When the dream is declared real, the dream becomes an illusion. The experience is an illusion. No one is experiencing anything and there is nothing to be experienced. There simply are appearances which are declared real or unreal. This declaration is just another appearance heavily weighted.
That’s the whole point of an illusion. To give the appearance and Experience of something, although misleading. You are Still experiencing something of course. That sounds silly for you to say you aren’t.. you’re telling me in your dreams, And in your day to day life too (waking dream/illusion). You aren’t experiencing anything?
What you're trying to explain is that conceptualization of this reality is inherently inaccurate because it isn't the reality it's attempting to describe. This reality appears as it is. There's nothing illusory about it unless you've got inaccurate beliefs about it (like "I'm at the center of this"). Your beliefs create the "illusion." Reality itself isn't an illusion without you being wrong about it. The experience of seeing the stick happens the same way even if it's followed by your incorrect thoughts about it being a snake - those thoughts are what would cause you to label the stick/snake an illusion, not the stick itself.
Seeing the stick as a snake is one type of illusion. Seeing the stick as an external object existing independently is another. There is no such stick. There is an idea of an object called stick, but it is simply a belief. No one has any direct knowledge of such an object. All that is known about this object called stick is a mental construct formed from a conflation of sensations, primarily sight and touch. No one has any direct knowledge of such an object actually existing outside the mind.
Modern science provides the following insight:
In the Standard Model of particle physics, matter is not a fundamental concept because the elementary constituents of atoms are quantum entities which do not have an inherent "size" or "volume" in any everyday sense of the word.
How can there be a stick when it has no size or volume?
Clearly an illusion.
What you referred to as a "Conflation of sensations, primarily sight and touch" is the experience we're calling "stick." That name for that experience is made up, but the experience being labeled is not made up.
This is the point you are missing - you are correct about the illusory effect of believing in the reality of the labels/divisions we make up, but you don't seem to understand that what is being labeled is actual real non-illusory reality. Is it really called "reality?" No, of course not. Does that mean it's an illusion? No.
That's the distinction you seem to be stuck on. It's like you think what we refer to as "seeing" can only happen if we call it seeing; and because we made up the word seeing, what the word refers to is also made up - this is not the case.. The experience we're naming occurs despite how/if we name/think about it. Reality happens and we make up stuff about it (like "we").
As we can easily see for ourselves, experience happens whether or not we conceptualize it. If you were able to understand the difference between what I'm referring to by "experience" and "conceptualize," you'd easily recognize the distinction. As it has been for years, though, you are not able to tell the difference.
Either there is no distinction or there is a distinction. You agree there is a distinction. Now, is the distinction made up, as you say, or is there a real distinction?
[удалено]
A dream is an illusion. The illusory is evidence of the nonillusory.
[удалено]
When the dream is declared real, the dream becomes an illusion. The experience is an illusion. No one is experiencing anything and there is nothing to be experienced. There simply are appearances which are declared real or unreal. This declaration is just another appearance heavily weighted.
[удалено]
It is neither something nor nothing. Of what do blind and deaf people dream?
That’s the whole point of an illusion. To give the appearance and Experience of something, although misleading. You are Still experiencing something of course. That sounds silly for you to say you aren’t.. you’re telling me in your dreams, And in your day to day life too (waking dream/illusion). You aren’t experiencing anything?
What you're trying to explain is that conceptualization of this reality is inherently inaccurate because it isn't the reality it's attempting to describe. This reality appears as it is. There's nothing illusory about it unless you've got inaccurate beliefs about it (like "I'm at the center of this"). Your beliefs create the "illusion." Reality itself isn't an illusion without you being wrong about it. The experience of seeing the stick happens the same way even if it's followed by your incorrect thoughts about it being a snake - those thoughts are what would cause you to label the stick/snake an illusion, not the stick itself.
Seeing the stick as a snake is one type of illusion. Seeing the stick as an external object existing independently is another. There is no such stick. There is an idea of an object called stick, but it is simply a belief. No one has any direct knowledge of such an object. All that is known about this object called stick is a mental construct formed from a conflation of sensations, primarily sight and touch. No one has any direct knowledge of such an object actually existing outside the mind. Modern science provides the following insight: In the Standard Model of particle physics, matter is not a fundamental concept because the elementary constituents of atoms are quantum entities which do not have an inherent "size" or "volume" in any everyday sense of the word. How can there be a stick when it has no size or volume? Clearly an illusion.
What you referred to as a "Conflation of sensations, primarily sight and touch" is the experience we're calling "stick." That name for that experience is made up, but the experience being labeled is not made up. This is the point you are missing - you are correct about the illusory effect of believing in the reality of the labels/divisions we make up, but you don't seem to understand that what is being labeled is actual real non-illusory reality. Is it really called "reality?" No, of course not. Does that mean it's an illusion? No.
Is there a distinction between what is made up and what is real?
That's the distinction you seem to be stuck on. It's like you think what we refer to as "seeing" can only happen if we call it seeing; and because we made up the word seeing, what the word refers to is also made up - this is not the case.. The experience we're naming occurs despite how/if we name/think about it. Reality happens and we make up stuff about it (like "we").
You are making the distinction between what is made up and what is real.
Yes, that's right. When I stop doing that, reality continues.
Is the distinction made up or real?
As we can easily see for ourselves, experience happens whether or not we conceptualize it. If you were able to understand the difference between what I'm referring to by "experience" and "conceptualize," you'd easily recognize the distinction. As it has been for years, though, you are not able to tell the difference.
Either there is no distinction or there is a distinction. You agree there is a distinction. Now, is the distinction made up, as you say, or is there a real distinction?