Emptiness & Non Self
2 Feb 2018
… this article belongs to Who Am I?. Your help is sought in refining these articles for better flow and accuracy. Please send feedback by email. Thanks! :)
Once the concepts of impermanence and non-duality are grasped, then Non-Self (anatta) and Emptiness (shunyata) in Buddhism become easy to grasp. And vice versa! :)
Non Self

The idea of non-self is straightforward. It combines the ideas of 'I am Nothing' and 'Everything in the Universe is changing'. Basically, if I attempt to say 'I am X' where X is some tangible phenomena (some sense object or the body or some mental phenomena), that attempt fails to produce a meaningful statement. Why? Because every X that we try to substitute in the statement 'I am X' fails except for X = 'consciousness' (the one who witnesses / perceives / experiences). The right statement is 'I perceive X', for example, 'I witness a tree', 'I perceive a sensation in my foot' or 'I experience anger'. Another way to say these is 'A tree has arisen in my consciousness', 'A foot sensation has arisen in my experience', 'Anger has arisen'. Additionally, since everything in our experience / consciousness keeps changing, it is futile to associate 'I' with any individual impermanent phenomena.

Emptiness

The idea of emptiness is basically the same as non-duality. If it is understood that everything in The Universe is basically happening inside you, that it does not have its own independent existence, then it's the same as saying that 'The Universe' is empty, there is nothing 'intrinsic' in it.

Emptiness is explained in the Heart Sutra. See Translation of Heart Sutra by Thich Nhat Hanh. Emptiness is basically the same as impermanence and non-duality put together. The Diamond Sutra is another fascinating Buddhist sutra that is difficult to decipher. I believe the Diamond Sutra is another exposition of Emptiness (change and non-duality put together).

Story of Venerable Upasena

Below is a Buddhist story that exemplifies the concepts of 'no ego', 'no I', 'non-self', 'acceptance' and 'I am nothing' :)

Venerable Upasena, bitten by a snake, and at the point of death, asked his brother, Venerable Sariputta, to carry him outside. Venerable Sariputta remarked that Venerable Upasena seemed very calm about this shocking event, and that there was “no change in his faculties”. Venerable Upasena replied:
“Friend Sariputta, for one who thinks,
   “The eye is a me or part of a me” (ahaṃ cakkhunti vā mama cakkhunti vā)
   “The ear is a me or part of a me” (ahaṃ sotanti vā mama sotanti vā)
   “The nose is a me or part of a me” (ahaṃ ghānanti vā mama ghānanti vā)
   “The tongue is a me or part of a me” (ahaṃ jivhāti vā mama jivhāti vā)
   “The body is a me or part of a me” (ahaṃ kāyoti vā mama kāyoti vā)
   “The mind is a me or part of a me” (ahaṃ manoti vā mama manoti vā)
there might be a change in the faculties. But, friend Sariputta, such thoughts do not occur to me”.

Venerable Sariputta replied: “It must be because the tendency to ahaṅkāramamaṅkāramānānusayā has been thoroughly uprooted in the Venerable Upasena for a long time that such thoughts do not occur to him (dīgharattaṃ ahaṃkāramamiṃkāra mānānusayā susamūhatā) (S.4.40-1).

Continue Reading …

Next article in this section?

Advaita Vedanta Resources

Explore another section?

© Copyright 2008—2023, Gurmeet Manku.