EGOLESSNESS  (soul).

C affinity that people often called the soul, self or ego, is to imply an absolute entity, eternal in the human, unchanging substance behind the changing phenomenal world. According to some religions, each with a separate souls thus being created by God, and that after death the soul will live forever in hell or heaven. Its fate depends on the judgment of its creator. According to several other religions, that soul through many lives, until it is completely clean and eventually became identified with God or Brahma  Brahman , Universal Soul or Ātman  from which it comes . This soul or self in man is the thinking, feeling, and receive rewards and punishments for all its good and bad behavior. Such a concept called  Self is .

Buddhism  is the only religion in the religious history of humanity denying the existence of a soul, or Ātman Falls. According to Buddhist teachings, ego is a false belief, does not correspond to reality, and it produces harmful thoughts of 'I' and 'mine', selfish desire not bored, permission competition, hatred, evil, arrogant conceit, and other defilements, impurities and problems. It is the source of all the troubles in this world, from personal conflicts to wars between nations.In short, all the evil in the world comes from this false conception.

There are two ideas ingrained in human psychology: self-defense and self-preservation. For self-protection man has created God to lean on, to be protected, security is guaranteed, as a child depends on the parents. For self-preservation man has created the idea of ​​an immortal soul or Ātman will live eternally. In his ignorance, weakness, fear, desire, two things are needed to reassure themselves, self-pampering; for that reason they cling to it fanatically and enthusiasm.

Buddha's teaching does not support this ignorance, weakness, fear, thirst ', but aims at making man enlightened by removing out, destroy, eradicate these habits. According to Buddhism, our ideas about God and the soul is false, empty.Although his ideas are developed deeply woven into the doctrines, all of which are projections of the imagination sophisticated wrapped up in a tangle noun metaphysical philosophy and complexity. These ideas are so deep-rooted in human psychology, with their nearest and dearest that they do not wish to hear, nor want to understand what a moral vice versa.

Buddha knew that, he taught that his teachings "go upstream" ( patisotagami ), in contrast to the selfish desires of man. Four weeks after enlightenment, sitting under an ancient origin, he said to himself: "I did witness a profound truth, hard to see, hard to understand ... just wise men finally understood. People with passion tame passion, ignorance being surrounded can not see this truth, because it is upstream, it is sublime, deep, subtle vakho think. "

Think so, Buddha hesitated a moment: "Is vain if he tried to explain to the world the Truth he had just realized?" Then he compared the world to a lotus pond: in many flowers that were still in the water, there are other flowers just sticking up above the water, but also the flowers put themselves out of the lake and is no longer active contact with water. Likewise in this world, the development level of different people. There are some who will understand the truth. So the Buddha decided to teach this truth [1] .

The doctrine of Anatta is the natural result, the corollary of the analysis and Origination Five Aggregates ( or dependent arising, Paticca-samuppāda ) [2] .

In the discussion of the First Noble Truth (Dukkha), we have seen what we call the soul or an individual is composed of five aggregates, and carefully analyzing the five aggregates do not see anything behind they can be called is I, Ātman or Self, or any other permanent substance unchanging. That is the method of analysis. We also have similar results when considering disciplinary origination, synthesis methods, and according to this law, there is nothing in this world is absolute. Everything (legal) are limited, relative, and interdependent. This is the Buddhist theory of relativity.

Before you actually go into the question of Anatta, we should have a brief idea about the laws of dependent origination. The principle of this theory is summarized in a formula consisting of 4 lines:

This one has, the other one can  (sati idam hoti imasmim).
This arising, that arises  (imassuppada idam uppajjati).
This is not, then the other is not  (idam na hoti imasmim asati).
This one kill, then the kill the other  (idam nirodhā Imassa airujjhata)[3] .

According to the conditional principle, relativistic and reciprocity depends then, the continuity of life and its cessation are explained in a detailed formula called origination, (ie the uprising conditional or  grace ) of 12 elements:

1. Ignorance (as) grace (for) operating (intentional activities or  industrial ) (avijjapaccaya samkhava).

2. Action (do) grace (for) knowledge (samkharapaccaya vinnanam).

3. Consciousness (as) grace (for) mentality (psychological phenomena and physics) ( Vinnanapaccaya namarupam).

4. Mentality (as) grace (for) record entry (5 senses and consciousness) (Namarupapaccaya salayatanam).

5.  sixfold (do) predestined (to) contact (touching, exposure) (salayatanapaccaya phasso).

6. Promotion (do) grace (for) life (feeling) ( phassapaccaya vedana).

7. Feeling (as) grace (for) craving (thirst desire) ( vedanapaccayatanha).

8. Ai (as) grace (for) players (cling, hold) ( Tanhapaccaya upadanam).

9. Prime (as) grace (the) ownership (process born and become) (upadanapaccaya bhavo).

10- Friends (as) grace (for) students (of life, born)  (Bhavapaccaya Jati).

11. Birth (do) grace (for)

12. Lao (old) to death (death), sorrow (sorrow pain)  (Jatipaccaya jaram maranam).

This is the process by which the life arises, exists and continues. If we reverse the formula again, we will go to the end of the process:

Ignorance is operating kill kill, kill, the official practice killing, form and matter destroy the kill, kill the continental mentality death etc. until birth, aging, death, sorrow, ... kill.

Need to remember one thing that each of the elements above are both just as effective workers, it has been determined by  (paticcasamuppanna),  and as a condition for  (paticcasamuppàda) [4] . Therefore we are all relative, interdependent and interrelated, nothing is absolute or isolated, so that Buddhism does not recognize the "first cause" as we have seen previously [5] .  Origination should look like a circle, rather than seen as a chain [6] .

The problem of free will occupy an important place in thought and Western philosophy. But according to the law of dependent origination, this problem does not arise and can not arise in Buddhist philosophy. If the whole of existence is relative, conditioned and interdependent, how can will alone be free? the will also be limited as any other ideology. The so-called "freedom" itself and relatively limited. There can not be something physical or psychological can absolutely free, because all things are relative and relative. "Free will" implied a desire not depend on the conditions, independent of cause and effect. How one wishes or anything belonging to the will, which may arise without conditions, away from cause and effect - the whole of existence are relatively limited and, in the law of causality? Again here, the notion of free will is also closely related to the idea of ​​God, Soul, justice, reward and punishment. Not the so-called freedom was not free, but even the very idea of ​​free will has not escaped these conditions.

According to the law of dependent origination, as well as the analysis of being into Five Aggregates, the idea of an immortal substance in man or outside, whether called Ātman, I, Soul, Self, or the Self, is considered only a false belief (false beliefs), a shadow of consciousness. This is the Buddhist theory  of Anatta (a natta ).

To avoid confusion, it should be mentioned here that there are two kinds of truths: conventional truth, custom insole  (sammutisacca),  and the absolute truth and win imperialism  (paramatthasaca ) [7] .

When we use everyday words like "I", "me", "soul", "personal" and so on. not we lie, but we speak a truth conforming to the convention of the world. But the ultimate truth is no "I" or "soul". As of Mahāyāna  ( Mahayana enter old Lang ) taught: "A man ( pudagala ) should be considered only in the emulator (prajnapati ) (ie, by convention, the individual or a person), not must in reality (dravya ) [8] .

"The negation of an immortal soul is the common characteristic of all systems as well as Theravada doctrine Mahayana, and so there is no reason to assert that the Mahayana tradition, a tradition entirely concur with Theravada point on this issue, has deviated from the original teachings of the Buddha. "  [9]

It is therefore curious that recently some scholars (a vain and others) [10]  has tried - in vain - alternating idea of self into the teaching of the Buddha, a stark contrast Buddhism. This These scholars respect, admire and venerate the Buddha and his teachings. They admired Buddhism. But they could not have imagined that the Buddha, whom they see as a deep thinker and most transparent, to be able to deny the existence of Ātman or Self which they need to. They do not know that they are looking for the support of the Buddha for this need, the need for an eternal existence - of course not in a petty individual self with a word  n normally, but in the big Self with a word  N  flowers.

Preferably, they should tell the truth that they believe in Ātman or Self, or one might even say that the Buddha was totally wrong in denying the existence of a Self. But surely no one should take into Buddhism an idea which the Buddha never accepted, as we can see from the extant original.

These religions believe in God and the soul no secret that the two concepts, on the contrary, they proclaim them out, repeated several times in the most eloquent terms. If the Buddha had accepted that the two ideas, two crucial ideas in every religion, then surely he has publicly declared them as he had claimed among other things, and not let them hidden to be discovered only 25 centuries after his death.

People become nervous at the idea that through the Buddha's teaching of Anatta, the self they imagine they have, will be destroyed. The Buddha was not unaware of this.

One day, the monks asked him: "O Buddha, when people have been tormented for not found in her something permanent?"

Buddha replied:

- Fruit is so, the monks. When a person is thinking, "The universe is Ātman, after death is something that we will, everlasting, forever, lasting, unchanging, so we'll survive until infinity," which is heard Tathagata or a disciple of the Tathagata preached the theory leads to the complete destruction of all speculative views ... leading to the quench thirst, to liberation, to terminate, Nirvana; he will think: "So I will be annihilated, I will be destroyed, I will not anymore."Therefore it whine, worry, mourn mourning, and becomes bewildered. Thus, the monks, one result has been the case when not tormented find in it something lasting  [11] .

In another passage, the Buddha says: 'O bhikkhus, thinking' I will no longer exist, nothing more "make people stupid fear." [12]

Those who want to find a 'Self' in Buddhism  argue as follows: Verily Buddha analyzes being into matter, sensation, perception, and consciousness (Five Aggregates), and said nothing in things it self. But he is not absolutely sure there is no intersection, where human or any other place outside the five aggregates.

This position is untenable for two reasons:

One is that, according to Buddhist teachings, man is only five aggregates is none other combinations. Nowhere has said that there was something else in man, in addition to the five aggregates.

The second reasons is that the Buddha rejected, with the words transparency, existence of Ātman or Self within or outside man, or anywhere in the universe.Here are some examples:

The first two verses say:

"All acts are impermanent '( Sabbe samkhārā aniccā )  and
" All acts are suffering "  ( sabbe samkhārā dukkhā ).
[ Act  or  compounded,  that what has birth, residence and removal; are combined by the conditions - translator]

The third question:

"All selfless approach" ( sabbe dhammā anattà ) [13] . 

Special attention should be paid here that in the first two verses, the word samkhārā  - "things conditional" - has been used. But in the third sentence instead of letters  samkhāra , letters  dhammā  was used. Why did not the third verse use the word  practice, samkhārā,  "conditioned things", like the previous two, but used the term  legal ,  dhammā  instead? The main point that is the most important of issues.

List of  operating , samkhāra [14]  denotes the Five Aggregates, all things and the state is limited, interdependent, relative, every "legal" physical and psychological (mind the legal and material). If the third verse says: "All acts (limited things) are without self ', then one might think things are selfless restricted, but there may be a Self outside conditioned things limits, outside the Five aggregates. Key to avoid misunderstanding which nouns  measures (dhammā) was used in the third verse.

List of  law  has wider scope  practice  a lot. No word in the Buddhist terminology the word has broader  legal . It includes not only the state of things and conditions, but also the non-conditioned, the Absolute, Nirvana; nothing in the universe or outside, good or bad, conditioned (conditional) or unconditioned (unconditional), relative or absolute ..., that are not included in this term.Therefore, it is clear, according to the statement  "all non-self approach"  then there is no self, no soul, not only in the Five Aggregates, but also anywhere outside the five aggregates or separate from the five aggregates [15] .

According to the original teachings, this means that there is no self in man (puggala)  or in the law. Mahayana philosophy also has an identical position, there is no any difference on that point, the emphasis on the selflessness of law and human selflessness (selfless approach,  dhammanairatmya  and selfless person,  pudgalanairatmya ).

In Xa example  Alagadddupamasutta  (Central I), Buddha's disciples: "O bhikkhus, he can cling to the soul-theory (theory of self) if it does not arise sorrow, lamentation pain, grief, brain . But the monks, he has seen a fall of such arguments or not, a soul-theory in the acceptance of it, would not arise sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and the brain?

- Blessed, is not certain.

- Exactly so, ask the monks, the Tathagata, too. This monks, the Tathagata does not see a soul-theory which, if accepted, would not arise sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and distress. " [16]

If the Buddha had accepted a soul-theory, he would certainly have explained it here, because he asked the bhikkhus to accept that soul-theory which did not produce suffering. But according to him, does not have such a theory, and any soul-theory, though subtle and sublime, is only pretending and imagining, born any problems, accompanied by sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief brain.

Next, the Buddha was also in business:

"O bhikkhus, when neither self nor anything pertaining to self not really so, this speculative view:" The universe is the Self, and I will be after death, will be everlasting, N, permanent telecommunications, immutable, and we will present how to infinite time ", that point of view there is absolutely crazy reasonable?"[17]

Here the Buddha states that a Ātman, or soul, or Self, is no where to be found in reality, and it is foolish to believe that there is such a thing.

Those seeking a self in the Buddha's teaching quote a few examples which they first translate wrongly, and then explained erroneously. One example was the reputation  Āttā hi attano nātho does  the Dhammapada (XII, 4, or verse 160), which is translated as "I am the lord of self", and explained that it means something big ego is the lord of the small self.

First of all, this translation is incorrect.  Āttā  this does not mean that the soul down. In Pali, the noun  Āttā often used as a pronoun, except in rare cases be used in a special meaning to the philosophical theory of the soul just as we have seen above.

According to common usage, as in the XII chapter in the Dhammapada where this line is extracted, and in many other places,  Āttā  used as a pronoun or pronoun uncertainty means "myself", "Main I "," itself "," ourselves "," oneself "and so on. [18]

Next, the word nātho no means "lord", which is "helpless", "shelter, help Dou, protects"  [19] . Therefore  Āttā hi attano  really means, "I am my own refuge."It does not pertain to a self or any metaphysical soul. It just means you have to rely on yourself, and not rely on others.

Another example of the attempt to introduce the idea of self into the Buddha's teaching is the reputation  Attadipa viharatha, attasarana anannasarana  be separated from the context Mahaparinibbana Sutta [20] .  This phrase literally means: "Be your own island, is the main shelter for you, and not anyone else as your refuge " [21] .   Those who want to find  self in Buddhism has interpreted the word  attadipa  and  attasarana  is" taken down as tops lamp "," get down as refuge " [22] .

I do not understand the full meaning Buddha advised Ananda  (Ananda)  without considering the context and the context in which these words were uttered.

At that time the Buddha was staying at a village called Behuva, three months before he died, Bat Nirvana  (parinirvana) . At this time he was 80 years old, was very ill. But he thinks should not die without breaking it to his disciples who love Him closely. Therefore, a courageous way, all decisions, he endured all the pain, wins surfing illness, and recovery. But his health was still poor. After his recovery, he sat one day in the shade outside his residence. Ananda, the most devoted attendant of the Buddha, the Master toward his beloved, sitting next to the Buddha and said:

"Blessed One, I have looked after the health Buddha, I have looked after him in his illness. But seeing his condition, the sky for children to become blurred, and the senses I no longer clear. but there was one small consolation: I thought that Buddha would not enter Nirvana without leaving a mobile teacher's words referring to the Sangha. "

Then the Buddha, full of compassion and kindness, who gently spoke to his devoted and beloved attendant: 'Ananda Sangha waiting for something from me? I have said Justice (truth) regardless special high-low. In terms of truth, the Tathagata has nothing like the closed fist of a teacher ( acariyamutthi ). Ānanda, if anyone have thoughts lead the Sangha, the Sangha should depend at them, then of course they will put them instructions. But the Tathagata has no such idea. then why Tathagata must save the contact instructions to organize the Sangha? I am now old, A- nan, was 80 years old. as an old car needs to be repaired to run, too, the body of the Tathagata now continue operating only thanks to repair. Therefore, this Ananda, be self-employed the main island for you, yourselves as helpless, do not rely on anyone else; take a French island, took French as dependable, no-one else can do for your shelter [23] .

What he wanted to teach Ananda is quite clear. Ananda is sad and depressed. He thought that they would all be lonely, helpless, helpless, without a guide, after the Master's death great. Thus the Buddha gave him words of comfort, advised him courage, confidence, teaches that should depend on themselves, and rely on the "French" He commanded, and not on anyone else, to something else. Here the question of a metaphysical Ātman, or ego, is completely beside the point.

Then the Buddha explained to Ananda how can the islands or shelter for himself: it is by the formation of attention to observe the body, feelings, mind and Justice (4 customary law, see the next chapter of Contemplation) [24] . Here, too, without a word related to self or soul.

Another document is also often cited by those who want to find the Buddha's teaching Falls. The Buddha was sitting under a tree in a wooded area on the way from Benares (Benares) to Uruvela. On that day, 30 young prince is going camping with their young wives in the same forest. A princely unmarried brought a prostitute. While others were amusing themselves, she purloined some valuables and escaped. In their search for her in the woods, they saw the Buddha sitting under the tree they had asked him to see a woman come across. He asked something, and after listening to the explanation Buddha asked them: "What do you think, asked the young people? Which is better for you? To find a woman, or to search after yourselves? " [25]

Here again it is a question very simple and natural, there is no reason to put into place the remote idea of ​​Self or Soul. They respond better to search yourself.Buddha asked them to sit down and lecture to them. According to the teachings of the Buddha has preached to them are recorded in the original texts, without a word to say about self.

It has written extensively on the topic "the silence of the Buddha", as a wanderer named Vacchagotta asked whether he would fall or not. The story is as follows:

Vacchagotta went to the Buddha and asks:

- Lord Gautama, have a self?

Buddha is silent.

- So sir, no falling star?

Buddha is silent.

Vacchagotta got up to leave.

After wanderer ( parivrajaka ) leave, Ananda asked Buddha why he did not answer the question of Vacchagotta. Buddha explains his position as follows:

- Hey Ananda, when Vacchagotta asked: "Is there a self?" If the answer: "Yes" means I have sided with the monks, Brahmins enduring theory advocates (sassatavada ). And this Ananda, when Vacchagotta asked: "There is no self?" if answered "No" as it was on the side of a Brahmin monk advocates the doctrine of annihilation ( uccheda Vada ) [26] .

Again, Ananda, when Vacchagotta asked: "Is there a self?", If I had answered: "Yes", would that be consistent with my knowledge that all dhammas are without self? " [27]

- Buddha, really is not.

- Again, Ananda, when Vacchagotta asked: "There is no self?" I had answered: "No", it will cause even more confusion Vacchagotta have further panic  [28] .  For he would have thought: "Before we can indeed fall, but now we do not have anymore."  [29]

Now we have to understand exactly why the Buddha was silent. But we would also understand if the whole context and consider how Buddha treated questions and questioners - which the issue was discussed completely ignored.

Buddha is not like a computer giving answers to any questions, posed by anyone without judgment. He was a practical masters, full of compassion and wisdom.He did not answer questions to show knowledge and his intelligence, but to help the questioner on the way to realization. When someone told him always interested in their level of development, their tendencies, their mental make-up, their character and their ability to perceive the problem [30] .

According to Buddhism, there are four ways of treating questions:

1. There should be answered direct questions.
2. There are questions to be answered by the analysis.
3. There should be answered by asking the reverse.
4. And finally, there are questions should put aside [31] .

There can be many ways up an issue. One is to have no problem answering that, that is how Buddha had used with her Vacchagotta wanderer, when he put the famous question about the universe is eternal or not etc. [32] . Also the same way he answered for Mãlunkyaputta and others. But he can not do that on a matter falling or not, because he had always discussed and explained it. He can not say: "There fell" because it opposed his knowledge that all things are selfless. Then he did not want to say there is no soul, because it is in vain to make the poor guy was bewildered Vacchagotta increasingly more confused, as he himself has acknowledged [33] . He was not yet in a position to understand the self. So in this case, up questions aside by silence, is the wisest attitude.

I also do not forget that Buddha was known Vacchagotta long. This was not the first occasion that the inquiring Wanderer had come to see the Buddha. Teacher who is full of wisdom and compassion saved more attention to people looking for this confusion. There are many passages mentioning wanderer Vacchagotta in Pali texts, he had come to the Buddha and his disciples many times, repeated many times with these questions, it is clear he is very anxious, almost the other problem was obsessed [34] .   the Buddha's silence probably had more effect on Vacchagotta any answer or eloquent discussion [35] .

Some viewers down means something usually called "mind" or "consciousness".But Buddha taught that it is better for a man to take his physical body is "self" rather than mind and mind or consciousness ( citta, mano, viňňāna ) is down because mind, thought or consciousness, it changes constantly day night, changing even faster than the body ( kaya ) [36] .

Main vague feeling "I AM 'that creates the idea of self which has nothing equivalent in reality: and see this truth is the realization of Nirvana, it's not easy for too . In the Samyutta  nikāya [37] , have a conversation quite clarify matters on this point between a bhikkhu named Khemaka and a group of monks. These men have asked Khemaka find in the Five Aggregates a "self" yet or anything belonging to "self" does not. Khemaka answered "no". Then the bhikkhus say that, if so, he should be an Arahant free from pollution. But Khemaka confessed that although he did not find in the Five Aggregates any self or anything pertaining to a self, "I am still not a Luohan (Arahant) free from all impurities. O friends , for the Five aggregates, I have the feeling that "I AM", but did not clearly see "this is what I am." Then Khemaka explains that what he calls the "I" is not sharp, not life, not great, not the executive, nor knowledge, nor anything but them. But he still has a sense of "I AM" for 5 aggregates, although he could not see clearly 'This is what I. " [38]

He says it is like the smell of a flower: it's not the smell of the petals, not the color of the flower, nor of the pollen, but the smell of flowers. He further explained that even a person who has reached the first stage of realization still feel "with me" thing. But later, when further, the feeling was completely gone, just as the chemical smell of a freshly washed shirt to take some time after it's out of the box.

This discussion and clarification of benefits for their problems that then, as the scriptures record, everyone, including Khemaka, have attained Arhat, freed of all pollution, and so in the end they were defeated by the feeling "I AM".

According to Buddhist teachings, accepting that "I have no ego" (ie theoretical cessation) as wrong to accept that "I have self '(theory of longevity), because both concepts are tied, are arising from the false idea 'I AM'. The right attitude towards the problem of selflessness is not holding an opinion or "is" yet, but try to see things objectively, look at them as the truth, without the projection of the mind. Must see that what we call "I" or "self" is just a combination of physical and mental aggregates, correlates closely work with each other in a line change every moment, be governed by causality, and in the whole of existence, nothing is eternal, immutable forever.

Here a natural question arises: "If there is no self, then who gets the results of karma (action)?" No one can answer this question better than the Buddha. When the monks asked him that question, Buddha says: 'O bhikkhus, I have taught him clearly see the interdependence of all things. " [39]

The Buddha's teaching on Anatta should not be seen as negative or destructive.Like Nirvana, it is Truth, Reality, and Reality is never negative. Erroneous belief in a self imagine no new real negative. The teaching on Anatta dispels the darkness of false beliefs arise light and wisdom. It is not negative, as Asanga (Asanga)  very aptly says:  "There is the fact of No-self".END=NAM MO CAKYA MOUNI BUDDHA.( 3 TIMES ).VIETNAMESE TRANSLATE ENGLISH BY=THICH CHAN TANH.THE MIND OF ENLIGHTENMENT.WORLD VIETNAMESE BUDDHIST ORDER=VIETNAMESE BUDDHIST NUN=GOLDEN LOTUS MONASTERY=AUSTRALIA,SYDNEY.27/11/2016.MHDT.