Why is it called illusion?

Exploring Theravāda's connections to other paths - what can we learn from other traditions, religions and philosophies?
brahmabull
Posts: 65
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2011 9:56 pm

Re: Why is it called illusion?

Post by brahmabull »

TMingyur wrote:
Where does the pondering about "reality" come from when there is no capacity to say what the term "reality" shall refer to?
What makes you think of nihilism? :shrug:
This bit is nihilism if you are saying "there's no reality to refer to." That would be a view, a view of "no reality." To that view the Buddha said, "The world is the six-sense media."

But that is not true. He did not "describe the world as".
He described the world as the world of the senses.
Anyway, do you want to imply that through one of the six senses you can directly perceive what the term "reality" refers to? If so, what sense is it?

Or do you want to imply that the term "reality" refers to the totality of the six senses qua six senses
Reality is just another word for dhamma. The Buddha taught dhamma. A dhamma is a phenomena. A phenomena is an experience produced by the senses. This is really elementary, I'm surprised a highly realized student of dhamma like you is still bouncing this theme around.
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Why is it called illusion?

Post by ground »

brahmabull wrote:
TMingyur wrote:
Where does the pondering about "reality" come from when there is no capacity to say what the term "reality" shall refer to?
What makes you think of nihilism? :shrug:
This bit is nihilism if you are saying "there's no reality to refer to."
Hold on. I asked what the term does refer to. Obviously you cannot give an answer but insist on the validity of the term.

I would say that to exaggerate sense perception through labelling it with "reality" is a manifestation of clinging aggregates.
brahmabull wrote: That would be a view, a view of "no reality." To that view the Buddha said, "The world is the six-sense media."
Please give a sutta quote. I think you made this up.
brahmabull wrote: Reality is just another word for dhamma.
No. I think you are just holding a philosophical view.
brahmabull wrote: The Buddha taught dhamma. A dhamma is a phenomena. A phenomena is an experience produced by the senses.
That's fine. but what does the term "reality" add to this?

Kind regards
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Why is it called illusion?

Post by mikenz66 »

TMingyur wrote:
brahmabull wrote: That would be a view, a view of "no reality." To that view the Buddha said, "The world is the six-sense media."
Please give a sutta quote. I think you made this up.
There are suttas such as:

SN 12.44 Loka Sutta: The World
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The Blessed One said: "And what is the origination of the world? Dependent on the eye & forms there arises eye-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. ...
One could make an argument that such suttas get over-enthusiastically interpreted by some readers.
I am inclined to think that the Buddha is only saying:
  • "This is the 'world' that my teaching is concerned with, and that's all that matters for awakening"
not making a philosophical statement along the lines of:
  • "I am teaching that there is no 'world' other than the senses, etc".
:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Why is it called illusion?

Post by ground »

mikenz66 wrote:
TMingyur wrote:
brahmabull wrote: That would be a view, a view of "no reality." To that view the Buddha said, "The world is the six-sense media."
Please give a sutta quote. I think you made this up.
There are suttas such as:

SN 12.44 Loka Sutta: The World
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The Blessed One said: "And what is the origination of the world? Dependent on the eye & forms there arises eye-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. ...
But this is not a description of "the world as the six senses" which has been asserted. It is a description of the dependent origination of the notion "the world".

Kind regards
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Why is it called illusion?

Post by mikenz66 »

TMingyur wrote: But this is not a description of "the world as the six senses" which has been asserted. It is a description of the dependent origination of the notion "the world".
Yes, good point. Which is why I don't think that the Buddha denied an "objective world" (however one wants to define that...).

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Why is it called illusion?

Post by ground »

mikenz66 wrote:
TMingyur wrote: But this is not a description of "the world as the six senses" which has been asserted. It is a description of the dependent origination of the notion "the world".
Yes, good point. Which is why I don't think that the Buddha denied an "objective world" (however one wants to define that...).

:anjali:
Mike
I agree that he did not deny. However he did not confirm it either because both denial and confirmation lies beyond range.

Kind regards
User avatar
mikenz66
Posts: 19941
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Aotearoa, New Zealand

Re: Why is it called illusion?

Post by mikenz66 »

TMingyur wrote: I agree that he did not deny. However he did not confirm it either because both denial and confirmation lies beyond range.
Yes, agreed. It's irrelevant... And again, I could argue that "the all" in that is not a statement about "the universe", but "the all" of experience...

:anjali:
Mike
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Why is it called illusion?

Post by ground »

mikenz66 wrote:
TMingyur wrote: I agree that he did not deny. However he did not confirm it either because both denial and confirmation lies beyond range.
Yes, agreed. It's irrelevant... And again, I could argue that "the all" in that is not a statement about "the universe", but "the all" of experience...
"the all" necessarily refers to experience directly depending on "eye & forms [seen by the eye], ear & sounds [heard by the ear], ... intellect & ideas [thought by the intellect]" since otherwise the sutta would contradict itself.

kind regards
brahmabull
Posts: 65
Joined: Sat Oct 29, 2011 9:56 pm

Re: Why is it called illusion?

Post by brahmabull »

TMingyur wrote:Hold on. I asked what the term does refer to. Obviously you cannot give an answer but insist on the validity of the term.

I would say that to exaggerate sense perception through labelling it with "reality" is a manifestation of clinging aggregates.
So?
brahmabull wrote:Please give a sutta quote. I think you made this up.
Are you serious?

Sabba Sutta.
"Monks, I will teach you the All. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak."

"As you say, lord," the monks responded.

The Blessed One said, "What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. [1] Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range."

SN 35.23

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
No. I think you are just holding a philosophical view.
Not really. I'm just relying on what the buddha really says, not what I think he says.
brahmabull wrote:The Buddha taught dhamma. A dhamma is a phenomena. A phenomena is an experience produced by the senses.
That's fine. but what does the term "reality" add to this?[/quote]

It's just a word. The Buddha was not a philosophizer or a lawyer. He just spoke plainly in ordinary language. Buddhists are stuck on hairsplitting verbal contentions with vein hopes to become a teacher. Aryadhamma is just about dealing with what's what so we can get on with it.
User avatar
ground
Posts: 2591
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 6:01 am

Re: Why is it called illusion?

Post by ground »

brahmabull wrote:
brahmabull wrote:Please give a sutta quote. I think you made this up.
Are you serious?

Sabba Sutta.
Please see communication with mikenz66 above. There is no basis for your introducing a realistic notion.

brahmabull wrote:
brahmabull wrote:The Buddha taught dhamma. A dhamma is a phenomena. A phenomena is an experience produced by the senses.
That's fine. but what does the term "reality" add to this?
It's just a word.
Seems to be a word of great significance for you, not for the Buddha.

Kind regards
User avatar
Ben
Posts: 18438
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 12:49 am
Location: kanamaluka

Re: Why is it called illusion?

Post by Ben »

MODERATOR NOTE:


This thread has been reopened following the removal of a number of posts.

Members are requested to be heedful of their posting style.
Thanks for your cooperation.

Ben
“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.”
- Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:
in mountain clefts and chasms,
loud gush the streamlets,
but great rivers flow silently.
- Sutta Nipata 3.725

Compassionate Hands Foundation (Buddhist aid in Myanmar) • Buddhist Global ReliefUNHCR

e: [email protected]..
Post Reply