non-self

Gautam Buddha stated that nothing exists in itself. That is, nothing has an independent existence. This teaching, which I suspect came originally from a vedantic and yogic tradition, goes rather deep. And because it’s rather deep, it can take some time to really feel it. And in the meantime, we will tend to understand it rather philosophically, if at all. But as with everything on the spiritual path, the important thing is not the philosophy, it’s not a mental understanding. The important thing is the direct feel of existence. And eventually, we can come to feel the truth of this non-self characteristic of everything in life. But until we are really feeling it, we can only discuss it rather intellectually. And this intellectual discussion can be a starting point. We can use it as an approach to feeling the truth. But remember, intellectual understanding is not the end point.

So to approach this truth of non-self, there are a couple of ways that we can talk about it, think about it. One is the definition of things. If you ask what is something – and it doesn’t matter what thing you choose – you will find that you have to define it in terms of other things. For example, if I ask ‘what is a chair?’, and the answer may be: ‘it is a physical object designed for sitting upon’. Or I may describe it more by its form: ‘a flat surface supported by legs, usually with a back so that one can sit on it and rest against the back’. I may describe the materials the chair is constructed of, especially if I am talking about a specific chair. So  you see, even a simple object like a chair, in defining it, in trying to answer the question: ‘what is it?’, then we resort to many other things: functional things, material things, structural things concerning its form, its shape. But we cannot define a chair just in terms of itself: a chair is a chair. It doesn’t help, it doesn’t get us anywhere.

So our mental understanding of something is the same as trying to answer this question: ‘what is it?’  And so our mental understandings are always in terms of other things. And if you look closely, you will see that there is a huge network of interconnected definitions. And ultimately, these definitions are circular. They come back around, so that A is defined in terms of B, and B is defined in terms of A. Everything is relative when it comes to definitions, when it comes to mental understandings. This is a relative world we are living in, without any absolute. So this approach of defining things is one way to intellectually get a glimpse of the Buddhist teaching of non-self.

Definitions is one approach. There is a second approach and this has to do with dependence. If I take the same example of a chair, if it’s made of wood, then its existence depends on a tree. It has been made from the material of a tree, and without trees that chair would not exist, at least not in the form that it is. And the chair also depends upon human beings. Human beings have constructed the chair, and human beings use the chair. So if I did not exist to sit on the chair, then the chair would have no purpose and it would not exist either. So the existence of the chair depends on the existence of me, or at least some human being, and it depends on the existence of a tree, trees in general.

And of course this chain of dependence does not stop there. A chair depends on the tree, but the tree can only live if there is sunlight and if there is rain, and if there is air with carbon dioxide, and if there are minerals in the soil. All these things are needed for the chair to come into being, via the tree. So in the chair, we can also see something of the rain and the air and the sunshine that has formed a tree, which in turn has formed the chair. And of course we can go further. The rain depends upon clouds and upon the oceans and upon the heat of the sun and upon winds and many factors bound up in the rain that has helped formed the tree that has formed the chair.

We can go on endlessly. Ultimately, everything depends upon everything else. The great Vietnamese Zen master, Thich Nhat Hanh, calls this interbeing. I am a being, but actually, in my own being is everything else. I depend upon everything else. And in some way, everything else depends upon me. So to consider oneself, or anything, to be existing in isolation, is a misunderstanding. The whole of existence is one complex process and any part of it is dependent upon the rest. This interdependence is another approach to understanding the Buddhist teaching of non-self.

So from these two mental approaches – of definitions or of dependencies – we can begin to understand non-self teaching. But remember that eventually this can be felt: the interbeing, the interconnectedness of all that is. A non-separation. This can be felt in a mystical way. Mysterious beyond words. It can be felt and it can be lived.