna be a hot thread :D
Last edited by Tilopa on Tue Mar 15, 2011 6:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Tilopa
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2010 3:53 am

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby retrofuturist » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:07 am

Greetings TMingyur,
TMingyur wrote:I find it even more tricky in the context of "In reference to the cognized, only the cognized."
Because "cognition" appears to be readily associated with "re-cognition" which may be discerned as "conceptual overlay".

What's your view?

In that regard it is understanding cognition as cognition... not taking it to be something else, and not superimposing it over objects from other sense bases and taking that 'sensory composite' to be a dhamma (thing).

Metta,
Retro. :)
Live in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, blending like milk and water, viewing each other with kindly eyes

Dhamma Wheel (Theravada forum) * Here Comes Trouble
User avatar
retrofuturist
Founding Member
 
Posts: 1254
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 11:54 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia

Re: Do you really think existence is an illusion

Postby Astus » Thu Mar 10, 2011 9:16 am

The error is in the question. To as "Is this illusion?" implies there is something that is an illusion. So even if one believes it is an illusion he still maintains the view that there is something existent that has the quality of illusion. Of course, this is how language works. But the point of the metaphor of illusion and such is to make beings less attached to their experience. So this investigation of the illusory nature of things is indeed a dream in a dream. There is quite a difference between illusion and suchness, i.e. the things as they are, in terminology. But the meaning of both is simply not to get so hooked on like and dislike.
"There is no such thing as the real mind. Ridding yourself of delusion: that's the real mind."
(Sheng-yen: Getting the Buddha Mind, p 73)

“Don’t rashly seek the true Buddha;
True Buddha can’t be found.
Does marvelous nature and spirit
Need tempering or refinement?
Mind is this mind carefree;
This face, the face at birth."

(Nanyue Mingzan: Enjoying the Way, tr. Jeff Shore; T51n2076, p461b24-26)
User avatar
Astus
Former staff member
 
Posts: 4125
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 11:22 pm
Location: Budapest

Next

Return to Open Dharma

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests

>