No Permanent Self
This is a quote from a Western monk, Ajahn Jayasaro, who studied under the Thai forest master Ajahn Chah.It is a clear and concise explanation of the "no permanent self" doctrine of Buddhism, anatta.It may be helpful for readers who know a little of Buddhism, in order to see how Buddhism differentiates from other spiritual paths.
-
-
Ajahn Jayasaro statement is noct convincing because it begins with the assumption that there is nothing permanent upon which experiences register.
Conversely, some systems of thought and realization begins with the premise that there is a self and then these system provide supports or suggestions for such an assertion.
In both cases, that of there being a permanent self and that of there not being any such feature, the proof is hard to come by.
Ajahn Jayasaro's statement begins with a declaration where there is a sarcasm to people who think there is a self or who believe in a self. This declaration that such persons are unenlightened. This is not such a good approach to this discussion.
The fact that the sense of self is created from moment to moment as he states is not evidence that there is no permanent or underlying self around which experiences happen. His statement is brash to say the least.
However the fact that he did meditation research and did not find a permanent anything, is reason to respect his conclusions and appreciate his dedication to the topic.
-
The reality is that there are essentially, two types of persons. One type leans more to there not being a self. The other gravitates towards there being one somehow somewhere. And there is another type of person, who is unconcerned either way.
It seems that there will always be these types of persons. How to reconcile these?
-
In my experience and observation so far, this statement:
"Buddhism teaches that far from being the solid centre of experience, the sense of self is created moment by moment, by means of an instinctive identification with aspects of experience — our body, feelings, perceptions, thoughts, emotions, sense-consciousness."
refers to the subtle body, that is where lifetimes of experiences are referenced as the stock of instincts and other kneejerks reactions corresponding to consciousness.
And, so yes, as indicated in the of the original post, that is the root of suffering, or as correctly stated there, the identification with it causes the suffering.
The purported conclusion of Lord Buddha's teaching is also understandable. Though the self, if defined as higher than the subtle body may not be discovered by looking closer at the experiences, but rather by retracting from them.
However, part of the process to this withdrawal implies observation of the experiences, in considering that as part of purificatory step of the psyche/ subtle body.
-
The proof is certainly hard to come by. What the monk Jayasara states may seem brash or sarcastic but it is representative of the Buddhas teachings throughout the Pali Canon. Unenlightened simply means to be unawake. Specifically it means to not have attained the first path attainment of stream entry (sotapanna). But I can understand how his phrasing would be taken as derogatory. The insight into anatta is really significant because without it, one cannot get the stream entry. Thanks for all the comments.
-
Perhaps inSelf Yoga’s approach to this may be explained using the buddhist vocabulary like this:
Far from being the solid center of experience, a sense of self is created moment by moment, by means of an instinctive identification with aspects of experience — our body, feelings, perceptions, thoughts, emotions, sense-consciousness. But that flickering sense of self surrounds a transcendent center of experience which itself radiates a constant stream of neutral awareness-consciousness, and which senses the presented moment to moment sense of self.
-
-
Jayasaro said:
The unenlightened person assumes that there is a permanent independent entity behind our experience, and that this entity is our self, who we really are.
Michael Beloved said there is a:
transcendent center of experience which itself radiates a constant stream of neutral awareness-consciousness, and which senses the presented moment to moment sense of self.
Question for Michael:
Would you say that the:
"transcendent center of experience" asserted in InSelf Yoga
equates to the
"permanent independent entity behind our experience" which is denied by Jayasaro and the Theravada Buddhists.
???
-
I disagree if someone said that inSelf Yoga publishes that. Rather, it publishes that the transcendent center of experience is a permanent core which is independent only in certain aspects. For instance, it independently and causelessly exists as a subjective reality but it may be afforded objectivity from time to time.
The problem with this subjective existence is that it means it may exist and not be objective to itself. It may for long phases where it has no contrast for itself which means that it exists as if it were nothing, while in fact it is something but it is something without control over its pronouncements about itself. It is environment reliant as far as objectivity is concerned.
We have many aspects in this existence which support this. For instance, rocks which are millions of years old but which have no way to be self-object. Of course, rocks are temporary but that itself still affords us some understanding.
The transcendental center of experience is not deliberate. Hence it cannot pronounce itself to provide or render proof of itself in a scientific way.
-
Devapriya, in Buddhism the body and mind, or mind and matter are considered to be ultimate realities. I have been incarnating as mind and matter for time immemorial. At least I accept that on the basis of having faith and confidence in Buddhist scripture.
Eventually a stage is reached where there is a stilling of formations, in which matter and mind no longer arise. This is the state in which transcendence can occur. At this point, there is a shift to the supramundane. Until then, all entities that have come to be, are subject to work and practice and struggle with the sense of identity, the mind and the forms which are assumed. All of these are constantly shifting. Of great significance is the fact that so long as I assume mind and matter as "my permanent self", rebirth continues on the basis of receiving vipaka (results) in line with karma (actions) performed in the very real spheres of ultimate mind and matter.This is the level of my current understanding and I pray I have not misrepresented the Buddha's teachings.
I tend to agree with you that we have very little choice in the matter to be or not to be. I sort of think that we were randomly flung out into ignorance and have been stuck here, wandering in samsara ever since. The results (vipaka) of my karma (action) led me to Buddhism in a very real and intimate way in this lifetime. My preceptor, Ajahn Chaiya, told me that I had sufficient paramis (virtues) that enabled me to come to his monastery and receive teachings.
Each entity has acquired different vipaka based on karma performed, and so we wander in samsara along the ruts and tendencies created by these. I wish you well! I do not wish to argue or incite. At this Forum we are all fortunate to be spiritual seekers. Good luck too all!
