by Tang Huyen
A persistent interpretation of the Buddha's famous silence before Vacchagotta — his refusal to say either "there is a self" or "there is no self" — holds that the not-self teaching is purely soteriological, a technique of liberation, and carries no metaphysical import. Bhikkhu Thanissaro's widely read translation notes argue this position at length. Tang Huyen disagrees, sharply.
This essay, posted to talk.religion.buddhism in December 2007, argues that the Buddha does take a clear metaphysical position on the self — not the position that "there is no self" in the naive sense, but the more precise position that any self we attribute to ourselves is a composition (saṅkhāra), a product of the fourth aggregate of mental formations. As a composition, it is fictitious, produced only when the mind ments it, and absent when the compositions are quiesced in Nirvāṇa. The Buddha thus takes a rigorous ontological stance: the self is dependently arisen, not self-existent, and Nirvāṇa is precisely the state in which the conditions for its production are stilled.
The essay cites SA (Chinese Saṃyukta-Āgama), SN (Saṃyutta Nikāya), MN (Majjhima Nikāya), AN (Aṅguttara Nikāya), the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra, and the Śikṣā-samuccaya to demonstrate the coherence and rigour of the canonical position.
The Buddha clearly engages a metaphysical or ontological position, in that he denies the self as a self-existent entity that exists from its own side. He says that any self that we attribute to ourselves is a composition, a product of the compositions, the fourth aggregate. It is therefore fictitious, made up, composed, unreal and untrue.
The Buddha says: "The foolish common person sees form [and the other aggregates] as self. This seeing is a composition (ya kho pana sā samanupāsanā saṅkhāro so, Skt. yā sā samanupāśyanā saṃskāras te)." — SA, 57, 14a14; SN, III, 96 (22, 81); Dietz, Dharma-skandha, 53.
We have to see form (and the other aggregates) as self, for self to exist. And this seeing is a composition, a product of the fourth aggregate, the compositions. When the compositions are quiesced, as in Nirvāṇa, we don't create a self for us to carry around. And when we don't create a self, the self does not exist.
The Buddha defines Nirvāṇa as the complete calming of the compositions (sabba-saṅkhāra-samatho), as non-doing (an-abhisaṃskāra), a state of complete quiescence in which one does not think and mentate, therefore does not create a self for one to carry around. However if one wants to do anything, one has to reactivate one's mentational apparatus, and it includes the idea of self or "I", though now such ideas, as all ideas, will be mere servants and not masters — transparent, light, flexible, and not opaque, heavy, unwieldy. In such a state there is a sense of self or "I", as a centre of convergence for thinking and acting, but it is recognised as merely thought-up, purely mentated and not real. It is simply assumed for the sake of convenience and not invested with essence or substance.
The "I Am" as Mentation
At SN, IV, 202 (35, 207); SA, 1168, 312a–b, the "I am" (asmiti) is declared to be a thought or a mentation (maññita), and the Buddha adds: "mentating (maññamāna, Skt. manyamāna) is to be bound by the Evil One (marassa baddho), not mentating (amaññamāna, Skt. amanyamāna) is to be released from the Evil One (mutto pāpimato)."
This sentence is repeated at SA, 21, 4c; SN, III, 74–75 (22, 64), where it is expanded: "Mentating form (rūpaṃ maññamāno) [and the other aggregates] is to be bound by the Evil One, not mentating (here not mentating is absolute as the aggregates are not mentioned) is to be released from the Evil One."
Later the Scripture on the Meeting of Father and Son (Pitā-putra-samāgama-sūtra) from the Śikṣā-samuccaya, 251, clones the Buddha's words: "Great king, thinking is the name of the domain of the Evil One, non-thinking the Buddha's (māyanā ca nāma mahārāja māra-gocaraḥ, a-māyanā buddha-gocaraḥ)"; so does the Descent into Ceylon (Laṅkāvatāra-sūtra, ed. Vaidya, 72): "As far as the effervescence of mind extends, so far extends the domain of the world (yāvad ... mano-vispanditam ... tāval lokāyatam)."
When the mind quiesces completely, both the third aggregate (notion, idea, concept) and the fourth aggregate (the compositions) are held in abeyance and do not proceed, and the self, as a composition, is not created.
The Practice: Tranquillising the Compositions
"And how, monks, is mindfulness of in-breathing and out-breathing developed? How is it made much of? How is it of great fruit, of great advantage? Herein, monks, a monk who is forest-gone or gone to the root of a tree or gone to an empty space, sits down cross-legged, holding his back erect, arousing mindfulness in front of him. Mindful he breathes in, mindful he breathes out.... He trains himself, thinking, 'I will breathe in tranquillising the compositions of body (kāya-saṅkhāra).' [Ditto with breathing out].... He trains himself, thinking, 'I will breathe in experiencing the compositions of mind (citta-saṅkhāra).' [Ditto with breathing out]. He trains himself, thinking, 'I will breathe in tranquillising the compositions of mind (citta-saṅkhāra).' [Ditto with breathing out].... Monks, mindfulness of in-breathing and out-breathing when developed thus, made much of, is of great fruit, of great advantage."
— MN, III, 82–83 (118); MLS, III, 124–125 (slightly modified).
When the compositions of mind (citta-saṅkhāra) are tranquillised, mentation is tranquillised and does not proceed, and the self as a composition is not produced. This is entirely within the realm of experience, with the self being produced as a composition by the compositions and not produced as a composition by the compositions. The Buddha does take a clear-cut position on the issue and does not wimpily skirt around it.
Colophon
Written by Tang Huyen. Posted to talk.religion.buddhism, alt.zen, alt.philosophy.zen, and alt.buddha.short.fat.guy, December 2007, in response to a discussion of MN 1.141 and Bhikkhu Thanissaro's interpretation of the Vacchagotta silence.
Tang Huyen was a regular contributor to talk.religion.buddhism in the 2003–2009 period, known for engaging Buddhist canonical texts in Pali, Sanskrit, and Classical Chinese. This essay exemplifies his approach: beginning from a canonical crux, marshalling multi-lingual canonical evidence, and arriving at a philosophically precise conclusion that cuts against popular secondary-source interpretations. The argument that the asmiti ("I am") is a maññita (mentation) and that Nirvāṇa is precisely the quiescing of the conditions for its production is central to understanding the Buddha's metaphysics.
Preserved from the Usenet archive for the Good Works Library by the New Tianmu Anglican Church, 2026. Original Message-ID: [email protected].
🌲