Many people struggle with understanding the Buddhist concept of anatta or non-self, which is quite understandable. The idea that there is no permanent self is hard for many to grasp. Typically, people believe that someone or something within them is in control. They think there is a self that they need to let go of, and losing this supposed self can be a frightening thought.
The Buddha didn’t explicitly say that there is no self. What is often summarized as “there is no self” is actually shorthand for explaining that the kind of self we believe we have does not exist. This illusory self is thought of as a unified entity that ties our experiences and actions into one conscious whole. We don’t actually have this kind of self, so there isn’t a self to lose, and consequently, we do just fine without it. What we actually have is the illusion of a self, which often causes more problems than it solves, making us less happy.
People assume this self is in charge and makes conscious decisions. Ben Libet’s experiments in the 1980s showed that what we think are conscious decisions are actually made unconsciously. This discovery was confirmed with further studies using fMRI, where researchers could predict a person’s decision several seconds before they were consciously aware of it.
The concept of non-self might be difficult to accept because people think that consciousness or awareness is the self, but in Buddhism, these are also seen as impermanent and not self. To help understand this idea, some teachings use the method of “direct pointing,” encouraging practitioners to look beyond their delusions to see what is actually happening.
To conceptualize this, consider Stephen King’s term “the boys in the basement,” which he uses to describe the unconscious creative forces at work. Similarly, our minds consist of various unconscious parts that interact in complex ways without direct access to our conscious thoughts. Imagine our mind as a house with different rooms (each occupied by different aspects of our unconscious). These rooms communicate indirectly, through a central atrium, which represents our conscious awareness. The atrium is empty; it is just a space where communication happens, not a decision-maker itself.
In emotional conflicts, different parts of our brain or “the boys in the basement” debate and influence our reactions. Sometimes emotional parts win, and we lash out, but other times more rational parts prevail. The conscious awareness (the atrium) just observes these decisions and actions, mistakenly believing it made them.
Free will and the concept of a self are tricky. We do make choices, but these are often unconsciously derived from various competing internal factors. This doesn’t make “free will” a useless term, but it implies a more constrained freedom. Our ability to choose depends on our unconscious mind, which can be trained to make better decisions through practices like mindfulness and compassion.
Understanding anatta helps in reducing suffering because it teaches us not to cling to the notion of a permanent self. It helps us see that many problems arise from this clinging, and by letting go of it, we can live more freely and happily.