user17219: If it's wrong view to say, "I am" then why isn't it also wrong view to say, "there is" since they both point to the same verb, "to be?" It is said that there are Four Noble Truths. Yet, somehow, these conditioned phenomena of words and mental formations (i.e. "truth" is merely a concept) are not subject to cessation.
All conditioned phenomena arise and cease, except for the "magical" mind stream that, somehow, from beginningless time manages to avoid cessation with the exception of its eternal annihilation at parinibbana (i.e., the extinction of all subjective experience which is said to be the "highest happiness"). If the mind stream is "just a process, not a person," then the same should be true of all phenomena, yet all conditioned phenomena are subject to cessation whilst the mind stream somehow dodges this immutable law until the manual intervention of practicing the path finally pushes this naughty rebel of conditioned phenomena into the annihilation machine of parinibbana.
I'm just trying to better understand the logic of this. I have some doubts and thus push hard on certain issues that don't make sense to me. Personally, I don't need the Buddha to be 100% correct about everything to find value in his teachings. However, I'm not even claiming that something is correct or incorrect, only that I have doubt, yet I still find value in many of the teachings.

user43: Existence is always existence of something. Existence without a "something" is a fun abstraction to talk about, but for practical purposes there is no existence unless it is an existence of something. We could say, existence is a quality of something - and as any quality, it does not stand by itself.
Once we have "something", we have boundaries and conditions for its ongoing existence. Outside of those boundaries and conditions, that "something" can no longer exist.
So "existence", "something" and "boundaries and conditions" always come bundled together.
Now, if we put any serious weight on that "something", if we lean on it for our own objectives or goals - then our objectives and goals become bounded and conditioned by the boundaries and conditions of "something". Boundaries and conditions are transitive. 
So when you say "something is", you implicitly entering a contract. If you now think in terms of that "something" having existence, if you believe in its existence - which means you take its definition, its boundaries and conditions seriously - then those of your actions that are based on that "something" - are now subject to its boundaries and conditions.
This is true for any value of something, including "I". As soon as you take "I am" as something real, you are bound by its definition. Needless to say, "bound" is not "free".

The stream we are talking about is not a "stream" of individual person's mind. (The "stream" of individual person's mind is an optical illusion. It is a "something" we ourselves delineate, and moment to moment work hard to delineate again and again, connect with something in the past, in order to maintain the appearance of identity.)
The stream we are talking about is a stream of mind at large. And when we say mind, it is not what you think of as person's mind, but mind as a global dynamic process of integrated information exchange permeating all interactions whatsoever.
This process is what's known as The Law (i.e it is what's described by Dharma) and it is this very process is what develops into self-perpetuating confusion called Samsara. Understanding this process is what's required for liberation. Gaining peace that comes from realizing ontological reality of this process, sans confusion and boundaries of Samsara with its "somethings" and definitions, is what's known as attaining Nirvana.

As far as I can see, this process is made of quadrillions of spanning nested self-reinforcing tendencies.
There is no annihilation, no eternal existence either. Only individual "somethings" arise and end, because the underlying process keeps on unfolding and endlessly shifting. 

The process itself is the Law. Whether "somethings" arise or cease, whether Buddhas arise or cease, the Law of self-reinforcing tendencies remains.

17219: <p>If it's wrong view to say, "I am" then why isn't it also wrong view to say, "there is" since they both point to the same verb, "to be?" It is said that there are Four Noble Truths. Yet, somehow, these conditioned phenomena of words and mental formations (i.e. "truth" is merely a concept) are not subject to cessation.</p>

<p>All conditioned phenomena arise and cease, except for the "magical" mind stream that, somehow, from beginningless time manages to avoid cessation with the exception of its eternal annihilation at parinibbana (i.e., the extinction of all subjective experience which is said to be the "highest happiness"). If the mind stream is "just a process, not a person," then the same should be true of all phenomena, yet all conditioned phenomena are subject to cessation whilst the mind stream somehow dodges this immutable law until the manual intervention of practicing the path finally pushes this naughty rebel of conditioned phenomena into the annihilation machine of parinibbana.</p>

<p>I'm just trying to better understand the logic of this. I have some doubts and thus push hard on certain issues that don't make sense to me. Personally, I don't need the Buddha to be 100% correct about everything to find value in his teachings. However, I'm not even claiming that something is correct or incorrect, only that I have doubt, yet I still find value in many of the teachings.</p>
 43: <p>Existence is always existence of <em>something</em>. Existence without a "something" is a fun abstraction to talk about, but for practical purposes there is no existence unless it is an existence of <em>something</em>. We could say, existence is a <em>quality</em> of something - and as any quality, it does not stand by itself.</p>

<p>Once we have "something", we have boundaries and conditions for its ongoing existence. Outside of those boundaries and conditions, that "something" can no longer exist.</p>

<p>So "existence", "something" and "boundaries and conditions" always come bundled together.</p>

<p>Now, if we put any serious weight on that "something", if we lean on it for our own objectives or goals - then our objectives and goals become bounded and conditioned by the boundaries and conditions of "something". Boundaries and conditions are transitive. </p>

<p>So when you say "something is", you implicitly entering a contract. If you now think in terms of that "something" having existence, if you believe in its existence - which means you take its definition, its boundaries and conditions seriously - then those of your actions that are based on that "something" - are now subject to its boundaries and conditions.</p>

<p>This is true for any value of something, including "I". As soon as you take "I am" as something real, you are bound by its definition. Needless to say, "bound" is not "free".</p>

<hr>

<p>The stream we are talking about is not a "stream" of individual person's mind. (The "stream" of individual person's mind is an optical illusion. It is a "something" we ourselves delineate, and moment to moment work hard to delineate again and again, connect with something in the past, in order to maintain the appearance of identity.)</p>

<p>The stream we are talking about is a stream of mind <em>at large</em>. And when we say mind, it is not what you think of as person's mind, but <em>mind as a global dynamic process of integrated information exchange permeating all interactions whatsoever</em>.</p>

<p>This process is what's known as The Law (i.e it is what's described by Dharma) and it is this very process is what develops into self-perpetuating confusion called Samsara. Understanding this process is what's required for liberation. Gaining peace that comes from realizing ontological reality of this process, sans confusion and boundaries of Samsara with its "somethings" and definitions, is what's known as attaining Nirvana.</p>

<hr>

<p>As far as I can see, this process is made of quadrillions of spanning nested self-reinforcing tendencies.</p>

<p>There is no annihilation, no eternal existence either. Only individual "somethings" arise and end, because the underlying process keeps on unfolding and endlessly shifting. </p>

<hr>

<p>The process itself is the Law. Whether "somethings" arise or cease, whether Buddhas arise or cease, the Law of self-reinforcing tendencies remains.</p>
