Insight into Non-Self: A discussion Between Venerable Alawwe Anomadassi Thero and a Disciple

 

Understanding the Vision of Non-Self

Question: Venerable sir, you've clarified that the phrase "N'etam mama, n'eso'ham asmi, n'eso me attā" ("This is not mine, I am not this, this is not myself") is not a personal assessment but a profound, direct vision of reality. This vision seems to be the very essence of abandoning the self (sakkāya nirodha). Is my understanding correct? Also, when we guide someone toward this truth, isn't it through this vision that the Dhamma is seen as profound (athakkawachara), leading to a state of complete loyalty and devotion (anugatha), rather than just intellectual reasoning? I tried to practice this, but I couldn't sustain the discernment, reverting to old habits. How can I sustain this practice?

---

Answer: That's a perceptive question, and you've touched on a critical point. As long as we hold onto the notion of "self" or "I am" (Pathavī), any attempt to transcend it, even through spiritual practice, can paradoxically lead us to the opposite extreme—the idea of "it is not" (Na-Pathavī). This is a subtle but profound error.

In the Mūlapariyāya Sutta, the Buddha explains how the uninstructed person (puthujjana) perceives "earth" (paṭhaviṁ paṭhavito sañjānāti). This perception immediately leads to delight (abhinandati). The moment we perceive something as "earth," we've already created a mental construct (saññā) and clung to it, making any attempt to break it down simply a move from "it is" to "it is not." This is not the true transcendence.

True transcendence comes from a different kind of knowledge, an understanding that completely shatters the very perception of "earth." The sutta goes on to say that the instructed person, the Arahant, cognizes "earth" (paṭhaviṁ paṭhavito abhijānāti) but doesn't delight in it (na abhinandati). This is not merely an intellectual distinction; it is the result of a direct vision—a profound realization that leaves no room for the initial perception of "earth" to arise in the first place.  This is not a worldly "Na-Pathavī" but a profound freedom from the very possibility of perceiving anything as "Pathavī." This state is called sakkāya nirodha—the cessation of the perception of self.

So, when you experience "N'etam mama, n'eso'ham asmi...", you're challenging the very foundation of the self. This isn't a mere intellectual exercise; it's a direct assault on the perception of "I" and "me." When this perception is challenged and relinquished, the delight (abhinandana) can no longer take place. Without delight, there is no "Pathavī" to talk about. This is the true transcendence.

Your experience of "losing" the practice is normal because the deluded mind, rooted in the notion of "I," constantly seeks to define and possess the experience. You want to "have" the vision, which ironically puts you right back in the territory of "self." True understanding (yathābhūta ñāna) is beyond intellectual grasp; it is the abandonment of the "self," which is why it's so difficult to define. It is the state of being dissolved in the Dhamma, where there is no longer an "I" who is listening, reasoning, or practicing. This is the state of Anugatha—a complete alignment with the truth.

---

Sustaining the Vision in Practice

Question: So, does our distorted sense of "I" veil this true understanding? We move from "it exists" to "it doesn't exist" without the proper vision. How, then, can we sustain the vision of "N'etam mama, n'eso'ham asmi..." in practice (bhāvita)?

---

Answer: That is precisely the issue. The vision cannot be forced. Our daily experiences—seeing, hearing, feeling—are naturally and effortlessly framed by the delusion of "I am here, and there are things out there." We don't have to try to be deluded; it's our default setting.

To change this, we need a level of mindfulness (sati) that operates from the perspective of the newly gained vision. Mindfulness is a cornerstone of the path, as seen in the Sapta Bojjhaṅga (Seven Factors of Awakening), which begins with mindfulness. The key is to apply mindfulness with Yonisomanasikāra—wise attention—to what is happening right now, without the intrusion of "I."

A vision of non-self (sakkāya nirodha) has no definition, which is why it's called a crossing over. The moment you try to define it, to make it "yours," you've introduced the "self" and are back at the beginning. This is a common pitfall. The practice isn't about gaining a defined vision to cling to; it's about the abandonment of the self that seeks the vision. It's a surrender to the truth, not a personal achievement.

---

The Importance of a Wise Teacher and Focused Practice

Question: So, are you advising me to practice with a clear focus on what a wise friend or teacher has instructed?

---

Answer: Yes, a clear focus on the instruction is essential. This is a mutually aligned relationship between the teacher and the student. If the student lacks focus, they need to be "shaken up" to become conscious of their deluded state. This is the jolt that takes away the verbal and intellectual constructs, leaving a space for true discernment. When you're shaken up, you become speechless, and in that silence, true focus can arise.

This focus is crucial for developing Saddhānusāri (the faith-follower), which begins with seeing the impermanence of everything—the eye, the ear, and the entire process of sensory experience. Only when you truly realize you cannot continue to dwell in this sensitivity does the dissolving into the Dhamma occur. It is only at this point that discernment becomes practical and ceases to be a mere intellectual exercise.

This kind of discerning is a deep dive, not mere reasoning. It's a profound realization of the impermanence of the eye itself, which completely undermines the notion of 'my eye,' rather than being a detached, abstract concept. When discernment happens at the level of sensitivity (gocara), it arrests the process of clinging. If it doesn't, you simply move from clinging to one thing to another. The discerning must begin at the point of sensory contact, preventing reasoning from taking precedence. This is the state of being dissolved in the Dhamma, a state of profound clarity.

---

The Nature of True Understanding

Question: So, is this dissolving into the Dhamma one's inherent nature at that state?

---

Answer: Yes, it is your nature, but without any personal involvement. It's not something "you" do. The dissolving, the wisdom, the abandonment of self—all these things occur without any "someone" gaining them. This is why it is called duddassa duranubodha—"hard to see, hard to awaken to." It is a state of "oneness" in which the very notion of "one" has dissolved.

The Buddha's teaching on Na-kiñci ("nothing whatsoever") is often misunderstood. We tend to think we must first take something as "existing" (kiñci) and then declare that "it is not." But the Buddha's teaching shows how something can be said to be Akiñcañña (free from the notion of anything) without first perceiving it as "something." This is a state where the perception of "something" has no ground to arise.

In the Mogharāja Sutta, the Buddha says to see the world as "empty" (akiñcanan anadanan). This doesn't mean "nothing is there," but rather, it is a state free from the perception of anything to be clung to. This is the sakkāya nirodha state—the state free of the self, which cannot be explained in words. It can only be pointed to, so that one can abandon the self and realize it for themselves.