Buddhism Formal Paper 1
Buddhism Formal Paper 1
Buddhism Formal Paper 1
Formal Essay 1
Beyond the Question of Self: The Anātman Teaching as Conducive to Greater Awareness
interpretations. It is easy to become absorbed in varying arguments over the extent to which the
teaching of anātman denies the existence of self. However, investigation of the concept in both
scholarly work and ancient sutta reveals the question of whether self exists to be of less import
than initially regarded. Preoccupation with the question itself is inconsistent with the Buddha’s
teachings and distracts from the value of non-self in fostering greater awareness. The purpose of
the anātman teaching, as analyzed through contemporary works and ancient buddhist texts, is to
use the understanding of one’s ever-changing nature as a path to greater awareness, not to fixate
ultimate awareness.
The Buddha never expressly answers the question of self—neither explicitly confirming
nor denying its existence. In choosing not to answer, he indicates that the question is itself
misguided and discourages fixation on the question alone. When asked directly by a wandering
ascetic “is there a self”, the Buddha does not answer. When asked by Ānanda why he chose not
to respond, the Buddha states: “if in response to Vacchagotta’s first question I asserted that there
is a Self, that would be associating myself with the renouncers and brahmins who are eternalists.
But, Ananda, if...I asserted that there is no self, that would be associating myself with the
renouncers and brahmins who are annihilationists” (The Buddha’s Silence 3.2.3). The Buddha’s
reply suggests the question itself is faulty and unproductive, as it may give rise to extremism and
ultimately distract from the real point of the anātman teaching, to be further discussed.
Confirming neither the absence nor presence of self, Gautama Buddha takes the ‘Middle Way’,
condemning commitment to either extreme (Strong 2007, 105). This ‘Middle Way’ approach is
also seen in The Buddha's refusal to answer a number of metaphysical questions like that of self,
also known as the “questions not explicated” (Strong 2007, 104). For example, Gautama Buddha
is said to have stated: “one who sees the arising [and cessation] of the world as it truly happens,
with right wisdom, cannot maintain the nonexistence of the world [or] the existence of the
world” (Channa is Taught the Middle Way 3.2.4). Here the Buddha claims that one who is aware
of the world’s transient, ever-changing state (who sees the ‘arising’ and ‘cessation’ of the world),
cannot affirm or deny its existence. This presumably applies to all that the world encompasses,
and thus can be extended to the self—no enlightened being can claim to know of the existence or
The Buddha’s refusal to maintain the absence or presence of self not only suggests the
question is misguided, but that preoccupation with either extreme is misaligned with the true
intentions of the anātman teaching. According to Strong, the previously discussed passages
regarding self “reflect the real struggle Buddhists underwent to grapple with this question of
anātman” (105). The Buddha's answers—or non-answers—leave ample room for interpretation.
Some firmly believe no self exists, and some the opposite; the ambiguity of his words allows for
either. However, both extreme views are at odds with the very lessons these discussed passages
convey, in which the Buddha himself opts for option three— the middle way. Thus, the anātman
teaching does not intend to spark fixation on and debate over the absence or presence of self.
What actually matters in this teaching is how true understanding of one’s own nature can reduce
suffering and aid in enlightenment. Recognizing the concept of non-self facilitates the attainment
of awareness and ultimate contentment. This is the true purpose of the anātman teaching, to be
one’s ever-changing nature, not simply a doctrine denying the existence of self. Embracing that
there is no “abiding ego, no unchanging me”, allows for the recognition of one’s own fluidity and
thus ability to change for the better (Strong 2007, 100). One who sees the self as incapable of
change would not commit to a goal of greater awareness—they may not even believe greater
awareness is possible as they see the ‘self’ as some stagnant, constant, entity. Seeing one’s own
transcience is to see one’s capacity for growth and change. Gautama Buddha's own
acknowledgment of his inconstant nature illustrates the capacity for betterment this recognition
gives rise to: “The Buddha found in his own Awakening that the realization of the absence of
such a permanent self leads to selfless loving-kindness and compassion for others” (Mitchell and
Jacoby 2014, 36). It is not the absence of self altogether, but the absence of a permanent self that
is the point of the anātman teaching. It is this embrace of inconstancy that allows for growth,
attaining nirvana, the concept can be analyzed in conjunction with the other two characteristics
closely related, each revealing key truths about the others (Mitchell and Jacoby 2014, 33).
Recognition of non-self prompts acceptance of impermanence which prompts cessation of
suffering. To elaborate, once one realizes there is no singular, constant, or fixed self, they are no
longer disillusioned with their own impermanence. Accepting the impermanence of self is key in
the acceptance of all things’ impermanence; the concept applies to both the internal and external:
“impermanence is not just a characteristic of the phenomena of the external world; it applies to
oneself” (Mitchell and Jacoby 2014, 35). Recognition of non-self also allows for the release of
ego and craving: “The realization of anātman puts an end to selfish desires'' (Strong 2007, 108).
The contentment with impermanence and loss of selfish desire that results from accepting
anātman is conducive to the cessation of suffering: “ ‘With this realization [of impermanence] I
was released from all clinging and delusion, and felt indescribably refreshed’ ” (Niwano, as cited
in Mitchell and Jacoby 2014, 33). Thus the concept of nonself unveils the transient nature of life,
a fact crucial to recognize in the path to Nirvana. The purpose of the anātman teaching hence has
little to do with debates on the existence of self, and everything to do with Buddhism’s ultimate
goal—to attain nirvana, a state characterized by contentment with the impermanence of all
The self—whether it exists or not—is hardly the permanent, independent object many
believe it to be. Acceptance of its multiplicity, constant flow, and dependence can relieve the
pain of mortality and desire for constancy. The Buddha discouraged extremes, thus the concept
of non-self is not the extreme many interpret it as. It is not denial nor confirmation, it is a middle
ground that diminishes ego, alleviates craving, and fosters greater awareness through the
embrace of impermanence.
Works Cited
The Buddha’s Silence 3.2.3
Strong, John S. The Experience of Buddhism: Sources and Interpretations. 3rd ed.,
Thomson/Wadsworth, 2007.