When the Buddha says that the Five Aggregates are not the self or in Pali anattâ, this means that the aggregates are the privation of the self. It doesn’t mean that there is no self which in Pali is natthattâ. People who read the following discourse to mean there is no such thing as a self or attâ/âtman have no understanding of the Buddha’s sublime teachings.
“Bhikkhus, form is nonself [anattâ]. What is nonself should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self'. Feeling is nonself... Perception is nonself... Volitional formations are nonself... Consciousness is nonself. What is nonself should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘This is not mine, this I am not, this is not my self’ (S. iii. 22–23)
Let's say, many years ago I once believed these aggregates (my psychophycial organism) were who I was. Now, I know they are not who I am. They are not myself. Considered from the vantage point of my true self I now read the discourse of the Buddha this way:
“Monks, form is the privation of self. What is the privation of self should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom thus: ‘This psychophysical organism is not mine, this I am not, this psychophysical organism is not my self'. Feeling is the privation of self... Perception is the privation of self... Volitional formations are the privation of self... Consciousness is the privation of self. What is is the privation of self should be seen as it really is with correct wisdom: ‘This psychophysical organism is not mine, this I am not, this psychophysical organism is not my self.’
Until one gets to the point of seeing all conditioned things as the privation of the âtman, or the same, as the privation or lack of one’s Buddha-nature, they don’t understand—and can't understand—the Buddha’s teaching.
Comments