Buddhist Ideas about No-Self and the Person (Verhoeven)

Summary:
Herein, Martin Verhoeven gives a basic summary of the doctrine of No Self in Buddhism as part of a Zen-Catholic dialogue in Religion East and West.  He argues that the doctrine is largely misunderstood as a form of nihilism and explains why this is not the case.  First, he explains how the Buddha taught anatman against the background of Brahmanical conceptions of atman, something with which many interested in Catholic scholarship may not be familiar.  Second,  he discusses the development of No Self from the absence of 'self' to the absence of any inherent reality to any dharmas whatsoever.

Next, he explains the connection between the belief in Self  and suffering and, conversely, the correct understanding of No Self and the attainment of nirvana.   Rather than relying on some sort of metaphysical speculation, Verhoeven argues, the Buddha taught "what would lead to calming, knowledge enlightenment and nirvana." It is not the case that he did not have answers to the metaphysical questions, but that they did not contribute to ending samsaric existence.  He then discusses the story of the poison arrow for clarification.

If we experience personhood, but there is no Self, then what constitutes our false experience of Selfhood?  Of course, this is the five skandhas.  The idea that the five skandhas combine to create our experience of the self helps distinguish Buddhist thought from forms of nihilism because it helps account for our moment to moment existence in the absence of a Self.

How are we to attain No Self, he asks?  By ending philosophical posturing and resorting to the primacy of everyday experience and the noble eightfold path.  By relying on a less philosophical orientation, "the abstract concepts of 'no-self' and 'emptiness' get translated into the more concrete expressions of nonattachment and nonhindrance"(p.103).

In the end, Verhoeven explains how the Buddha anticipated the fears of nihilism that his doctrine of No Self would create, citing his statement:

"There is an unborn, unarisen, uncreated, unconditioned; if there were no unborn, there would be no release for what is born, arisen, created and conditioned."

This demonstrates how the Buddha steered a middle course between eternalism and annihilationism in the teaching of No Self. 


Reflection:
This is a well-written article meant for an audience that is interested in interreligious dialogue.  Though there is little to no content dealing specifically with Catholic ideas, it seems that the relatively superficial investigation into the doctrine of No Self was geared less to a Buddhist audience and more toward an interreligious one.

Furthermore, defending the doctrine against charges of nihilism is a comparably easier enterprise than a lot of other scholars studying No Self are engaged in presently.  Charges of nihilism, though uninformed, are rampant in non-Buddhist circles when it comes to anatman. This aside, he does a nice job of introducing the doctrine of No Self, why some believe it is nihilistic, and how one is supposed to come to realize anatman.