If reality is non-dual/monistic, then why does the illussion persist?

[adren@line]

Often people ask "why do we exist?". My answer is that we do not, its simply an illussion.

So that then leads me to ask, "Why is there an illusion"? Other than invoking solipsism, I cant come up with a somewhat reasonable explanation.

:huh:

[OneInFundieville]

Personally I have no friggin' clue how here got here.

[adren@line]

Ah crap this is supposed to be in the NARP forum.

:banghead:

[OneInFundieville]

<Moving to NARP then...>

[aupmanyav]

It persists because the system (our senses) with which we observe does not change. And we take it as truth. When we employ another system (viveka - discrimination), we see the truth.

[TruthPrevails]

Often people ask "why do we exist?". My answer is that we do not, its simply an illussion.

So that then leads me to ask, "Why is there an illusion"? Other than invoking solipsism, I cant come up with a somewhat reasonable explanation.

:huh:
1. Existence is simply "is".
2. Humans cannot be absolute about anything which,
3. would include statement 1. and 2. as well,
4. leaving us forever suspended in non-absoluteness.

The other aspect of humanity is pragmaticism, contextualism, dualism, etc., when we can introduce the concept of illusion, solispism, truth, realism, idealism, objectivism, etc.

[DBT]

Often people ask "why do we exist?". My answer is that we do not, its simply an illussion.

So that then leads me to ask, "Why is there an illusion"? Other than invoking solipsism, I cant come up with a somewhat reasonable explanation.

:huh:

Do you mean to say that the physical world is an illusion? Or just the concept of 'self?'

[Kharakov]

So that then leads me to ask, "Why is there an illusion"? Other than invoking solipsism, I cant come up with a somewhat reasonable explanation.
In that case, invoke schizophrenia:

Why is there an ill us I on?

[abaddon]

So that then leads me to ask, "Why is there an illusion"? Other than invoking solipsism, I cant come up with a somewhat reasonable explanation.
In that case, invoke schizophrenia:

Why is there an ill us I on?
It’s not that “I” am not real... It’s just the letter “i” that isn’t real! People have gotta stop capitalizing it and confusing everybody...

[abaddon]

More seriously: How do we not exist if we experience ourselves? Obviously we exist, it’s the starting point for anyone saying anything about anything.

If illusion means “non-existent” rather than “mistaken concept about something real” then it is itself a mistaken concept.

[adren@line]

So that then leads me to ask, "Why is there an illusion"? Other than invoking solipsism, I cant come up with a somewhat reasonable explanation.
In that case, invoke schizophrenia:

Why is there an ill us I on?

already tried, doesn't work.
:huh:

[adren@line]

Often people ask "why do we exist?". My answer is that we do not, its simply an illussion.

So that then leads me to ask, "Why is there an illusion"? Other than invoking solipsism, I cant come up with a somewhat reasonable explanation.

:huh:

Do you mean to say that the physical world is an illusion? Or just the concept of 'self?'

Perhaps both.

In the realm of physics, Bohm and Pribram's holonomic brain and holographic universe theory are interesting, as particle/wave duality and wave-only theories.

[adren@line]

It persists because the system (our senses) with which we observe does not change. And we take it as truth. When we employ another system (viveka - discrimination), we see the truth.

assume the system is part of the illussion, then what?

[aupmanyav]

Do you mean to say that the physical world is an illusion? Or just the concept of 'self?'All that is observed is afflicted with the same problem.If illusion means “non-existent” rather than “mistaken concept about something real” then it is itself a mistaken concept.Illusion is not always non-existence. Illusion is seeing something which is not there and not seeing what is there. Sarpa-Rajju Bhranti (Taking the rope as a snake - Bhranti - Illusion, mistake, not taking correctly).assume the system is part of the illussion, then what?Nothing to assume, the observing system is a part of the illusion.

[Will.L]

This is one of the problems I have with the term "illusion." I wonder, if the ancient "sages" were alive today, would they use that term? Or would they come up with something simpler and more straight forward?

Illusion implies that something is a total fabrication, that there is nothing real underlying it. It SHOULD be obvious and apparent that we DO in fact exist, and that the universe exists, but what Hinduism and Buddhism call an "illusion" I see as a mere caveat regarding our perception of such things, and their underlying true nature.

Plus, when I hear people say "it's all merely an illusion" I just want to say "Oh brother, please stop waxing so mystical on me..."

[aupmanyav]

Sankara defines three levels of truth.
'Pratibhasika' (hallucination), like a demon in a dream, nothing of the demon exists, a creation of mind only.
'Vyavaharika' (pragmatic), the observed world, how we percieve it is not correct but it is not that nothing exists there, a creation of mind built upon what exists.
'Paramarthika' (absolute), what exists, which would exists even if mind was not there.

[hinduwoman]

The illusion is not non-existent. It is an illusion only in the sense that it makes us think the material world is all there is and prevents us from seeing the reality underlying it --- in marxist terms looking at the superstructure and missing the base.

[perfectbite]

We are born we live and grow old and we die and a lot can happen in between. Even if it is an illusion it sounds mightily like existence to me. I couldn't tell the difference.

[aupmanyav]

Perfectbite, that we do, blow hot and cold, bondage of Maya, but do we have an 'atta' (apart from Brahman)? Do you like cocktail drinks?

p.s. - or is it really a cocktail?

[adren@line]

This is one of the problems I have with the term "illusion." I wonder, if the ancient "sages" were alive today, would they use that term? Or would they come up with something simpler and more straight forward?

Illusion implies that something is a total fabrication, that there is nothing real underlying it. It SHOULD be obvious and apparent that we DO in fact exist, and that the universe exists, but what Hinduism and Buddhism call an "illusion" I see as a mere caveat regarding our perception of such things, and their underlying true nature.

Plus, when I hear people say "it's all merely an illusion" I just want to say "Oh brother, please stop waxing so mystical on me..."

Well, herein lies the problem of how one interprets "illusion".

Is it only an illusion relatively speaking or absolutely?

There are actually scientific theories that back either proposition.

[Will.L]

True that, but it depends on whether you are more concerned with practical reality or factual reality which view you choose to uphold. Depending on what is more important to you, and at what arm's length you decide to keep it, there may be a heavy danger of falling into solipsism which certainly isn't any fun...

[perfectbite]

Perfectbite, that we do, blow hot and cold, bondage of Maya, but do we have an 'atta' (apart from Brahman)? Do you like cocktail drinks?

p.s. - or is it really a cocktail?

I have recently come to see brahman as the visible evidence in the world of individuated prajna but no, even away from brahman, I do not accept atta.

I like a good manhattan or a good martini and will drink bloody marys for the tomato juice but I am not sure that that is the kind of cocktail you mean.

[aupmanyav]

Oh, I had a cocktail of hinduism and buddhism in my mind. :)

[premjan]

Pina coladas are good.

[wordy]

Often people ask "why do we exist?".

My answer is that we do not, its simply an illussion.

Depends on what you mean with "we" and "exist" and "illusion".

The illusion could be a bad model of reality but in an every day
usage of the word exists we sure are physical bodies but "we"
as exactly the same as the young person or middle age or retired
is not exactly the same.

I have changed with my body's changes.
so if that is what you refer to then sure "we" are
an illusion in that way. But if you put me together with
somebody knowing me when I was 5 and 10 and 15 and 20 and
25 and 30 and so on they can affirm that it is no illusion at all.

It is the same body who got the scar from a knife when I was 5
and the say guy who started listening to recitation from theKoran
when I was 10 adn who loved Elvis when he was 15 and Beatles
when he was 20 and Norwegian fiddle when he was 30 and so on.

so same that it is embarrassing how little me have changed.

So no it is only an illusion if one use the word very strict formally.

Practically it is not illusion at all. The physical body that see itself
as the one that is "I" am me.

[premjan]

Because of the limitation of the mind.