每一个具有明确自我意识的成年人，首先面对的不是外在的世界，而是自身。这种自我意识是人类区分于动物的特质。那些急于向外开拓的人，或许更接近于动物的本能，而非真正的人。人类的首要问题，不在外界，而在于内心对“我是谁”的追问。
这种追问，让我们无法逃避自我意识带来的困局：身体不过是坐骑，而“我”是这坐骑的所有者，是一切非我的拥有者之一。那么，“我”究竟在哪里？这个问题将我们带入了心与物、镜与像、我与非我的对立之中。
镜与像：自我意识的隐喻
镜与像的关系，是理解自我意识的关键。像是动态的，镜是静止的；像是多样的，镜是恒常的。然而，镜总是被像掩盖，就像电视剧剧情掩盖了电视机的原理。人类的自我意识让我们执着于镜中的像，或者猜测镜子的本质。这两种执念，便是“我执”与“法执”。
镜子本身是恒定的，但它需要像的变化来显现自身。同样，没有物像的变动无常，就无法凸显心镜的不变与常住。然而，执着于镜像的变化，我们陷入了对个体存在的迷失；执着于镜本身，我们又被抽象的概念困扰。自我孤立于非我的妄念，实际并不成立。然而，一旦自我意识产生，人们很难放下这种妄念。有了“我”，却又找不到“我”，这种矛盾让我们在迷失感与孤立感之间徘徊。
我执与法执：自我意识的双重困局
我执：个体的迷失
我执是一种对个体独立性的误认。我们被身体或思想的“寿者相”和“相续相”迷惑，认为“我”是独立存在的。然而，庄子说，“方生方死，方死方生”，个体不过是缘起和合的产物，是生灭交替的流转显现。
执着于个体的独立性，反而让我们陷入了寻找“真我”的疯狂。无法接受个体的暂时性，我们试图通过物像（如身体、思想）或背后的心镜（如文化概念或宗教信仰）来定义自己。然而，这种努力注定失败，因为个体的独立性本身是幻觉。迷失感因此成为一种普遍的心理问题。
法执：统一的幻象
法执，则是一种对“同时”“同地”的误解。我们往往执着于同一片天空、同一个真理，甚至唯一神的存在，忽视了时间与空间的本质。现实中并不存在所谓的“同时同地”。就像我们看到的星光，是数万光年之前的产物；与人交流，无论多么亲近，也存在微小的时间延迟。
这种法执让人试图通过统一思想、信仰或秩序来寻求整体的意义。许多历史上的大一统观念，甚至一些宗教预言，都源于对统一性的执念。然而，这种追求忽略了“和而不同”的智慧。世界的多样性，正是其丰富与美丽的源泉。执着于统一，反而会消解个体的独特价值。
没有个体，就没有集体
**集体的意义必须落实到每一个个体之上，否则便是空谈。**如果以“集体”为名，忽视个体的价值，甚至以集体之名行自私之事，这不仅是一种欺骗，更是一种对人性的背叛。没有一个个体，又哪里来的集体？真正有意义的集体，是每一个个体都能够在其中找到归属与认同的整体。
自我意识让我们意识到个体的独特性，但也容易让我们陷入孤立感之中。事实上，个体与集体并非对立，而是相互依存的。只有每一个个体都被尊重，集体才能真正存在。
超越对立：生命的意义与觉知
当某人对自我意识有足够的反思后，会发现人类所面对的根本问题，其实是各种对立：镜像对立、能觉与所觉的对立、个体与集体的对立。这些对立并非本质，而是自我意识带来的假象。
正是这种对立，使人类产生了两大心理问题：
迷失感：找不到真我，导致精神的疯狂。孤立感：无法融入整体，导致抑郁。
如果我们能够认识到“同时同地”并不存在，他人的主观是我的客观，我的主观是他人的客观，就会明白：每一个人的每一个当下，都是不可替代的。正是这种不可替代性，构成了生命的意义。
当下即是永恒
如今，人类过分关注外物的消逝，反而忘记了生命的真正价值在于当下。正如没有人因为一场电影会结束就放弃观看，我们也不应因生命的短暂而忽视它的意义。当下的主观体验，是我们唯一能够感知的真实；他人的当下，反映了我们的客观现实。通过彼此交互，我们成为整体的一部分。
时间与空间的延迟让我们无法真正“同时同地”。就像我们只能看到八分钟前的太阳，与他人的交流也总隔着一层时间的微光。接受这一点，我们便能放下对“统一”的执念，转而欣赏生命的多样性。
结语：从镜像中看到镜子
自我意识的困局，源于我们对镜与像的执念。正如电视剧剧情掩盖了电视机的原理，像的变化让我们忽略了镜的不变。超越“我执”与“法执”，不是否定它们的存在，而是认识到它们的依存关系。正是像的生灭变化，显现了镜的恒常；正是个体的独特性，构成了整体的丰富。
生命的意义，不在于追求不变的“真我”或唯一的“真理”，而在于觉知每一个独特的当下。放下执念，接纳变化，欣赏多样性，我们才能在自我与整体之间找到真正的平衡，获得自由与安宁。  
The Dilemma and Transcendence of Self-Awareness: The Metaphor of Mirror and Reflection
Every adult with a clear sense of self-awareness first faces themselves, not the external world. This self-awareness is a distinctive trait of humanity. Those who are eager to explore outward may be closer to animal instinct than to being truly human. The fundamental question for humanity lies not in the external world but in the inner inquiry of “Who am I?”
This inquiry forces us to confront the dilemma of self-awareness: the body is but a vehicle, while the "self" is its owner, a possessor of all that is not-self. So, where exactly is this "self"? This question plunges us into the oppositions of mind and matter, mirror and reflection, self and other.
Mirror and Reflection: A Metaphor for Self-Awareness
The relationship between mirror and reflection is key to understanding self-awareness. Reflections are dynamic; the mirror is static. Reflections are diverse; the mirror is constant. Yet, the mirror is always obscured by the reflection, just as the plot of a television show distracts us from the principles of the TV itself. Human self-awareness entangles us in an obsession with the reflection, or in speculations about the nature of the mirror. These two fixations are what Buddhism calls attachment to self (ātmagraha) and attachment to doctrines (dharmagraha).
The mirror itself is constant, but its constancy is revealed through the changing reflections. Without the transient changes of reflections, the enduring nature of the mirror could not be perceived. However, by clinging to the changes of the reflection, we lose ourselves in the illusion of the self. By speculating on the essence of the mirror, we become trapped in abstract ideas. The notion of a self isolated from everything else is fundamentally false. Yet, once self-awareness arises, it becomes exceedingly difficult to let go of this illusion. There is a "self," yet we cannot truly find it. This paradox drives us to varying degrees of madness—some obsess over material appearances, while others become fixated on abstract concepts like the mind or religious and cultural constructs.
The Twin Dilemmas of Self-Awareness: Attachment to Self and Attachment to Doctrines
Attachment to Self: The Illusion of the Individual
Attachment to self arises from a mistaken belief in the independence of the individual. We are deceived by the continuity of physical or mental identity, believing that the "self" exists as a discrete, enduring entity. Yet, as Zhuangzi noted, “Life arises from death; death arises from life.” The individual is nothing more than a temporary convergence of conditions, an ever-shifting flow of existence.
Clinging to the independence of the self, we spiral into a desperate search for the "true self." Unable to accept the transience of the individual, we seek to define ourselves through external forms (such as the body or thoughts) or abstract ideals (such as cultural or religious concepts). This effort is doomed to fail because the notion of the self’s independence is itself an illusion. This leads to a profound sense of disorientation and alienation—a universal psychological challenge.
Attachment to Doctrines: The Illusion of Uniformity
Attachment to doctrines reflects a fixation on concepts such as "simultaneity" and "sameness." We cling to the idea of a shared truth, a single sky, or even a singular divine entity, ignoring the realities of time and space. In truth, simultaneity and sameness do not exist. The light from stars we observe today originated billions of years ago; even our conversations with others occur with infinitesimal time delays.
This attachment drives the pursuit of unification, whether through a universal ideology, belief system, or order. Throughout history, this longing for uniformity has manifested in quests for global empires or universal religions. However, such pursuits overlook the wisdom of "unity in diversity." The world’s richness lies in its multiplicity. By fixating on uniformity, we lose sight of the unique value of individuals.
No Collective Without Individuals
The meaning of a collective must be rooted in each individual; otherwise, it is an empty concept. To act in the name of the collective while disregarding the individual is not only deceptive but also a betrayal of humanity. There can be no collective without individuals. A meaningful collective must allow each person to find their place and value within it.
Self-awareness highlights the individuality of each person but also risks isolating us. Yet, the individual and the collective are not oppositional; they are interdependent. Only when the individuality of each member is respected can the collective truly exist.
Transcending Opposition: The Meaning of Life and Awareness
Upon deep reflection, one discovers that the fundamental issues of humanity lie in oppositions: the opposition between mirror and reflection, awareness and perception, individual and collective. These oppositions are not inherent truths but illusions born from self-awareness.
It is these oppositions that give rise to two major psychological challenges:
Disorientation: The inability to locate the true self, leading to existential madness.Alienation: A sense of isolation from the collective, resulting in depression.
If we can understand that simultaneity does not exist, that another’s subjective reality is our objective experience, and vice versa, we will realize that every moment in every individual’s life is irreplaceable. This irreplaceability is the essence of life’s meaning.
The Eternal Present
Modern society is overly preoccupied with the transience of external things, forgetting that the essence of life lies in the present. Just as no one would refuse to watch a movie simply because it will end, we should not dismiss the significance of life due to its brevity. The present moment, our subjective experience, is the only reality we can grasp; another person’s present is our objective counterpart. Through the exchange of experiences, we become part of a greater whole.
The delay inherent in time and space ensures that we cannot truly be “simultaneous.” Just as we see the sun as it was eight minutes ago, every interaction with others occurs through the prism of the past. Accepting this truth allows us to let go of the illusion of uniformity and embrace the diversity of life.
Conclusion: Seeing the Mirror Beyond the Reflection
The dilemma of self-awareness stems from our fixation on the mirror and its reflection. Just as a television plot obscures the workings of the device, the changes of the reflection hide the constancy of the mirror. Transcending attachment to self and doctrines does not mean denying their existence but recognizing their interdependence. The transient changes of the reflection reveal the constancy of the mirror, just as the uniqueness of individuals gives meaning to the collective.
The meaning of life is not found in pursuing an immutable "true self" or a singular "truth," but in embracing each unique moment of awareness. By letting go of attachments, accepting change, and appreciating diversity, we can find balance between the self and the collective, achieving true freedom and peace.

有一次，笔者去剃头。看着镜中的自己，觉得很陌生。  
不禁又想起《楞严经》里那个故事。 
“汝岂不闻室罗城中，演若达多。忽于晨朝以镜照面，爱镜中头眉目可见。瞋责己头不见面目。以为魑魅（音痴妹，山泽中鬼也）无状狂走。” 
说的是：有个人照镜子，因为太羡慕镜子里的头脸面目可以被看见，以为那是别人的头脸面目，嗔怪为什么看不见自己的头脸面目，以为自己已经成了鬼怪，到处狂走要找自己的头脸面目。
这个故事是理解楞严经的一个难点。 
人们常觉得此人疯得莫名其妙。为什么不摸摸自己的头？不就知道脸还在吗？
这是个譬喻故事，未必实有其事。
重点不在怎么治疗这个疯病，而在于理解“演若达多”为什么狂走，其背后的逻辑是什么。
笔者认为，演若达多疯得很有道理。
既然心与物，镜与像是对立的，相对的。
那么像（所觉，非我）都是外物了，那么我在哪里呢？
《楞严经》一开始，佛问阿难的，也是同一个问题：能觉的心在何处？
大哉斯问！比什么“我是谁，从哪里来，到哪里去”重要多了。
没几个人真的关心自己的名号、标签，甚至也未必真的在意自己的来历与归宿。
但是如果内心深处不知道“我在哪里”，那怎么能真得睡得安稳呢？
所以我曾称这个问题为大魔王。
这是每一个有所谓的自我意识的生命都要面对的问题，
至少在其潜意识的深处是无法回避这个魔王的。
“我在哪里”“心在何处”“我是什么”“什么是我”“哪些是我”……都是同一个问题。
这些问题都源于我们的自我意识。
当我们产生了我与非我对立，能觉与所觉对立，心与物对立，镜与像对立的意识（哪怕只是潜意识），
（产生了离开所觉，另有个能觉，的认识，
或者说产生了独立于孤立于非我之一切事物，另有个我自己，的认知）
就必然要设法，如同在一张地图上做标记，试图在一切事物（一切非我）中把自己圈出来。
也许你以为一张皮肤就已经解决了这个问题。那么为什么我们多少还是有点心不安呢？
那是因为：要想心安，这个自己，这个我，必须是独立于孤立于一切非我的，这样才能自由自在，长在长存，以至于永生。
显然，依赖食物阳光水……（害怕刀枪水火事故……）的肉体是远远达不到这个要求。
我们所拥有的（例如身体，思想，境界）不是我们自己。
我们常常以为自己怕死。
其实在我们的内心深处，我们都不知道“什么是我”，
找不到自己，是因隐藏更深而更大的恐惧。
我们都是“演若达多”。
也许你会问：那怎么办呢？
已经辞世的李敖曾在演讲时说：宪法是假的，民主也是假的，只有自由是真的。
他没说错。
只要把生死置之度外，我们人人都是自由的。
要想获得或凸显镜的独立自在长存永生，就必须任由像变化、无常、无住、生老病死、成住坏败……
像的变化越大越快越能凸显镜的不变常住。
这需要相当的勇气，有时甚至过于无情。
我们真的有必要追求个性，追求个体的独立自由吗？
（质疑这个似乎有点“政治不正确”，我姑妄言之，你姑妄听之。）
《楞严经》：性觉必明，妄为明觉。
最虚妄的，就是，（生命的单个个体的）孤立或独立。
只有孤独感，没有孤独。
既然有觉得（感到）孤独的我在，必有被觉知被感知的非我（例如清风明月）在对面相伴。
生命即觉，觉即生命。
生命从来不是以一个个个体存在的。（医生警察老师领导，各路权威，也许会认为我在胡说）
生命从来不是孤独的，滴水从来没有离开过大海。
一滴水里有大海，每个生命每个当下的觉镜及像都是整个多重宇宙一时一地之闪现。
生命，觉，（多重）时空，三无差别。
空性起缘，缘起性空。空的是个体，不是整体。
整体是不空的。但是整体是不可见不可知的（不可全知，不可确知，不可捉摸，不可描述，只可意会）。
所见所知都是个体（都是片面的暂时的），缘起缘灭，缘灭缘起。方生方死，方死方生。无寿命可计，无寿者相。
例如我理发时所看到的自己，为什么如此陌生？
因为原来的我早就死了. 个人独立孤立于集体潜意识是自我意识陷阱带来的幻觉。然而没有一个个个体，又哪里来的集体？所谓集体如果不能落实在每一个个体身上，就是空谈，甚至欺骗，以集体之名义行自私之事。
Reflection on the Mirror: A Story from the Śūraṅgama Sūtra
Once, I went to get a haircut. Looking at my reflection in the mirror, I found myself feeling strangely unfamiliar. This brought to mind a story from the Śūraṅgama Sūtra:
“Have you not heard of the man in Śrāvastī, known as Ānanda? One morning, he looked into a mirror and admired the image of his head, with its visible features of brows and eyes. Yet, he grew angry, lamenting why his own head, as it appeared in the mirror, could not be directly seen. Believing himself to have become a ghost or a demon, he ran madly, searching for his real face.”
The story tells of a man who, seeing the reflection of his face in a mirror, mistook it for someone else's. Unable to see his own face outside the mirror, he became convinced he had turned into a ghost and frantically searched for his "real" face.
This story is an allegory and may not refer to an actual event. Its significance lies not in how to treat the man’s madness but in understanding the logic behind his frenzy.
The Dilemma of Ānanda
I believe Ānanda’s madness has a deeper rationale. If the mind and objects, the mirror and its reflection, are inherently oppositional, then all reflections (perceived objects, or the not-self) are external. But if everything perceived is external, then where am I?
This question echoes the very one posed by the Buddha at the beginning of the Śūraṅgama Sūtra: “Where is the mind that perceives?”
This is a profound inquiry, surpassing other existential questions like “Who am I?”, “Where do I come from?”, or “Where am I going?”. Few people genuinely care about their name, their labels, or even their origins and destinations. However, if one does not know “Where am I?” at the deepest level, how can one ever rest peacefully?
The Great Question of Self-Awareness
I have called this question the "ultimate boss" of existential dilemmas. It is a question that every self-aware being must face, one that lurks in the depths of the subconscious, unavoidable and unrelenting:
“Where am I?”
“Where is the mind?”
“What am I?”
“What is the self?”
“What constitutes me?”
These are variations of the same essential question, arising from our self-awareness. When we create the dichotomy of self and not-self, subject and object, mind and matter, mirror and reflection—whether consciously or subconsciously—we inevitably attempt, as if on a map, to mark our position in relation to all that is "not-self."
Perhaps you believe that the boundaries of your skin solve this dilemma. Yet why do we still feel uneasy at times? This unease stems from a deeper need: for the self to be truly at peace, it must be independent and isolated from all that is not-self. Only then could it be free, eternal, and unchanging. Clearly, a physical body—dependent on food, sunlight, water, and vulnerable to harm—fails to meet this criterion.
Everything we claim to possess—our bodies, thoughts, or perceptions—is not truly "us."
The Fear Behind the Fear of Death
We often think that we fear death. But deep down, what we fear more is not knowing what the “self” truly is. The inability to find ourselves gives rise to a profound and hidden terror.
We are all, in a sense, Ānanda, running madly in search of ourselves.
Freedom Beyond the Illusion
You may ask, "What should we do about this?" The late scholar Li Ao once remarked in a speech: “The Constitution is false; democracy is false; only freedom is real.” He was not wrong.
If we can set aside the fear of life and death, we are all inherently free.
To perceive or manifest the mirror's constancy, we must allow the reflections—impermanence, flux, birth, aging, sickness, death, formation, sustenance, decay, and dissolution—to unfold freely. The greater and faster the changes in the reflections, the more vividly the unchanging essence of the mirror can be perceived.
However, such a realization requires tremendous courage and sometimes even a degree of detachment.
Do we truly need to pursue individuality and the independence of the self? While questioning this might seem “politically incorrect,” I pose it as a thought to be considered.
The Illusion of Solitude
The Śūraṅgama Sūtra states: “The essence of awareness must be clear; delusions arise when clarity is mistaken for awareness.” The greatest delusion is the notion of individuality as an isolated, independent entity.
There is only the feeling of loneliness but never actual solitude. If there is an "I" that perceives loneliness, there must also be something "not-I"—such as the breeze or the moon—that stands opposite and accompanies it.
Life Is Awareness; Awareness Is Life
Life has never existed as isolated individuals. (Doctors, police, teachers, and other authorities may think I am speaking nonsense.) Life has never been solitary. A drop of water has never left the ocean.
Within a single drop of water exists the entire sea. Each moment of awareness—each interplay of mirror and reflection—represents a unique manifestation of the multiverse in a specific time and space. Life, awareness, and spacetime are inseparable.
Emptiness and Wholeness
The nature of emptiness arises from interdependence, and interdependence arises from emptiness. Emptiness applies to the individual, not the whole. The whole is never empty, yet it remains beyond perception—unknowable, indescribable, and ineffable, accessible only through intuition.
Everything we see or know is partial and temporary, arising and ceasing in cycles. Life, as Zhuangzi said, moves in a rhythm of “arising from death, and dying into life.” There is no fixed lifespan or static identity.
When I looked at my reflection during that haircut and felt a sense of unfamiliarity, it was because the “me” I once knew had long ceased to exist.
The Individual and the Collective
The notion of an individual isolated from the collective subconscious is an illusion created by self-awareness. However, without individuals, how could there be a collective? A collective that fails to respect and embody each individual is mere empty rhetoric—at worst, a justification for selfish deeds committed in its name.
True freedom lies not in clinging to the reflection or speculating about the mirror but in recognizing their interdependence. Through the interplay of their impermanence and constancy, we can glimpse the infinite expanse of life.
 
 每一个成人，有明确自我意识的成人，首先面对的是自己，而不是外在的世界。那些急于对外开拓的，或许更近于动物，而不是人？而当某人对自我意识有足够反省后，会发现人类所面对的首要问题是镜像对立，能觉与所觉的对立，个体与集体的对立。本不该对立，或者说这些对立是自我意识带来的假象。而有了建立在像变动镜不变不动之上的自我意识，就无法回避这些对立。于是就会有两大心理问题，找不到真我的迷失感使人疯狂，孤立感使人抑郁。以至于无法认同各种哲学与文化定义的意义，陷入各种慢性或爆发的自毁与互毁。如能充分认识同时同地其实并不存在，他人的主观就是我的客观，反之亦然，就会明白，每一个人的每一个当下都是不可替代的，具有唯一性，这就是你我他生命的意义所在。没有人会因为一场电影终会结束就不看了。如今的人类过分关注外物的消逝，忘记了生命在于当下，当下即是永恒。我当下的主观就是他人的客观。他人当下的主观就是我的客观。而且并不存在所谓的同时同地，无论多近，我与他人之间的信息交互也是需要时间的。就好比我们只能与八分钟前的太阳处于同时同地。个人独立孤立于集体潜意识是自我意识陷阱带来的幻觉。然而没有一个个个体，又哪里来的集体？所谓集体如果不能落实在每一个个体身上，就是空谈，甚至欺骗，以集体之名义行自私之事。
Every adult with a clear sense of self-awareness must first face themselves, not the external world. Those who rush to explore outward might be closer to animals than to true humanity.
When someone engages in sufficient reflection on their self-awareness, they will realize that the primary issues humanity faces are the dualities created by self-awareness: the opposition between the perceiver and the perceived, between the individual and the collective. These oppositions should not exist—or, more precisely, they are illusions born of self-awareness. Yet, once self-awareness emerges, grounded in the constancy of the mirror juxtaposed against the mutability of the reflection, it becomes impossible to avoid these oppositions.
As a result, two profound psychological challenges arise: the disorientation of not being able to find the true self, leading to madness, and the sense of isolation, leading to depression. These issues often culminate in an inability to accept the meanings ascribed to life by various philosophies and cultures, pushing people into chronic or acute forms of self-destruction and mutual harm.
If we can fully grasp that “simultaneity” does not truly exist—that another’s subjectivity is my objectivity and vice versa—we will understand that every individual’s present moment is irreplaceable and uniquely significant. This is the essence of the meaning of life for you, me, and everyone else. No one refrains from watching a movie simply because it will eventually end.
Today, humanity is overly fixated on the transience of external things, forgetting that the essence of life lies in the present moment. The present moment is eternal. My subjectivity in this moment is someone else’s objectivity, just as their subjectivity becomes my objectivity. Moreover, true simultaneity and shared locality do not exist. No matter how close we are to others, the exchange of information always requires time—just as we can only interact with the sun as it was eight minutes ago.
The notion of an individual as isolated or independent from the collective subconscious is an illusion created by self-awareness. Yet without individuals, how could there be a collective? A collective that does not embody the value of each individual is mere rhetoric—at best empty, at worst a tool for selfish actions carried out in its name.
每一个有自我意识的人，都会在内心深处发现：身体不过就是坐骑，也是所有者（我）所拥有的或有可能拥有的所有物(非我)之一。那么我在哪里呢？我来自心物对立，镜像对立，我与非我的对立。没有物像的变动无常就无从凸显性镜的不变常住。自我孤立于独立于非我这个妄念实际并不成立，而有了自我意识后，人们就很难真正放下这个妄念了。有了个我，而又找不到我，以至于人人发狂，程度不同而己。或执着于物像，或痴迷于对与物像背后之心镜或其他文化概念与宗教概念。个人独立孤立于集体潜意识是自我意识陷阱带来的幻觉。然而没有一个个个体，又哪里来的集体？所谓集体如果不能落实在每一个个体身上，就是空谈，甚至欺骗，以集体之名义行自私之事。
Every self-aware individual will, in the depths of their consciousness, realize that the body is nothing more than a vehicle, one of the possessions (or potential possessions) of the owner—the "self." So where is this "self"? It emerges from the dualities of mind and matter, mirror and reflection, self and not-self.
Without the impermanence and mutability of reflections, the constancy and permanence of the mirror could not be revealed. The notion that the self is isolated and independent from the not-self is ultimately an illusion. Yet once self-awareness arises, people find it exceedingly difficult to relinquish this illusion.
There is a "self," but they cannot locate it. This paradox drives everyone to varying degrees of madness. Some cling obsessively to material forms, while others become fixated on the mirror of the mind behind these forms, or on cultural and religious constructs derived from it.
The idea of the individual as separate from the collective subconscious is a delusion brought about by self-awareness. However, without individual entities, how could a collective exist? A collective that fails to manifest itself in each individual is mere rhetoric—at best empty words, at worst a form of deception, enabling selfish acts carried out in the name of the collective.

 关键点或与在于镜总是被像所掩盖，好比电视剧剧情永远不会是电视机原理。执着于电视剧或镜中像的就是所谓我执，执着于对不可知的电视机原理或心镜的各种猜想，就是所谓的法执。人（乃至所谓智慧生命）大约都有两执：我执，法执。 
（再次借用佛家概念，不喜勿看，免得添堵）
我执：被寿者相，相续相所惑。执着于独立的身或灵，不悟缘起性空，
（方生方死，方死方生）
妄想、追求个体的单独的解脱
法执：被“同时”“同地”所惑，执着于同一片天空，同一个真理，唯一神……
不悟现在是过去的集合（时间上的缘起性空），见面如同联网，分处不同的时空宇宙世界
妄图统一思想，追求一同天下,(所谓紫薇圣人的预言，就是此类）
不知和而不同才是最理想的。
并没有所谓的“同时”“同地”。
如果说我们看到的星星都是来自过去的，多少多少光年之外的。
（假设现在银河里的某个帝国用超级死星毁灭抹去了某个恒星
处在银河系边缘的60,000光年外的我们要到60，000年后才知道，
在长达60,000年的时间里我们还能观察到那颗恒星，以为它还存在呢）
那么，我们面前的人其实也来自过去，只是刚过去而已（相距多少多少“光微秒”乃至“光皮秒”）
处于异时异地的我们，真的在同一个地球上？同一片天空下？
只有一个真相？一个真理？唯一神？ 
The key idea here is that the mirror is always obscured by its reflection, much like how the plot of a TV show never reveals the operating principles of the television itself. Clinging to the TV show or the reflection in the mirror is what Buddhism refers to as attachment to self (ātmagraha). Clinging to speculation about the unknowable workings of the television or the essence of the mind-mirror is referred to as attachment to doctrines (dharmagraha).
Humans—and so-called intelligent life forms—tend to exhibit two primary attachments: attachment to self and attachment to doctrines.
Attachment to Self (ātmagraha)
This is the delusion of being misled by the appearance of continuity, by the illusion of an independent body or soul. Such attachment arises from ignorance of the principle of dependent origination and the emptiness of self-nature.
Life arises from death, and death arises from life.
Clinging to this illusion leads to the futile pursuit of individual and isolated liberation.
Attachment to Doctrines (dharmagraha)
This is the delusion of being misled by the concepts of "simultaneity" and "shared locality." It manifests as attachment to ideas of a singular sky, one truth, or a sole deity, without realizing that the present is merely an aggregation of the past—a temporal manifestation of dependent origination.
Meetings are akin to network connections, where different participants occupy different temporal and spatial universes.
This attachment drives the pursuit of ideological unification, such as the vision of “one world under one truth” (e.g., certain prophecies about saviors like the “Ziwei Sage”).
However, the ideal state is not unification but harmony in diversity. Simultaneity and shared locality do not truly exist.
The Illusion of Simultaneity and Shared Locality
The stars we see in the night sky are all reflections of the past, some from millions or even billions of years ago. Suppose a galactic empire on the edge of the Milky Way destroys a star with a superweapon. For those of us 60,000 light-years away, it would take 60,000 years before we even realize the star is gone. During those 60,000 years, we would still observe its light, believing it to exist.
Similarly, the person standing before us is also a product of the past—just a very recent past, measured in microseconds or even picoseconds of light delay.
Are we truly inhabiting the same Earth? Under the same sky? Is there truly only one truth, one reality, or one deity?

The answer lies in recognizing the delusions of simultaneity and shared locality. They are constructs of perception, not reflections of reality.
贴主:湖叶于2024_12_11 22:39:03编辑
贴主:湖叶于2024_12_11 23:15:57编辑

贴主:湖叶于2024_12_12 20:03:22编辑