Merle, Very good. Those are exactly the things I use when I write. I don't cross-check every word I use with a dictionary (reference). I don't need to do that.
...Bill! --- In [email protected], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@...> wrote: > > Â insight, feelings, thoughts and dare i say LOGIC...... merle > Â > Merle, > > What do you use as a guide and reference when you paint? > > ...Bill! > > --- In [email protected], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> wrote: > > > > > > > > bill do not make it up..what you think these words mean ... use a > > dictionary...merle > > > > > > ÃÂ > > Edgar, > > > > Below you asked: "What do you think illusory actually means?", and that is > > exactly what I dreamed about last night and was prepared to explain to you > > this morning. I do think part, but not all, of our perpetual disagreement > > about this is because we are using the same terms for 'reality' and > > 'illusion' but they have different meanings to each of us. Below is what I > > mean by these terms: > > > > REALITY is experience. I sometimes say 'raw' experience to differentiate > > it from 'perceptions' or 'illusions'. > > > > EXPERIENCE is immediate sensory experience. There is actually no other > > kind of experience, but we do use that word in common English to describe > > other things. These 'other things' are illusions. > > > > AWARENESS is actually implied by 'experience'. You can't say you've > > 'experienced' something if you're not aware of the experience, but I do > > sometimes additionally use the term 'awareness' just to emphasize that > > state and avoid confusion. > > > > BUDDHA NATURE is experience, or using the superfluous add-on, is awareness > > of experience. Again, experience is reality. > > > > PERCEPTION is the post-processing of experience by your discriminating > > mind. I think we agree on this term. > > > > ILLUSION is the result of PERCEPTION, and can also just be fantasy (no > > basis in reality at all). > > > > Now I do think an additional difference between us that might not be > > apparent here is that when I say reality is experience, I mean just that > > and only that. There is no other or more reality than what's experienced. > > All inferences you make about other or more reality are products of your > > discriminating mind and are illusory. That doesn't mean they are not > > logical, practical or somewhat dependable. They can be all of these but > > are still illusory. > > > > Now to your post below. > > > > I will repeat what I said below using the terms I've defined above. I > > don't think that will make you agree with it, but at least you should be > > able to more fully understand what I'm saying: > > > > Reality has no structure. Experience is [the awareness of] reality and > > nothing more. Experience does not present nor contains any structure such > > as time, place, cause-and-effect, projections, assumptions, conclusions, > > judgments, classifications, etc... Experience is reality. Experience is > > Just THIS! That's it. That's all. Everything else you 'think' about > > reality is illusory - a projection. Reality is holistic (non-dualistic). > > It's Just THIS! It's not this and that. When you catch yourself (your > > dualistic self) creating this and that then you are no longer holistically > > experiencing reality. You have slipped into a dualistic mode are creating > > illusions. > > > > Now to your example... You wrote: "You don't even admit that the sun rises > > in the morning is evidence of the structure of reality when any schoolboy > > understands that." > > > > Buddha Nature is the awareness of only the total immediate sensual > > experience of what we call the 'sunrise'. It would include sight and > > possibly touch, sound and smell, and though unlikely maybe taste also. > > (These divisions of experience into 5 senses has been done by our > > discriminating mind and I use these terms for clarity only. Buddha Nature > > being holistic does not discriminate between these senses and experiences > > them as a whole, Just THIS!) > > > > So, what I've described above the experience. When you add things like > > 'the sun', 'rising', 'morning' and the implication that this 'event' will > > 'happen again' in the 'future', you are engaging your discriminating mind. > > Buddha Nature is not aware of the divisions, classifications, projections > > or even the terms I listed above in parenthesis (' '). These are all > > products of your discriminating mind and are all illusory. (And again let > > me say that being illusory doesn't mean they are not logical, practical or > > somewhat dependable. They can be all of these but are still illusory.) > > > > Whew! That's enough for now. I hope this post at least helps clarify my > > position on these topics even if you still don't agree with me. > > > > I might add all that I've posted is not what I have come to understand, but > > what I have experienced; and is my best attempt to communicate that to you. > > > > ...Bill! > > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote: > > > > > > Bill! > > > > > > What do you think illusory actually means? I know it's not what I think... > > > > > > And you are provably wrong on your first sentence. Discrimination is PART > > > of reality. Discrimination has structure. Therefore reality (or at least > > > part of it) has structure. Therefore your statement is self > > > contradictory... > > > > > > Thus the world of forms has structure. I think your misunderstanding is > > > not understanding that is true even though I agree that discrimination > > > adds ADDITIONAL structure. The mental simulation of reality only works > > > because there is some degree of accuracy in its modeling of the structure > > > of reality. This is basic. > > > > > > If reality itself had no structure it could not exist and we could not > > > exist. > > > > > > You don't even admit that the sun rises in the morning is evidence of the > > > structure of reality when any schoolboy understands that. > > > > > > I've explained this tooooo many times and it still doesn't sink in! > > > :-) > > > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 5, 2012, at 8:14 AM, Bill! wrote: > > > > > > > Edgar, > > > > > > > > Everything that IS discriminated has structure. It's the discrimination > > > > that gives it the structure, not the structure that allows it to be > > > > discriminated. > > > > > > > > I don't disagree with you that everything in the world of forms has > > > > structure, but all forms are illusory - and the structure is a > > > > structure we impose on it. > > > > > > > > ...Bill! > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen <edgarowen@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Bill! > > > > > > > > > > Everything that can be discriminated has structure including Merle's > > > > > paintings. There is nothing in the world of forms that doesn't have > > > > > structure. > > > > > > > > > > Edgar > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sep 4, 2012, at 10:21 PM, Bill! wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Very nice! I like them because many of them appear to have > > > > > > structure but actually do not...Bill! > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected], Merle Lester <merlewiitpom@> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> check here what i draw and paint > > > > > >> Merle > > > > > >> www.wix.com/merlewiitpom/1 > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ Current Book Discussion: any Zen book that you recently have read or are reading! Talk about it today!Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Zen_Forum/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: [email protected] [email protected] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [email protected] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
