Selected excerpts from “The Island: An Anthology of the Buddha’s Teachings on Nibbana” by Ajahn Amaro and Ajahn Pasanno
The word atammayata literally means ‘not made of that.’ It can also be rendered as ‘non-identification,’ focusing on the subject side of the equation. Other translators have it as ‘non-fashioning’ or ‘unconcoctability’ – thus hinting more at the object dimension of it. Either way, it refers primarily to the quality of experience prior to, or without, a subject/object duality arising. This insight leads us into a contemplation of the relationship of the apparent subject and object – how the tension between the two generates the world of things and its experiencer, and more importantly how, when that duality is seen through, the heart’s liberation is the result.
“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: This, Bahiya, is how you should train yourself.”
“When, 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, then, Bahiya, there is no ‘you’ in connection with that. When, Bahiya, there is no ‘you’ in connection with that, there is no ‘you’ there. When, Bahiya, there is no ‘you’ there, then, Bahiya, you are neither here nor there nor in between the two. This, just this, is the end of suffering.” [ ~Ud 1.10]
In more recent times, Ajahn Buddhadasa outlined three qualities which describe the upper reaches of spiritual refinement:
sunnata– voidness or emptiness;
tathata – thusness or suchness;
atammayata – nonidentification or ‘not-thatness.
When the qualities of emptiness and suchness are considered, even though the conceit of identity (self) might already have been seen through, there can still remain subtle traces of clinging; clinging to the idea of an objective world being known by a subjective knowing even though no sense of ‘I’ is discernible at all. There can be the feeling of a ‘this’ which is knowing a ‘that,’ and either saying “Yes” to it, in the case of suchness, or “No” in the case of emptiness. Atammayata is the closure of that whole domain, expressing the insight that “there is no ‘that.” It is the genuine collapse of both the illusion of separateness of subject and object and also of the discrimination between phenomena as being somehow substantially different from each other.
The ninth of the Ten Fetters is uddhacca – restlessness. The restlessness to which this refers is the subtlest of feelings that there might be something better over there or just in the future; a feeling that ‘that’ (which is out of reach) might have more value in some way than ‘this.’ It is the ever-so-insidious addiction to time and its promises. Atammayata is the utter abandonment of this root delusion: one sees that in ultimate truth there is no time, no self, no here and no there. So rather than “Be here now” as a spiritual exhortation, perhaps instead we should say: “Let go of identity, space and time,” or: “Realize unlocated, timeless selflessness.”
6.4) [I]n the Vedanta … to be wholly and exclusively aware of Brahman (Hindu Godhead) was at the same time to be Brahman… The origins of this idea seem to lie in a theory of sense perception in which the grasping hand supplies a dominant analogy. It takes the shape of what it apprehends. Vision was similarly explained: the eye sends out some kind of ray which takes the shape of what we see and comes back with it. Similarly thought: a thought conforms to its object. This idea is encapsulated in the term tanmayata, ‘consisting of that’: that the thought of the gnostic or meditator becomes con-substantial with the thing realized. ~ Richard Gombrich, ‘Metaphor, Allegory, Satire,’ in ‘How Buddhism Began: The Conditioned Genesis of the Early Teachings,’ pp 86-7 That is to say, with the opposite quality, a-tammayata, the mind’s ‘energy’ does not go out to the object and occupy it. It neither makes an objective ‘thing’ or a subjective ‘observer’ knowing it; hence ‘non-identification’ refers to the subjective aspect and ‘non-fabrication’ mostly to the objective.
The reader should also carefully bear in mind the words “The origins of this idea…” and not take the Vedic concept and imagery as representing the Buddhist use of the word entirely accurately. In the state of atammayata, in its Buddhist usage, there is no actual ‘becoming con-substantial’ with the thing that is being known; it is more that the deluded identification of the mind with the object is being dispelled (see also §6.7)
One helpful way of understanding atammayata’s role and significance is to relate it to the other two items in the final triad of the nine insights as outlined by Ajahn Buddhadasa. These three qualities describe the upper reaches of spiritual refinement: sunnata – voidness or emptiness; tathata – thusness or suchness; atammayata – nonidentification or ‘not-thatness.’ The three qualities speak to the nature of experience when many of the coarser defilements have fallen away. When the qualities of emptiness and suchness are considered, even though the conceit of identity might already have been seen through, there can still remain subtle traces of clinging; clinging to the idea of an objective world being known by a subjective knowing even though no sense of “I” is discernible at all.
There can be the feeling of a ‘this’ which is knowing a ‘that,’ and either saying “Yes” to it, in the case of suchness, or “No” in the case of emptiness. Atammayata is the closure of that whole domain, expressing the insight that “There is no ‘that.'” It is the genuine collapse of both the illusion of separateness of subject and object and also of the discrimination between phenomena as being somehow substantially different from each other.
Perhaps one of the simplest, clearest and most practical expressions of the principle of atammayata – ‘not-made-of-that-ness’ – has come down to us from the teachings of Luang Pu Dun, a direct disciple of Ven. Ajahn Mun and one of the great lights of Dhamma in Asia in recent years. Here is his reformulation of the 117 Four Noble Truths, based on the depiction of ignorance (avijja) as the fundamental error of the mind attempting to ‘go out’ and pursue ‘thatness’ in the form of perceptions, feelings and ideas. In reflecting on these four formulae, it might be helpful to recollect the analogy of the grasping hand, mentioned in §6.4, reaching out to become con-substantial with its object and then returning with it. 6.6)
The mind that goes out in order to satisfy its moods is the Cause of Suffering (II); The result that comes from the mind going out in order to satisfy its moods is Suffering (I); The mind seeing the mind clearly is the Path Leading to the Cessation of Suffering (IV); The result of the mind seeing the mind clearly is the Cessation of Suffering (III).
~ Luang Pu Dun, ‘Atulo,‘ collected teachings compiled by Phra Bodhinandamuni
dhamma footsteps 
You must be logged in to post a comment.