I see you are not very familiar with Buddhist thought. Might I suggest you read some Nagarjuna? The definition of what is “real” in Buddhism is very rational and precise.
In these terms, time is certainly not “real,” and while there is consciousness, there is no self-existent “we.” Time and we are certainly conditionally dependent non-entities. I believe modern physics holds this view as well.
However this doesn’t mean we don’t experience these things or that time doesn’t inexorably pass. Buddhism never denies the material universe, you know.
@Mitchell Porter
I see you are not very familiar with Buddhist thought. Might I suggest you read some Nagarjuna? The definition of what is “real” in Buddhism is very rational and precise.
In these terms, time is certainly not “real,” and while there is consciousness, there is no self-existent “we.” Time and we are certainly conditionally dependent non-entities. I believe modern physics holds this view as well.
However this doesn’t mean we don’t experience these things or that time doesn’t inexorably pass. Buddhism never denies the material universe, you know.