Illusion has no value ((([AdvaitaToZen] The Illusionist

[Guest guest]

Pedro:

Illusions are, generally, created by taking a perspective,

a point of view for reality. By reality we mean certain

qualities and consequences which do not depend on

point of view. A hammer solidity doesn't depend in our

point of view. Someone can come behind our back and

gives us a whack, and it will have consequences. But

if someone hits us with a hammer in a dream, it wouldn't

have durability or consequences.

>>>>

 

What gets hit by the hammer aimed squarely at the

back of the head? Does " someone " get hit, or is it

just a body that gets hit?

 

The perspective or point of view that is " taken " ...

is that attached -- necessarily -- to a sense of " I am " ?

 

<<<

Even a Jnani needs his former persona to act in the world.

He no longer believe he is Joe Blow, but he will act as Joe

when talking to his mother, wife, son, or best friend. The

sense of " I am " would be seen as illusory, but will return

when needed.

>>>

His family may see him as Joe Blow. But the jnani is not

*there* as a person any more. And the absence of him as

a person doesn't mean there is anything unusual noticed

by others. Perhaps he is more fluid, relaxed, engages

in a more present way with others. He most likely will

be all the more human a perceived by the " others " . And

all of this happens as if by magic. So the sense " I am "

does not need to return because in fact it is not needed.

It is simply excess baggage. I has no efficacious value

in a survival sense or in any other sense that makes any

real difference.

 

<<<

Illusion is part of nature, it's here to

stay, and realization or not it must be deal with.

>>>

I heartily disagree.

Illusion is just that, illusion. It is a mis-taking of

what is. It serves no real value.

 

 

Bill

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nisargadatta , Pete S <pedsie4 wrote:

>

>

> On Feb 22, 2006, at 9:51 AM, billrishel wrote:

>

> > An illusion [is]...a projection,

> > Illusionism is ... all about self protection.

> > >>>>

> >

> > [self] projection for self protection!

> >

> > So there is a *self* after all?

> >

> > Well, no, of course not.

> >

> > So what is projecting...?

> >

> > To infer something that is projecting is reification.

> >

> > So we should *not* speak of *self* projection for *self*

> > protection. There's no such *thing*.

> >

> > Hmmm...

> >

> > So then, if there is no " anything " doing the projection,

> > how can the projection have a *purpose* of protection?

> >

> > It can't.

> >

> > So what is this " projection " phenomenon really?

> >

> > Has anyone ever seen one? (I mean the phenomenon)

> >

> > It would be too trite to suggest that the notion of

> > projection is a projection. And also self contradictory.

> >

> > Let's go back to the text:

> > > When we are sad the whole world looks drab, and sad;

> >

> > Hmmmm...

> >

> > The problem begins with the proposition, " We are sad. "

> > Putting it in the first person (which is presumably how

> > it originates) that is: " I am sad. "

> >

> > That's the real problem. " I am sad, " is an interpretation

> > of experience. A statement of the form, " I am ____ " is

> > an interpretation of experience. Start with a non-starter

> > and you can only end up in the ditch.

> >

> > Forget the projection thing.

> > Rather take a look at the " I am ____ " whenever it crops

> > up.

> >

> > And then put your best forgetting cap on, cuz you really

> > need to forget *that*, cuz that is the root illusion.

> >

> >

> > Bill

> >

> >

>

> P: Is Bill right about 'I am' being the root of illusion?

> Yes, he is in a metaphorical way. And his advice

> has value as a liberation tool. Of course, the " I am "

> belief has nothing to do with:

> > A perspective on a flat canvas, or the bending of the

> > >Â Â part of a ruler immersed in water.

>

> But it has a lot to do with conceptual psychological

> and spiritual illusions. It's worthwhile to

> notice that illusions just don't vanish when we stop

> believing in their reality. A mirage still can be

> seen shimmering in the distance, even after we

> no longer consider it water.

>

> Illusions are, generally, created by taking a perspective,

> a point of view for reality. By reality we mean certain

> qualities and consequences which do not depend on

> point of view. A hammer solidity doesn't depend in our

> point of view. Someone can come behind our back and

> gives us a whack, and it will have consequences. But

> if someone hits us with a hammer in a dream, it wouldn't

> have durability or consequences.

>

> So, seeing illusions as illusions doesn't make them vanish.

> Even a Jnani needs his former persona to act in the world.

> He no longer believe he is Joe Blow, but he will act as Joe

> when talking to his mother, wife, son, or best friend. The

> sense of " I am " would be seen as illusory, but will return

> when needed. Acting or feeling like Mr Zero just won't

> do in all situations. Illusion is part of nature, it's here to

> stay, and realization or not it must be deal with.

>

> Samsara is Nirvana.

>

> Pete

>

>

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > AdvaitaToZen , Pete S <pedsie4@> wrote:

> > >

> > > An illusionist is one who produces illusory effects.

> > > An illusion seldom means non-existence, it means

> > >Â Â just a misplacement, a projection, misunderstanding

> > >Â Â or a misattribution.

> > >

> > >Â Â A perspective on a flat canvas, or the bending of the

> > >Â Â part of a ruler immersed in water, are common

> > > examples of illusionism. Spiritual illusionism is more

> > > difficult to detect because, usually, it's our own mind

> > > which creates the illusion.

> > >

> > > When we are sad the whole world looks drab, and sad;

> > > when we are cheerful the entire world looks happy. We

> > > are natural projectors. When we feel deep love, we feel

> > > that God is love; when we feel deep peace we think

> > > peace is eternal. And of course, some when feeling

> > > keenly aware think awareness is everything.

> > >

> > > Idealists are illusionist per excellence, they spray paint

> > > their perceptions over the universe, and claim there is

> > > no thing outside of that which they feel. Everything is

> > > spirit, God, or Self. Well, this boils down to saying,

> > > everything is everything. It really doesn't matter what

> > > you call this everything. Call it matter, and it wouldn't

> > > change. Except, that self projection would go out of

> > > the window, and is this little self they try to expand

> > > and protect. Illusionism and idealism is, in the last

> > >Â Â instance, all about self protection.

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Words must be used like stepping stones: lightly and with nimbleness,

> > because if you step on them too heavily, you incur the danger of

> > falling

> > into the intellectual mire of logic and reason. - Balsekar

> > *********************************

> > AdvaitaToZen

> >

> >

> >

> >