This idea of self-supporting experience without a material self has even been embraced by some within the field of Cognitive Science. There, the formulation of the term "enaction" signifies "embodied action", or perceptually guided action. Thus, in dealing with the transitory phases of an experience...
"This arising and subsiding, emergence and decay, is just that emptiness of self in the aggregates of experience. In other words, the very fact that the aggregates are full of experience is the same as the fact that they are empty of self. If there were a solid, really existing self hidden in or behind the aggregates, its unchangeableness would prevent any experience from occurring; its static nature would make the constant arising and subsiding of experience come to a screeching halt. But the circle of arising and decay of experience turns continuously, and it can do so only because it is empty of a self."
Francisco J. Varela, Evan Thompson, Eleanor Rosch, The Embodied Mind (Cambridge: The MIT Press, 1993), p. 80.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
For myself (as it were) I've run across the "Anata" or no self doctrine in Buddhism. While I like it for helping to point away from identity with the ego and highlighting the discreteness and newness of moment to moment experience, I think it overlooks the fact that we embody continuity as well as change.
If this emptiness of self is true, then what part of us is conscious of all the emerging and decaying?
Good point Paul. I have to admit, Pauline, when I read your question my first reaction was to remind myself..."Not-knowing is true knowledge. Presuming to know is a disease. First realize that you are sick; then you can move toward health." So, I won't presume to know, but will take up the point in my next post. Thanks!
Post a Comment