[Unakjyfk]

Don't mind if I jump in here.

no not at all ,

me jumping in for the day too

Even people in India at the time of Buddha knew about fleeting nature of life (they probably called it Dukkha), they just didn't know why. please excuse me , but even people in india ?...duhkham , it is a sanskrit word , equateing to suffering in the same sence as buddha used it , so sorry to contradict but I am afraid they did know what it meant ...... dissquietitude . unsteadiness . and is often translated in just this way allso from palli .(how ever I understand the mistake as very little is taught about pre buddhist india within the buddhist tradition)


So sunyata is not about fleeting nature of life, because there is no point in teaching this. sorry this part I dont quite understand ?......sunyata is not about the fleeting nature , but is about the un steady nature , the illusive nature , the un satisfactory nature , ..thus suffering!


Srivijaya , sujests its illusory nature and uses the sanskrit maya ;Illusion .
(phenomena being illusory ), prehaps another way to describe the phenomenal world as we currently perceive it is often refered to as the illusory energy of ......(I am not going in to a debate about bhraman as there are many conceptions of..)(but it equates to the buddha nature that some buddhists accept)(me included).


What people keep forgetting when they discuss sunyata is the concept of "dependent origination." Without "dependent origination," the whole concept of sunyata is rather meaningless. so I am assuming that you are meaning "dependent origination" is that in order to originate there must be an origin ,

way back I had said that beyond sunyata is that which is not sunyata , that which is sat cit ananda (sorry that is sanskrit ) ...the essence of universal conciousness , sat;truth ...cit;conciousness ...ananda;bliss .....

so maya is the illusion to which we cling which masks true realization ....

so when aloka says ....