Grace Celi

Professor David McMahan

Formal Essay 1

September 21, 2020

Beyond the Question of Self: The Anātman Teaching as Conducive to Greater Awareness

The concept of non-self in Buddhism is confusing, disputable, and subject to manifold

interpretations. It is easy to become absorbed in varying arguments over the extent to which the

teaching of anātman denies the existence of self. However, investigation of the concept in both

scholarly work and ancient sutta reveals the question of whether self exists to be of less import

than initially regarded. Preoccupation with the question itself is inconsistent with the Buddha’s

teachings and distracts from the value of non-self in fostering greater awareness. The purpose of

the anātman teaching, as analyzed through contemporary works and ancient buddhist texts, is to

use the understanding of one’s ever-changing nature as a path to greater awareness, not to fixate

unproductively on the existence or nonexistence of self. Embracing one’s transient nature

encourages acceptance of the impermanence of all existence, a revelation vital in attaining

ultimate awareness.

The Buddha never expressly answers the question of self—neither explicitly confirming

nor denying its existence. In choosing not to answer, he indicates that the question is itself

misguided and discourages fixation on the question alone. When asked directly by a wandering

ascetic “is there a self”, the Buddha does not answer. When asked by Ānanda why he chose not

to respond, the Buddha states: “if in response to Vacchagotta’s first question I asserted that there

is a Self, that would be associating myself with the renouncers and brahmins who are eternalists.
But, Ananda, if...I asserted that there is no self, that would be associating myself with the

renouncers and brahmins who are annihilationists” (The Buddha’s Silence 3.2.3). The Buddha’s

reply suggests the question itself is faulty and unproductive, as it may give rise to extremism and

ultimately distract from the real point of the anātman teaching, to be further discussed.

Confirming neither the absence nor presence of self, Gautama Buddha takes the ‘Middle Way’,

condemning commitment to either extreme (Strong 2007, 105). This ‘Middle Way’ approach is

also seen in The Buddha's refusal to answer a number of metaphysical questions like that of self,

also known as the “questions not explicated” (Strong 2007, 104). For example, Gautama Buddha

is said to have stated: “one who sees the arising [and cessation] of the world as it truly happens,

with right wisdom, cannot maintain the nonexistence of the world [or] the existence of the

world” (Channa is Taught the Middle Way 3.2.4). Here the Buddha claims that one who is aware

of the world’s transient, ever-changing state (who sees the ‘arising’ and ‘cessation’ of the world),

cannot affirm or deny its existence. This presumably applies to all that the world encompasses,

and thus can be extended to the self—no enlightened being can claim to know of the existence or

nonexistence of the self. Consequently, the futility of questions of existence is demonstrated in

their inability to be answered.

The Buddha’s refusal to maintain the absence or presence of self not only suggests the

question is misguided, but that preoccupation with either extreme is misaligned with the true

intentions of the anātman teaching. According to Strong, the previously discussed passages

regarding self “reflect the real struggle Buddhists underwent to grapple with this question of

anātman” (105). The Buddha's answers—or non-answers—leave ample room for interpretation.

Some firmly believe no self exists, and some the opposite; the ambiguity of his words allows for

either. However, both extreme views are at odds with the very lessons these discussed passages
convey, in which the Buddha himself opts for option three— the middle way. Thus, the anātman

teaching does not intend to spark fixation on and debate over the absence or presence of self.

What actually matters in this teaching is how true understanding of one’s own nature can reduce

suffering and aid in enlightenment. Recognizing the concept of non-self facilitates the attainment

of awareness and ultimate contentment. This is the true purpose of the anātman teaching, to be

further developed and discussed over the following paragraphs.

Non-self is a strategy by which greater awareness is achieved through acceptance of

one’s ever-changing nature, not simply a doctrine denying the existence of self. Embracing that

there is no “abiding ego, no unchanging me”, allows for the recognition of one’s own fluidity and

thus ability to change for the better (Strong 2007, 100). One who sees the self as incapable of

change would not commit to a goal of greater awareness—they may not even believe greater

awareness is possible as they see the ‘self’ as some stagnant, constant, entity. Seeing one’s own

transcience is to see one’s capacity for growth and change. Gautama Buddha's own

acknowledgment of his inconstant nature illustrates the capacity for betterment this recognition

gives rise to: “The Buddha found in his own Awakening that the realization of the absence of

such a permanent self leads to selfless loving-kindness and compassion for others” (Mitchell and

Jacoby 2014, 36). It is not the absence of self altogether, but the absence of a permanent self that

is the point of the anātman teaching. It is this embrace of inconstancy that allows for growth,

betterment, and aspiration of greater awareness.

To further illustrate how the understanding of anātman is ultimately conducive to

attaining nirvana, the concept can be analyzed in conjunction with the other two characteristics

of samsara—impermanence and suffering. All three characteristics, or “life’s constituents” are

closely related, each revealing key truths about the others (Mitchell and Jacoby 2014, 33).
Recognition of non-self prompts acceptance of impermanence which prompts cessation of

suffering. To elaborate, once one realizes there is no singular, constant, or fixed self, they are no

longer disillusioned with their own impermanence. Accepting the impermanence of self is key in

the acceptance of all things’ impermanence; the concept applies to both the internal and external:

“impermanence is not just a characteristic of the phenomena of the external world; it applies to

oneself” (Mitchell and Jacoby 2014, 35). Recognition of non-self also allows for the release of

ego and craving: “The realization of anātman puts an end to selfish desires'' (Strong 2007, 108).

The contentment with impermanence and loss of selfish desire that results from accepting

anātman is conducive to the cessation of suffering: “ ‘With this realization [of impermanence] I

was released from all clinging and delusion, and felt indescribably refreshed’ ” (Niwano, as cited

in Mitchell and Jacoby 2014, 33). Thus the concept of nonself unveils the transient nature of life,

a fact crucial to recognize in the path to Nirvana. The purpose of the anātman teaching hence has

little to do with debates on the existence of self, and everything to do with Buddhism’s ultimate

goal—to attain nirvana, a state characterized by contentment with the impermanence of all

beings and things.

The self—whether it exists or not—is hardly the permanent, independent object many

believe it to be. Acceptance of its multiplicity, constant flow, and dependence can relieve the

pain of mortality and desire for constancy. The Buddha discouraged extremes, thus the concept

of non-self is not the extreme many interpret it as. It is not denial nor confirmation, it is a middle

ground that diminishes ego, alleviates craving, and fosters greater awareness through the

embrace of impermanence.
 Works Cited
The Buddha’s Silence 3.2.3

Channa is Taught the Middle Way 3.2.4

Mitchell, Donald W., and Sarah H. Jacoby. Buddhism: Introducing the Buddhist Experience. 3rd
ed., Oxford University Press, 2014.

Strong, John S. The Experience of Buddhism: Sources and Interpretations. 3rd ed.,
Thomson/Wadsworth, 2007.