Today is the day I finally woke up to the general concept of anatta, or ‘non-self’ in Buddhism. After finally understanding karma and rebirth in terms of non-self (see “Non-Self, Karma and Rebirth” below), I have come to understand that non-self is a generalized term that does not imply the unique individual. Non-self is a generalized ‘theory’ (if you will) about existence, human existence in particular, but that’s about as particular as it gets. In other words, it’s not about YOU. Non-self is not trying to negate you as a unique individual, or deny who you are, or take anything away from you as a unique individual. It is not saying that you don’t exist as an individual, because of course you do. It’s not trying to deny your existence or imply in any way that you are not in substance an embodied living being, which of course, you are. In fact, that’s what the Five Skandhas teaching is about: it’s saying that your unique physical embodiment consists of these Five Skandhas: form (body) sensation, feeling, perception, consciousness and so on. So in that sense, the Five Skandhas affirm you as a living embodied and conscious being that actually does exist and feels pain and has all kinds of experiences. That’s not what anatta is about.
Anatta is generalized, but not limited to social generalization. It’s not even about “society” in general, although it could imply “society” as a matter of practical application. It’s not about a specific ethnicity, race, culture, nation or group of people. And believe me, I’m a sociologist and I’ve been studying sociology for 40 years, so this is definitely my bailiwick. It’s not a generalized theory of “society”, much as I would have liked that. No, it’s something even more general than “society.”
Anatta is not about the individual “self” either in the Western sense of an individual ego or in the Hindu/Sanskrit interpretation of the word atta, as the individual and eternal soul that transmigrates from body to body, life to life. Anatta points in a completely different direction—to the universal and existential sense of “being”.
Anatta is a universal theory about a universal experience. All beings suffer, all beings are born, live for some time and die. All beings are subject to the conditions which cause both suffering and enlightenment. All beings. Not you in particular, although “you” are obviously included in “all beings.” Not North American or Asian or South American or African or European specifically, but All Beings. All beings includes all those many cultures and ethnicities, and does not negate them. It does not say they are all “empty” and have no meaning. But it includes all those specificities in the most universal category: All Beings.
It’s not about You, although you, as a unique and embodied individual can certainly benefit from applying all the teachings and practices to your individual life and experience. Meditation definitely works on an individual level and the ethical teachings of Buddhism certainly apply to your life specifically. You as an individual instance of All Beings.
But ultimately, it’s not about You, or Us or We. It’s a universal ‘non-self’. In that sense, Buddhism cannot be confined to being just about your unique suffering, your unique psychological makeup, your personal history and development, your specific cultural, ethnic and geopolitical location. Because it’s not about “you” although it does apply to you. It’s not about making you feel better, or chanting for what you want, or your personal sanctification, however you define that. Because it’s not about “you”. Buddhist philosophy and practice applies to the broadest and most universal sense of “being”. Buddhism is about total liberation for all beings. And that is what I have come to understand as the meaning of anatta, ‘non-self.’
But it’s true that thinking about anatta in this way can make you feel very small, a tiny speck within the boundless universe. I am no longer capital “I”; I am not even lower-case “I”. I am the dot above lower case “I”. A mere speck in the vast ocean of being.
Dharmaecology 