Suññata and Anattā

Exploring the Dhamma, as understood from the perspective of the ancient Pali commentaries.
Post Reply
User avatar
cooran
Posts: 8503
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2009 11:32 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia

Suññata and Anattā

Post by cooran »

Hello all,

I'm wondering in which way the terms Suññata and Anattā are saying the same thing, and in which way they are not. There seems to be a wide belief that Anattā refers only to 'beings'.

SN 35.85 Suñña Sutta Empty
Then Ven. Ananda went to the Blessed One and on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there he said to the Blessed One, "It is said that the world is empty, the world is empty, lord. In what respect is it said that the world is empty?"
"Insofar as it is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self: Thus it is said, Ananda, that the world is empty. And what is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self? The eye is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self. Forms... Eye-consciousness... Eye-contact is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self.
"The ear is empty...
"The nose is empty...
"The tongue is empty...
"The body is empty...
"The intellect is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self. Ideas... Intellect-consciousness... Intellect-contact is empty of a self or of anything pertaining to a self. Thus it is said that the world is empty."
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka ... tml#answer" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Mere suffering exists, no sufferer is found;
The deeds are, but no doer of the deeds is there;
Nibbāna is, but not the man that enters it;
The path is, but no traveler on it is seen." Vis.M. XVI
The contemplation of not-self (anattānupassanā) leads to the emptiness liberation (suññatā-vimokkha, s. vimokkha). (Nyanatiloka Thera. A Buddhsit Dictionary)

metta
Chris
---The trouble is that you think you have time---
---Worry is the Interest, paid in advance, on a debt you may never owe---
---It's not what happens to you in life that is important ~ it's what you do with it ---
User avatar
retrofuturist
Posts: 27848
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:52 pm
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Contact:

Re: Suññata and Anattā

Post by retrofuturist »

Greetings Chris,
Chris wrote:I'm wondering in which way the terms Suññata and Anattā are saying the same thing, and in which way they are not. There seems to be a wide belief that Anattā refers only to 'beings'.
I understand suññata to simultaneously represent both anattā and anicca.

I would be interested to know if this conforms with the Classical Theravadin position.

Metta,
Retro. :)
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
User avatar
Jason
Posts: 595
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 1:09 am
Location: Earth
Contact:

Re: Suññata and Anattā

Post by Jason »

Chris,

My understanding is that the term "emptiness" (adj. sunna, noun sunnata) is used in a couple of different but related ways. In one context, as Thanissaro notes, emptiness is used as a mode of perception, a way of looking at experience that is utilized in meditation (e.g., MN 121, MN 122).

In another context, emptiness refers to the unsubstantiality of the five clinging-aggregates (khandhas) and the six sense media (ayatanas) (e.g., SN 2295, SN 35.85). In this sense, it is synonymous with not-self (anatta).

Beyond that, I am not sure.

Jason
"Sabbe dhamma nalam abhinivesaya" (AN 7.58).

leaves in the hand (Buddhist-related blog)
leaves in the forest (non-Buddhist related blog)
User avatar
kc2dpt
Posts: 957
Joined: Thu Jan 01, 2009 3:48 pm

Re: Suññata and Anattā

Post by kc2dpt »

Chris wrote:There seems to be a wide belief that Anattā refers only to 'beings'.
I would say anatta relates to beings, as it is beings who take things as atta - me, mine, or myself. But they can end up taking anything as atta - my arm, my personality, my car.
- Peter

Be heedful and you will accomplish your goal.
User avatar
Eko Care
Posts: 1107
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:13 am

Re: Suññata and Anattā

Post by Eko Care »

This is how I have heard the traditional interpretation in brief:
self = authority = essence;
empty = empty of self;

Therefore
empty = empty of self = empty of authority = empty of essence
Relationship with the word 'beings':
All the phenomena(of beings and non-beings) are empty of an authority (of beings)
Correct me if I am wrong in traditional interpretation.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Suññata and Anattā

Post by DooDoot »

Jason wrote: Sat Apr 04, 2009 4:51 pm In another context, emptiness refers to the unsubstantiality of the five clinging-aggregates (khandhas) (e.g., SN 22.95...
SN 22.95 does not appear to refer to Suññata or Anattā.
cooran wrote: Sat Apr 04, 2009 9:09 am Hello all, I'm wondering in which way the terms Suññata and Anattā are saying the same thing, and in which way they are not.
Hello fellow Queenslander.

Anattā, when originally taught, appears to be: (i) a teaching about "dispossession", where it is said the five aggregates are "not me, not mine, not myself". Anattā appears to pertain to the "individual" and the individual's relationship towards the five aggregates; and (ii) relied on 1st realising impermanence (anicca) & non-pleasurableness (dukkha), i.e., if something is impermanent, it cannot be a 'self'; as argued in MN 148, where it is said because phenomena are seen to arising & cease, it does not follow from the former (upapajjati) those phenomena can be a self.

Where as Suññata appears to pertain to the inherent nature of the five aggregates rather than to the individual's relationship to the five aggregates; nor does it rely on realising impermanence. Suññata is the plain direct realisation that no self can be found in anything when things are clearly seen. For example, if we dig into sand & sift the sand, it does not matter how much we dig & sift, a self cannot be found in that pit or beach of sand.

In short, the suttas define the respective terms as follows:

1. Anattā - 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself' (‘netaṁ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’) - SN 22.59.

2. Suññata - 'This is empty of self or of anything pertaining to self' (‘suññamidaṁ attena vā attaniyena vā) - MN 43
cooran wrote: Sat Apr 04, 2009 9:09 am There seems to be a wide belief that Anattā refers only to 'beings'.
Yes, this is my impression, as i suggested above, when i referred to the "individual" lifeform.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
Mudryj
Posts: 43
Joined: Mon Sep 18, 2017 8:44 am

Re: Suññata and Anattā

Post by Mudryj »

DooDoot wrote: Thu Apr 22, 2021 10:02 am
Jason wrote: Sat Apr 04, 2009 4:51 pm In another context, emptiness refers to the unsubstantiality of the five clinging-aggregates (khandhas) (e.g., SN 22.95...
SN 22.95 does not appear to refer to Suññata or Anattā.
cooran wrote: Sat Apr 04, 2009 9:09 am Hello all, I'm wondering in which way the terms Suññata and Anattā are saying the same thing, and in which way they are not.
Hello fellow Queenslander.

Anattā, when originally taught, appears to be: (i) a teaching about "dispossession", where it is said the five aggregates are "not me, not mine, not myself". Anattā appears to pertain to the "individual" and the individual's relationship towards the five aggregates; and (ii) relied on 1st realising impermanence (anicca) & non-pleasurableness (dukkha), i.e., if something is impermanent, it cannot be a 'self'; as argued in MN 148, where it is said because phenomena are seen to arising & cease, it does not follow from the former (upapajjati) those phenomena can be a self.

Where as Suññata appears to pertain to the inherent nature of the five aggregates rather than to the individual's relationship to the five aggregates; nor does it rely on realising impermanence. Suññata is the plain direct realisation that no self can be found in anything when things are clearly seen. For example, if we dig into sand & sift the sand, it does not matter how much we dig & sift, a self cannot be found in that pit or beach of sand.

In short, the suttas define the respective terms as follows:

1. Anattā - 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not myself' (‘netaṁ mama, nesohamasmi, na meso attā’) - SN 22.59.

2. Suññata - 'This is empty of self or of anything pertaining to self' (‘suññamidaṁ attena vā attaniyena vā) - MN 43
cooran wrote: Sat Apr 04, 2009 9:09 am There seems to be a wide belief that Anattā refers only to 'beings'.
Yes, this is my impression, as i suggested above, when i referred to the "individual" lifeform.
:goodpost:
Wow, it seems you to solve the old problem about meaning of the anatta term; that is, wether not-self or no-self interpretation is right.

It apears that not-self is related with anatta itself, because it points out on a things and its relation with "I" or "Self, to do a sense of I (or self-view) much smaller about things

And no-self points on sunatta and revealing the complete absence of self or "I" in the reality; it is obvious that no-self fits much more for the term sunatta rather then anatta. And the No-Self does really have its place in Teaching of The Buddha as a conception of sunatta.

We can see that it is merely a degree of rejection of the clinging to and sunatta/no-self is a more compleat degree
pegembara
Posts: 3465
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: Suññata and Anattā

Post by pegembara »

Both are found in the Buddha's teachings.
whatever, whether past, future or presently arisen, whether gross or subtle, whether in oneself or external, whether inferior or superior, whether far or near must, with right understanding how it is, be regarded thus: 'This is not mine, this is not I, this is not my self.'

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .nymo.html
Form is like a glob of foam;
feeling, a bubble;
perception, a mirage;
fabrications, a banana tree;
consciousness, a magic trick —
this has been taught
by the Kinsman of the Sun.
However you observe them,
appropriately examine them,
they're empty, void
to whoever sees them
appropriately.

Beginning with the body
as taught by the One
with profound discernment:
when abandoned by three things
— life, warmth, & consciousness —
form is rejected, cast aside.
When bereft of these
it lies thrown away,
senseless,
a meal for others.
That's the way it goes:
it's a magic trick,
an idiot's babbling.
It's said to be
a murderer.[1]
No substance here
is found.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Suññata and Anattā

Post by DooDoot »

pegembara wrote: Tue Apr 27, 2021 12:46 am
Questionable translation. SN 22.95 does not appear to refer to Suññata or Anattā.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
pegembara
Posts: 3465
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 8:39 am

Re: Suññata and Anattā

Post by pegembara »

DooDoot wrote: Tue Apr 27, 2021 4:45 am
pegembara wrote: Tue Apr 27, 2021 12:46 am
Questionable translation. SN 22.95 does not appear to refer to Suññata or Anattā.
"Monks, suppose that a large glob of foam were floating down this Ganges River, and a man with good eyesight were to see it, observe it, & appropriately examine it. To him — seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in a glob of foam? In the same way, a monk sees, observes, & appropriately examines any form that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near. To him — seeing it, observing it, & appropriately examining it — it would appear empty, void, without substance: for what substance would there be in form?
Nevertheless, the impression given is quite clear what the Buddha meant in the following discourses. Empty=without substance, without self, egoless, without essence, insubstantial. No-thingness or without an atta.
Mogharaja's Question

View the world, Mogharaja,
as empty
always mindful
to have removed any view
about self.

This way one is above & beyond death.
This is how one views the world
so as not to be seen
by Death's king.
Dhamapada 13.170
The World : See it as a bubble, see it as a mirage: one who regards the world this way the King of Death doesn't see.
Loka Sutta: The World

Dwelling at Savatthi. There the Blessed One addressed the monks: "I will teach you the origination of the world & the ending of the world. Listen & pay close attention. I will speak."

The Blessed One said: "And what is the origination of the world? Dependent on the eye & forms there arises eye-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. From craving as a requisite condition comes clinging/sustenance. From clinging/sustenance as a requisite condition comes becoming. From becoming as a requisite condition comes birth. From birth as a requisite condition, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair come into play. This is the origination of the world.

"And what is the ending of the world? Dependent on the eye & forms there arises eye-consciousness. The meeting of the three is contact. From contact as a requisite condition comes feeling. From feeling as a requisite condition comes craving. Now, from the remainderless cessation & fading away of that very craving comes the cessation of clinging/sustenance. From the cessation of clinging/sustenance comes the cessation of becoming. From the cessation of becoming comes the cessation of birth. From the cessation of birth, then aging & death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, distress, & despair all cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of stress & suffering. This is the ending of the world.
"Lord, 'Right view, right view,' it is said. To what extent is there right view?"

"By & large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by (takes as its object) a polarity, that of existence & non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one.

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html
"Bhikkhus, all is burning. And what is the all that is burning? https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .nymo.html

What is the All? Simply the eye & forms, ear & sounds, nose & aromas, tongue & flavors, body & tactile sensations, intellect & ideas. This, monks, is called the All. [1] Anyone who would say, 'Repudiating this All, I will describe another,' if questioned on what exactly might be the grounds for his statement, would be unable to explain, and furthermore, would be put to grief. Why? Because it lies beyond range."
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitak ... .than.html

Nibbāna is the supreme voidness
(Nibbānaṁ paramaṁ suññaṁ).
And what is right speech? Abstaining from lying, from divisive speech, from abusive speech, & from idle chatter: This is called right speech.
User avatar
DooDoot
Posts: 12032
Joined: Tue Aug 08, 2017 11:06 pm

Re: Suññata and Anattā

Post by DooDoot »

pegembara wrote: Tue Apr 27, 2021 6:30 am Nevertheless, the impression given is quite clear what the Buddha meant in the following discourses. Empty=without substance, without self, egoless, without essence, insubstantial. No-thingness or without an atta.
SN 22.95 is about empty of value; empty of meaning; empty of utility; etc. It is not about empty of self. You should study the relevant Pali words (namely, ritta, tuccha, asāra) and how they are used in the suttas at large.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.

https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/paticcasamuppada
https://soundcloud.com/doodoot/anapanasati
Post Reply