Maggie Smith has died, or has she?

Not about her but just processing stuff at moment of relevance.

So the American Ray Bradbury wrote "Death is a lonely business" but he's American and so we know this is wrong. How is it wrong?

Is Maggie Smith really lost to us? And we lost to her? Sure no more appearances in Downton Abbey etc yes true, but why should she/we care?

The point is that at no point ever did the real Maggie Smith inhabit what we call "Maggie Smith." Very few of us had ever even met a real Maggie Smith, the image we have of Maggie Smith is produced through media either fictional roles or documentaries and interviews. This is hardly a very real impression of Maggie Smith. Perhaps if we had been to dinner with her we might feel more acquainted. But perhaps being a friend or married we might feel we knew her better. So at what stage can we go from being a fan, or simply someone who knows of her, to feeling we know her and she us? Can we ever get to a stage where we think we know the true Maggie Smith? If not then what have we lost with her dying? Who actually died?

What is also interesting about this is that there is no difference between the real "Maggie Smith" and our real selves. At what point can we say we really know ourselves? In both cases we have only an impression or an image of someone but not the full real living thing. That real person doesn't ever get replaced with an image or impression or idea we know them: even when talking for our self. The image we have of our self is the "ego" but that like "Maggie Smith" should not be confused with the real indefinable person.

This is what is called "non attachment" in Buddhism; or, conversely it is confusing "things" like "Maggie Smith" with our true self that causes all the problems. If the true Maggie Smith ever for a second confused herself with what we call "Maggie Smith" then sure she would have had a lonely death like Americans do, and a difficult life as well like Americans do. So what is the self then if not "Maggie Smith" or "Me"? Well even looking for an answer to that shows we are confused. Better just to note it is not "Maggie Smith." So in a lesser sense yes she is dead, but in a greater sense nothing has changed. I'm 95% sure this is what Christians call "everlasting life" but to get there we have to abandon the self and realise that this mortal existence that we nurture so avidly in confused life is not the actual truth, stylised as Jesus on the cross. I think most people are half way to this (and most further along than myself), but the sticking point is that we can't take the leap because there is no satisfactory landing point for what "true self" is. God is really not helpful, and in Buddhism "Emptiness" is not an initially convincing destination at all. So Capitalism wins instead cos at least we get a solid pay cheque at the end of the month and can buy tangible things to prove we exist.