The Illusion of 'I': A Dialogue on Mindful Perception

-

 


This article presents a dialogue with Venerable Anomadassi Thero, exploring a core concept in Buddhist philosophy: the nature of the "I" (wemi).

We often assume the "I" is a solid, permanent entity, but the venerable monk clarifies that it is a distortion arising from clinging. The conversation unravels this illusion by distinguishing between the direct experience of "me" and the much more common notion of "mine" (mama:pali), which is tied to objects and actions.

The dialogue highlights a key error in our perception: we believe a separate "I" does an action, rather than seeing the "I" arise with the action itself. This false view traps us in a cycle of distortion.

Ultimately, the discussion shifts to the path of a practitioner, contrasting the worldly view of existence with non-existence . A practitioner's wisdom allows them to see through the illusion of the "I" and realise the truth as really is.

The Illusion of 'I'

Question: Venerable sir, in the Ananda Sutra, it's said that the notion of "I" (wemi) is due to clinging. Can wemi be understood as "I" (mama), or is mama just a compounded thing (samkatha)?

Answer: Yes, wemi can be understood as mama. However, we rarely encounter a solitary "I" in our daily lives. Instead, we're almost always dealing with the notion of "mine." The idea of "I" always comes alive through an action, such as "I eat" or "I go." Although we perceive an "I" as the doer (Kathru), it's inseparable from the action itself.The belief in an "I" independent of action is a distortion.

The Distortion of a Separate Doer

Question: So, the doer is not a separate entity from the action.

Answer: That's right. Believing the doer is a separate entity is the core distortion. As long as we think there's an "I" independent of an action, we also create a separate "thing." We're conceptually conditioned to link actions to objects. For instance, we say, "I sit on a chair" or "I listen to a voice." The moment a "thing" comes into play, it implies an "I" exists alongside it. This is a mental formation (samskara) that appears real to us.

If we wisely focus only on the action, we see how this "I" pops out as wemi. The Buddha reveals the truth by stating, "I arise from seeing." We, however, distort this by saying, "Seeing occurs in the eye," which then reinforces the presence of "me." If we can penetrate this distortion, we can see that the notion of "I" is a samkatha, or a compounded thing, that arises with an action.

Understanding Truth and Untruth

Question: It seems that the "I" we perceive is a compounded thing that arises from not seeing the truth of an action. So, would saying "I am" by removing the "I" from an action lead us toward a Self (Atma)?

Answer: If we use the term Atma, we suggest it exists. In truth, we can only refer to a Self in terms of Anatma (Non-Self). We must first show that the notion of "exists" (a "thing") is false and that nothing truly exists. We use concepts like compounded things (samkatha) to help people understand the uncompounded (Asamkatha) truth. The goal is to remove the distortion, not to define a new kind of self. This is why the Buddha discusses "nothingness" (akincanan anadanan : Mogaraja Sutta) from the perspective of truth without referring to our worldly errors.

The Path of a Practitioner

Question: How does a practitioner relate to this?

Answer: Only a person on the path can truly understand this. An uninstructed person (Putajjana) is ignorant of impermanence and is caught up in the awareness of permanence (nicca sammassana). A practitioner on the path sees both sides. They can see compounded things (samkatha) for what they are (yathabhutha nana), free from the illusion of permanence.

Question: Can a stream-winner still associate with worldly things?

Answer: Yes, but with a deep understanding, not just mindfulness. A stream-winner sees a kuti (room) not as a fixed concept but as an occurrence. The word is just a designation. Their vision focuses on the occurrence itself, seeing Form or Sensation as a sankatha. They still interact with the world like an uninstructed person, but they do so knowingly.

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

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

-
Image
  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 tran...
Read more

The Four Postures Meditation (Iriyapatha Bawana) as Taught by the Buddha

-
Image
There are four types of Posture meditation ( Iriyapatha Bhavana ) , which are  Sitting ( nisinna ), Standing ( ṭhita ), Walking ( gacchanta ), and Lying ( sayāna ).  Posture meditation techniques are commonly practiced to develop Samdhi or stillness.  However, the practice of Iriyapatha taught by the Buddha aims to develop insights to his profound Dhamma.  What is commonly practiced today is simply walking and to switch posture between sitting down, standing or lying positions maintaining concentration and mindfulness in whatever body posture or movement you choose to contemplate on. We need to know well how Iriypatha meditation can be practiced for e.g. walking ( sakman ) meditation. It is to be noted that Irriyapatha meditation was not invented by the Tathagatha but was practiced even before the Buddha's time by the practitioners or yogis who sought liberation.  However, the common understanding is that it is solely a Buddhist practice wher...
Read more

Māgandiya Sutra: The Discourse to Māgandiya

-
Image
On one occasion the Buddha was residing in a village named Kammāsadhamma in the Kuru country. A Brahmin called Bhāradvāja has prepared a grass-spread as resting-place for the Buddha in his fire-house. While the Blessed one had his dayrest in a nearby forest grove, the wanderer Māgandiya who visited Bhāradvāja learnt about Buddha’s visit and remarked that he would avoid Gauthama as he preaches to destroy births which he thought was detrimental to the existence of the world. His claim was that the beings who travel on Samsara ends the continuation of their existence when they listen to Buddha’s teachings and follow his Dhamma. As these people are not born again, he accused the Buddha, calling him a Destroyer of Births .  That evening the Buddha retired to the fire-house, where Bhāradvāja met him. The Buddha, knowing through his divine hearing what has happened earlier, asked Bhāradvāja about it, to his great surprise. They were interrupted by Māgandiya’s arrival. The ...
Read more