Wouldn't be more practical and much more of a shortcut looking into yourself 
and see what is there?.  Why do you want to know what is in me and not what is 
in you?.  
I don't understand very well your question: "is that how you actually 
experience yourself or is it a conception or an act of faith"? .  It sounds a 
nonsense question.  A kind of entanglement of words and concepts.  This is what 
one gets when depends upon the wikipedia dictionary and other definitions 
sources but not as much as within resources.  Repeating what you hear won't do 
the trick either.
--- On Thu, 4/11/10, ED <seacrofter...@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: ED <seacrofter...@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Zen] Questions, questions, question
To: Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com
Date: Thursday, 4 November, 2010, 15:46


--- In Zen_Forum@yahoogroups.com, Maria Lopez <flordel...@...> wrote:

> Thanks for clarification Chris. Definetely in that respect all in me too is a 
> massive illusion. --M
M, is that how you actually experience yourself or is it a conception or an act 
of faith?  --E

> I meant my idea of myself, especially as having some spiritual significance, 
> is not reality.  --C 
Conceptions are just conceptions, conjured up by the discursive mind. One would 
be deluded to *believe* them to be 'true' or 'not true'.   --E
> I'm not an illusion.  The only thing that is an illusion is the nonsense in 
> me.  --M
Do you *really* experience the nonsense in you as 'illusory'? What about the 
good in you? Is it illusory too?   --E

> Aren't we all!  --C
We may or may not experience ourselves and/or others as illusory.
For the over 99.9999%, stating that they themselves or others are illusory are 
acts of faith.  --E
> Bill Smart himself is also an illusion. Don't atttach any spiritual 
> significant.  --A
Wouldn't it be illusory to *believe* you if we didn't experience Bill that 
way?  --E


Reply via email to