It hasn't been hard to 'transcend the plane' of some of the recent
On Jan 13, 2009, at 9:36 AM, <billsm...@hhs1963.org> wrote:
Hi Edgar! I haven't seen posts from you in a while. I thought maybe
transcended this plane into a higher one. Thanks for your post and
I think your reading of my post as stating that perceptions (such
of touch) are not illusory, and deducing from that statement that I
"...aspects of the objective world are not illusory" is invalid,
could see where you could make that interpretation. It all depends
and to what you apply the term 'aspect'.
Your dualistic mind creates the objective world. It is an illusion.
Perceptions are not aspects of an objective world. The objective
an aspect of your dualistic mind. Your immediate perceptions (like
touch), prior to any intellectualizations, are real. They are
your Buddha Nature. As soon as you exercise your dualistic mind and
intellectualize your perceptions, like classifying them as good or
are creating illusions.
I used the word 'pain' in my original because Anthony used it. I
to directly address a post if I'm responding to it. I've the term
touch' in this post to be more precise. 'Pain' could be interpreted
unpleasant or undesirable sense of touch. As soon as you classify
of touch as unpleasant or undesirable then you're intellectualizing.
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to clarify this.
From: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com [mailto:zen_fo...@yahoogroups.com]
Of Edgar Owen
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 8:21 PM
Subject: Re: [Zen] Re: The Reason For God
You are actually saying that aspects of the objective world are not
illusory! I'm amazed. That is not Buddhism, Buddhism states that
that is all forms, are illusory. I think you just shot your own Buddha
nature in the foot!
Care to clarify?
That being said I certainly agree that there are different 'levels' of
illusion since the veils of illusion are multiple and overlapping.