Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

No-self?

Expand Messages
  • Scaroth
    Hi all, I ve studied Buddhism for several years, on and off. Most of the concepts seem reasonable to me, though some have taken years of study to truly
    Message 1 of 14 , Mar 2, 2008
      Hi all,

      I've studied Buddhism for several years, on and off. Most of the
      concepts seem reasonable to me, though some have taken years of
      study to truly understand them.

      However, one concept that I'm still stuck on is this idea of no-
      self. I must be mis-intepreting it or something. If there is
      no "self"/"I" (i.e. this is just an illusion), then what is it that
      is having thoughts and experiences? And if rebirth occurs, what is
      it that is being reborn? If enlightenment is achieved, what is
      achieving that enlightenment?

      Decartes once observed that the only reality he could be certain
      about is that his mind existed, since he was able to think about the
      question of existence in the first place. To me, this just seems
      like common-sense, but the no-self idea seems to contradict it.

      Can anyone help?

      Peace,
      Matt
    • asongfirst@aol.com
      ... IMHO A. A survival skill (fortunate to have) / abstraction / internalized dialog, agreements, labelled boundaries. Q. And if rebirth occurs, what is it
      Message 2 of 14 , Mar 3, 2008

        In a message dated 3/3/08 3:01:26 AM, cabinfotech@... writes:


        Q. However, one concept that I'm still stuck on is this idea of no-
        self. I must be mis-intepreting it or something. If there is
        no "self"/"I" (i.e. this is just an illusion), then what is it that
        is having thoughts and experiences?

        IMHO
        A. A survival skill (fortunate to have) / abstraction / internalized dialog, agreements, labelled boundaries.

        Q. And if rebirth occurs, what is it that is being reborn?

        A. Whatever you want to imagine, that strikes your fancy, and is advantageous somehow... is the usual way that line of thinking goes


        Q. If enlightenment is achieved, what is achieving that enlightenment?

        A. The above that understands and can simply be and smile............

        Q. Can anyone help?
        A. Yes, well maybe,......on second thought NO, give up, let it happen, just sit, give up hope, let it happen, just watch it continue....

        Like a blue sky once you were, when mama, wawa, etc. were like clouds, becoming useful as did other symbols, tools & concepts to use and play with, until the blue sky became overcasted....

        mat



        **************
        It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money & Finance.
        (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001)
      • Ryan Harrison
        Ghana, feel free to delete this answer if you feel like it would confuse matt... i thought i would try since this has been my practice lately. Matt, I can
        Message 3 of 14 , Mar 3, 2008

          Ghana, feel free to delete this answer if you feel like it would confuse matt... i thought i would try since this has been my practice lately.

          Matt,

          I can relate a whole lot to your questions. I asked a very similar question just a month or so ago. I hope I can help you with some experiences that I have had/learned recently in my practice.

          A Bhikku I talked with explained it like this. He used the example of the physical experience of brushing ones teeth.

          “How can I brush my teeth if there is no I”. Well, you can brush you teeth, and they can be brushed with or without “I”. With  “I” you may hate the brushing or hate the teeth or something, but with no ”I” there can be just teeth brushing with out the hard feelings generated by the thought, ”MY teeth”.

          ~~~Quoted from Phra Achan Dhammarato , Bhikkhu.

           

          I have now realized that all I experience is just that; an “experience”.

          I guess I can explain in a common situation that occurs in my life.

          Sometimes here In the south of the US we have allot of Flies. When in meditation if a fly got on me (used to drive me nuts/still kinda does..lol) I would freak out and go on a thought “rampage”. My mindfulness would collapse around me in a torrent of thoughts and sensations of just a little bug crawling on my arm. So much for mindfulness.

          Now, the more I practice, the more I realize “it’s just a feeling”. I can label it for what it is and let it go. I don’t have to sit and focus on this little bitty fly that once could turn a great meditation into a thought rampage.. I can let it go. My Thoughts were making it bigger than it needed to be.

          With “I” there is a fly on my arm and it tickles and is driving me nuts and I’m gonna go get the fly swatter and kill it NOW..

          Without “I” the fly is just a sensation… that’s all.

          The fly was not doing this to me.

           My “I” (kandhas/aggregates) were creating a scenario where the fly could not be tolerated.

          this fly thing is very difficult. lol.

           

           Another way “I” is talked about is in anatta.

          Anatta (no self) and being free from unwholesome attachments is another way of saying; be selfless do not be attached to the things of this world.  Develop the
          wholesome piti/sukha/equanimity/loving kindness/compassion /appreciative
          joy/equanimity thereby purifying the mind..

           

          I hope this helps in your quest. I know I need to practice more to fully understand this concept of self. Since I started studying this “anatta”, I see attachment in everything I do and say.

          It is very enlightening to learn about. More enlightening to try to practice with this knowledge.

           

          I wont even attempt to help with your questions of enlightenment and rebirth....

           

          Ryan



          ----- Original Message ----
          From: Scaroth <cabinfotech@...>
          To: BuddhismBasicsAndBeyond@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Sunday, March 2, 2008 9:03:13 PM
          Subject: [BuddhismBasicsAndBeyond] No-self?

          Hi all,

          I've studied Buddhism for several years, on and off. Most of the
          concepts seem reasonable to me, though some have taken years of
          study to truly understand them.

          However, one concept that I'm still stuck on is this idea of no-
          self. I must be mis-intepreting it or something. If there is
          no "self"/"I" (i.e. this is just an illusion), then what is it that
          is having thoughts and experiences? And if rebirth occurs, what is
          it that is being reborn? If enlightenment is achieved, what is
          achieving that enlightenment?

          Decartes once observed that the only reality he could be certain
          about is that his mind existed, since he was able to think about the
          question of existence in the first place. To me, this just seems
          like common-sense, but the no-self idea seems to contradict it.

          Can anyone help?

          Peace,
          Matt




          Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
        • Scaroth
          I read your post several times, and as I understand it, you seem to be saying that the reality of the situation is not important, what is important is
          Message 4 of 14 , Mar 3, 2008
            I read your post several times, and as I understand it, you seem to
            be saying that the reality of the situation is not important, what
            is important is pragmatism: what works? what is useful? These are
            the appropriate questions to ask, not "what is it?"

            Is this reasonably correct?

            Namaste,
            Matt

            --- In BuddhismBasicsAndBeyond@yahoogroups.com, asongfirst@... wrote:
            >
            >
            > In a message dated 3/3/08 3:01:26 AM, cabinfotech@... writes:
            >
            >
            > > Q. However, one concept that I'm still stuck on is this idea of
            no-
            > > self. I must be mis-intepreting it or something. If there is
            > > no "self"/"I" (i.e. this is just an illusion), then what is it
            that
            > > is having thoughts and experiences?
            > >
            > IMHO
            > A. A survival skill (fortunate to have) / abstraction /
            internalized dialog,
            > agreements, labelled boundaries.
            >
            > Q. And if rebirth occurs, what is it that is being reborn?
            >
            > A. Whatever you want to imagine, that strikes your fancy, and is
            advantageous
            > somehow... is the usual way that line of thinking goes
            >
            >
            > Q. If enlightenment is achieved, what is achieving that
            enlightenment?
            >
            > A. The above that understands and can simply be and
            smile............
            >
            > Q. Can anyone help?
            > A. Yes, well maybe,......on second thought NO, give up, let it
            happen, just
            > sit, give up hope, let it happen, just watch it continue....
            >
            > Like a blue sky once you were, when mama, wawa, etc. were like
            clouds,
            > becoming useful as did other symbols, tools & concepts to use and
            play with, until
            > the blue sky became overcasted....
            >
            > mat
            >
            >
            > **************
            > It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money &
            > Finance.
            > (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001)
            >
          • Cindy
            Hi Matt, The concept of no-self doesn t mean there IS no self. It means we do not possess an INDEPENDENT self. We don t have a self which can stand alone. Our
            Message 5 of 14 , Mar 3, 2008
              Hi Matt,
              The concept of no-self doesn't mean there IS no self. It means we do
              not possess an INDEPENDENT self. We don't have a self which can
              stand alone. Our "self" is a manifestation of multiple causes and
              conditions as well as the aggregates of Form, Feeling, Perception,
              Mental Formations (Karmic or Volitional Factors), and Consciousness.
              We arise or come into being as a result of Dependent Origination, or
              dependence on other factors. For example, if you did not have a
              mother and father, you wouldn't be here. The things you learned in
              school changes your perception of "self". If you had an Independent
              self you would not be capable of change or growth. Understanding
              the Two Truths in relation to your "self" can lead to better
              understanding. The Two Truths are Conventional and Ultimate.
              Conventional Truth describes how we exist in the context of day to
              day living. In this context, you do have a self. The Ultimate Truth
              is the Emptiness of that self. Emptiness being the lack of a
              seperate independent existence. Using the Two Truths you can say
              that although one achieves Enlightenment, there is nothing which
              achieves Enlightenment. In other words, only a conventional self
              achieves it. The Ultimate is that there is no self which can achieve
              Enlightenment. At least no independent self. As for what is re-born,
              it is the Karmic imprints and the Mental Continuum. Think of the
              continuum as a river that flows from lifetime to lifetime. The river
              is always flowing. The Karmic imprints also flow with the river,
              sort of like leaves floating downstream. Enlightenment is stepping
              out of the river onto the shore. I hope this is helpful.
              Peace and Love,
              Cindy

              --- In BuddhismBasicsAndBeyond@yahoogroups.com, "Scaroth"
              <cabinfotech@...> wrote:
              >
              > Hi all,
              >
              > I've studied Buddhism for several years, on and off. Most of the
              > concepts seem reasonable to me, though some have taken years of
              > study to truly understand them.
              >
              > However, one concept that I'm still stuck on is this idea of no-
              > self. I must be mis-intepreting it or something. If there is
              > no "self"/"I" (i.e. this is just an illusion), then what is it
              that
              > is having thoughts and experiences? And if rebirth occurs, what is
              > it that is being reborn? If enlightenment is achieved, what is
              > achieving that enlightenment?
              >
              > Decartes once observed that the only reality he could be certain
              > about is that his mind existed, since he was able to think about
              the
              > question of existence in the first place. To me, this just seems
              > like common-sense, but the no-self idea seems to contradict it.
              >
              > Can anyone help?
              >
              > Peace,
              > Matt
              >
            • asongfirst@aol.com
              Well said Cindy :o) ... ************** It s Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money & Finance.
              Message 6 of 14 , Mar 4, 2008
                Well said Cindy :o)

                In a message dated 3/3/08 11:04:51 PM, CindBird9@... wrote:

                The concept of no-self doesn't mean there IS no self. It means we do
                not possess an INDEPENDENT self. We don't have a self which can
                stand alone. Our "self" is a manifestation of multiple causes and
                conditions as well as the aggregates of Form, Feeling, Perception,
                Mental Formations (Karmic or Volitional Factors), and Consciousness.
                We arise or come into being as a result of Dependent Origination, or
                dependence on other factors. For example, if you did not have a
                mother and father, you wouldn't be here. The things you learned in
                school changes your perception of "self". If you had an Independent
                self you would not be capable of change or growth. Understanding
                the Two Truths in relation to your "self" can lead to better
                understanding. The Two Truths are Conventional and Ultimate.
                Conventional Truth describes how we exist in the context of day to
                day living. In this context, you do have a self. The Ultimate Truth
                is the Emptiness of that self. Emptiness being the lack of a
                seperate independent existence. Using the Two Truths you can say
                that although one achieves Enlightenment, there is nothing which
                achieves Enlightenment. In other words, only a conventional self
                achieves it. The Ultimate is that there is no self which can achieve
                Enlightenment. At least no independent self. As for what is re-born,
                it is the Karmic imprints and the Mental Continuum. Think of the
                continuum as a river that flows from lifetime to lifetime. The river
                is always flowing. The Karmic imprints also flow with the river,
                sort of like leaves floating downstream. Enlightenment is stepping
                out of the river onto the shore. I hope this is helpful.
                Peace and Love,
                Cindy





                **************
                It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money & Finance.
                (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001)
              • pariyatti
                Dear Matt, I prefer to understand ourselves as bio-computers. At the time of death the hardware dies and the software continues. The software weaves another
                Message 7 of 14 , Mar 4, 2008
                  Dear Matt,
                  I prefer to understand ourselves as bio-computers. At the time of
                  death the hardware dies and the software continues. The software
                  weaves another hardware which we call rebirth. The processing is
                  known as thinking, feelings etc.. The conflicting thoughts,feelings
                  or the conditionings which get activated when faced with challenges
                  create an impression/illusion of a THINKER known as self.
                  Metta
                  pariyatti

                  --- In BuddhismBasicsAndBeyond@yahoogroups.com, "Scaroth"
                  <cabinfotech@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > Hi all,
                  >
                  > I've studied Buddhism for several years, on and off. Most of the
                  > concepts seem reasonable to me, though some have taken years of
                  > study to truly understand them.
                  >
                  > However, one concept that I'm still stuck on is this idea of no-
                  > self. I must be mis-intepreting it or something. If there is
                  > no "self"/"I" (i.e. this is just an illusion), then what is it that
                  > is having thoughts and experiences? And if rebirth occurs, what is
                  > it that is being reborn? If enlightenment is achieved, what is
                  > achieving that enlightenment?
                  >
                  > Decartes once observed that the only reality he could be certain
                  > about is that his mind existed, since he was able to think about
                  the
                  > question of existence in the first place. To me, this just seems
                  > like common-sense, but the no-self idea seems to contradict it.
                  >
                  > Can anyone help?
                  >
                  > Peace,
                  > Matt
                  >
                • Ryan Harrison
                  Cindy, Ive read this over and over, and then a few more times.... what a great answer. you rock. Ryan ... From: Cindy To:
                  Message 8 of 14 , Mar 5, 2008
                    Cindy,
                    Ive read this over and over, and then a few more times.... what a great answer.
                    you rock.
                    Ryan

                    ----- Original Message ----
                    From: Cindy <CindBird9@...>
                    To: BuddhismBasicsAndBeyond@yahoogroups.com
                    Sent: Monday, March 3, 2008 11:04:16 PM
                    Subject: [BuddhismBasicsAndBeyond] Re: No-self?

                    Hi Matt,
                    The concept of no-self doesn't mean there IS no self. It means we do
                    not possess an INDEPENDENT self. We don't have a self which can
                    stand alone. Our "self" is a manifestation of multiple causes and
                    conditions as well as the aggregates of Form, Feeling, Perception,
                    Mental Formations (Karmic or Volitional Factors), and Consciousness.
                    We arise or come into being as a result of Dependent Origination, or
                    dependence on other factors. For example, if you did not have a
                    mother and father, you wouldn't be here. The things you learned in
                    school changes your perception of "self". If you had an Independent
                    self you would not be capable of change or growth. Understanding
                    the Two Truths in relation to your "self" can lead to better
                    understanding. The Two Truths are Conventional and Ultimate.
                    Conventional Truth describes how we exist in the context of day to
                    day living. In this context, you do have a self. The Ultimate Truth
                    is the Emptiness of that self. Emptiness being the lack of a
                    seperate independent existence. Using the Two Truths you can say
                    that although one achieves Enlightenment, there is nothing which
                    achieves Enlightenment. In other words, only a conventional self
                    achieves it. The Ultimate is that there is no self which can achieve
                    Enlightenment. At least no independent self. As for what is re-born,
                    it is the Karmic imprints and the Mental Continuum. Think of the
                    continuum as a river that flows from lifetime to lifetime. The river
                    is always flowing. The Karmic imprints also flow with the river,
                    sort of like leaves floating downstream. Enlightenment is stepping
                    out of the river onto the shore. I hope this is helpful.
                    Peace and Love,
                    Cindy

                    --- In BuddhismBasicsAndBe yond@yahoogroups .com, "Scaroth"
                    <cabinfotech@ ...> wrote:

                    >
                    > Hi all,
                    >
                    > I've studied Buddhism for several years, on and off. Most of the
                    > concepts seem reasonable to me, though some have taken years of
                    > study to truly understand them.
                    >
                    > However, one concept that I'm still stuck on is this idea of no-
                    > self. I must be mis-intepreting it or something. If there is
                    > no "self"/"I" (i.e. this is just an illusion), then what is it
                    that
                    > is having thoughts and experiences? And if rebirth occurs, what is
                    > it that is being reborn? If enlightenment is achieved, what is
                    > achieving that enlightenment?
                    >
                    > Decartes once observed that the only reality he could be certain
                    > about is that his mind existed, since he was able to think about
                    the
                    >
                    question of existence in the first place. To me, this just seems
                    > like common-sense, but the no-self idea seems to contradict it.
                    >
                    > Can anyone help?
                    >
                    > Peace,
                    > Matt
                    >




                    Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.
                  • xixthlegion@aol.com
                    Yes, this evanescence of self can easily be understood if we observe the slow evaporation of self in neurological disorders such as Alzheimer s dementia or
                    Message 9 of 14 , Mar 5, 2008
                      Yes, this evanescence of self can easily be understood if we observe the slow evaporation of "self" in neurological disorders such as Alzheimer's dementia or rare neurological disorders whereby the short term memory is nonexistent and the individual approaches every new moment as their first moment.  This, in my opinion, reveals the "clay feet" of  ego or ego/soul concept pronounced by so many other beliefs.  Imagine even if beings could live for several hundred years even there "longer term" memories, which is the stuff of ego, would be but shadows.



                    • xixthlegion@aol.com
                      A well known metaphor for the idea of non self is the wave on the Ocean. The mighty wave, beautiful and blue, powerful, comparing itself to the multitude of
                      Message 10 of 14 , Mar 5, 2008
                        A well known metaphor for the idea of non self is the wave on the Ocean. The mighty wave, beautiful and blue, powerful, comparing itself to the multitude of other waves, (I am beautiful, I am powerful, I am the best of all the waves I see, I am blessed among waves) but like all waves it consists of the Ocean's water and from the Ocean it arises and to the Ocean it will return.  The wave sees the shore and has great fear that it will no longer be after it crashes against the rocks but in reality it is returning to what it is, it is returning to the Ocean. This wave is like our ego/self, existing but also. ultimately, an illusion.



                      • madamzola@aol.com
                        I liked that XIXth...thank you for sharing this...an excellent metaphor for the no self concept. Peace, Adele ************** It s Tax Time! Get tips,
                        Message 11 of 14 , Mar 7, 2008
                          I liked that  XIXth...thank you for sharing this...an excellent metaphor for the "no self" concept.

                          Peace,

                          Adele



                          **************
                          It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money & Finance.
                          (http://money.aol.com/tax?NCID=aolprf00030000000001)
                        • Cindy
                          Thanks Ryan, You rock too lol Peace and Love Cindy ... great answer. ... do ... Consciousness. ... or ... achieve ... born, ... river ... is ...
                          Message 12 of 14 , Mar 7, 2008
                            Thanks Ryan, You rock too lol
                            Peace and Love
                            Cindy

                            --- In BuddhismBasicsAndBeyond@yahoogroups.com, Ryan Harrison
                            <soam_k@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Cindy,
                            > Ive read this over and over, and then a few more times.... what a
                            great answer.
                            > you rock.
                            > Ryan
                            >
                            >
                            > ----- Original Message ----
                            > From: Cindy <CindBird9@...>
                            > To: BuddhismBasicsAndBeyond@yahoogroups.com
                            > Sent: Monday, March 3, 2008 11:04:16 PM
                            > Subject: [BuddhismBasicsAndBeyond] Re: No-self?
                            >
                            > Hi Matt,
                            > The concept of no-self doesn't mean there IS no self. It means we
                            do
                            > not possess an INDEPENDENT self. We don't have a self which can
                            > stand alone. Our "self" is a manifestation of multiple causes and
                            > conditions as well as the aggregates of Form, Feeling, Perception,
                            > Mental Formations (Karmic or Volitional Factors), and
                            Consciousness.
                            > We arise or come into being as a result of Dependent Origination,
                            or
                            > dependence on other factors. For example, if you did not have a
                            > mother and father, you wouldn't be here. The things you learned in
                            > school changes your perception of "self". If you had an Independent
                            > self you would not be capable of change or growth. Understanding
                            > the Two Truths in relation to your "self" can lead to better
                            > understanding. The Two Truths are Conventional and Ultimate.
                            > Conventional Truth describes how we exist in the context of day to
                            > day living. In this context, you do have a self. The Ultimate Truth
                            > is the Emptiness of that self. Emptiness being the lack of a
                            > seperate independent existence. Using the Two Truths you can say
                            > that although one achieves Enlightenment, there is nothing which
                            > achieves Enlightenment. In other words, only a conventional self
                            > achieves it. The Ultimate is that there is no self which can
                            achieve
                            > Enlightenment. At least no independent self. As for what is re-
                            born,
                            > it is the Karmic imprints and the Mental Continuum. Think of the
                            > continuum as a river that flows from lifetime to lifetime. The
                            river
                            > is always flowing. The Karmic imprints also flow with the river,
                            > sort of like leaves floating downstream. Enlightenment is stepping
                            > out of the river onto the shore. I hope this is helpful.
                            > Peace and Love,
                            > Cindy
                            >
                            > --- In BuddhismBasicsAndBe yond@yahoogroups .com, "Scaroth"
                            > <cabinfotech@ ...> wrote:
                            > >
                            > > Hi all,
                            > >
                            > > I've studied Buddhism for several years, on and off. Most of the
                            > > concepts seem reasonable to me, though some have taken years of
                            > > study to truly understand them.
                            > >
                            > > However, one concept that I'm still stuck on is this idea of no-
                            > > self. I must be mis-intepreting it or something. If there is
                            > > no "self"/"I" (i.e. this is just an illusion), then what is it
                            > that
                            > > is having thoughts and experiences? And if rebirth occurs, what
                            is
                            > > it that is being reborn? If enlightenment is achieved, what is
                            > > achieving that enlightenment?
                            > >
                            > > Decartes once observed that the only reality he could be certain
                            > > about is that his mind existed, since he was able to think about
                            > the
                            > > question of existence in the first place. To me, this just seems
                            > > like common-sense, but the no-self idea seems to contradict it.
                            > >
                            > > Can anyone help?
                            > >
                            > > Peace,
                            > > Matt
                            > >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            ______________________________________________________________________
                            ______________
                            > Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page.
                            > http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
                            >
                          • xixthlegion@aol.com
                            yw ... From: madamzola@aol.com To: BuddhismBasicsAndBeyond@yahoogroups.com Sent: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 4:13 pm Subject: Re: [BuddhismBasicsAndBeyond] Re: No-self? I
                            Message 13 of 14 , Mar 7, 2008
                              yw


                              -----Original Message-----
                              From: madamzola@...
                              To: BuddhismBasicsAndBeyond@yahoogroups.com
                              Sent: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 4:13 pm
                              Subject: Re: [BuddhismBasicsAndBeyond] Re: No-self?

                              I liked that  XIXth...thank you for sharing this...an excellent metaphor for the "no self" concept.

                              Peace,

                              Adele



                              ************ **
                              It's Tax Time! Get tips, forms, and advice on AOL Money & Finance.
                              (http://money. aol.com/tax? NCID=aolprf00030 000000001)
                            • Jonnsteinbeck@AOL.com
                              Hello all . The way I understood No-self was emptiness a correct understanding of it prevents us from falling into traps of realism and nihilism ,
                              Message 14 of 14 , Mar 7, 2008
                                Hello all .
                                      The way I understood  No-self  was  " emptiness"   a correct understanding of it prevents us from falling into traps of realism and nihilism , Meditation on emptiness attenuates the belief in the real existence of things , yet you should not become attached to emptiness as a belief , if you do you will relapse into nothingness.
                                       Nagarjuna writes In the Garland of Jewels  " Since we find nothing real , How can we find something real ? Indeed the "nonexistent"can only be related to something existent ". In his fundamental  wisdom he concludes.
                                                " When emptiness is wrongly construed It leads the ignorant to their perdition and thus  "is or :is not"  Does the sage abide ." ?  
                                        With that said. Buddhism I believe would comply with the secret of understanding reality lies in the union of emptiness and appearances.  Hence ," When things are empty . they appear ,When they appear they are empty .
                                              A true understanding of this statement can only be reached by contemplation, and as it is said in the "Transient Knowledge
                                        People say " I see a space -But how can a space be seen ?  Examine this.
                                          In such a way The Buddha spoke of "seeing the ultimate nature of things "
                                          He found no other words than "seeing  that I know of to express himself on this
                                         Hope that was not too wordy
                                      Thanks for reading
                                           Jonn



                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.