Buddhist Ideals of the Self and Kant

While reading Kant I couldn't help but think of the Buddhist teaching of no-self, and how these two seemingly different teachings might compare.

Kant claims that an a priori foundation for experience is necessary for an experience to occur. This being said, the world can be seen as some form of a blur, the term form being used loosely, that does not organize itself until it comes across the perceptive qualities of the mind.  He also subcategorizes the a priori foundations for experience as space and time, and a natural setting of the mind that seems to be described as a form of intuition.The idea that there are fundamentals of an individual do not necessarily contradict the ideas of most Buddhist teachings in regards to the self, but it does offer a sense of identity in the form of necessary precursors to experience and therefore a priori to expression and behavior.

Buddha taught that the self is a by-product of thoughts that arise from 'Skandhas,' these include the main means by which we form ideas and concepts of our surroundings.  In addition, these 'Shandhas' are not possessed by the individual who experiences them, and therefore cannot identify with the precursors of experience.

It seems that by acknowledging precursors for experience, buddhist teachings and Kantian ideas work nicely together.  They both defy the existential idea that all humans are blank slates that are mere products of posteriori impressions, by implementing the idea that there are necessary fundamentals that all individuals contain that allows them to process their surroundings.