Indeed.Nonsense.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Indeed.Nonsense.
I'm not sure what your reasoning is, Kirran. Could you elaborate, please?
Well, if we are to say that the keyboard I'm typing on is real, then it seems to me we can say that a vision seen in meditation, for example, is real (or what you see after taking peyote, or whatever else), and the inverse. They're both just observed phenomena.
I'm not seeing how what you seem to mean by "real" comports with the definition of "real" as given in the OP.
Well, I guess I find it a rather shaky definition
Are you seriously proposing that your personal preferences for how to define "real" should be mine? I cannot believe you'd be such an "imperialist", so to speak! If so, why stop at "real"? Why not redefine the meaning of all the words in the OP so that instead of asking "Are makyo ever real" using the definitions of "makyo" and "real" that I provided, you use your own definitions, and so come up with your very own meaning for the sentence "Are makyo ever real?" Let's see, you could say, "Yes, makyo are real, and by 'makyo are real', I mean what you, Sunstone, might mean when you say, 'I love ice cream'." Seriously, Kirran, what's your logic in redefining the terms used in the OP in order to fit your own notion of what they "ought" to mean? Mind you, I'm finding your attitude genuinely amusing -- but also genuinely perplexing!
To be sure, words have no fixed or proper meanings -- contra the world's 1800s schoolmams who taught that they did. So you are perfectly within your rights to define your terms any which way you wish, just as I am within my rights to do the same thing. I am not trying to say otherwise here. But I am politely asking you and everyone else to answer a question, "Are makyo ever real", using the definitions of "makyo" and "real" that I have provided. If you must, call it silly of me -- hell, call me a dolt -- to want an answer to that question, and not to the question of whether someone likes ice cream! But whatever names you call me, please be so kind as to answer my question and to NOT answer your own question instead!
Please note: This is the Mysticism DIR.
Are makyo ever real?
I'm using the term "makyo" loosely here. In fact, I'm borrowing the word from Zen and somewhat re-defining it to mean any sort of mystical experience apart from the mystical experience, the experience of oneness or of a One.
Makyo would thus include mystical experiences of prophetic dreams and visions, remote viewing, telekinesis, levitation, and most other paranormal experiences, but would not include any experience of oneness or of a One.
You are looking for things that pertain outside of the subjective mind. Alright. In this case, one would have to consider the nature of the objective reality we share--this objective reality may or may not be larger than what we think. For instance, one might invoke Plato's World of Forms, the "fine material realms" of devas, asuras, frost giants, and whatnot, or even Carl Jung's Collective Unconscious. If "reality" does indeed include these expanded dimensions, and we can access them as individuals, then remote viewing, prophesy, and such can certainly be real if they involve accessing these portions of "super-reality" or whatever you want to call it, and be considered as real, as they are part of this "super-reality." (One would not be mistaking the subjective for the objective if this "super-reality" was established, in other words.)By the way,. by "real" I mean that the experiences reference an actual state of affairs independent of one's own mind. So, for instance, if one had a vision of some woman, then two years later met her, that would be a "real" vision, it would "realized".
Now, online sources about makyo aren't very helpful -- at least not the ones I've seen. So I'm asking the question here: Are makyo ever real, and if so, what makes you think so?