So you're saying that an enlightened person loses the ability to descriminate between a flower and a duck?
Or loses the ability to name things because they see the fundamental unity in the diversity? L ---In [email protected], <[email protected]> wrote : ---In [email protected], <LEnglish5@...> wrote : The way Maharishi explained the "illusion of Maya" is rather different than what a lot of people understand. Consciousness is not an illusion, nor is what most people call "reality." The illusion is that there is a fundamental difference between them. This is the "veil of maya": a thin, non-existent membrane that separates the two which is merely an artifact of our perception of things based on having a nervous system. Full enlightenment is when you can full see on both sides of that non-existent veil. I'll go along with that, except for the bit about seeing everything on both sides after enlightenment. L ---In [email protected], <inmadison@...> wrote : This may be above my pay-grade, but if one is a transcendentalist/idealist, then belief in classic cause and effect is incompatible with that belief . . . or one has to significantly qualify what is meant by cause and effect. Many folks who refer to them selves as transcendentalists/idealists are actually dualists, or simply rebranded materialists (I am not suggesting you are) Regarding the 'illusion' - when you pick up an object, like an apple for example, what does your experience tell you? When I pick up an apple, I see it's color and shape, I feel the texture and if pressed with a fingernail - I can sense the sticky juice, I taste the tart sweetness . . . and I remember apple pies and so forth. My experience of the apple is passionate and lively - Where is the illusion? Toss in more awareness and all you get is more passion - there is no illusion. 'Illusion' is just India of old - we don't need no stinking illusion in the 21st century.
