One of the three marks of existence is anatta, no self. There is no self in the created or the uncreated.
First, I need to define some terms.
? Created means anything that comes into existence. It is implied that anything that comes into existence will, eventually, cease to exist.
? Uncreated refers to Nibanna, Nirvana, the Deathless, the Unconditioned, that which simply is with no beginning and no end.
? Self in this context means an unchanging, preexisting and everlasting essence of a thing.
Nothing has a “self” prior to its existence. And no particular thing has a “self” that will continue after existence. As a human being, I came into existence through a long series of causes and conditions. And a long series of causes and conditions – called aging and which began at birth – will eventually lead to my ceasing to exist. In me there is no “self” that preexisted me, nor is there a “self” that will succeed my existence.
These words as I write them are creations that have roots in more creations, that is, my own thoughts. There is no self in these words I write, nor in the thoughts I think. Do I believe this? Intellectually, sure. But not identifying with my thoughts, my words and my actions is difficult. Difficult is not a very useful word here. It is so plain and insignificant. Insurmountable might be a better choice.
The bond between this body and mind & this identity of me and mine is strong. Is it possible to break this bond? I think it’s not only possible, but necessary. Stream-entry, the first stage toward liberation from suffering, occurs when a person (1) is free of doubt in the Dhamma, (2) has abandoned any notion that mere participation in rites and rituals has any effect on one’s spiritual outcome, and (3) is free of the misunderstanding that there is an individual, separate personality, i.e., a self. The first two criteria have been easy enough for me to accomplish. But it is one thing to have some intellectual understanding of the teachings on anatta and another thing altogether to have a deep experiential knowledge of it.
Release from the cycle of suffering and the sustained happiness that goes with it cannot occur without release from this bondage. When I am forced to take a look at why I experience a certain bit of pain, a bad mood for example, I see that its cause was not what someone said or did to me, it?s my reaction to it. There is nothing profound about this understanding on a superficial level. The question is why the reaction, what is its source?
Some might say I’m just too sensitive or I can’t handle criticism, with the implication that I must become less sensitive, develop “a thick skin,” or that I must “learn to let go.” But these are not solutions. Rather they are ways of becoming more defended. In other words, more deluded. Some might say, “You’re just tied up in your ego!” Does that mean I am and you’re not? More delusion. We’re all tied up with, bound to our egos. That is, I’m bound to my notion of “self.” And that appears to be the problem.
It’s not that I don’t have a body and mind composed of the Five Aggregates of body, feelings, perceptions, thoughts and consciousness. I do. I’m as real as anyone else. It’s that I identify with these things. This identification says: “They are me and I am they.” It is precisely this identification that brings about pain and suffering in any form and to any degree. Buddhists refer to this vast array of suffering with just one word: dukkha.
Not identifying with the Five Aggregates is not the same as dissociation. Dissociation is a separation of one mental faculty from another. Rather it’s an understanding on an experiential level that there is no “self” that can be attributed to my body and my mind. Have I come to that level of understanding yet? No, not yet. But I have come to the understanding – experientially – of the necessity of it. And of the urgency, too.
8 Comments
Is it possible that your ideas about living in a state of ‘sustained happiness’ are also delusion and contribute to your suffering? Is enlightenment anything other than being present to what is happening right now?
Daniel,
Thanks for the questions. At this point in my practice I concede to the possibility that all my ideas are potentially delusional. But I also must take a few things on faith, that is, to take refuge in the Triple Gem.
To answer your second question: I don?t think so. What is enlightenment anyway? Is there a single definitive answer? Not that I?ve heard, unless we?re talking about the Buddha?s enlightenment, which involved more than being present to the moment.
Being present to what is happening right now is mindfulness. In my understanding, mindfulness is a practice, not the goal (unless the goal is mindfulness). If the goal is freedom from suffering, mindfulness is just a factor of the means to the end.
The purpose of mindfulness is to notice the arising and passing of phenomena, which, I trust, leads to insight into the nature of suffering and to the end of suffering. Suffering can be attributed to, in part, the belief in a core ?self? that suffers.
paulg
Hi Paul, I just wanted to raise the point that the absence of suffering does not imply sustained happiness. This is unfortunately a widely held misunderstanding. I highly suggest asking someone who is enlightened whether they are happy all the time. You might find the answer enlightening.
Daniel
Hi to you, Daniel.
OK, I take your point, and I will take your suggestion. But I wonder if we agree on what enlightenment is and, further, what sustained happiness is. Also, I?m intrigued by your statement regarding ?a widely held misunderstanding.? Is the suggestion that happiness is the absence of suffering a form of Wrong Understanding (Wrong View)? If so, what is Right Understanding on this point?
paulg
Hi Paul, According to the Theravadan Four Path model one is technically enlightened after completing a single cycle of insight and entering into the Ultimate for the first time. However, full enlightenment involves many cycles of insight and the eventual opening of the Wisdom Eye – the absence of perceptual inclinations toward inferring a self that exists independently of the world. I myself have not attained this, and so remain silent regarding right understanding in this case.
Daniel Ingram has a chapter in his book, Mastering the Core Teachings of the Buddha, that presents a comprehensive analysis of the the different models (i.e. descriptions) of enlightenment. I highly recommend it for the purpose of bringing one’s ideals of enlightenment back to reality.
http://www.interactivebuddha.com/mctb.shtml
Best, Daniel
Hi Paul, one more thing: attaining stream-entry does not *require* freedom from doubt, disbelief in ritual or disbelief in the self. These things drop away all by themselves *after* one attains stream-entry. Before stream-entry the only thing that matters is practicing well.
Best, Daniel
Hi Danial –
I agree. “Requires” was a poor choice of words and needs correcting.
Thanks,
paulg
One more thing, Daniel I agree that practicing well is primary.
paulg