Re: Interiority? Or inter-relatedness?

Raymond wrote:

> On Sat, 3 May 2008 07:33:10 -0700 (PDT), "ltlee1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"
> <ltlee1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 
> 
>>On May 3, 7:01?am, Raymond <ni...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 1 May 2008 17:43:25 -0700 (PDT), "ltl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"
>>>
>>><ltl...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>
>>>>The self is like an arrow in flight. If we look at it at any time, it
>>>>is an illusion and can be dropped. But this is also an illusion.
>>>
>>>How can the realization of illusion be an illusion itself? ?Is the
>>>dreamer still dreaming when he wakes up? or has the dreamer waken up
>>>yet?
>>
>>1.The self we can know is always time limited. It is like a snapshot
>>of an arrow in flight. It is never the true self because the
>>dynamicism of an arrow in flight or the real self cannot be captured.
>>Why our mind cannot function like a camcorder? One explanation is too
>>many junks inside.
>>
>>2. Whether we do anything or not, we are always dropping the self at
>>time t.Let us call it self(t).  But as soon as we drop self t, we are
>>picking up self(t+1). So, one's awareness of dropping the self is also
>>an illusion.
> 
> 
> I agree everything the mind can think of is an illusion, but that does
> not mean there is no reality which the mind can not think of. To claim
> the self is an illusion is a good start, but to claim Buddhism is all
> about no self is a ****ing idiot. Buddhism is about the Buddha mind
> which is the crown Jewel of this universe, and it is real and true
> more than everything else.

No-self is the bridge to buddha-mind.

Robert

= = = = = = = =