new fortune.

[feisty_meow.git] / database / fortunes.dat

diff --git a/database/fortunes.dat b/database/fortunes.dat
index 8fd1c4acdde7ea87ba0d7ccf72b9335706b65e54..d7235d959aa1ac4f62be65edb8da96fb67c82163 100644 (file)
--- a/database/fortunes.dat
+++ b/database/fortunes.dat
@@ -39407,3 +39407,21 @@ through the rain falling on the ground without conceptual thought.
 virtue through the rainfall of Dharma without conceptual thought.
   -- Gampopa, from "The Jewel Ornament of Liberation: The Wish-fulfilling Gem
      of the Noble Teachings"
+~
+  Psychologists tell us that a strong sense of self is essential to be
+psychologically healthy.  But it seems Buddhism says there is no self.  How
+can we reconcile these two views?
+  When psychologists speak of a sense of "self" they are referring to the
+feeling that oneself is an efficacious person, someone who is self-confident
+and can act in the world.  Buddhists agree that such a sense of self is both
+realistic and necessary.  However, the sense of self that Buddhism says is
+unrealistic is that of a very solid, unchanging, independent "I."  Such a
+self never has and never will exist.  To understand this is to realize
+emptiness.
+  Strange though it may sound, someone may have a psychologically weak sense
+of self that in Buddhist parlance would be considered strong self-grasping.
+For example, a person with poor self-esteem may focus a lot on himself and
+have a strong feeling of the existence of an independent self that is
+inferior, unlovable, and a failure.  From a Buddhist viewpoint, such an
+independent self does not exist, although a conventional self does.
+  --Thubten Chodron, "Buddhism for Beginners"