Buddhism - conceptual doubts

[nanda chandran]

Sergei Schmalz writes :

>we identify objects not by their qualities and attributes alone, but
>rather by their application.

You've missed the point. The main point is that you're not able to
identify what the thing in itself is, but that you're only able to
identify it with its attributes or something in relation to it - like
linking it to its application - saying that a ring is something one
wears on one's finger. Anyway if you do not wear that ring on your
finger and lay it on the desk, does it cease to be a ring?

The point is not that you've to express it to somebody what the thing
is, but whether you yourself know what it is.

What you are saying is like, when I ask you who you are, you identify
yourself with your name, as the son of your parents, as husband
of your wife, as the father of your children, with your position in the
place you work in etc  You can only tell me what you are in relation to
something else, but still you cannot tell me what you - yourself - are!

Such is the lakshanam of mAyam!

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com