
If belief in Self leads people to selfish thinking and actions without regard for others, and belief in No Self leads folks to behave as if there are no consequences to their actions, then the teaching of Non-Self introduces a Provisional Self that needs to treat people well and not live like it’s the only one who matters.
By David Jones
According to Buddhists, there is no Self.
It’s an illusion, something we think of as real and enduring when it really isn’t. The delusion of Self can be dispelled through our practice.
Also according to Buddhists, of course there’s a Self. Stub your toe and find out. Part of Buddhist practice is to discover our true Self, buried deep under that pile of experiences and myths we compile and call “Me.”
Which one is right? Both! Neither! What were we talking about again?
Let’s deconstruct these teachings and see what’s up.
What is the Self?
That’s a big question. It’s what we refer to when we say, “I vow to honor the Dharma.” It’s the focus of Me, Myself, and I. But then who am I?” We continually define our Self throughout life. We’ll return to this in a bit.
What is Atman?
This is the Sanskrit term for this Self. But it carries a quality that the Indian Brahmans took as obvious truth but the Indian Buddhists couldn’t accept: Atman as a permanent, eternally-living inner core of selfhood. Abrahamic religions have similar notions, and have their own terms for it. Basically it’s the part of you that goes on after you die. It also patrols Gotham City.
What is No Self?
It’s the opposite of this Self we’re talking about. It’s Anatta, a Pali term often translated as No Self. Anatta and No Self are reactions against all these personal notions of permanence. Impermanence is a big Buddhist concern. But No Self isn’t the only translation of Anatta.
What is Non-Self?
It seems that some folks take Ain’t No Such Thing As A Self to extremes. “There’s no Self so don’t worry about being moral, ethical, responsible, karmic, reborn, or whatever.”
So some Buddhist teachers tried a different approach. If belief in Self leads people to selfish thinking and actions without regard for others, and belief in No Self leads folks to behave as if there are no consequences to their actions, then the teaching of Non-Self introduces a Provisional Self that needs to treat people well and not live like it’s the only one who matters. If No Self opposes the permanence of Self, then Non-Self opposes the separateness of Self.
It says, “Just because you aren’t permanent doesn’t mean you’re free to be a jerk to everybody.” Impermanence still recognizes Interconnectedness. Self’s actions have consequences beyond itself.
No Self as a dogmatic doctrine
Have you ever met folks who have a visceral dislike to concepts like “I,” “Me,” or “Mine?” I certainly have. Like Buddhism itself, views such as No Self can become religious doctrine because of how we use them.
Treating teachings like they’re a bridge you must defend (or die trying) is a trait we probably picked up from our own past relationship with religion (I’m looking at you, Christianity). Treating these anti-Self teachings like ultimate truths just turns them into more Delusions of Self.
Again: what is the Self?
Rather than insist on distinctions and definitions, maybe we could just relax. I mean, if we stop clinging to Self, only to turn around and cling to No Self, have we really progressed any towards truth? It’s still clinging to views, right? In an effort to deconstruct these teachings, let’s try something.
If I say “I’m just being myself,” is that really some egregious heresy that must be fought? What if there is a Self, but it doesn’t mean what we’ve always thought it meant? Just like “God” or “oldies music,” sometimes we first have to shed our old views of something to finally see it. Can’t see the new if the old gets in the way all the time.
Free to become Me
We spend our lifetime building and tweaking our idea of our Self, affecting everything from personal goals to personal boundaries, self-care to self-esteem, and even self-checkout at the grocery store. It helps to become mindful of what we consider our Self.
This frees us from not only insisting on what others must believe, but also how they must understand things. We can all have different views without fussing over who’s right or wrong. “Right View” is less “correct view” and more “complete view.”
We can all discover more complete understandings about ourselves. Sure, embracing No Self might be necessary to free us from our misunderstandings. But it’s a step in the journey, not the destination. No Self as an end point is just a religious doctrine.
Wait! So what’s the answer?
That’s the thing: I can’t answer that for you. I’m not a Gateless Gatekeeper, deciding what you have to believe to gain entry. I’m not the universal arbiter of truth for humanity. But I can be a sort of Ice Breaker, chopping up and clearing doctrinal ice jams that prevent my fellow sea travelers from making progress.
Like Buddha, I don’t want to deal in absolutes here. I want folks to be free from endless Thou Shalts, including Thou Shalt Not Believe In A Self!
But hey, go ahead and fight if ya gotta fight. It’s not up to me to tell you what you have to do. I’m just a guy in Missouri who popped by to suggest maybe it’s not particularly skillful or wise to stand on our views in judgment of others. And like anything I teach, this totally includes myself.
Well, assuming My Self is a thing.
Photo: Pixabay
Editor: Dana Gornall
Did you love this piece? Tip the author! Help support writers: paypal/donate
Did you like this? You may also like:
What Do They Mean By No-Self in Buddhism? (Hint: It’s Not What You Think)
Comments
- 11 Ways to Be a Light in the Darkness - January 30, 2025
- No Self. Yes Self. Maybe Self? - January 15, 2025
- Who is Thousand Hand Thousand Eye Guan Yin? (and why is she so relevant even now?) - December 12, 2024