8.1. All Experience is Anatta
At last we come to the heart of the matter.
cakkhu attā’ti yo vadeyya taṃ na upapajjati. cakkhussa uppādopi vayopi paññāyati. yassa kho pana uppādopi vayopi paññāyati, ‘attā me uppajjati ca veti cā’ti iccassa evamāgataṃ hoti. tasmā taṃ na upapajjati – ‘cakkhu attā’ti yo vadeyya. iti cakkhu anattā.
MN 148 chachakkasuttaṃ
Whoever says, "I am the eye / the eye is me", that is unacceptable. The coming into being and disappearance of the eye is evident. Then one would have to conclude, "I am coming into being and disappearing". Therefore it is unacceptable to say, "I am the eye / the eye is me". The eye is not oneself.
By the same logic, the sutta goes on to discuss every aspect of six sense experience from the same logic.
Whoever says, "I am visible forms / visible forms are me" …
Whoever says, "I am eye consciousness / eye consciousness is me" …
Whoever says, "I am visual experience / visual experience is me" …
Whoever says, "I am vedanā / vedanā is me" …
Whoever says, "I am craving / craving is me", that is unacceptable. The coming into being and disappearance of the craving is evident. Then one would have to conclude, "I am coming into being and disappearing". Therefore it is unacceptable to say, "I am craving / craving is me". Craving is not oneself.
What is this sutta emphasising? If the process of experience is entirely made out of parts, and all those parts are dependent on each other, then it's impossible for one of the parts to be some kind of permanent essence or Self. And yet, this is exactly what we believe.
It doesn't matter if you come from an Abrahamic religion and believe in a soul, or follow Hindu ideas and believe in a Higher Self, or even if you are a scientific atheist with no belief. Still, we almost all believe and act as if there's a self right here in experience—an experiencer, if you will. Nobody even questions the validity of this belief, it seems to be a self-evident truth. But when we analyse experience, subjectively or objectively, it turns out to be a false idea, an unfounded belief.
We consider ourselves to be rational human beings, and yet this magical belief of an experiencing self persists, despite all evidence to the contrary. There certainly is the illusion of a continuous self that's experiencing the objective material world, and having this inner subjective experience. But when we zoom into experience, we can clearly see it is made out of component parts, and that there's no self hiding within any of the parts, or outside the parts, or in relation to any of the parts.
Without any investigation, almost all of us take consciousness to be some kind of continuous entity, our true being. "Sure, consciousness keeps changing," we might say, "yet I'm still the same person". But if we put consciousness under the spotlight, it becomes obvious that it is completely dependent on things which are very clearly not oneself, leading to the ridiculous situation mentioned in the sutta above, where our self must be arising and passing away on the whims of impersonal external objects.
The other thing which we really take to be our self are our wishes, wants, desires and loves. And on the opposite side, our dislikes, grudges, grievances and hatreds. Even the smallest preferences are taken as part of one's self. Nothing could be more personal than what we love and hate, surely?
Yet an investigation of vedanā clearly shows that all our likes and dislikes are based on the impersonal push and pull of feelings in the mind which arise due to their own causes and conditions. So even our personal desires turn out to be highly impersonal and conditioned by external forces.
With that, let's dive into a practical examination of the topic.
Meditation on all experience is anatta
Transcript
This is meditation on anatta. The absence of a self.
Let's begin by examining every aspect of experience to ensure there is no self hiding away in any of the corners of experience.
-
Eye
We can start by examining the process of seeing and all of its components.
Taking the eyes to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? The eyes arise at some point and disappear at another, they change and alter.
If the eyes were a self then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time the eyes change.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that the eyes are not one's self.
-
Visible forms
Taking visible forms to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? Visible forms appear and disappear, change and alter.
If visible forms were your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time a form changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that visible forms are not one's self.
-
Eye consciousness
Dependent on the eyes and visible forms, eye consciousness arises.
Taking eye consciousness to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? It appears and disappears, changes and alters.
If eye consciousness were your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time eye consciousness changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that eye consciousness is not one's self.
-
Experience of seeing
When the eye, visible forms and eye consciousness are present, a conscious experience of seeing occurs.
Taking the experience of seeing to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? The experience appears and disappears, changes and alters.
If the experience of seeing were your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time the experience of seeing changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that the experience of seeing is not one's self.
-
Vedanā
Dependent on seeing, vedanā arises, pleasant, unpleasant or neutral.
Taking vedanā to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? Vedanā appears and disappears, changes and alters.
If vedanā was your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time vedanā changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that vedanā is not one's self.
-
Liking and disliking
Dependent on vedanā, there is the tendency towards liking and disliking, craving, resisting and ignoring.
Taking liking and disliking to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? Liking and disliking appear and disappear, change and alter.
If liking and disliking were your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time liking and disliking changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that liking and disliking are not one's self.
-
Ear
Let's examine the process of hearing and all of its components.
Taking the ears to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? The ears arise at some point and disappear at another, they change and alter.
If the ears were a self then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time the ears change.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that the ears are not one's self.
-
Sounds
Taking sounds to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? Sounds appear and disappear, change and alter.
If sounds were your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time a sound changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that sounds are not one's self.
-
Ear consciousness
Dependent on the ear and sounds, ear consciousness arises.
Taking ear consciousness to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? It appears and disappears, changes and alters.
If ear consciousness were your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time ear consciousness changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that ear consciousness is not one's self.
-
Experience of hearing
When the ear, sounds and ear consciousness are present, a conscious experience of hearing occurs.
Taking the experience of hearing to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? The experience appears and disappears, changes and alters.
If the experience of hearing were your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time the experience of hearing changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that the experience of hearing is not one's self.
-
Vedanā
Dependent on hearing, vedanā arises, pleasant, unpleasant or neutral.
Taking vedanā to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? Vedanā appears and disappears, changes and alters.
If vedanā was your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time vedanā changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that vedanā is not one's self.
-
Liking and disliking
Dependent on vedanā, there is the tendency towards liking and disliking, craving, resisting and ignoring.
Taking liking and disliking to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? Liking and disliking appear and disappear, change and alter.
If liking and disliking were your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time liking and disliking changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that liking and disliking are not one's self.
In the same way it's safe to conclude that …
the ears, sounds, ear consciousness, the experience of hearing, any vedanā which arises from hearing, any liking and disliking in response to that vedanā, none of these are one's self.
Likewise …
the nose, smells, nose consciousness, the experience of smelling, any vedanā which arises from smelling, any liking and disliking in response to that vedanā, none of these are one's self.
Similarly …
the tongue, flavours, tongue consciousness, the experience of tasting, any vedanā which arises from tasting, any liking and disliking in response to that vedanā, it's safe to conclude that none of these are one's self.
-
Body
Let's examine the process of feeling a physical sensation and all of its components.
Taking the body to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? The body arises at some point and disappear at another, it changes and alters.
If the body were your self then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time the body changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that the body is not one's self.
-
Tangible sensations
Taking tangible sensations to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? They appear and disappear, change and alter.
If tangible sensations were your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time sensation changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that tangible sensations are not one's self.
-
Body consciousness
Dependent on the body and tangible sensations, body consciousness arises.
Taking body consciousness to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? It appears and disappears, changes and alters.
If body consciousness were your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time body consciousness changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that body consciousness is not one's self.
-
Experience of feeling
When the body, tangible sensations and body consciousness are present, a conscious experience of feeling a sensation occurs.
Taking the experience of feeling physical sensation to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? The experience appears and disappears, changes and alters.
If the experience of feeling a sensation were your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time the experience of feeling physical sensation changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that the experience of feeling a sensation is not one's self.
-
Vedanā
Dependent on feeling physical sensation, vedanā arises, pleasant, unpleasant or neutral.
Taking vedanā to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? Vedanā appears and disappears, changes and alters.
If vedanā was your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time vedanā changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that vedanā is not one's self.
-
Liking and disliking
Dependent on a vedanā, there is the tendency towards liking and disliking, craving, resisting and ignoring.
Taking liking and disliking to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? Liking and disliking appear and disappear, change and alter.
If liking and disliking were your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time liking and disliking changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that liking and disliking are not one's self.
-
Mind
Let's examine the process of knowing a mental experience and all of its components.
Taking the mind to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? The mind arises and disappears, it changes and alters.
If the mind were a self then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time the mind changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that the mind is not one's self.
-
Mental phenomena
Taking mental phenomena to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? They appear and disappear, change and alter.
If mental phenomena were your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time mental phenomena change.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that mental phenomena are not one's self.
-
Mind consciousness
Dependent on the mind and mental phenomena, mind consciousness arises.
Taking mind consciousness to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? It appears and disappears, changes and alters.
If mind consciousness were your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time mind consciousness changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that mind consciousness is not one's self.
-
Experience of feeling
When the mind, mental phenomena and mind consciousness are present, a conscious mental experience occurs.
Taking a mental experience to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? Mental experience appears and disappears, changes and alters.
If a mental experience were your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time a mental experience changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that a mental experience is not one's self.
-
Vedanā
Dependent on mental experience, vedanā arises, pleasant, unpleasant or neutral.
Taking vedanā to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? Vedanā appears and disappears, changes and alters.
If vedanā was your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time vedanā changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that vedanā is not one's self.
-
Liking and disliking
Dependent on vedanā, there is the tendency towards liking and disliking, craving, resisting and ignoring.
Taking liking and disliking to be one's self makes no sense.
Why? Liking and disliking appear and disappear, change and alter.
If liking and disliking were your self, then you'd have to conclude that the self arises and disappears every time liking and disliking changes.
That makes no sense, so it's safe to conclude that liking and disliking are not one's self.
Having done a thorough examination, it's safe to reach the conclusion that there is no self anywhere within the six fields of sense experience.
There's no self hiding anywhere within experience.
Each and every component of experience is anatta.
Each and every conscious experience is anatta.
All phenomena are anatta.
Everything is anatta.
Spend the day with this meditation. Try your best to accomplish these two goals.
- Logically, be able to confirm any experience or component of experience is anatta.
- Carefully examine which experiences or aspects of experience create your sense of self. Where does the sense of self find its footing?
Q&A
Q: Do you have any questions or doubts at this point?