Understanding the notion of ‘self’ ≈ atta
When the Sakya (i.e. the Scythian) Buddha (together with the
fantasists who created the Upanishads) claimed that ‘things (i.e. dharmas, now more usefully called ‘emerging events’) are
‘not-atta’ or ‘not self’, i.e. because they don’t
last and, as effects, are dependent, i.e. not own, therefore not free, he
(and they) got it half right, half wrong. For his basic assumption was that
for an atta to be a true self it had to be
permanent (not transient) and essential to itself, i.e. fully self owned, hence independent.
Well yes! But it’s the time
(≈
function) factor that is crucial for determining whether or not a dharma (or
thing) has/is an atta or not. Note that the Old
Buddha didn’t say dharmas didn’t have an atta. What he said (with his 2nd characteristic
of arisen phenomena) was that they didn’t have an abiding (i.e. permanent, eternal)
atta.
He also missed
the basic requirement of identifiablity, unless he
was taking about what the Vedantins called the Nirguna Brahman/atman.
The ancient Indians
assumed, wrongly, that an atta (specifically the
atman) exists as a permanent essence (or substance) or own (-ed) property. They did not
realise that a true (Sanskrit: sat,
meaning both real and true) atta (and the true
(hence saguna) atman/brahman)
happens (only when actively relativised).
An essence, that is to say a true, because
real self (or atta) happens in the nano sphere, that is to say, as momentary event (i.e. a
‘little bang’) triggered by the collision of two random quanta. Moreover, an
identifiable real self (or atta) happens as the affect of a quantised series (or cluster) of random
quanta collisions. Each individual collision (in the series of unidentifiable
quanta) provides the realness affect. The whole (hence quantised) series
produces the identity (i.e. the series provides the shape or message).
In other
words, a true/real atta or self happens as
individual essence when two quanta (i.e. bits) collide (indeed, at random,
therefore in a relativity vacuum). @ collision (or
contact) a quantum collapses, in the act/explosion (i.e. the sammasambodhi
(i.e. as maximum awakening ≈ arousal) affect) revealing
(and transmitting) its current state, now its momentarily true essence, i.e.
its momentarily real self, nowadays called a message or signal. This
true/real self ceases immediately after impact.
The minimum task to be performed by a logic machine, i.e. by any
‘thing’, is to collide at random. Random collision alone produces basic logic
(i.e. a moment of absolute realness). All things (actually ‘stilled’ events,
i.e. as decided/ended series of random collisions) emerging from random
collision are logic. So
the Old Buddha was right when he stated that in the long run, i.e. longer than
a moment (hence in the sphere of relativity), all dharmas
are without an ‘abiding self’ (i.e. sunja). But he
was wrong (or perhaps chose not to comment) in that perfect attas (i.e. selves) happen from moment (contact) to
moment (contact), and identifiable real/true attas
(or selves) happen as moment to moment random collision of clustered quanta
(i.e. as decided or sliced, hence ended series). At each new contact a new atta (self) happens (in fact, is born). And a string or
series of contacts, ‘waiting’ still (hence in nirvana, i.e. @ rest in
apparent ‘stand by’) within a colliding clustered (or complex) quantum,
produces (complex quantum or bite) identity. The attas
(selves) that emerge from such collisions are identifiable, real, true
(because non-relative) and free (i.e. liberated), and, in the relativity
excluded moment, permanent. Hence to
claim that all dharmas are not atta
(i.e. not a true self) is false (indeed, incomplete). The Sakya
Buddha flunked the test and by promoting his half-truth became the cause of a
lot of unnecessary human suffering. More about the ‘self’
|