This is interesting take. But the 5 skandhas are not a self. We mistake them for a self, but no self can be found. I think this distinction is subtle, but important.https://twitter.com/thomyor_/status/983691453321838592 …
-
-
Replying to @anyane
That’s saying the same thing, as far as I can tell. Skandhas is one model, pretty good too, although I think it misses out on some of the socially determined aspects of what we usually mistake as self....Buddha could take some hints from Whitehead’s process-relational philosophy.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @misen__
Belief in self, illusory or not, is the cause of samsara. So the distinction is important. Sorry if that is neither helpful nor skillful. Maybe someone else can explain it better.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @anyane
So there isn’t a bundle of activity tweeting back at me here, now? Doesn’t mean that bundle of activity tweeting back at me isn’t dependantly originated, completely empty of a self, and so on. But here we’re debating emptiness instead of realising it, lulz yolo.pic.twitter.com/eaWQu3X5xu
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @misen__
Is a bundle of activity a self? Is there a you beyond the five aggregates we mistake for you? Or are there just appearances arising, abiding and falling away? To be honest, I could be a bot scripted to debate finer points of Buddhist philosophy. No self needed to tweet at all!
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes
-
-
Smart man
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.