[TessUnsonia]

The notion of "I" can be left entirely out of the equation.

Does the Buddha not use "I" - that is, how can it be left out of the equation? It is not at all clear to me what "I" means in Buddhist thinking. That "I" is impermanent seems clear to me, even in a moment to moment sense but this doesn't give me any insight as to how the word is used.

Is the "I"='the sum of " the five skandahs, at least for the purpose of communicating ideas? Does it even make sense to ask what the "I" is - perhaps it needs to remain a concept not definable(and not needing a definition) within the context of Buddhism?

If one takes dependent origination as an "axiom", then nothing has any intrinsic existence, including "self".

Maybe I'm splitting hairs here and I need to put this aside and go on - I'm very much of a beginner.


Hope my ramblings aren't too boring and thanks for your patience.