Did Buddha say “The world is but an illusion?

[SarathW]

One of the meanings of Maya is illusion.

I do not know what the background of SarathW is. In (some forms of) Hinduism the world is Maya which points to an ultimate, truly true true reality atman/brahman, which is, of course, not the teachings ofthe Buddha.

Hi Tilt
I am a Sri Lankan and my native language is Sinhalease. We use Maya in many ways
- Magician
- A woman who try to seduce a man by false pretense

[SamKR]

One of the meanings of Maya is illusion.

I do not know what the background of SarathW is. In (some forms of) Hinduism the world is Maya which points to an ultimate, truly true true reality atman/brahman, which is, of course, not the teachings ofthe Buddha.

I agree. Any talk about Maya in the context of Hinduism usually involves talk about Atman/Paramatman/Brahman.
So, when we use this word Maya in the context of Theravada Buddhism we need to be careful.

[vinasp]

Hi SarathW,

This passage may be of interest:

"That end of the world wherein one is not born, does not grow old or die, pass away or reappear, that I declare, is impossible to be known, seen or reached by travelling. But, friend, I do not declare that one can make an end of suffering without reaching the end of the world. Friend, I do proclaim that in this very fathom-long body, with its perceptions and consciousness, is the world, the world's arising, the world's cessation and the path leading to the world's cessation." A.N. II.48 Rohitassa (pali text) translated by Nanananda in Concept and Reality page 83.

AN 4.45 Link:

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... .than.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Regards, Vincent.

[hermitwin]

it is all a matter of perspective.
is a man real or illusion?
if you see a man as nothing more than a collection sub-atomic particles.
then which is the illusion and which the reality???

[DAWN]

it is all a matter of perspective.
is a man real or illusion?
if you see a man as nothing more than a collection sub-atomic particles.
then which is the illusion and which the reality???

It's a good questioning.

What part of a man is considered as man.

[Polar Bear]

it is all a matter of perspective.
is a man real or illusion?
if you see a man as nothing more than a collection sub-atomic particles.
then which is the illusion and which the reality???

Man is a word that refers to an actual specification of sub-atomic particles that follow a consistent pattern. Man has a true referent. They are both realities, they're just on different scales of description.

[SamKR]

Can someone tell me what exactly Buddha said about illusion. Did he say that world (five aggregate) is an illusion (Maya)?

I am reading a book called The Buddha’s Ancient Path by Ven Piyadassi Thero. page 56 it says:

In regard to Kassapa’s question Buddha said “Surely, Kassapa, suffering is not non-existent. Suffering is”

Does it mean that suffering is not an illusion?

If world is an illusion why Buddha asked us to practice Metta?

In my understanding:
Realization of suffering caused by illusion happens when there is no illusion. So, we can say: [realization of] suffering is not an illusion but illusion is [the cause of] suffering.
Phena sutta is awesome.

[cbonanno]

Samsara does not exist, but it also does not "non-exist". Notice that the Buddha said “Surely, Kassapa, suffering is not non-existent. Suffering is”. He is very clear in a confusing way. He did not say "suffering exists", he used a double negative and said, yeah, it is happening, and you are affected by it, but its just a trick.

He is pointing out that suffering based on an illusion is also an illusion. It is like someone pointing a fake gun at your head, if you do not know that gun is an "illusion" you will suffer only because of your lack of knowing the truth. The Buddha takes it a step farther and reveals even a real gun pointed at your head also should not lead to suffering.

Humans create the illusion of the world to navigate it, to find food and shelter. Dogs see it one way, we see it another. Someone who is colorblind sees blue where there is no blue, which is the reality? No reality, no non-reality, just a trick. It is like the following optical illusion, both the old couple and the mexican men exist but our mind can only choose to see one at a time.

http://brainden.com/images/old-couple.jpg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Edited to add: http://www.dhammawiki.com/index.php?title=Illusion" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

An illusion (māyā) is something false or without real existence. Some misinformed people believe that the Buddha taught that everything is an illusion created by the mind and that nothing really exists. This is one of several examples of where a doctrine of Vedantic Hinduism has been mistakenly attributed to the Buddha. So what did the Buddha mean when he said: 'Everything is unreal' (sabbaṃ vitathaṃ, Sn.9)?
Idealism is the concept that everything is just a creation of the mind, the 'dance' or 'play' (līlā) of God, according to Vedanta. The extreme opposite of this is naive realism, the concept that everything is exactly as it appears to be. Both these ideas are false, the first much more so than the second, and the Buddha subscribed to neither of them.
Very clearly the external world exists in the real sense of the word. The elements of existence - earth or solidity (paṭhavī), water or fluididity (āpo), fire or caloricity (tejo) and wind or movement (vāyo) - exist independently of our minds. However, when the external world impinges on our senses we react by projecting ideas, values, assumptions and expectations onto it. As a result, what we perceive is often more a product of our minds than the qualities of the object itself. This is what the Buddha called 'the distortion of perception' (saṭṭā vipullāsa, A.II,52).
The value of meditation is that in watching the mind we see its projecting and distorting tendency and are less likely to be led astray by it. In time, as the mind becomes utterly still and clear, it stops projecting and sense objects reveal themselves to us as they are. The ordinary person sees everything through the filter of his or her desires, memories, prejudices and wants; the enlightened person 'sees things as they really are' (yathābhūtaṭāṇadassana).

[SamKR]

Ven. Nyanananda also writes in his The Magic of The Mind (1974):

...In that moment of compassion for the frenzied crowd applauding the magician, you had stumbled upon a wider concept of truth. It is the understanding of the principle of relativity behind the concept of truth. The realization that anyone placed in a similar situation would behave as that crowd, had a mellowing effect on your sense of judgment. Given the same measure of ignorance as to the secrets of the magician, given the same psychological impulses of greed and hate, anyone would take up such a standpoint as that frenzied crowd and it is probably the same conviction that caused some embarrassment and hesitation in you in the course of that conversation with your friend. The same magic-show was seen in two different perspectives. While the audience saw what the magician performed, you from your point of vantage saw how he performed. Thus there were actually two levels of experience -- one arising out of ignorance, the other out of knowledge. Each level carried with its own conception of bliss, its own reactions and convictions. The former tended towards a tumultuous bliss of ignorance; the latter towards a bliss of appeasement born of understanding. In the Buddhist conception of the 'knowledge-and-vision-of-things-as-they-are' (yathabhutanana-dassana) both levels of experience find a place. Its content is not any particular theory or a definite body of knowledge, but a norm which analyses and lays bare the very structure of experience. This is none other than the law of Dependent Arising (paticca-sammuppada), which in its direct order accounts for the former level of experience while recognizing at the same time the latter as well by its formulation in reverse order.

...the existence of the magic can neither be affirmed nor denied absolutely. And what is true of the magic is true of all phenomena comprising the magic-show of consciousness. The fact that existence is a relative concept is often overlooked by the worldling. Says the Buddha: "This world, Kaccayana, usually bases (its views) on two things: on existence and non-existence. Now, he who with right insight sees the arising of the world as it really is, does not hold with the non-existence of the world. And he who with right insight sees the passing away of the world as it really is, does not hold with the existence of the world. The world, for the most part, is given to approaching, grasping, entering into and getting entangled (as regards views). Whoever does not approach, grasp and take his stand upon that proclivity towards approaching and grasping, that mental standpoint--namely, that thought:'This is my soul'--he knows that what arises is just suffering and what ceases is just suffering. Thus he is not in doubt, is not perplexed and herein he has knowledge that is not dependent on another. Thus far, Kaccayana, he has right view. 'Everything exists,' this is one extreme. 'Nothing exists,'this is the other extreme. Not approaching either of those extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma by the middle way: From ignorance as condition formations come to be;...

[Parth]

Dear all,

Suffering is a truth which Buddha called an Arya Satya, one of the realisations without realising which no one can hope to even become a sotapanna.

Instead of this debate would request all to practise Vipassana where you would realise what is meant by illusory.

Regards

Parth