The link between Vyavaharika and Paramartika

[Charles A. Hillig]

>The Conciouness that we have is said to be the reflection of the Self.
>But the Self is defined as being incapable of action - so how can it
>cause a reflection?

     But is there really a division between the Self and its so-called
"reflection?"
Aren't you already what you are, seemingly, looking at?

>So how can the link be made to the Vyavaharika, where the everything is
>an illusion and the Paramartika, where there's only Non-Duality?
>
>The crux of my whole argument lies in the question as to how "I", who am
>Eternal and Absolute, can exist in the realm of Maya?

     Well, where else would (or could) you be?  Nothing is ever separate
from the Self because the Self is all that there is.    Since there's no
"separate" realm or kingdom of Maya, it's impossible for anything to really
"exist" IN its realm.  At best, you can say that this Eternal and Absolute
"I" appears to manifest AS maya itself.
.
     In truth, though, it's an illusion that there's really an illusion
here at all.

     After all, exactly "who" (and where) is this separate one who is
experiencing this maya as illusory?   In other words, saying that there's
an illusion at all implies the objective existence of at least one separate
someone who is likely to be fooled by it.

     But, in non-dualism, isn't it all only the Self...pretending to not
pretend that it's not pretending?


                                                 With Blessings,

                                                     Chuck Hillig