Anatta as substitute for anicca + conditional
arising. The Buddha’s liberating1
insight was: 1. ‘All that is subject to arising is subject to
cessation.’ To this insight he added a second, namely: 2. ‘Whatever arises is caused, that is to say, results from
conditions.’ To which he added an affect, namely: 3. ‘Dukkha’, meaning
distress, sorrow, suffering and so on. In
other words, all arisen things happen as impermanent effects, hence, since
they can’t be (permanently) owned, result in distress. So
initially the Buddha story2 was that all arisen things showed
three characteristics, namely impermanence (Pali: annicca), conditionality (Pali:
paṭiccasamuppāda) and distress (Pali: dukkha). See: The
3 characteristics sutta It
was later on when the followers of the Buddha were challenged by the far more
popular3 view of their competitors, the Brahmins, and who claimed4
that all things were created by the permanent and uncaused Atman5
included within themselves,6 thus owned,7
that they had to respond and adapt their belief system. To
ward off the challenge and reassert themselves the Buddhists simply
substituted conditionality (+ impermanence) by denying the existence of the
Atman.8 So
the Buddhist slogan-cum-mantra changed from ‘anicca- paṭiccasamuppāda9-dukkha’
to ‘anicca-anatta-dukkha’10,11. End
of story! © 2018 by
Victor Langheld |
1.
In other words,
liberation from the drag or weight of ignorance (Sanskrit: avidyya) and believed by a very naïve Buddha (and the
Upanishads) to have been the 1st cause, hence enlighten’ment. 2.
Buddhism, just
like Vedanta, Christianity, Islam and several hundred other religious and
philosophical, social and economic belief systems functions as healing story, i.e.
hence as placebo) whose job it is top restore an individual to wholeness,
meaning to maximum survival capacity. 3.
Because
offering an exit to Samsara and entry to eternal salvation. 4.
On the basis of
Upanishad speculation. The notion of the Atman as unconditioned, permanent
(hence real/true = Sanskrit sat) world creator had first appeared out of
the blue in the Brahadaranyaka Upanishad together
with the other world creator, the Brahman, and a revamp of the ancient world
creator Prajapati. It appears that the three
different versions of world creator were invented in different locations and
then brought together into the compilation of the Brahadaranyaka
Upanishad. Later Parjapati was dropped and Atman
and Brahman became interchangeable, later still equalised (by Shankara) as in Atman equals Brahman. 5.
Pali: atta. The translation of atta
(or atman) as self (understood as oneself or essence
of oneself … more ..) is a serious error, but one that made the
Buddhist story acceptable to Western Christian readers. 6.
i.e. as eternal substance or intrinsic nature. 7.
Each living
thing as it were owned (and could not disown) a piece of the Atman. The
translation of the word Atman as Self (with a capital S) is meaningless since
the term ‘self’ (i.e. as self-referential pronoun) is nowhere defined. more
.. 8.
At least within
the arisen thing. 9.
Translate
(Pali) paṭiccasamuppāda
as: causal arising, dependent origination, dependent arising, interdependent co-arising, conditioned arising or conditioned genesis. 10.Whereby anicca is actually redundant. All
the Buddhists needed do was declare an’atta-dukkha
since an’atta (or an’atman),
meaning ‘not-atman’, includes the notion of impermanence. Since according to
the Buddha all arisen things were impermanent they could not therefore be or
have part of the atta (i.e. of the Atman). A number
of suttas appear to suggest that the Buddha
believed in the un’caused and permanent, though he
avoided been drawn into any discussion on the topic. 11.
The mantra anicca-anatta-dukkha, intoned
continuously during a Vipassana course, trips
easily across the tongue. Sri Goenka, the Hindu
cloth salesman from Burma who popularised Vipassana
in the West, made a big deal of the mantra though he never quite understood
(or needed to understand) it. Not that it mattered since no one else
understood it either. |