Bouddha Encounter

[Chandran, Nanda (NBC)]

Greg :

>"Me" as "Greg" doesn't know, but the true "I" that I really am is the
one
>that knows.
Well, for that, the "I" has to say it and not you Greg!

Jonathan :

>Ultimate nothingness is unintelligible
>> Just because it's unitelligible, does it mean it cannot be true?

>What is the meaning of the word "true" in this context?
OK, substitute "possible" for "true" then.

>not to be confused with the Buddha's
Well, you would have to argue with Nagarjuna for that!

>At any rate, in your account, the monk seemed to be claiming that his
faith
>in nothingness was not only intelligible, but obvious. Experiential
even.
What you say is true. If the end is really nothingness how can it be
intelligible? It's cannot be experential because there's no experiencer!

        Because e-mail can be altered electronically,
        the integrity of this communication cannot be guaranteed.