What Is the Self?

Ru Chun: "I" implies autonomy (control) and permanence. Suppose the aggregate of form were the self; then I would have control, and I would control my physical body to remain forever young, beautiful, and healthy. But the fact is I cannot control it—I cannot make the physical body permanent and unchanging. The sufferings of birth, aging, sickness, and death are all beyond my control; the aggregate of form is neither autonomous nor permanent. Suppose the aggregate of feeling were the self; then I would want my feelings to always be wonderful, always enjoying pleasant sensations such as delicious food and the joy of meditation. But the fact is I cannot hold on to these feelings, whether painful or pleasant feelings. The suffering of the five aggregates blazing intensely is beyond my control. The aggregate of feeling is not autonomous and not permanent. 

Suppose the aggregate of volitional formations were the self; then I could freely ascend to the heavens or descend into the earth, but the fact is I cannot do that—I cannot even control maintaining normal walking. The aggregate of volitional formations is thus not autonomous and not permanent. By extension, all five aggregates are suffering; I cannot be the master of any of them, nor can I keep them permanent; therefore, the five aggregates are without self. Suppose the various roles and identities in the world were the self—there is no role or identity that can be free from suffering, autonomous, and permanently unchanging.

Assessment: If the five aggregates of form, feeling, perception, volitional formations, and consciousness could control themselves and master themselves, being no different from the Buddha, would the five aggregates then be the self?

Ru Chun: The five aggregates are impermanent and changing, lacking permanence; therefore, even if they had mastery, they would still not be the self. Suppose an intelligent robot had an external appearance more perfect than that of humans, functions more powerful and complete than those of humans—including emotions and reproduction—and had developed autonomous consciousness, no longer controlled by humans; would it then be a human being? Humans and robots are inherently different categories. No matter how intelligent a robot is, it is still made by humans; it is a fake person, and in no way can it be a real human being.

No matter how powerful the functions of the five aggregates are, even like the Buddha's, they still cannot be the self, because the five aggregates themselves are manifested by the true self; they are illusory dharmas. They are inherently two different concepts from true dharmas. We can say that a fake apple closely resembles a real apple, but real is real, and fake is fake. I wonder if this question can be understood in this way?

Assessment: You have understood it very correctly. Your wisdom has advanced greatly. When was your mind "consecrated" (opened to wisdom)? 

Ru Chun: In the past, my master said I was dull, but I didn't know where my dullness lay. Now I finally know: my dullness lay in using all my intelligence and talents to chase after worldly dharmas—the accumulation of wealth and the entanglements of family affection. Over the past two years, due to certain karmic conditions, I have basically returned to my family, no longer pursuing fame and profit externally. My mind in daily life has become increasingly simple, and without realizing it, I have gradually made some progress.