Dexing, you keep on saying a lot of things about illusions...
Let's say that there was a magic show. After it was over, a bunch of friends got together and then discussed about what they saw:
Friend #1, "There was no way that rabbit came out of the empty hat! It was an illusion."
Friend #2, "No, no, that was real. He had the rabbit in his sleeve all along."
Now... which one of them is more correct?
If you think that this was a nonsense question, then you would be right. You're actually trying to frame the discussion in this way. This also explains some of the posts on here, if you didn't get their significance the first time around.
This reminds me of a koan (I gotta paraphrase this, hope you don't mind):
The emperor asked the old monk seated before him to explain. The old monk rose and then walked over to the table. He banged it on the floor several times, and then left.
The emperor was astonished. He stroked his own impeccable, nicely-groomed beard. The spiritual advisor then whispered to him, "Wow, that monk really knows his stuff... he expounded the Dhamma fully!"
Now... why did the monk do that?
Did someone talk about the emptiness and the hallucinatory flowers in front of the emperor again?