Three Remarks on the Diamond Sutra


Picture taken from this site

“But the Buddha has taught that personal existence is just a name, for it is in fact neither existence nor non-existence. So it only has the name ‘personal existence’.”

Something is only as much individual, separate, definite as much it is unreal.


“What do you think, Subhuti? Has the Buddha taught any definite teaching in this Sutra?”

“No lord, the Buddha has not taught any definite teaching in this Sutra.”

[…] “there is, in fact, nothing to be attained. Someone would be mistaken to say that the Buddha has attained the highest, most fulfilled, and awakened mind because there is no such thing as a highest, most fulfilled, or awakened mind to be attained.”

[…] “When I attained total Enlightenment, I did not feel, as the mind feels, any arbitrary conception of spiritual truth, not even the slightest. Even the words ‘total Enlightenment’ are merely words, they are used merely as a figure of speech.”

Talking about spiritual enlightenment is like trying to eat a cake and have it too. Paradoxically, this is the very reason why it is important.


“Like a tiny drop of dew, or a bubble floating in a stream;
Like a flash of lightning in a summer cloud,
Or a flickering lamp, an illusion, a phantom, or a dream.”

“So is all conditioned existence to be seen.”

How many dreams are there? – that’s an issue.


Quotes from The Diamond Sutra translated by Alex Johnson.

Two Sources of Oneiric Personalism

Picture taken from this site

Oneiric Personalism has two sources: – intuition – the experience of the reality of dreams -, and speculation – reflections on the two “aspects” od the Absolute (God and the Self); therefore one of my biggest problems is how to unite these both sources into a metaphysical system. Is it possible at all to bridge this gap?



Picture taken from this site

Metametaphysics is even more fascinating than metaphysics:

My favorite metametaphysical question: is it reasonable to discuss about the whole world with some elements of it? Metaphysicians are these elements.

The interesting issue arises: could metametaphysics be pursued apart from metaphysical views of the people dealing with it? This question belongs to metametametaphysics.