The Old Buddha’s half truth



The Sakya Buddha claimed that suffering arises because all dharmas are not atta, i.e. not or empty of self.


During 40 years of continuous preaching he never once clearly defined what he meant by atta (i.e. a self). However, in his explanation as to why a dharma is anatta, i.e. not-a-self, he describes two qualities that are missing from a dharma, thus actually describing at least two essential qualities of an atta/self, namely permanence and ownership.

The ownership question

The 3 characteristics sutra


In other words, for me to have a (true) self it must be mine permanently. Since it is obvious that I can’t own anything permanently and in addition emerge dependent on conditions, hence don’t own myself, I don’t have a true atta/self.


Well yes!, in the long run.


But what about the short run? Is it possible to have a true atta/self from moment to moment? So to speak as a discrete reality?


The Old Buddha dodged this question in his conversation with Vacchagotta. Had he answered Vacchagotta truthfully then Buddhism would never have emerged as a world religion-cum-mental-emergency-health-care-service or would have taken on an entirely different shape.


Vacchagotta’s unanswered question







The Old Buddha: ‘In the long run I’m dead, ..… so what’s the point?’ ‘I suffer because I don’t live forever, unchanging!’


The New Buddha’s other half truth



The Old Buddha existed in an analogue relativistic world. The New Buddha operates upon a quantum ground.


@ quantum collision (@q2, i.e. formerly Einstein’s c2) realness happens. Quanta, i.e. discrete (or digital) units) collide in a relativity vacuum. Consequently the realness effect is absolute (i.e. perfect).


When a self, as ongoing (or on-line), hence undecided, therefore uncertain, incomplete process collides on-end with another ongoing process, also undecided, therefore uncertain, incomplete, it does so in a relativity vacuum, thus, for an instant becoming absolutely real.


That instant of absolute realness is fully owned because the elimination of relativity has also eliminated the conditions via which the self-as-process arose. The momentary (or quantised) self is therefore a true self or atta. It is also timeless (i.e. self-permanent) since time (i.e. a function of series or string length) belongs to the domain of relativity which is excluded @ contact.


If the whole sequence (or line or string) of which as self is composed (namely its identity) likewise collides on end, i.e. quantum by quantum, then the whole identity achieves momentary whole absolute realness, in other words, the status of a true identifiable atta or self.


The difference of view between the Old and the new Buddha arises because the Old Buddha took a relativistic view of existence whereas the New Buddha understands quantum mechanics and the nature of the quantum base.


The New Buddha: ‘In the moment I am real and identifiable, a true me … and that’s a wonderful point!’ ‘I enjoy because I live fully real and identifiable, hence perfectly true in the moment!’


But how to create such perfect moments in which one’s true (i.e. essential) self can be experienced absolutely? 

That’s the tricky bit. The Old Buddha performed the trick, but never taught it.



Understanding the notion of self


Topics Index