A Zen Exploration of the Bahiya Sutta
Some excerpts of postings about Bahiya Sutta by AlexWeith (who is a lay Soto Zen priest who recently realized anatta) from http://kennethfolkdharma.wetpaint.com/thread/4765011/A+Zen+exploration+of+the+Bahiya+Sutta?offset=0&maxResults=20
"In the seen, there is only the seen, in the heard, there is only the heard, in the sensed, there is only the sensed,
in the cognized, there is only the cognized. Thus you should see that indeed there is no thing here;
this, Bahiya, is how you should train yourself. Since, Bahiya, there is for you
in the seen, only the seen, in the heard, only the heard, in the sensed, only the sensed,
in the cognized, only the cognized, and you see that there is no thing here,
you will therefore see that indeed there is no thing there. As you see that there is no thing there,
you will see that you are therefore located neither in the world of this,
nor in the world of that, nor in any place betwixt the two.
This alone is the end of suffering.” (Ud. 1.10)
.............
There is no end to
the process of awakening, but in Zen Buddhism there are steps and
strategies. These introductory posts will explain my position, what I
discovered so far, and how it unfolds.
Having got hold of the ox,
one has realized the One Mind. In Zen literature this One Mind has
often been compared to a bright mirror that reflects phenomena and yet
remains untouched by appearances. As discussed with one of Sheng-yen's
first Western students, this One Mind is still an illusion. One is not
anymore identified to the self-center, ego and personality, yet one (the
man) is still holding to pure non-dual awareness (the ox). Having tamed
the ox, the ox-herder must let go of the ox (ox forgotten) and then
forget himself and the ox (ox and man forgotten).
The problem is
that we still maintain a subtle duality between what we know ourself to
be, a pure non-dual awareness that is not a thing, and our daily
existence often marked by self-contractions. Hoping to get more and more
identified with pure non-dual awareness, we may train concentration,
try to hold on to the event of awakening reifying an experience, or
rationalize the whole thing to conclude that self-contraction is not a
problem and that suffering is not suffering because our true nature is
ultimately beyond suffering. This explains why I got stuck in what Zen
calls "stagnating waters" for about a year.
This is however not
seen as a problem in other traditions such as Advaita Vedanta where the
One Mind is identified with the Brahman that contains and manifests the
three states of waking, dreaming and deep sleep within itself, yet
remains untouched by its dreamlike manifestation.
.............
So what has been
puzzling me what the sense of presence, the sense of being and its
relation with the sense that things around me manifest their presence.
Over the months I realized that if this beingness seems to be located
as the center of our being, it is actually the flavor of all things.
Reading
the blog "Awakening to Reality" that has become my main source of
inspiration, I realized that this presence felt as the presence of 'what
is' is the *luminosity* that the Mahamudra teachings are talking about.
Gradually, feeling my own sense of being has become feeling the
beingness of all things, leading to a deeper non-dual realization that
gradually colapsed the sense of a Primoridal Awareness, True Self, or
Bright Mirror into what is present here and now.
The conclusion
is that all phenomena are in themself empty and luminous, ungraspable
and self-aware, ever changing and alive. The conclusion is also that
there is nothing beyond that; no permanent pure potential beyond
phenomena, no true self that would be the source and substance of
phenomena and above all no primordial awareness or Consciousness that
would contain the five aggregates.
The whole universe is
contained and expressed in a the "cypress tree in the court", simply
because in the absence of a super Self in the background, the cypress
tree brightly present in this very moment is the absolute reality made
manifest in its suchness (tathata). Most Zen koans point to this
realization, together with Hui-neng poem "Fundamentally no wisdom-tree
exists, Nor the stand of a mirror bright. Since all is empty from the
beginning, Where can the dust alight".
Surprizingly this
deconstruction leads to a deeper level of non-duality. Huang-po's "One
Mind' is starting to become Mazu's "No Mind, no Buddha".
.............
Practically speaking this means:
1).
becoming aware of one's sense of existence and focusing on it until it
starts to feel as if the only reality is this pure presence-awareness
containing everything;
2). shifting this sense of
being-existence-presence-awareness to apprehend the beingness of all
things, until everything starts to feel bright, luminous, present and
alive. At this stage, there is no more "self" and "other", nor is there
any subtle duality between primordial awareness and phenomena arising
and passing away within it. There is only "seeing seeing the seen"
without a seer, nor solid material objects behind the seen.
This
does not mean that there is absolutely no Primordial Awareness, Self or
One Mind. This would be an extreme position rejected by the Buddha. This
explains why the Buddha remained silent when asked about the existence
of a Self. Answering "Yes" would mean that there is an eternal abiding
inherent essence beyond phenomena (eternalism), while answering "No"
would lead to nihilism, the other extreme view. The Buddha's way is the
middle way, between these two extremes. There is a self, but this self
is an conventional concept to describe something that appears to be and
is experienced as such, but it not an abiding ultimate reality.
There
is a Mind, but this Mind is empty [of an abiding essence]. This Mind is
the *non-abiding mind* of the Diamond Sutra. Therefore, *Mind* is *No
Mind*.
.............
This also means that
the first step is to disembed from impermanent phenomena until the only
thing that feels real is this all pervading uncreated all pervading
awareness that feels like the source and substance of phenomena. Holding
on to it after this realization can hower become a subtle form of
grasping diguised as letting go.
The second step is therefore to
realize that this brightness, awakeness or luminosity is there very
nature of phenomena and then only does the duality between the True Self
and the appearences arising and passing within the Self dissolve,
revealing the suchness of what is.
The next step that I found
very practical is to push the process of deconstruction a step further,
realizing that all that is experienced is one of the six consciousness.
In other words, there is neither a super Awareness beyond phenomena, not
solid material objects, but only six streams of sensory experiences.
The seen, the heard, the sensed, the tasted, the smelled and the
cognized (including thoughts, emotions, and subtle thougths like
absorbtion states, jhanas).
At this point it is not difficult to see how relevent the Bahiya Sutta can become.
.............
This also means that
the first step is to disembed from impermanent phenomena until the only
thing that feels real is this all pervading uncreated all pervading
awareness that feels like the source and substance of phenomena. Holding
on to it after this realization can hower become a subtle form of
grasping diguised as letting go.
The second step is therefore to
realize that this brightness, awakeness or luminosity is there very
nature of phenomena and then only does the duality between the True Self
and the appearences arising and passing within the Self dissolve,
revealing the suchness of what is.
The next step that I found
very practical is to push the process of deconstruction a step further,
realizing that all that is experienced is one of the six consciousness.
In other words, there is neither a super Awareness beyond phenomena, not
solid material objects, but only six streams of sensory experiences.
The seen, the heard, the sensed, the tasted, the smelled and the
cognized (including thoughts, emotions, and subtle thougths like
absorbtion states, jhanas).
At this point it is not difficult to see how relevent the Bahiya Sutta can become.
.............
@beoman & @giragirasol:
Yes, when we realize that there is no super Awareness beyond consciousnes and become mindful of
consciousness
as it manifests at the 6 doors of the senses, we also realize that
everything that we can ever experience is contained within one of these 6
streams of consciousness, including the 4 other aggregates that are
known through the agregate of consciousness and the arupa jhanas that
are in reality very subtle non-conceptual mind-states of the
cognizing-consciousness.
Arriving at this point, we can start to investigate the 5 aggregate as well as the sense of self.
If
we start with the aggregate of form (the physical body), we realize
that our direct experience of the body is nothing more than stream of
images (seeing legs, arms, a nose), the other senses and above all
sensations. Exploring these sensations we realize that there is an
impermanent stream of sensations that more of less matches the images of
the body. However, the stream of seeing-consciousness is always
distinct from the stream of sensing-consciousness. One never sees a
sensation, but an unpleasant sensations can match the sight of a wounder
arm. These stream are therfore seem as independent, yet totally
interdependent. A sound, can trigger a thought that can trigger a
sensations, that can trigger the images of a hand moving. Altogether,
these 6 impermanent every changing streams of consciousness create the
illusion of a solid substancial body. The same method applies to the
other aggregates.
.............
When it comes to the
investiation of the sense of self, we must first realize that, even
after what some have called technical 4th path, and even if we know that
what we are is not any of the 5 aggregates, we still have a sense of
self, a sense of existence. The sense "I am" has not been overcome yet.
This issue is discussed in the Khemaka Sutta.
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn22/sn22.089.than.html
In
this text, Ven. Dasaka meets the Arhant Khemaka and tells him that
"there is nothing I assume to be self or belonging to self, and yet I am
not an arahant. With regard to these five clinging-aggregates, 'I am'
has not been overcome, although I don't assume that 'I am this." (...)
""Friends, it's not that I say 'I am form,' nor do I say 'I am something
other than form.' It's not that I say, 'I am feeling... perception...
fabrications... consciousness,' nor do I say, 'I am something other than
consciousness.' With regard to these five clinging-aggregates, 'I am'
has not been overcome, although I don't assume that 'I am this.'"
The
Arhat answers saying "friends, even though a noble disciple has
abandoned the five lower fetters, he still has with regard to the five
clinging-aggregates a lingering residual 'I am' conceit, an 'I am'
desire, an 'I am' obsession."
Abendoning the five lower fetters
means being an Anagami. Here the Arhant says that that even Anagami may
still have a residual sense of self that he calls, the 'I am' conceit,
an 'I am' desire, an 'I am' obsession."
As to how this sense 'I am' is experienced, the Arhant asks: "then how would he describe it if he were describing it correctly?"
And
the monk replies, "as the scent of the flower: That's how he would
describe it if he were describing it correctly." he sense of self is
like the scent of the flower. It is the flavor of being.
In order to get rid of this residual sense of self and become an Arahat, the sage explains:
"As
he keeps focusing on the arising & passing away of these five
clinging-aggregates, the lingering residual 'I am' conceit, 'I am'
desire, 'I am' obsession is fully obliterated. Just like a cloth, dirty
& stained: Its owners give it over to a washerman, who scrubs it
with salt earth or lye or cow-dung and then rinses it in clear water.
Now even though the cloth is clean & spotless, it still has a
lingering residual scent of salt earth or lye or cow-dung. The washerman
gives it to the owners, the owners put it away in a scent-infused
wicker hamper, and its lingering residual scent of salt earth, lye, or
cow-dung is fully obliterated".
This means observing the arising
and passing away of the 5 aggregates until "the lingering residual 'I
am' conceit, 'I am' desire, 'I am' obsession is fully obliterated".
.............
Practically
speaking, the above mentioned method works in the same way. One can
either split each of the 5 aggregates into 6 streams of consciousness,
to see how the sense of "a body" (aggregate of form) arises when all
senses working together create the illusion of substantiality, pretty
much like the images track and the sounds tracks of a movie that
together create the illusion of reality. Using the same method we can
also see how the illusion of a solid body dissolves when we look deeply
and see that what we had assumed to be a body is nothing more than an
illusion created by 6 impermanent, separate-yet-interdependent streams
of consciousness.
We can also investigate the sense of self as such.
In
the seen, only the seen. We first realize that we cannot know the
objects seen as such, but only the seen (shapes, colors, textures,
etc.). We also realize that there is no separate entity that sees. There
is seeing, but no seer. Seeing is seeing. Same with the other streams
of sense consciousness.
Then, what I do is to look for a sense of
self, and see whether it is more assocated to one of these 6 streams of
consciousness. It is generally associated with a physical sensation
around the solar plexus or gut, and is therefore related to the stream
of sensing-consciousness. When this is seen for what it is, the sense of
self drops. There is nothing beside the spontanious functioning of the
senses.
Here the purpose is not to lock and make permanent a
special state of consciousness, but only to gain deeper and deeper
insights into Anatta and Shunyata until we become absolutely unable to
make anything into "me" or "mine".
.............
@giragirasol - and yes
the results experienced during meditation when we stop investigating and
let go of clinging that what has been seen as an illusion does match
the traditional description of Rigpa. It first come for a brief moment,
until it eventually becomes the only game in town. This is no surpize,
since the Dzogchen teachings are basically about seeing the fruit (of
mainstream Buddhism) as its ground (view) and the path (practice).
But
here one should clearly mention that there is absolutely no inherently
existing "Awareness" that is felt as existing separately from "phenomena
arising witghin awareness", which would be Advaita Vedanta and maybe
Kashmir Shaivism, but not Dzogchen. The Dalai Lama was very clear about
that and insisted on the fact that Dzogchen can lead people astay if
they lack a clear understanding of no-self, emptiness, co-dependent
origination, interdependence, etc., recommending the in-depth study of
Longchenpa with a solid background rooted in Tsongkapa's Lam Rim or
other similar treaties.
.............
With respect
to the Zen 10 ox-herding pictures this above deals with "ox forgotten,
man remains" (no more super-Awareness, One Mind beyond the 18 dhatus, 6
senses) and then "ox and man forgotten" when the lingering "sense I am"
that used to apprehend the aggregate of consciousnes as the One Mind is
also extinguished. This is not the only interpretation, but it does
match Zen master Sheng-yen's commentaries.
.............
And of course,
mindfulness of the mind/6 sense doors/citta, being totally one with the
seen, the heard, etc. is at the heart of Zen practice.
Ultimately,
meditation practice is always "allowing everything to be as it is".
However can only let go of what we see as an illusion. As an exemple
disembedding from thoughts, sensations and perceptions allows us see
them as mere reflexions. It then becomes easier to let go of thougths,
sensations and perceptions. However, the same practice will also
crystalize the sense of a witness untouched by phenomena that gradually
evolves into a super non-dual Awareness seen as the source and substance
of phenomena. Without further investigation, letting go is letting go
thoughts, sensations and perceptions, but unknowingly also holding on to
the Witness, Awareness or some other illusory inherent self hanging
somewhere in the background. It is only when we investigate and look
deeply into this awareness that we become able to let go of clinging to
what looked like the Absolute leading to a deeper non-dual realization
from the Awareness vs reflections-within-awareness duality.
.............
@jhsaintonge - hi,
it's pretty much on topic actually. On May 12, 2011, I was doing the
laundry after struggling for days on the fundamental koan "if you knew
that you couldn't do anything to gain elightenment, then what do you
do?" Suddenly, everything felt dreamlike, everything namely may life,
the universe, several past lives, everything felt like a dream,
something that never happened, something illusory arising from a great
void, a creative nothingness, unborn, uncreated, beyond birth and death,
beyond time, non existing yet source and substance of all things; me,
awareness, consciousness was seen as being nothing more than its
projection that would then get identified with its projected dreamlike
appearences to create the illusion of a real life in a real world. As a
result of this event, everything felt perfect, whole and complete for
weeks. And something did shift permanently.
Now what is that?
Advaita Vedanta Jnanis told me you are That". You are a jnani. Zen
masters said, "you have seen the ox", the essence of the Mind. Reading
Christian mystics, it is clear that this event is seeing God as the
Ground of Being, the unmanifest source of all things. Nothing wrong with
the experience. It is great, awesome, and enlightening in the sense
that it opened the an abiding non-dual state that some call technical
4th path.
But then, iis this the Buddha's awakening? Not so sure.
Because although this event does validate the teachings of
Neoplantonism, Advaita Vedanta, Christian mysticsm, there is no real
insight into "Co-dependent origination" and most as the other things
that set the Buddha's teachings apart from other great Indian spiritual
traditions.
.............
There remains a
duality between "That" and phenomena. "That" feels like an impersonal
uncreated clean mirror in the background that reflect phenomena, yet
remains untouched. As a matter of fact that is the Self that Raman
Maharishi talked about. That is the Arma (or Atta in Pali).
On a
later stage, we realize that "That" can self-contract or on the contrary
expend. It is like zooming in an out. In reality, it never changes, but
gets more or less identified with phenomena. Attending to this pure
presence-awareness, it naturally grows and overpowers phenomena to the
point where everything is seen as appearences reflected within it. Yet
"That" is the Self.
The problem is not the Self, but what we make
out of it. Grasping at it tends to create a subtle duality, since we
can become more or less identified with its dreamlike projections. There
is Awareness vs phenomena arising within awareness. Awarenees is IT.
Phenomena arising within it are Maya, illusions. We must cease
identification with, or disembed from illusory (empty, impermanent,
not-the-self) phenomena. This is precisely what great Advaita Jnanis
did, like Ramana Maharishi who meditated for years in a cave after his
awakening.
The problem is that the more we disembed as this
stage, the more we grasp at this pure non-dual Awareness, Absolute or
Self and fail to realize what the Buddha realized under the Bodhi Tree.
My
conviction is that in order to realize No-Self (Anatta), the Buddha has
realized the Self. He was already an accomplished yogi, a master in his
own right. But he still wasn't satisfied, because it wasn't yet the end
of suffering. Why, because as long as there remains any tiny sense of
"me" or "mine" either in relation with body and mind, or with a Self,
primordial awareness, Consciousness, Brahman, the One Mind, God, etc.
there will be suffering.
.............
My guess is that the
Buddha first realized the Self and then started deconstructing it. He
took this non-dual awareness and thought, "how can I be sure that this
will not perish with the body?", "isn't awareness nothing more than
something that arises as the result of sense contact"; "can awareness or
consciousness exist beyond the 5 aggregates?", "what is the sense of
self, being, existence?", "how does it arise?", "why is it still there
after self-realization?", "why is it still there in the highest arupa
jhanas?", "how can it be extinguished without dying?"
Then one
day, Gautama awakened to impermanence, co-dependent origination, no-Atma
(antta), emptiness, suchness, etc. and knew that, "this is the end of
suffering", "the holy life has been lived, there is no more coming and
going, etc.".
I am far from that, but I am starting to realize
that the Buddha did go beyond what everybody saw (and still seem to see
-even Buddhists- as enlightenment, awakening or self-realization.
Something that implies the realization of the Self, but goes further.
.............
So what is this
pure, unborn, empty, timeless and nondual Awareness? As I see it now, it
is just the non-arising, unsupported, empty and self-luminous nature of
what is that the mind grasps and imagines to be an essential sustancial
inherhent ultimate reality beyond phenomena. Seeing a white ox on a
while empty field covered with snow (common Zen simile for the
experience of the One Mind), the mind assumes that there is a pure
"Whiteness" beyond all white objects.
Why? Because when the mind
is not yet freed from ignorance, it needs to hold on to some kind of
stable reference point, reifying its unconditioned and nonabiding nature
realized in a moment of total surrender into seeing the eternal Source
and substance of all things.
As I am starting to see it now,
there is no clean mirror behind the images reflected in the mirror.The
mirror cannot be separated from its reflected images. The reflected
images are the mirror. Reality is like a lucid dream, but there is no
dreamer, nor dreamed reality beyond the dream. There is just an timeless
flow of dream images dreaming themselves within the dream. In dreaming,
only the dream / in seeing, only the seen / in hearing, only the heard.
.............
Padmasambhava's take on the same subject (where we see that Dzogchen and Vajrayana do not contract Pali Buddhism):
"The mind that observes is also devoid of an ego or self-entity.
It is neither seen as something different from the aggregates
Nor as identical with these five aggregates.
If the first were true, there would exist some other substance.
This is not the case, so were the second true,
That would contradict a permanent self, since the aggregates are impermanent.
Therefore, based on the five aggregates,
The self is a mere imputation based on the power of the ego-clinging.
As to that which imputes, the past thought has vanished and is nonexistent.
The future thought has not occurred, and the present thought does not withstand scrutiny."
.............
The suggestions that
I have received were to acquire 'right view'. The mind needs to acquire
some form of conceptual model that allows it to accept the possibility
of its own non-abiding ungraspable empty nature. Right view is
therefore required to facilitate the shift of perspective from "I am
Awareness, everything is in me" to "nothing whatsoever is me or mine,
all dharmas are empty".
A good start would be Walpola Rahula's
classic "What the Buddha Taught: Revised and Expanded Edition with Texts
from Suttas and Dhammapada". It can be completed by "The Way to
Buddhahood: Instructions from a Modern Chinese Master" by Ven.
Yin-shun. A great autoritative summary of the Mahayana path. Then, based
on a solid understanding of the core insights of Buddhism, Dakpo Tashi
Namgyal's "Clarifying the Natural State" (if still in print, or anything
from the same great 16th century yogi) will be the best introduction to
the Mahamudra and indirectly to the the sem-de series of Dzogchen.
The logical progression is therefore:
- Advaita Vedanta
- Pali Buddhism
- Mahayana Buddhism
- Mahamudra, Dzogchen
If
we skip Pali and Mahayana Buddhism and jump directly to Mahamudra or
Dzogchen, the risk is to interpret Mahamudra or Dzogchen as a Buddhist
version of pop-neo-advaita, equating emptiness and rigpa with awareness.
This
is very common nowadays and some Western lamas seem to encourage this
trend to water-down the Dzogchen teachings, as always in order to appeal
to a larger public. Business is business.
.............
The great thing about Buddhism is that is never goes beyond our direct experience.
In
our direct experience, "the seen" does not imply the existence of solid
objects out there that are the objects of what is seen. They may or may
may not exist, but our direct experience is only "in seeing, only the
seen".
In our direct experience, "the seen" does not imply the
existence of a subject (an entity located in our brain looking through
our eyes) or an impersonal unmanifest eternal witness (the Self,
Awareness). In our direct experience there is only "the seen", without
anybody seeing.
The dream is just a metaphor. "The seen" is itself: not existing, not non-existing, nor both existing and non-existing ;-)
.............
Mahamudra is often
defined as the union of emptiness and clarity. In Zen we call it the
inseparability of the empty essence and luminous function of the mind.
What does it mean exacty and how is it related to practice.
As
I see it, the practice of what Kenneth called 1st and 2nd gear (noting
vipassana and self-inquiry) allows us to witness the impermanent nature
or phenomena that are gradually seen as being dreamlike, impermanent and
ungraspable. As a result, we disembed from our identification to
phenomena and wake up to our existence as pure awareness, first as the
silent witness untouched by thoughts, then as an impersonal
presence-awareness somehow detached from phenomena (3rd path) and
finally as a non-dual awareness [that is not a thing] that includes
phenomena and manifests as phenomena (4th path).
Through this
process, the witness crystalizes the *clarity* aspect of what is, while
phenomena manifest the *emptiness* aspect of what is. When the
separation is complete, empty phenomedna are seen as dreamlike
apprearences within pure clarity apprehended as non-dual awareness.
In
the Direct Mode (3rd gear?) some have noticed that phenomena become
more alive, luminous, clear, in a way hyper-real, while the sense of an
observing witness tends to dissolve.
Why? Because at this
stage the direct mode shifts the our attention for the witnessing
position beyond or behind phenomena towards phenomena and objects on the
foreground. As a result phenomena (the seen, the heard, etc.) become
more clear, alive, actual and hyper-real revealing its *clarity* aspect,
while the sense of self, the witness, the observer or the sense of
existing as a pure impersonal univolved awareness dissolves and fades
away, revealing the *emptiness* aspect.
In both cases, *emptiness* and *clarity* are present but are somehow divided into two opposites sides:
a).
The subject is the only reality: the all pervading witnessing non-dual
awareness (clarity) on one side, and empty impermanent phenomena
reflected within awareness on the other (emptiness), or
b.) The
objects are the only reality in the absence of a knower: the "actual"
world bright clear and luminous out there (clarity) and no self, witness
or presence on the other side (emptiness).
Both states are valid
point of views as long as we understand that everything is both *empty*
and *luminous*. Then there is no opposion or conflict between cycling
mode and direct mode, this or that. Gaining freedom from fixed views we
gradually realize the union of emptiness and clarity.
Zen master Linji (Jap. Rinzai) illustrates a). and b). as the 1st and 2nd of his Four Positions:
1). Remove the objects, not the man (non-dual awareness that is both the source and substance of all things)
2). Remove the man, not the objects (no sense of self or agency, all that remains is the functioning of the six senses)
3). Remove both man and objects (emptiness of both self and phenomena)
4). Remove neither man, nor objects (traceless enlightenment beyond enlightenment)
.............
What is nibbana?
"If
we wish to go by the Buddha's words, there is an easy principle that
the Buddha taught to a disciple named Bahiya. "O Bahiya, whenever you
see a form, let there be just the seeing; whenever you hear a sound, let
there be just the hearing; when you smell an odor, let there be just
the smelling (...) When you practice like this, there will be no self,
no "I". When there is no self, there will be no running that way and no
coming this way and no stopping anywhere. Self does not exist. That is
the end of dukkha. That itself is nibbana". Whenever life is like that,
it's nibbana. If it's lasting, then it is lasting nibanna; if it is
temporary, then it is temporary nibanna. In other words, there is just
one principle to live by".
- Buddhdassa Bhikkhu, 'Heartwood of the bodhi Tree'
For more, see the original link
So any thoughts and beliefs you have are just conditions. But I'm not saying that you shouldn't believe in anything, I'm just pointing out a way to see things in perspective so you're not deluded by them. We won't grasp the experience of emptiness or the Unconditioned, the Deathless, as a personal attainment. Some of you have been grasping that one as a kind of personal attainment, haven't you? I know emptiness. I've realised emptiness' - patting yourselves on the back. That's not sabbe dhamma anatta - that's grasping the Unconditioned, making it into a condition. Me' and Mine'. When you start thinking of yourself as having realised emptiness, you can see that also as a condition of the mind.
Now sabbe dhamma anatta: all things are not-self, not a person, not a permanent soul, not a self of any sort. That's very important to contemplate also, because sabbe dhamma includes all things, the conditioned phenomena of the sensory world and the Unconditioned, the Deathless.
Notice that Buddhists make no claim for Deathlessness as being a self either! I have an immortal soul, or God is my true nature!' The Buddha avoided any statements of that nature at all. Any possible conceiving oneself as anything at all is an obstacle to enlightenment, because you attach to an idea again, to a concept of self as being part of something. Maybe you think there's a piece of you, a little soul, that joins the bigger one at death. That is a conception of the mind - isn't it? - that you can know. We're not saying it's untrue, or false, but we're just being the knowing, knowing what can be known. We don't feel compelled to grasp that as a belief, we see it as only something that comes out of the mind, a condition of the mind, so we let even that go.
Ajahn Sumedho
http://amaravati.org/abmtrial/documents/the_way_it_is/04tfk.html