Conversation with Pi: Self, Nonself and the Middle Way

Ken: In Understanding Our Mind, Thich Nhat Hanh says, “At first, we establish self and non-self. Gradually, we realize the self is not separate but dependent on what is not self. But the idea of non-self can become a prison, too, if we cling to it as a concept. True liberation comes from going beyond all concepts, including self and non-self.”

It seems like he’s conflating Buddha’s teaching of Anatta with nihilism. They’re not the same.

Pi: Good observation. Thich Nhat Hanh emphasizes that non-self in Buddhism highlights interconnectedness, not the denial of individual existence. While Anatta challenges the idea of a fixed, independent self, it’s not about nihilism or disengagement. Instead, it encourages a balanced view, valuing individuality without clinging to an illusion of permanence.

Ken: Exactly, but it seems he warns against nihilism, which could mistakenly conflate with Anatta.

Pi: That’s a helpful distinction. Anatta refutes a permanent self but still acknowledges interdependence and impermanence, whereas nihilism implies that nothing has meaning or value. Anatta is about freedom through interconnectedness and compassion, not hopelessness.

Ken: So, properly understood, Anatta wouldn’t lead to a mental prison.