cappuccino wrote: ↑Mon Jan 17, 2022 3:25 am
Not self is a (new) way of thinking
Sutta
No self is a way to the realm of Nothingness
In that sutta, the Buddha explains that form, feeling, the body, and so on are not a self. A self cannot be found among them. This is to correct anyone who might think, when asked to find where a self (atman) resides, they might say, “my body” or “my thoughts” or whatever. The point is that the Buddha is saying that one cannot find any ultimate “self” anywhere in those parts. He says the aggregates are “not-self” (according to this translation) but in this context, it’s exactly the same as saying “no self” or “not the self”. Here, he is not addressing the nihilistic view that nothing is occurring whatsoever, or addressing the two extremes of eternalism and annihilationism.
Nor is he saying that “not self” is some kind of thing that is found among aggregates. It’s not as though you can pick up a tooth and say that it is full of “not-self”.
Anatman is akin to sunnata. Just as sunnata isnt an independent quality, but can only describe apparent phenomena, likewise, atman (non self or no self) only describes a
lack of inherent existence of being. Anatman is not a state of being. Not-self isn’t a state of being.
Non-self only occurs conditionally. It’s like a hole in the ground. There’s nothing filling the hole. The hole isn’t full of “hole-ness”. In fact, a hole isn’t really a thing at all. “Hole” only refers to a lack of ground, or a lack of fabric in a piece of cloth, a lack of calcium in a tooth or whatever.
Similarly, “no self” or “non self” or “not self” can only refer to a lack of intrinsic being in reference to body, thoughts, feelings, and so on.