The attachment/concept of self

[pranna]

While Bio's take is a great one, concerning superiority, inferiority and equality, there are other ways of looking at the issue that may also be helpful to consider.

Attachment to anything gets in the way of experiencing things in the moment. If you are attached to any experience, can you really let it go as soon as it arises and be present for the next moment? Being present, continually, from moment to moment implies that we are aware of passing experience, free and independent from it. This is the practice of mindfulness. Attachments keep us from doing it well.

One particular attachment, attachment to an idea of "self" or the belief that there is a self somehow embedded within us, and to which experience happens, causes us to experience all phenomena from a particular point of view. Holding this point of view, consciously or unconsciously, gets in the way of being deeply mindful in the following ways.

For one thing, the arising and passing of experience is seen as one's own. "I am aware.", "I see the bus." "I feel the feet as I walk." This may not seem incorrect, and in common usage, it is not. But if mindfulness is done at a very subtle and close level, the "I" goes away. Sensations, perceptions, and consciousness are free to arise directly, without relying on the subject-object framework.

For another thing, if the idea of a self is present, then one always has "his" or "her" past and future to worry about. What's to become of "me"? How do I acquire, protect and keep what is "mine"? With worries such as these dominating our thoughts, there is agitation in the mind and we aren't free to be mindful of what is arising, moment to moment.

What the Buddha discovered is that the "self" is illusory. It is simply a bundle of factors that have come together--each factor is impermanent and when examined, includes no such thing as a self. When any of them are removed, the self disappears. All phenomena simply arise and pass due to causes and conditions. This isn't evident immediately. The "self" is a very intuitive understanding of how things are, but if we are able to see the illusory nature of it and stop relying on it, then we have a better chance of remaining mindful and getting much more concentrated in the present moment.

[JonW]

It's the idea of the solid self that causes us so many problems. Through conditioning we learn to think of ourselves as a solid this or a solid that. This makes us inflexible when it comes to experience. It means we're unable to bend with the wind as it were. It's not necessary, in my view, to dismiss the idea of the self completely. But life tends to be more manageable when we think of the self in a less solid way. We become more open to experience and we find it easier to just let things go, rather than remain neurotically attached to them. Without so much solidity, life tends to flow a lot easier. It's mindfulness in motion.

[BioSattva]

While Bio's take is a great one, concerning superiority, inferiority and equality, there are other ways of looking at the issue that may also be helpful to consider.

That was from Vietnamese Zen teacher Thich Nhat Hanh. MindfulnessBell.org:
"This morning when I touched the earth with the Sangha, I saw all the non-me elements coming together and touching the earth. I did not see me at all, only the non-me elements. That created a lot of space inside. Because you believe in a self, you compare that self with other selves. Out of it come the superiority complex, the inferiority complex, the equality complex. If you touch the truth of non-self in you, you are free."

For another thing, if the idea of a self is present, then one always has "his" or "her" past and future to worry about. What's to become of "me"? How do I acquire, protect and keep what is "mine"? With worries such as these dominating our thoughts, there is agitation in the mind and we aren't free to be mindful of what is arising, moment to moment.

As usual in these matters there are no 'absolutes', though, right? The likes of Soto Zen teacher Shunryu Suzuki remind us to always keep our beginners mind and he also refers to a 'big self' and a 'small self': "Our small self is included in our big self". The big self is our Buddha Nature; the Dao if you will.

I think Buddhism often infers, or people infer from Buddhism, that these words 'self' and 'I' are somehow poisonous and need to be eradicated; as if it is a sin to speak them, but they are just points of reference. I guess the big problem is that people don't see them as temporary, transitory points of reference - like a tree stump becoming a table and then a seat, and then a tree stump again, depending how one relates to it moment after moment. Instead we tend to take the label of 'my self' or 'your self' as a permanent phenomena that exists (often eternally) in the universe. A leopard can never change it's spots, once a criminal, always a criminal. Bang goes forgiveness, charity, and compassion - the glue that holds society together.

Anyone who has watched the documentary Dhamma Brothers (a mostly black group of 'high risk' inmates in an Alabama State prison doing Vipassana) will know how fluid the human perception of self and human morality in general can be. If you haven't seen it - I HIGHLY recommend it (show it to your friends too! ).

We also have other cases like people like Derren Brown flipping from preaching Christianity at university at one point, to becoming rampant Atheist. Think about how athiests would have branded Derren Brown as 'Bible Basher' one moment, then a year later they would probably condemn him in the same way, even though he had changed. Leopards can and do change their spots.

For one thing, the arising and passing of experience is seen as one's own. "I am aware.", "I see the bus." "I feel the feet as I walk." This may not seem incorrect, and in common usage, it is not. But if mindfulness is done at a very subtle and close level, the "I" goes away. Sensations, perceptions, and consciousness are free to arise directly, without relying on the subject-object framework.

Indeed; the skandhas. Personally, from my experience I feel that the skandhas are unnecessarily complex for modern mindfulness practice. It may be why the MBSR founders haven't 'gone there'.