I. Introduction
II. The Definition of Anatta (Non-Self_
III. Cause of Effect Condition
IV. The Buddha’s Teaching of Anatta (Non-Self)
V. Buddha’ Expression of Anatta (Non-Self)
VI. Conclusion
I. Introduction
The major doctrines of Buddhism differ from those religions. Anatta (non-self) is one of the principal teachings of Buddhist doctrine. Other religions assert the theory of ‘self”. For example, Hinduism claims the theory of ‘self’. Its teaching is the ‘stman’ of the Upanisads. But the doctrine of Buddhism stresses non-self. The non-self (anatta) doctrine is one of the central principal teachings given by Buddha. We often hear that other religions say that Buddhism is the religion of non-self or say the Buddhism is an empty religion. I is true according to Buddha’ teaching. We may think deeply what else, it anything, stands by its own “self”. Which things have their own self and exist forever? When Buddha first preached to the five monks, he taught them the Three-Dharma-Deals (three feature or marks). These Three-Dharma-Seals are impermanence, non-self (personality), and nirvana.
These three seals are the principal Buddhist teaching to analyze whether a dharma is true or not. To approve a dharma, one can apply this three-dharma-seals. Therefore, Buddha always asks his disciples: “Monks! Is the five aggregates (skandhas)-for, feeling, conception, perception, and consciousness-permanent.” The monks replied Buddha and said that it is “impermanent.” Does the impermanent suffer or not? Their answers are “suffering.” If it is impermanent and subject to suffering, am I a “self” or not? Their answers are “non-self.” Buddha, then tells them: Monks! Therefore, contemplating such as this impermanence, suffering, and non-self, then you shall attain nirvana.” According to this content of the sutra, we can understand that the three seals are related each other. From the calm nirvana of the three-dharma-seals tells us that everyone can attain enlightenment and obtain deliverance. Buddha says: “All elements are emptiness, everlasting of non-changeable subject is voidness, self is suffering, impermanence, and non-self, therefore, self or I is voidness, thus all things
are …” The original nature of all dharmas is emptiness, voidness, and calmness, therefore, they are non-permanent and that are non-self and nirvana.
II. The Definition of Anatta (Non-Self)
Conze gives the definition of Anatta as ‘not the self’, ‘not a self’, ‘not-I’, ‘is withou self’, ‘unsubstantial’, etc. The meaning of this mark is best clarified by quoting two very ancient formulas which explodes the notion of a ‘self’ by confronting it with the classification of constituents of the personality into the five aggregates. The two ancient formulas are “form and false view of individually or the belief in I and mind”.
These two formulas will be discussed later on.
The early Indian Buddhist doctrine of Anatta opens to questions who or what agent could be the inheritor of continuing karmic forces, but continues strongly to affirm the reality and significance of this natural-moral law. The doctrine of Anatta is defended against an opponent who asserts the existence o some kind of continuing personal
entity. As Gupta points out, Egoism or self-illusion, according to Buddha, is an obstacle to moral progress. Soul-lessness, on the other hand, is the key to the realisation of Nirvana, the goal of Buddhism. Egoism is exclusive while egolossness is all embracing.
Moreover, Luis O. Gomez states that the doctrine of emptiness (sunyata) represents a refinement to the ancient doctrine of no-self. In some ways it is merely an extension of the earlier doctrine: “The denial of the substantial reality of the self and what belongs to the self, as a means to effect a breaking of the bonds of attachment. The notion of emptiness, however, expresses a critique of our common notions of reality that is much more radical than the critique implicit in the doctrine of no-self. Emptiness of all things implies the groundlessness of all ideas and conceptions, including, ultimately, Buddhist doctrine themselves.” Therefore, the doctrine of anatta focuses more upon sentient beings and the doctrine of emptiness includes all things as Gomez mentions above.
III. Cause and Effect Conditions
Buddha taught that the dharma is based on sentient beings. The sentient beings are impermanent. Because they are impermanent, they are suffering. Because they subject to change, they are non-personality. According to the concept of cause and effect conditions, all living beings are non-permanent and non-personality because all beings are subject to change and eventual death. In order words, when there is a birth then there must be a death. Ordinary people think that they may have a suitable happy life and a good environment or they may keep their mind of staying a calmness such non-suffering and non-pleasure, because this, they think they are the great peaceful people. But according to Buddha’s wisdom view, this is also a kind of suffering. Their suffering is not suffering from worry. But they suffer from impermanent. No matter how comfortable one is now, that suitable enjoyment will gradually become a decay and death. Therefore, once is born, one must die. Once one is youn-age, one must get old-age. One one is abundant, one must become old- age and decay. Thus, the teaching of Buddhism is that it is ‘impermanent’, so that it suffers. Buddha says that suffering is non-self because ‘I’, ‘Ego’ who cannot control myself. Because I can be a ‘master’; I am free to allot myself. Such this Buddhist calls who is ‘I’. But sentient beings depend one the five aggreagtes,. Six senses, and six organs to set up of all entity. But, they are changing and non-permanent. Non-permanent is suffering, and then, suffering is not free from resisteance and no free from delusion of mind and body. Where could one find the ‘I’? Therefore, non-permanence is suffering and the suffering is non-self. Non-self is emptiness. Emptiness is calm nirvana. This represents a best interpretation of sentient beings. We can expan the theory of three-dharma-seals to indicate that all substance, of which the Mahayana Buddhist interpretation is: “Non-permanence is -non-self) emptiness.” The emptiness is non-self. The nature of all dharma is like this. All dharma are formed by cause and effect conditions coming together. Thus all dharmas are the voidness of tranquillity. This empty nature mans that all dharmas.
IV. The Buddha’s teaching of Anatta (Non-self)
Buddha points out sentient beings’ right and wrong views. Buddha taugth the two formulas which are mentioned. One is a false view of the individual or the belief in I and Mine. Another is form. Form is not identical with the self. Sentient beings always hold this view: “let my body eb thus, let my body not be thus.” They do not realize the body is not mine because the body is not self, therefore, it turns oppressive, and one cannot achieve the intention. The body is formed by the coming together of form, feeling, perceptions, impulses, and consciousness. What do we think the form permanent or impermanent. Therefore, Buddha asked his disciples: “Is it impermanent? But is the impermanent ill or ease? It is impermannet, O Lord. And so for feeling, etc. Therefore, whatever form there is-past, future or oresent, inner or outer, gross or subtle, low or exalted, near or far away-all that form shoulf be seen by right wisdom as it reality is , for example, all that form is not mind, I am not this, this is not my self. And so for feelings, etc. Seeing this, the well-instructed holy disciple becomes disgusted with the skandhas (aggregates). Disgusted he becomes dispassionate; through dispassion he is set free.”
This teaching of anatta in the Anatta-Lakkhana Sutra is perfectly clear in itself, and its very simplicity has the ring of truth about it. The formula in manifestly intended as a guide to meditation and not as a basis for speculation.
The other formula is known as the ‘false view of individuality’ or ‘the belief in I and mind’,. It distinguishes twenty bases of the grasping at the word ‘self”, by considering the possible relations of the five aggregates (skandhas) to the hypothetical ‘self’. One regards 1-5, the five skandhas as the self; as the flame of a lamp is identical with its visual appearing; 6-10. The self as haing, or possesing, the skandhas; as a tree has a shadow; 11-15. The skandhas as in the self; as the scent is in the flower; 16-20, the self as in the skandhas; as the gem is in the casket.
The two formulas derive their meaning from some idea of the ‘self’ (atman) which is rejected . The ideas have two kinds.(1) The idea implied in the use of ‘I’ and ‘mind’ by ordinary people, and (2) the philosophical opinion, held by the Samkhya and Vaisesika school of Hindusim. While the Upanishadic doctrine of the atman had held this notion, it is rejected by Buddhism. What in general is suggested by soul, self, Ego or atman, is that in man there is a permanent, everlasting and absolute entity, which is the unchanging substance behind the changing phenomenal world, according to Conze’s interpretation. In the Buddhist teaching of marks of not-self is a simple corollary of the impermanence of everything. There can be no lasting of individuality because the aggregates have neither permanence not unity. IF the five aggregates are aparted from them, there is nothing which can last forever. Buddha never taught that this, ‘I’, Ego, Soul stays everlasting in this world.
In the Heart Sutra which taught by Buddha and said: “Avalokitesvara spoke to Sariputra about how the Sravaka pratyekaddha, and Bodhisattva contemplate the five personal aggregates to realize “non-self” of personality:
“Here, Sariputra, form is voidness, and voidness verily is form, voidness is not different from form; form is not different from voidness. What is form, that is voidness; what is voidness, that is form. The same is the case with feeling, ideas, motivations, and perceptions.”
文章定位：
