Wade T.Smith wrote:
>
> >and [Buddhism is]
> >perfectly (I mean *perfectly*) compatible with rationality.
>
> I'm not at all sure anything adopted as a 'gloss' over rationality is
> ever compatible. It may well only be benignly parasitic....
What do you mean when you describe Buddhism as a 'gloss' over rationality?
> After all, grasshopper, is not Buddha not needing Buddha?
If you meet your television on the road, kill it.
-KMO