seeking the path
p. 155/28-31 p. 156/14-15
noted. [Thus the reflective achievement of Descartes, the cogito, must not be limited to the infinitesimal instant.] noted, ‘the infinitesimal instant’ u/l: what is this? Either it is an instant or it is an infinitesimal, but not both. Presumably the former is meant, but a certain ambiguity hangs about it. See p. 195 (=e149). p. 156/42 [for my being-in-the-instant is not a being] u/l: This, too, is ambiguous. p. 157/27-31 noted. p. 159/25-30 noted. p. 160/24-25 [this in-itself which reflection has to be is the reflected-on in so far as the reflective tries to apprehend it as being-initself.] ‘in so far … in-itself’ u/l: But how is it that impure reflexton succeeds where pure reflexion falls (pp. 200-201 [= e153-4])? If pure reflexion is really pure, how is impure reflexion possible? Does not impure reflexion haunt pure reflexion as the soi haunts the pour-soi? (See pp. 133-4 [= e89-91].) p. 161/21-32 noted. p. 165/28-40 noted. p. 168/27-33 noted. p. 170/8-9 noted. p. 170/17-24 noted. p. 172/5-9 noted. p. 172/23-24 noted. p. 172/32-33 noted. p. 173/27-31 noted. p. 174/24-26 noted. p. 174/33-36 noted. p. 174/40-175/4 noted. p. 175/34-38 noted. p. 176/41-43 noted. p. 177/18-20 noted. p. 177/27-35 noted. p. 179/10-11 noted. p. 179/25-28 noted. p. 179/35-37 noted. p. 179/43-44 noted. p. 180/39-181/3 noted.
Published on Jun 26, 2013
Part B includes two early essays (Nibbana and Anatta and Sketch for a Proof of Rebirth) as well as notes from a Commonplace Book and Margina...