The self in Buddhism
- The soul aka self doesn't exist in Buddhism. Only the non-self exists - the anatman. To my knowledge, that's the case in all major schools of Buddhism, viz. Theravada Buddhism, Mahayana Buddhism, Zen Buddhism, and Tibetan Buddhism.
- What is perceived to be the "self" in Buddhism consists of a collection of states or a bundle of perceptions. These are like psychological states or perceptions. We can simply call them "aggregates". These aggregates are known as khandhas.
- There are five khandhas: form/body, sensations, perceptions, mentations/cogitations, and awareness. These aggregates or khandhas are the entirety of what constitutes the self, but the reality is there is no "self". Afaik, it's not even that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, but that the whole is the sum of its parts.
- Indeed, modern Buddhists often use the ship of Theseus to illustrate how the self doesn't really exist despite its aggregates or khandhas. We're atoms in motion, but these atoms in motion are constantly being replaced by other atoms in motion.
- Suffering is caused by one being attached to or clinging onto (tanha) these aggregates. Suffering is extinguished (nirvana) when attachment (tanha) to these aggregates (khandhas) is relinquished.
- If there's no real self, then what, precisely, is thinking thoughts? Indeed, it would appear thoughts don't require a thinker!
Prima facie, this is absurd. Surely, if I know nothing, I know I exist? Cogito, ergo sum?
It seems a near insurmountable challenge to completely obliterate personal identity.
- In response, Buddhists use what I'll call the Transformers defense: there's more than meets the eye to reality. What seems to be common sense isn't necessarily so.
Buddhists cite various aspects of the quantum world as prime examples. It's true the quantum world is bizarre, but quantum mechanics is highly accurate in terms of the mathematics and physics. The weirdness of the quantum universe is anchored in the scientific and mathematical reliability of quantum mechanics.
By contrast, Buddhism has no such anchor. Either to reality in general or quantum mechanics. Buddhism is more like a free floating philosophy. A flight of fanciful ideas. As such, I see no justification to doubt our common sense in the way Buddhism expects us to doubt it. It might as well be playing make-believe.
- Regarding the ship of Theseus. The assumption in Buddhism is our aggregates is all we are. We have no essence. In fact, our "essence" is change and motion. Not only are we in a state of continual flux, but we are a state of continual flux. Impermanence is the base reality of personal identity in Buddhism.
If there is no personal identity - if all we are is change, or transition, or becoming, or somesuch - then there are no persons.
If there are no persons, then where does that leave Buddhists? When I speak to a Buddhist, I'm not speaking to a person, but I'm speaking to a...what? A quantum phase transition? A mathematical function? A strange loop? A flux capacitor?
Whatever the case, I'm not speaking to a person! Instead, it's more like I'm chasing the pot of gold at the end of a rainbow. The truth is there's no pot of gold (there's no person); all that exists is an illusory spectrum of water droplets ("aggregates"). I might see beautiful colors in the distance, but when I run toward the rainbow it all dissipates. Like trying to grab hold of mist. There's nothing to grab.
- Of course, this has ethical ramifications. For example, if people aren't persons, then why does it matter what we do to them? Buddhism has the noble eightfold path, but why should a Buddhist follow the noble eightfold path given Buddhist beliefs about personal identity and personhood? Why should the Buddhist cultivate kindness and compassion if people aren't persons?
As far as I can tell, the main reason Buddhists follow the noble eightfold path isn't for the sake of others, but rather for the sake of oneself. That is, the noble eightfold path isn't to benefit others, but to benefit "self". So that one can escape the painful cycle of rebirth (samsara). If so, then, contrary to public perception, Buddhism is quite self-focused or self-centered. However, any benefit to others is incidental, or at least secondary.
I'm reading through Neighboring Faiths and got through Buddhism. It talked about how there is no self in Buddhism, but then explained how Siddhārtha Gautama went to heaven and talked to his dead mother before she was reincarnated. But...you aren't you from one life to the next, so how was his mother available for communication? Also, the buddhas are available as well in some school, but how can they be?
ReplyDeleteI also wonder how Japan, a country influenced heavily by Buddhism, feels about the murder of 30+ people at Kyoto Animation. If they were consistent, no one really died.
Thanks, TheFlyingCouch! That's interesting. I've heard Neighboring Faiths (Win Corduan) is a good book, but unfortunately I've never read it.
DeleteAlso, I've heard many stories about Siddhartha Gautama are heavily embellished, but maybe that's true of many stories in Buddhism in general (and Hinduism and Taoism). I guess I'll have to read the book someday! Let me know how you like it if you do! :)
Well, when there are stories about Buddhas you can pray to no one thinks ever existed...yeah, embellishment is one word to use.
DeleteI finished it today. Overall I think it was pretty good. It's not deep, but very broad. It tries to cover every major religion, and some minor one in only 450 pages or so. It covers origins/history, beliefs, practices, and ends with a few pages on what to expect when you meet a follower of the religion, how you might make inroads, as well as problems with making inroads. For example when it comes to Chinese religion, there is a heavy emphasis on familial duty, so having one person convert to Christianity is very difficult because their family will condemn it and they will side with their family out of a very strong sense of duty a lot of the time.
It was also very engaging. A lot of books I read seem to be very dry, I enjoyed reading this book.
Thanks, TheFlyingCouch! Much appreciated. It sounds like a good book that I'll have to pick up then.
DeleteI'm interested in covering some of the Eastern religions and have been thinking about covering some aspects of them since they're not often covered in Christian apologetics (though of course Win Corduan is a wonderful exception).
Cool, thanks again!
Opening up Firefox today the browser recommend the article "The problem of mindfulness". It addresses the recent popularity of the practice of "mindfulness" which has its roots in Buddhism. It's an interesting confession of how Buddhist practices can interfere with one's thoughts, self-identity, self-perception and decision making.
ReplyDeleteThanks, AP! I'll take a look at the article now.
Delete