ED,

GIVE ME A BREAK!  I'm trying to find a 'kinder and gentler' term to replace 
'illusion'.

How about 'physical model'?  That's a different kind of model.

I thought about and rejected 'logical model' and 'rational model' already 
because I think what I'm trying to communicate isn't completely logical or 
rational.

I also thought about 'dualistic model', but that would have the same problem as 
'mental model'.  There is no 'holistic model'.  That's not a model.  That's the 
real deal - Buddha Nature.

So for now I'm sticking with 'mental model'.  The term I used to use was 
'illusions'.  Or...to be more precise, Maya...

..and for those of you that are dictionary definition junkies...

"Maya...in Indian religions, has multiple meanings, usually quoted as 
"illusion", centered on the fact that we do not yet experience the environment 
directly but rather through some projection of it—Maya sustains the self by 
blessing self judgement of self creation. Maya is the principal deity that 
manifests, perpetuates and governs the illusion and dream of duality in the 
phenomenal Universe. A mystic may attain self-realization observing the 
manifestations of Maya.  Each person, each physical object, from the 
perspective of eternity, is like a brief, disturbed drop of water from an 
unbounded ocean. The goal of enlightenment is to understand this—more 
precisely, to experience this: to see intuitively that the distinction between 
the self and the Universe is a false dichotomy. From the perspective of Maya 
any distinction between consciousness and physical matter, between mind and 
body (refer bodymind) is a kind of illusion of the unenlightened." - Wikipedia

And in case you're wondering I don't want to use 'Maya' it is because I try to 
steer clear of terms which are directly associated with religious or spiritual 
'mental models'.  On this forum I do 'default' most times to a general Buddhist 
'mental model' - like for 'Buddha Nature'.  Otherwise I would just use 'direct 
experience of reality' for that.

...Bill! 

--- In [email protected], "ED" <seacrofter001@...> wrote:
>
> 
> 
> Bill! -
> 
> 'Mental model' as against what other type of model?
> 
> --ED
> 
> 
> 
> --- In [email protected], "Bill!" <BillSmart@> wrote:
> >
> > Edgar,
> >
> > I AGREE!
> >
> > But I call the first condition, "Imagining things thinking they are
> real and actual...", a 'mental model' (formally known as 'illusions').
> >
> > I call the second condition, "Knowing you are imagining things...",
> zen as you do.
> >
> > However I call experiencing ONLY reality (no imagining, no 'mental
> model') 'Buddha Nature'.
> >
> > ...Bill!
> 
> 
> 
> > --- In [email protected], Edgar Owen edgarowen@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Bill,
> > >
> > > Imagining things thinking they are real and actual is not zen.
> Knowing you are imagining things is zen...
> > >
> > > Edgar
>



------------------------------------

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/

Reply via email to