Welcome!
登入
註冊
美寶首頁
美寶百科
美寶論壇
美寶落格
美寶地圖
首頁
>
學涯 / Cultivation Career
>
學門 Academy
>
東方思想
>
佛學
>
原始佛教
Advanced
原始佛教
作者:
主旨:
Tags:
Message:
gustav Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > No-self or Not-self? > by Thanissaro Bhikkhu © 1996–2011 (Reference) > > One of the first stumbling blocks that Westerners > often encounter when they learn about Buddhism is > the teaching on anatta, often translated as > no-self. This teaching is a stumbling block for > two reasons. First, the idea of there being no > self doesn't fit well with other Buddhist > teachings, such as the doctrine of kamma and > rebirth: If there's no self, what experiences the > results of kamma and takes rebirth? Second, it > doesn't fit well with our own Judeo-Christian > background, which assumes the existence of an > eternal soul or self as a basic presupposition: If > there's no self, what's the purpose of a spiritual > life? Many books try to answer these questions, > but if you look at the Pali canon — the earliest > extant record of the Buddha's teachings — you > won't find them addressed at all. In fact, the one > place where the Buddha was asked point-blank > whether or not there was a self, he refused to > answer. When later asked why, he said that to hold > either that there is a self or that there is no > self is to fall into extreme forms of wrong view > that make the path of Buddhist practice > impossible. Thus the question should be put aside. > To understand what his silence on this question > says about the meaning of anatta, we first have to > look at his teachings on how questions should be > asked and answered, and how to interpret his > answers. > > The Buddha divided all questions into four > classes: those that deserve a categorical > (straight yes or no) answer; those that deserve an > analytical answer, defining and qualifying the > terms of the question; those that deserve a > counter-question, putting the ball back in the > questioner's court; and those that deserve to be > put aside. The last class of question consists of > those that don't lead to the end of suffering and > stress. The first duty of a teacher, when asked a > question, is to figure out which class the > question belongs to, and then to respond in the > appropriate way. You don't, for example, say yes > or no to a question that should be put aside. If > you are the person asking the question and you get > an answer, you should then determine how far the > answer should be interpreted. The Buddha said that > there are two types of people who misrepresent > him: those who draw inferences from statements > that shouldn't have inferences drawn from them, > and those who don't draw inferences from those > that should. > > These are the basic ground rules for interpreting > the Buddha's teachings, but if we look at the way > most writers treat the anatta doctrine, we find > these ground rules ignored. Some writers try to > qualify the no-self interpretation by saying that > the Buddha denied the existence of an eternal self > or a separate self, but this is to give an > analytical answer to a question that the Buddha > showed should be put aside. Others try to draw > inferences from the few statements in the > discourse that seem to imply that there is no > self, but it seems safe to assume that if one > forces those statements to give an answer to a > question that should be put aside, one is drawing > inferences where they shouldn't be drawn. > > So, instead of answering "no" to the question of > whether or not there is a self — interconnected > or separate, eternal or not — the Buddha felt > that the question was misguided to begin with. > Why? No matter how you define the line between > "self" and "other," the notion of self involves an > element of self-identification and clinging, and > thus suffering and stress. This holds as much for > an interconnected self, which recognizes no > "other," as it does for a separate self. If one > identifies with all of nature, one is pained by > every felled tree. It also holds for an entirely > "other" universe, in which the sense of alienation > and futility would become so debilitating as to > make the quest for happiness — one's own or that > of others — impossible. For these reasons, the > Buddha advised paying no attention to such > questions as "Do I exist?" or "Don't I exist?" for > however you answer them, they lead to suffering > and stress. > > To avoid the suffering implicit in questions of > "self" and "other," he offered an alternative way > of dividing up experience: the four Noble Truths > of stress, its cause, its cessation, and the path > to its cessation. Rather than viewing these truths > as pertaining to self or other, he said, one > should recognize them simply for what they are, in > and of themselves, as they are directly > experienced, and then perform the duty appropriate > to each. Stress should be comprehended, its cause > abandoned, its cessation realized, and the path to > its cessation developed. These duties form the > context in which the anatta doctrine is best > understood. If you develop the path of virtue, > concentration, and discernment to a state of calm > well-being and use that calm state to look at > experience in terms of the Noble Truths, the > questions that occur to the mind are not "Is there > a self? What is my self?" but rather "Am I > suffering stress because I'm holding onto this > particular phenomenon? Is it really me, myself, or > mine? If it's stressful but not really me or mine, > why hold on?" These last questions merit > straightforward answers, as they then help you to > comprehend stress and to chip away at the > attachment and clinging — the residual sense of > self-identification — that cause it, until > ultimately all traces of self-identification are > gone and all that's left is limitless freedom. > > In this sense, the anatta teaching is not a > doctrine of no-self, but a not-self strategy for > shedding suffering by letting go of its cause, > leading to the highest, undying happiness. At that > point, questions of self, no-self, and not-self > fall aside. Once there's the experience of such > total freedom, where would there be any concern > about what's experiencing it, or whether or not > it's a self? > > Reference: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thaniss > aro/notself2.html > > > > SN 44.10 PTS: S iv 400 CDB ii 1393 > Ananda Sutta: To Ananda > (On Self, No Self, and Not-self) > translated from the Pali by > Thanissaro Bhikkhu > © 2004–2011 (Reference) > > > Then the wanderer Vacchagotta went to the Blessed > One and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings > with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings > & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was > sitting there he asked the Blessed One: "Now then, > Venerable Gotama, is there a self?" > > When this was said, the Blessed One was silent. > > "Then is there no self?" > > A second time, the Blessed One was silent. > > Then Vacchagotta the wanderer got up from his seat > and left. > > Then, not long after Vacchagotta the wanderer had > left, Ven. Ananda said to the Blessed One, "Why, > lord, did the Blessed One not answer when asked a > question by Vacchagotta the wanderer?" > > "Ananda, if I — being asked by Vacchagotta the > wanderer if there is a self — were to answer > that there is a self, that would be conforming > with those priests & contemplatives who are > exponents of eternalism . If I — being asked by > Vacchagotta the wanderer if there is no self — > were to answer that there is no self, that would > be conforming with those priests & contemplatives > who are exponents of annihilationism . If I — > being asked by Vacchagotta the wanderer if there > is a self — were to answer that there is a self, > would that be in keeping with the arising of > knowledge that all phenomena are not-self?" > > "No, lord." > > "And if I — being asked by Vacchagotta the > wanderer if there is no self — were to answer > that there is no self, the bewildered Vacchagotta > would become even more bewildered: 'Does the self > I used to have now not exist?'" > > Reference: > http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn44/sn > 44.010.than.html