No, with respect, I do not misunderstand Buddhist philosophy and teachings. It is Nagarjuna's philosophy that I have in mind, as well as the Pali canon. Original Buddhism teaches that we should see our thoughts as illusions and by so declaring them without value, we can reach the state of No Self and not reincarnate. Granted, some forms of Western Buddhism have abandoned the central principles of Maya (in both senses of illusion and deceit), though some, like the school I quoted that inspired my article, maintain the Buddha's teaching that thoughts are illusions.
Buddhism is based on negation, the desire to negate the self to escape Saṃsāra. In its desire for No Self it engages in the circular reasoning of assuming that if we can convince ourselves we have no self we will indeed have no self and escape Saṃsāra. Pure assumption, made all the more ironic because it further assumes that all thoughts are illusions, which as I pointed out is contradictory. “I do not want to be a self, so I will ignore the self, and claim all evidence of the self is an illusion.” Circular reasoning. Ironically, your word game beginning with "While your thoughts definitely..." engages in the same logical fallacy. And, of course, the central point of my article remains: the assertion, "all thoughts are illusions" is patently prima fascia absurd.
What you misunderstand is what I say in countering the absurdity that thoughts are illusions. "Your thoughts ARE you" because we adapt, we grow, and we continually constitute our self with our thoughts and actions. You mention "cause and effect." Well, take that seriously and realize that the self is an effect of many factors, a very significant one being our thoughts about the world and ourselves. Even some Buddhists texts acknowledge this. "Our thoughts are shaped by our mind. We become what we think." These are the first words of the Dhammapada.
Consciousness is a process. Our self and will are factors in that process as are myriad influences of the external world. We exist as a living, thinking beings. As Ortega y Gasset said, we need to accept the radical reality that I am an “I” — a self — and that everything radiates from our unique self, our unique life. We construct our world and our orientation to it within our circumstances freely choosing our actions from the possibilities before us. One can develop a greater sense of existence by opening one’s consciousness; that includes opening to the reality of the Self. Buddhism’s focus on negation precludes such awareness.
The Self is not a sequence of separate psychological states. We experience our Self as a seamless totality — qualitative multiplicity. That Self is really you. Why deny that?!? Our actions flow from our whole Self as free actions. We can encounter our real Self by, as Henri Bergson said, a sympathetic entering into what is observed. And it is a wonderful knowing.
What I do not understand about Buddhism is why it would throw all that goodness away for nothing.
For a fuller understanding of my philosophical worldview, please see https://medium.com/p/follow-up-to-buddhism-is-wrong-48bde358a503
