Do panentheists believe that Creation is an illusion?

[Monotheist Miriam]

Please answer this question.

 

[Willamena]

Does manifestation count as an illusion?

 

[doppelganger]

I prefer Schroedinger's term shaumkommen or the Hindu concept of maya to the term "illusions," which is easily misunderstood in English.

And what are you referring to as "creation"?

 

[Monotheist Miriam]

Does manifestation count as an illusion?

I don't know. Can you elaberate?

 

[Monotheist Miriam]

I prefer Schroedinger's term shaumkommen or the Hindu concept of maya to the term "illusions," which is easily misunderstood in English.

I looked up the concept of Maya and I am confused as to what it means.

 

[doppelganger]

I looked up the concept of Maya and I am confused as to what it means.

What prompted you to ask?

 

[Monotheist Miriam]

What prompted you to ask?

Curiosity. I like learning about other beliefs.

 

[doppelganger]

Curiosity. I like learning about other beliefs.

For me, it has nothing to do with belief. It has to do with the branch of philosophy known as epistemology, and more specifically, semiotics.

 

[Monotheist Miriam]

For me, it has nothing to do with belief. It has to do with the branch of philosophy known as epistemology, and more specifically, semiotics.

What do those words mean?

 

[doppelganger]

What do you mean by "creation"?

 

[Izdaari]

An illusion? No. But a simulation running in the mind of God, maybe.

 

[Joshua Pryce]

Does manifestation count as an illusion?

Depends on how the manifestation comes to be. I believe as a monotheist that human beings are made in God image and likeness. I have no idea how a pantheist resonates on that word.

 

[Willamena]

An illusion? No. But a simulation running in the mind of God, maybe.

What is the difference?

 

[wellwisher]

What is the difference?

An illusion is not real and is often purposely designed to trick people. The magician creates an illusion, to wow the audience, by appearing to break the laws of science. A simulation, on the other hand, is more based on trying to show how reality is supposed to behave, and is therefore not trying to trick you, but to inform and teach you.

For example, the Russian Collusion Coup was an illusion designed to trick people, therefore it was from political magicians. It appeared to be real to those who respond well to illusions, since they lacked a good simulation of reality, by which to compare.

Illusions, such as in magic, need the stage orientated a certain way, relative to the audience, so the trick, of the trick, is not revealed. If the magician seeks the best response from the audience, simulations of reality may have to be censored, since these can change the POV of the audience; sit in a different spot, making it harder for the illusionists to hide the support wires.

Censorship is a good litmus test of an illusion. Only an illusionist benefits by censorship. Simulations do not need to distract the audience in a very specific way for the simulation to work.

The political parties that censor the most belong to the league of illusions. Dictators need the audience to go along with the party line; sit here. They will remove those who dare sit differently.

Simulators prefer free speech; brain storm, since simulations can always get better, since reality and our understanding of realty is an evolving paradigm. More good ideas, from more angles, helps the simulation to get better in form and nuance.

 

[shunyadragon]

The problem I see is most of the above posts represent personal views of panentheism, and not how pantheism is defined. Panentheism is not specifically defined as believing Creation is an illusion.

The other problem is clearly separating Theism, Pantheism and Panentheism, in part because Panentheism allows a degree? of Theism.

For example:: The Baha'i Faith has attributes of Theism and Panentheism. Through progressive Revelation the God of the Baha'i Faith is Theist, but undefinable from the fsllable human perspective.. The diversity of the expression of God in Creation is more Panentheistic.

The following reference maybe helpful, but than again confusing: Panentheism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

More to follow . . .

 

[Aupmanyav]

I looked up the concept of Maya and I am confused as to what it means.

I have not voted because I am not a Panentheist. I am a strong atheist and therefore do not like even the smell of theism. But I will answer your question as it falls within my view and you mention that you are confused about it.

Take example of a film. What is shown is only a story, but the actors are there, though they may not be how they are depicted.
In a similar way, there is something existing in the universe (my view goes with science that it is space/energy). But we perceive that space/energy as the universe, the world and we think we live in it in our life. This wrong perception is 'maya'.