International Review of Social Research 2019; 9(1): 18–27 Research Article Nguyen Quy Hoang* The Doctrine of Not-self (anattā) in Early Buddhism https://doi.org/10.2478/irsr-2019-0003 renowed thinkers such as Sigmund Freud, Carl Jung, and Received: March 2, 2019; Accepted: March 14, 2019 Carl Rogers. The teaching of anattā is also a fundamental Abstract: Anattā or the Not-Self is a very important concept concept in early Buddhism and plays an important role for of Buddhism, which distinguishes it from other religions. understanding the nature of human existence and rebirth. there are some ways to explain this doctrine and many The term Early Buddhism in this article refers to debates were happened between Buddhist schools and the teachings and monastic organization and structure, between Buddhists and the Brahmanists on this issue. founded by Gautama Buddha. It is also called Pre- Early Buddhism analyse that self is the combination of sectarian Buddhism or Original Buddhism implying that five aggregates (skandhas), and each of them is not the Buddhism that existed before the various subsects of self. Based on this explanation, Buddhists think wrongly Buddhism caming into being. that anattā is ‘No-self. Deeply understand and practice of This doctrine appears in the Discourse on the the not-self concept will help practitioners of Buddhism Characteristic of Not-self (Anattālakkhana Sutta) (SN22.59, to be free from all sufferings. So, one needs to have a clear PTS 1980). It involves some difficulties, such as- how the understanding on this concept. The purpose of this paper continuity is maintained through the death to the rebirth is to present a comprehensive view of Not-self (anattā) of the person. How can people trace back all the past doctrine in Early Buddhism. All its related aspects are memories? How to explain the human free-will…? And presented in succession. This article investigates the the given responsibility of action (kamma) without self is doctrine of anattā, it is also examined with other related difficult to understand even for monks. doctrines in Early Buddhism. By analyzing method, This paper is an attempt to analyze the not-self the meaning of Not-self (anattā) in Early Buddhism is doctrine in relationship with the doctrine of Dependent proposed by the author. (https://www.abebooks.de/buch- Arising (paticca samuppāda), the five aggregates (pañca- suchen/titel/anatta/) khandha) and to find the way to explain all the said-above logical difficulties Keywords: Self, non-self, no-self, not-self, Early Buddhism No-self or Not-self Before analyzing the meaning of Not-self according Introduction to Early Buddhism, the translation into English of the term anattā needs to be discussed. This also helps us to Not-self (anattā) is an attentive point of any religion understand deeply the implication of this term. because it is a core subject in many forms of spirituality, In Buddhist philosophy, anattā (Pāli term) or it is also the inner critic in Western psychoanalysis by the anàtman (Sanskrit term) refers to ‘not-self’ or ‘absence of independent self.’ The prefix ‘a’ in anattā and anàtman Article note: This article is abridge from chapter I of ‘The Doctrine of bears the negative meaning (Not). It rejects the real or Not Self (anattā) in the history of Buddhism in India’ by Nguyen Quy permanent self. So, ‘anattā’ conveys the meaning of Hoang (Lambert Academic Publishing) negation of self or soul. The suitable English term for *Corresponding author: Nguyen Quy Hoang, Paramount University anattā is ‘not-self’. Non-self, No-self are not appropriate. of Technology, 101 Montgomery Street Suite 1500 , San Francisco, Yet, the translation of anattā into ‘no self’ cannot be CA 94104, Buddhist Studies, International Buddhist College, 88, correct, because the grammar and syntax show that it is Mu 2, Khlong-Ngae- Khuan Sato Rd, Thung Mo Sub-district, Sadao, not a possessive adjective, but a descriptive compound, Songkhia 90240, Thailand, E-mail: [email protected] and if the translation for attā is “self”, then the word © 2019 Nguyen Quy Hoang published by Sciendo. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License. The Doctrine of Not-self (anattā) in Early Buddhism 19 would mean ‘not self’(Norman,1997). impossible for the compounded things (saṅkhata); all ‘No’ and ‘Not’ have very different meaning, ‘No’means things will be destroyed and cannot last forever. A person never existence, ‘Not’ means denial of something. The with greed, anger, and delusion cannot get real happiness ‘Not’ should be used instead of ‘No’. in life. What does the not-self mean? The first it is not a So, it can be seen clearly that the Early Buddhism permanent self. The second is nothing that pertains to brought out the Not-self concept for the practical purpose. that self. ‘It is empty of self or what pertains to that self.’ Leaving self-attachment and self-possession would bring (Steven, 2015) humans being to happiness and escape the suffering. The Buddhist history in India shows that not all of the Buddhist sections agree with the anattā concept. “Selfishness is a powerful negative force that brings bad conse- quences, it is brought about by wrong views and the failure to Vātsīputrīya claimed that the self (pudgala) existed. Nyāya perceive the realities of life, and then they will cause the suffe- School claimed that if there is no self, how can people rings for people. (Dhammanada, 1993, p.72) trace back the memories? How can the kamma doctrine is understood in logic way? Because the being of this life is The teaching of not-self is a tool for helping people to put totally different with the being of past life. There should an end to suffering and stress. To believe that ‘I am this’ is be a self; then the relationship between the doer and the the origin of dukkha. This arises from the illusion of self. recipient, can be explained and understood. When there is no self there is no ‘mine’. When there is So the English term of anattā should be ‘Not self’. no ‘I’, dukkha does not occur. Self, I, and dukkha are all Edward Conze also used this term “Not-self” for anattā inseparable. Venerable Narada used a short paragraph in (Conze, 1971) and the same with Steven Collinsin his book. the Suttanta Piṭaka to quote for his work: “This body is (Collin,1990) not mine, this am I not, this is not my soul (N’etam mama, n’eso’ham asmi, n’eso me attā).” (Narada, 1988, p.xi) The purpose of Not-self Thus, the Not-self doctrine is the base therapeutic of mind. The Buddha was less interested in metaphysics than The purpose of Not-self in Early Buddhism can be seen in pointing the way to practical liberation from suffering. clearly through the relation between self and dukkha. Human being has the tendency to develop the attachments Dukkha is often translated into English as ‘suffering’ to views and desires though the reinforcing notions of ‘me’ or ‘dissatisfaction’, however it is not fully correct. Dukkha and ‘mine’. This is the cause of their suffering and not-self has other meanings as impermanence, lack of freedom can be used as a strategy for putting an end to clinging. and imperfection It finally serves as an effective strategy on the path to the Dukkha is a real fact of life. This fact is the first thing one end of stress. (Bhikkhu Thanissaro, 2016) must comprehend (pariññeyya) and the following three Furthermore, the Not-self doctrine stands in objection truths are the result to this one. Any thoughtful person to the ideas of Brahmanical philosophers who view can see the life, in general, unsatisfactory. In Buddhist self as an unchanging, non-physical and eternal entity philosophy, dukkha is one of the three marks of existence called àtman. From Buddhist point of view, there is (ti-lakkhaṇa), namely aniccā, dukkha and anattā: nothing permanent; everything is subject to decay and “The Buddha taught: All compounded things (saṅkhāras) are destruction. It is a rapidly shifting stream of momentary impermanent (sabbe saṅkhārā aniccā). All compounded things mental occurrences. are unsatisfactory (sabbe saṅkhārā dukkhā). All states are not- self (sabbe dhammā anattā).“Bhikkhus, what is impermanent is Self denial in Early Buddhism- What it really suffering, what is suffering is not-self.” (Bhikkhu Bodhi, 2000, p.869). means? In Saṃyutta Nikāya 4.10, there is a dialogue relating to the According to Buddhist view, Dukkha is a real fact of the question of self existence.The Buddha kept silent with two human life, because people attach to their self, they questions of Vacchagotta: “is there a self? And is there no indulge the self too much and fight each other to protect self? He explained, after that, to the venerable Ānanda as their selves. As a result, they feel suffering when their follows: selves are hurt and violated. A self in common understanding can be described “If, Ānanda, when asked by the Wanderer: ‘Is there a self?’. I as happiness finding and misery avoiding that a human had replied to him: ‘there is a self’, then, Ānanda that would be expects. However, this thing is illusion. Happiness is siding with those ascetics and Brahmins who are Eternalists” 20 Nguyen Quy Hoang “And if, Ānanda, when I was asked by him: ‘Is there no self?’ I had answred, there is no self this would have been siding with, Not-self and five aggregates those ascetics and Brahmins who are Annihilationists.” (pañca-khandhā) “If, Ānanda, when I was asked by the Wanderer Vacchagotta: ‘Is The term khandhā means a mass, a heap (rāsi), a collection there a self?’ I had answered, ‘there is a self’, would this have of separate componets.