Andre,
It is always possible we have misinterpreted each other. Marsha On Apr 17, 2012, at 3:53 PM, Andre <[email protected]> wrote: > Marsha to Andre: > > The response was there in my original post. In Buddhism there is the term > 'anatta', no-self: > > Andre: > I am not hearing anything 'Buddhism' shining through your posts Marsha. I > hear Marsha and I see a lot of theory. > > Marsha: > I have pondered and sought to find an intrinsically existing self, but have > consistently found only a flow of bits and pieces of inorganic, biological, > social and intellectual value patterns. > > Andre: > There you go! (and don't talk to me about an 'INTRINSICALLY existing > self'...this is not the discussion!!) You are contradicting your own > statement full stop. And if you cannot follow that... you confirm my > suspicion. > > Moq_Discuss mailing list > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org > Archives: > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ > http://moq.org/md/archives.html Moq_Discuss mailing list Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc. http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org Archives: http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/ http://moq.org/md/archives.html
