In the Kaccāna-Gotta Sutta (SN 12.15), Venerable Kaccayana Gotta asked the Buddha: “Lord, ‘Right view, right view,’ it is said. To what extent is there right view?” The Buddha replied: “This world, Kaccayana, usually bases its view on two things: on existence and on non-existence. Now he, who with right insight sees the uprising of the world as it really is, does not hold the view with the non-existence of the world. But he, who with right insight, also sees the passing away of the world as it really is, does not hold the view with the existence of the world.
Grasping after systems, imprisoned by dogmas is this world, Kaccayana, for the most part. And the man who does not go after that system-grasping, that mental standpoint, that dogmatic bias, who does not grasp at it, does not take up his stand upon it, does not think: ‘It is my soul!’
This man thinks: ‘That which arises is just Ill, that which passes away is Ill’
This man is not in doubt, is not perplexed. Knowledge herein is his, that is not merely another’s.
Thus far, Kaccayana, he has right view.”
“Everything exists: — this is one extreme. Nothing exists: — this is the other extreme. Not approaching either extreme the Tathāgata teaches you a doctrine by the middle way.”
Saying there is no self: — this is one extreme. Saying there is a self: — this is the other extreme. What the Buddha said was: the body is not the real self, and the real self is not inside the body. This is a way of thinking, a philosophy, which helps one to be not perplexed. Why would one choose to think otherwise if this way of thinking is useful? Why would one choose to be perplex?
Ātman, which means “real self” of the individual, “innermost essence” and soul, is considered as eternal, permanently unchanging, imperishable, beyond time. This traditional concept has been in existence before the Buddha’s time. It is not an invention of the Buddha. Since the body is impermanent, it doesn’t fit the description of Atman. The Buddha holds that everything which is subject to arising will be subject to cessation or passing away. Therefore, the real self must also be impermanent. Again, it doesn’t fit the description of Atman. In other words, a so-called Atman is not inside the body.
It is a useful philosophy (or a way of thinking) to think that everything in this world, including the body, is empty of substance. In the Mūlamadhyamakakārikā, “All experienced phenomena are empty (sunya). This does not mean that they are not experienced and, therefore, non-existent; only that they are devoid of a permanent and eternal substance (svabhava) because, like a dream, they are mere projections of human consciousness. Since these imaginary fictions are experienced, they are not mere names (prajnapti).” This was Nāgārjuna’s grand commentary on the Buddha’s discourse to Kaccayana. (I believe Nāgārjuna was a member of the pre-sectarian Buddhism but later hijacked by the so-called Mahayana sect as one of its founders. The usual antagonism towards the śravakas and arhats, as is typical of later Mahāyāna texts, was absent in his works.)
“And the man who does not go after that system-grasping, that mental standpoint, that dogmatic bias, who does not grasp at it, does not take up his stand upon it, does not think: ‘It is my soul!’” By not seeing the body as the real self, nor the real self is inside the body, this man has no fear of losing the body, leaving alone everything else. This true man has no craving for sensual objects (which causes three kinds of feeling: pleasure feeling, painful feeling, neither pleasure nor painful feeling), no craving for existence, and no craving for non-existence. This true man has no suffering because he sees that the real self is not the one experiencing birth, aging, illness, death, association with the dislike, separation from a loved one, not getting what one wants. This body which is impermanent, which will surely lead to suffering, is not fit to be considered as the self. The past of this body is not a cause for regret/remorse to the real self which is a different entity. The future of this body is not cause for worry/restlessness to the real self which is a different entity. Greed, hatred, and delusion originate from mistaking the body as the real self. The true man, who has the right insight, will not have greed, hatred, and delusion. Thus, he has perfect virtue, equanimity, and wisdom.
The question now is: Is there a real self or not? This is like the questions of whether the Tathāgata exist after death, the world is finite or infinite, the cosmos is eternal or not, etc. (Cula-Malunkyovada Sutta MN63) “It’s just as if a man were wounded with an arrow thickly smeared with poison. His friends and companions, kinsmen and relatives would provide him with a surgeon, and the man would say, ‘I won’t have this arrow removed until I know whether the man who wounded me was a noble warrior, a brahman, a merchant, or a worker.’ He would say, ‘I won’t have this arrow removed until I know the given name & clan name of the man who wounded me… until I know whether he was tall, medium, or short… until I know whether he was dark, ruddy-brown, or golden-colored… until I know his home village, town, or city… until I know whether the bow with which I was wounded was a long bow or a crossbow… until I know whether the bowstring with which I was wounded was fiber, bamboo threads, sinew, hemp, or bark… until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was wild or cultivated… until I know whether the feathers of the shaft with which I was wounded were those of a vulture, a stork, a hawk, a peacock, or another bird… until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was bound with the sinew of an ox, a water buffalo, a langur, or a monkey.’ He would say, ‘I won’t have this arrow removed until I know whether the shaft with which I was wounded was that of a common arrow, a curved arrow, a barbed, a calf-toothed, or an oleander arrow.’ The man would die and those things would still remain unknown to him.”
“In the same way, if anyone were to say, ‘I won’t live the holy life under the Blessed One as long as he does not declare to me that ‘The cosmos is eternal,’… or that ‘After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist,’ the man would die and those things would still remain undeclared by the Tathagata. Malunkyaputta, it’s not the case that when there is the view, ‘The cosmos is eternal,’ there is the living of the holy life. And it’s not the case that when there is the view, ‘The cosmos is not eternal,’ there is the living of the holy life. When there is the view, ‘The cosmos is eternal,’ and when there is the view, ‘The cosmos is not eternal,’ there is still the birth, there is the aging, there is the death, there is the sorrow, lamentation, pain, despair, and distress whose destruction I make known right in the here and now.”
“So, Malunkyaputta, remember what is undeclared by me as undeclared, and what is declared by me as declared.”
“And why are they undeclared by me? Because they are not connected with the goal, are not fundamental to the holy life. They do not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, self-awakening, Unbinding. That’s why they are undeclared by me.”
“And what is declared by me? ‘This is stress,’ is declared by me. ‘This is the origination of stress,’ is declared by me. ‘This is the cessation of stress,’ is declared by me. ‘This is the path of practice leading to the cessation of stress,’ is declared by me. And why are they declared by me? Because they are connected with the goal, are fundamental to the holy life. They lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, calming, direct knowledge, self-awakening, Unbinding. That’s why they are declared by me.”
We must know how to use the knowledge of knowing and also how to use the knowledge of not knowing. Only then, we can have complete knowledge.
The world as we know through the eyes, ears, nose, tongue, body and mind has its limitations. There are things which we cannot possibly understand through the six sense-organs. The Tathagata does not see the six sense-organs as the self. The Tathagata is not defined by the six sense-organs like a normal person. Therefore, the existence or non-existence of the Tathagata is unfathomable for one who sees the body as the self. Only the enlightened Arhats can possibly fathom it through direct and personal knowledge.
One who is inside a dream cannot possibly understand what the real self is until and unless he wakes up from the dream.
RESILIENT KID 