Relative no-self
One can look at the doctrine of an-attâ (no-self) through the perspective of relative and absolute. The doctrine of relative anattâ holds that the Nikayas teach that the five aggregates, the senses with their respective sense fields, are not the self and the self is not them.
On the other hand, the doctrine of absolute anattâ denies altogether the reality of the self which in Pali would actually be nattha-attâ. The absolute position is not saying the Buddha did not use the term attâ alone or in compounds. But such use expresses a conventional self so that the doctrine absolute anattâ still holds true.
But how good does the theory of absolute anattâ hold up, for example, in this passage which is from the Mahaparinibbana Sutta (D. ii. 120)?
My age is fully ripe, my life is at an end.
I shall depart leaving you. I have made a refuge for the self (katam me saram attano)."
It is hard to believe that the dying Buddha makes a refuge for the self, or even brings up such an idea, after having, supposedly, taught his followers there is no self. To do so would mean that his entire teaching is at odds with itself and confusing. The only way to get out of this conundrum is to acknowledge relative or qualified anattâ.
Comments
Post a Comment