Absence of a doer

1

Visuddhimagga XVI 90. 13. As to void, singlefold, and so on: firstly, as to void: in the ultimate sense all the truths should be understood as void because of the absence of (i) any experiencer, (ii) any doer, (iii) anyone who is extinguished, and (iv) any goer. Hence this is said:
For there is suffering, but none who suffers; Doing exists although there is no door. Extinction is but no extinguished person; Although there is a path, there is no goer.

XIX 20. Hence the Ancients said:
There is no doer of a deed
Or one who reaps the deed’s result; Phenomena alone flow on—
No other view than this is right.
And so, while kamma and result Thus causally maintain their round, As seed and tree succeed in turn,
No first beginning can be shown.
Nor in the future round of births
Can they be shown not to occur: Sectarians, not knowing this, Have failed to gain self-mastery. [603] They assume a being, see it as Eternal or annihilated.
Adopt the sixty-two wrong views, Each contradicting one another.
The stream of craving bears them on Caught in the meshes of their views: And as the stream thus bears them on They are not freed from suffering.
A monk, disciple of the Buddha, With direct knowledge of this fact Can penetrate this deep and subtle Void conditionality.

2

however the wise still use terms like ’ doer’ or person or me:

Visuddhimagga XIX 20.

In all kinds of becoming, generation, destiny, station, and abode there appears only mentality-materiality, which occurs by means of linking of cause with fruit. He sees no doer over and above the doing, no experiencer of the result over and above the occurrence of the result. But he sees clearly with right understanding that the wise say “doer” when there is doing and “experiencer” when there is experiencing simply as a mode of common usage.

1 Like
3

I just want add here,

‘Man’ , ‘God’ , ‘Person’, ‘Doer’ etc are Designated appropriately based on mere nāmarūpa (yathārahaṃ nāmarūpamattaṃ upādāya paññatto)

Here, ‘mere’ does not mean there’s anything simple about nāmarūpa dhammas.

It’s also pointless to talk about suññatā to someone for whom vedanā, saññā, viññāṇa etc might as well be just x, y, z.

When they are told something like

nāmarūpamattamidaṃ yathārahaṃ paccayehi uppajjati ceva nirujjhati ca, na ettha koci kattā vā kāretā vā

It’s meaningless to them.

4

This is merely [mattam) mentality-materiality , which arises and ceases depending on conditions as appropriate; here, there is no one who acts or causes to act.