Why the same dream?

[Williams, Pat]

I'd like to quibble just a bit.  Please understand (as I'm sure you all
do) that this is good-natured quibbling.  This sort of jousting over
words seems to be the essence of discussing advaita.  To some it might
appear trivial, but I trust we all understand that the words we use
represent our thoughts, and what we're after is right thinking.  As long
as we're going to talk about Reality (a highly questionable enterprise
to begin with), we must choose our words with great care.  So, with
regard to the following:

> There was never any snake in existence.
>
I must ask what is meant by "existence."  In Reality, there is no
existence; there is nothing to exist.  In Reality, there was never any
rope in existence either.  So when we use a word like "existence," we're
referring to a "level" other than the ultimate; we're referring to the
realm of relativity.  And from that perspective, the snake DID exist.
My understanding is that if an object "exists," this means that the
perceiver has projected a thought-form and attributed to it a name and a
form.  Regardless of the "fact" that the sequence began with a rope,
what existed for the perceiver was a snake.  We cannot say that what
REALLY existed was a rope and that it was simply misperceived by the one
who thought he saw a snake.  There was never any rope in existence
either EXCEPT as the thought-form of someone who attributed the name and
form of "rope" to it.

Feedback on these "thought-forms" of mine are appreciated.