Anatta and paticca-samuppada (dependent origination)

General Theravada topics
1

Kaccānagotta Sutta : the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma via the middle: From ignorance as a requisite condition come fabrications. From fabrications as a requisite condition comes consciousness {…]

Thus we see how the teaching on paticcasamuppada (dependent origination) is also an exposition on anatta as it explains the conditioned nature of phenomena-giving the important links, and revealing that there is no self behind these links.

It is not surprising if at times we have resistance about anatta.
Even the venerable Channa, who later became an arahat, knew the teaching about anatta but he shrunk back from it.

Saṁyutta Nikāya
Connected Discourses on the Aggregates

22.90. Channa
, the elder bhikkhus said to the Venerable Channa: “Form, friend Channa, is impermanent, feeling is impermanent, perception is impermanent, volitional formations are impermanent, consciousness is impermanent. Form is nonself, feeling is nonself, perception is nonself, volitional formations are nonself, consciousness is nonself. All formations are impermanent; all phenomena are nonself.”

Then it occurred to the Venerable Channa: “I too think in this way: ‘Form is impermanent … consciousness is impermanent. Form is nonself … consciousness is nonself. All formations are impermanent; all phenomena are nonself.’ But my mind does not launch out upon the stilling of all formations, the relinquishing of all acquisitions, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, Nibbāna; nor does it acquire confidence, settle down, and resolve on it. Instead, agitation and clinging arise and the mind turns back, thinking: ‘But who is my self?’(see note 181 below) But such does not happen to one who sees the Dhamma. So who can teach me the Dhamma in such a way that I might see the Dhamma?”

[…]

Then the Venerable Channa set his lodging in order, took his bowl and robe, and went to Ghosita’s Park in Kosambi, where he approached the Venerable Ānanda and exchanged greetings with him…”[…]
The Venerable Ānanda then said:
“In the presence of the Blessed One I have heard this, friend Channa, in his presence I have received the exhortation he spoke to the bhikkhu Kaccanagotta:

“This world, Kaccana, for the most part relies upon a duality … (the entire sutta 12:15 is cited here) … Such is the cessation of this whole mass of suffering.”

“So it is, friend Ānanda, for those venerable ones who have such compassionate and benevolent brothers in the holy life to admonish and instruct them. And now that I have heard this Dhamma teaching of the Venerable Ānanda, I have made the breakthrough to the Dhamma.”
The Commentary (note 181 bhikkhu bodhi connected discourses):
Atha ko carahi me attā. Spk:

It is said that this elder had started to practise insight meditation without having done discernment of conditions. His weak insight could not eliminate the grip of self (attagāha), and thus when formations appeared to him as empty, agitation arose in him along with the annihilationist view, “I will be annihilated, I will be destroyed.” He saw himself falling into an abyss. [Spkpṭ: Agitation through fear (bhayaparitassanā) and clinging to views (diṭṭh’ upādāna) arose in him over the thought, “If phenomena are nonself, then what self can deeds done by what is nonself affect?” (see 22: 82 (III 104,1) and n. 142)]

Bodhi (note 183 ) explains that "

Ānanda’s choice of the Kaccānagotta Sutta is especially apt, as this sutta teaches how dependent origination counters the two extreme views of eternalism and annihilationism and replaces the view of self with the realization that it is only dukkha that arises and ceases.
”

2

Here is another sutta showing the intertwining of the paticcasamuppada and anatta.

SN 12.12 PTS: S ii 13 CDB i 541
Phagguna Sutta: To Phagguna
translated from the Pali by
Nyanaponika Thera

“There are, O monks, four nutriments for the sustenance of beings born, and for the support of beings seeking birth. What are the four? Edible food, coarse and fine; secondly, sense-impression; thirdly, volitional thought; fourthly, consciousness.”

After these words, the venerable Moliya-Phagguna addressed the Exalted One as follows:

“Who, O Lord, consumes[1] the nutriment consciousness?”

“The question is not correct,” said the Exalted One. “I do not say that ‘he consumes.’[2] If I had said so, then the question ‘Who consumes?’ would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be: ‘For what is the nutriment consciousness (the condition)?’[3] And to that the correct reply is: ‘The nutriment consciousness[4] is a condition for the future arising of a renewed existence;[5] when that has come into being, there is (also) the sixfold sense-base; and conditioned by the sixfold sense-base is sense-impression.’”[6]

“Who, O Lord, has a sense-impression?”

“The question is not correct,” said the Exalted One.

“I do not say that ‘he has a sense-impression.’ Had I said so, then the question ‘Who has a sense-impression?’ would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be ‘What is the condition of sense-impression?’ And to that the correct reply is: ‘The sixfold sense-base is a condition of sense-impression, and sense-impression is the condition of feeling.’”

“Who, O Lord, feels?”

“The question is not correct,” said the Exalted One. “I do not say that ‘he feels.’ Had I said so, then the question ‘Who feels?’ would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be ‘What is the condition of feeling?’ And to that the correct reply is: ‘sense-impression is the condition of feeling; and feeling is the condition of craving.’”

“Who, O Lord, craves?”

“The question is not correct,” said the Exalted One. “I do not say that ‘he craves.’ Had I said so, then the question ‘Who craves?’ would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be ‘What is the condition of craving?’ And to that the correct reply is: ‘Feeling is the condition of craving, and craving is the condition of clinging.’”

“Who, O Lord, clings?”

“The question is not correct,” said the Exalted One, "I do not say that ‘he clings.’ Had I said so, then the question ‘Who clings?’ would be appropriate. But since I did not speak thus, the correct way to ask the question will be ‘What is the condition of clinging?’ And to that the correct reply is: ‘Craving is the condition of clinging; and clinging is the condition of the process of becoming.’ Such is the origin of this entire mass of suffering.[7]

“Through the complete fading away and cessation of even these six bases of sense-impression, sense-impression ceases;[8] through the cessation of sense-impression, feeling ceases; through the cessation of feeling, craving ceases; through the cessation of craving, clinging ceases; through the cessation of clinging, the process of becoming ceases; through the cessation of the process of becoming, birth ceases; through the cessation of birth, old age, death, sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief and despair cease. Such is the cessation of this entire mass of suffering.”

Notes
1.
Consumes or eats (aaharati) — The commentators say that this monk believed that he understood the three other kinds of nutriment but concerning consciousness he had conceived the notion that there was a “being” (satta) that takes consciousness onto himself as nutriment.
2.
Comy: “I do not say that there is any being or person that consumes (or eats).”
3.
Comy: “That means: ‘For what (impersonal) state (or thing; katamassa dhammassa) is the nutriment consciousness a condition (paccaya)?’” The term dhamma, in the sense of an impersonal factor of existence, is here contrasted with the questioner’s assumption of a being or person performing the respective function. By re-formulating the question, the Buddha wanted to point out that there is no reason for assuming that the nutriment consciousness “feeds” or conditions any separate person hovering behind it; but that consciousness constitutes just one link in a chain of processes indicated by the Buddha in the following.

1 Like
3

From the Channa sutta

https://suttacentral.net/sn22.90/en/bod … ight=false
samyutta nikaya 22.90. Channa

, the elder bhikkhus said to the Venerable Channa: “Form, friend Channa, is impermanent, feeling is impermanent, perception is impermanent, volitional formations are impermanent, consciousness is impermanent. Form is nonself, feeling is nonself, perception is nonself, volitional formations are nonself, consciousness is nonself. All formations are impermanent; all phenomena are nonself.”

Then it occurred to the Venerable Channa: “I too think in this way: ‘Form is impermanent … consciousness is impermanent. Form is nonself … consciousness is nonself. All formations are impermanent; all phenomena are nonself.’ But my mind does not launch out upon the stilling of all formations, the relinquishing of all acquisitions, the destruction of craving, dispassion, cessation, Nibbāna; nor does it acquire confidence, settle down, and resolve on it. Instead, agitation and clinging arise and the mind turns back, thinking: ‘But who is my self?’(see note 181 below) But such does not happen to one who sees the Dhamma. So who can teach me the Dhamma in such a way that I might see the Dhamma?”

[…]

Then the Venerable Channa set his lodging in order, took his bowl and robe, and went to Ghosita’s Park in Kosambi, where he approached the Venerable Ānanda and exchanged greetings with him…”[…]
The Venerable Ānanda then said:
“In the presence of the Blessed One I have heard this, friend Channa, in his presence I have received the exhortation he spoke to the bhikkhu Kaccanagotta:

“This world, Kaccana, for the most part relies upon a duality …[*] (the entire sutta 12:15 is cited here)
[unfortunately that section was removed . Here it is here]: This world, Kaccana, for the most part depends upon a duality—upon the notion of existence and the notion of nonexistence. But for one who sees the origin of the world as it really is with correct wisdom, there is no notion of nonexistence in regard to the world. And for one who sees the cessation of the world as it really is with correct wisdom, there is no notion of existence in regard to the world.

“This world, Kaccana, is for the most part shackled by engagement, clinging, and adherence. But this one with right view does not become engaged and cling through that engagement and clinging, mental standpoint, adherence, underlying tendency; he does not take a stand about ‘my self.’ He has no perplexity or doubt that what arises is only suffering arising, what ceases is only suffering ceasing. His knowledge about this is independent of others. It is in this way, Kaccana, that there is right view. “‘All exists’: Kaccana, this is one extreme. ‘All does not exist’: this is the second extreme. Without veering towards either of these extremes, the Tathagata teaches the Dhamma by the middle: ‘With ignorance as condition, volitional formations come to be; with volitional formations as condition, consciousness…. Such is the origin of this whole mass of suffering. But with the remainderless fading away and cessation of ignorance comes cessation of volitional formations; with the cessation of volitional formations, cessation of consciousness… . Such is the cessation of this whole mass of suffering.”
… Such is the cessation of this whole mass of suffering.”

“So it is, friend Ānanda, for those venerable ones who have such compassionate and benevolent brothers in the holy life to admonish and instruct them. And now that I have heard this Dhamma teaching of the Venerable Ānanda, I have made the breakthrough to the Dhamma.”

4

https://suttacentral.net/sn22.81/en/bod … ight=false

Saṁyutta Nikāya
Connected Discourses on the Aggregates
22.81. Parileyya

Bhikkhus, in regard to the Dhamma that has been thus taught by me discriminately, a reflection arose in the mind of a certain bhikkhu thus: ‘How should one know, how should one see, for the immediate destruction of the taints to occur?’

“And how, bhikkhus, should one know, how should one see, for the immediate destruction of the taints to occur? Here, bhikkhus, the uninstructed worldling, who is not a seer of the noble ones and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, who is not a seer of superior persons and is unskilled and undisciplined in their Dhamma, regards form as self. That regarding, bhikkhus, is a formation. That formation—what is its source, what is its origin, from what is it born and produced? When the uninstructed worldling is contacted by a feeling born of ignorance-contact, craving arises: thence that formation is born.

“Thus, bhikkhus, that formation is impermanent**, conditioned, dependently arisen; that craving is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen; that feeling is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen; that contact is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen; that ignorance is impermanent, conditioned, dependently arisen.** When one knows and sees thus, bhikkhus, the immediate destruction of the taints occurs.

5

https://suttacentral.net/sn12.61/en/bod … ight=false
Saṁyutta Nikāya
Connected Discourses on Causation
12.61. Uninstructed (1)

Thus have I heard. On one occasion the Blessed One was dwelling at Savatthī in Jeta’s Grove, Anathapiṇḍika’s Park….

“Bhikkhus, the uninstructed worldling might experience revulsion towards this body composed of the four great elements; he might become dispassionate towards it and be liberated from it. For what reason? Because growth and decline is seen in this body composed of the four great elements, it is seen being taken up and laid aside. Therefore the uninstructed worldling might experience revulsion towards this body composed of the four great elements; he might become dispassionate towards it and be liberated from it.

“But, bhikkhus, as to that which is called ‘mind’ and ‘mentality’ and ‘consciousness’ —the uninstructed worldling is unable to experience revulsion towards it, unable to become dispassionate towards it and be liberated from it. For what reason? Because for a long time this has been held to by him, appropriated, and grasped thus: ‘This is mine, this I am, this is my self.’ Therefore the uninstructed worldling is unable to experience revulsion towards it, unable to become dispassionate towards it and be liberated from it.

“It would be better, bhikkhus, for the uninstructed worldling to take as self this body composed of the four great elements rather than the mind. For what reason? Because this body composed of the four great elements is seen standing for one year, for two years, for three, four, five, or ten years, for twenty, thirty, forty, or fifty years, for a hundred years, or even longer. But that which is called ‘mind’ and ‘mentality’ and ‘consciousness’ arises as one thing and ceases as another by day and by night. Just as a monkey roaming through a forest grabs hold of one branch, lets that go and grabs another, then lets that go and grabs still another, so too that which is called ‘mind’ and ‘mentality’ and ‘consciousness’ arises as one thing and ceases as another by day and by night.

“Therein, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple attends closely and carefully to dependent origination itself thus: ‘When this exists, that comes to be; with the arising of this, that arises. When this does not exist, that does not come to be; with the cessation of this, that ceases. That is, with ignorance as condition, volitional formations come to be; with volitional formations as condition, consciousness…. Such is the origin of this whole mass of suffering. But with the remainderless fading away and cessation of ignorance comes cessation of volitional formations; with the cessation of volitional formations, cessation of consciousness…. Such is the cessation of this whole mass of suffering.

“Seeing thus, bhikkhus, the instructed noble disciple experiences revulsion towards form, revulsion towards feeling, revulsion towards perception, revulsion towards volitional formations, revulsion towards consciousness. Experiencing revulsion, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion his mind is liberated. When it is liberated there comes the knowledge: ‘It’s liberated.’ He understands: ‘Destroyed is birth, the holy life has been lived, what had to be done has been done, there is no more for this state of being.’”

6

https://suttacentral.net/mn148/en/bodhi … ight=false
Majjhima Nikāya
148. The Six Sets of Six

vi “‘The six classes of craving should be understood.’ So it was said. And with reference to what was this said? Dependent on the eye and forms, eye-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact; with contact as condition there is feeling; with feeling as condition there is craving. Dependent on the ear and sounds, ear-consciousness arises…with feeling as condition there is craving. Dependent on the nose and odours, nose-consciousness arises…with feeling as condition there is craving. Dependent on the tongue and flavours, tongue-consciousness arises…with feeling as condition there is craving. Dependent on the body and tangibles, body-consciousness arises…with feeling as condition there is craving. Dependent on the mind and mind-objects, mind-consciousness arises; the meeting of the three is contact; with contact as condition there is feeling; with feeling as condition there is craving. So it was with reference to this that it was said: ‘The six classes of craving should be understood.’ This is the sixth set of six.
Robert: thus we see dependent origination explained. The sutta then continues:
Demonstration of not Self
i “If anyone says, ‘The eye is self,’ that is not tenable. The rise and fall of the eye are discerned, and since its rise and fall are discerned, it would follow: ‘My self rises and falls.’ That is why it is not tenable for anyone to say, ‘The eye is self.’ Thus the eye is not self.

“If anyone says, ‘Forms are self’…That is why it is not tenable for anyone to say, ‘Forms are self.’ Thus the eye is not self, forms are not self.

“If anyone says, ‘Eye-consciousness is self’…That is why it is not tenable for anyone to say, ‘Eye-consciousness is self.’ Thus the eye is not self, forms are not self, eye-consciousness is not self.
[..]

vi “If anyone says, ‘The mind is self,’ that is not tenable. The rise and fall of the mind are discerned, and since its rise and fall are discerned, it would follow: ‘My self rises and falls.’ That is why it is not tenable for anyone to say, ‘The mind is self.’ Thus the mind is not self.

“If anyone says, ‘Mind-objects are self,’…‘Mind-consciousness is self,’…‘Mind-contact is self,’…‘Feeling is self,’… … ‘Craving is self’…That is why it is not tenable for anyone to say, ‘Craving is self.’ Thus the mind is not self, mind-objects are not self, mind-consciousness is not self, mind-contact is not self, feeling is not self, craving is not self

7

the Mahanidana sutta Commentary and sub-commentary.
Bodhi, The Great Discourse on Causation

Sutta: BECOME LIKE A TANGLED SKEIN
Commentary: When weaver’s yarn which has been badly kept and gnawed by mice becomes tangled all over, it is difficult to distinguish its begin­ ing and end and to straighten it out from beginning to end. Similarly, beings have stumbled over the principle of conditionality; they have become tangled and bewildered and are unable to straighten it out. How­ ever, it is possible for a person to straighten out a tangled skein by relying on his own personal ability. But except for the two kinds of bodhisattas [those who will become paccekabuddhas and perfect Bud­dhas], other beings are incapable of straightening out the principle of conditionality on their own [without the instructions of another]. And as a tangled skein, moistened with grease and worked over with a comb, becomes clustered and knotted all over, in the same way these beings who have stumbled over conditions and cannot set them straight be­ come confused and bound up in knots over the sixty-two views. For all those who rely on views are unable to straighten out the principle of conditionality.
SUB. CY. “Stumbled over the principle of conditionality”: having missed the middle path, they have fallen into the two extremes (of eternalism and annihilationism). “Stumbled over conditions”: stumbled by assuming the conditioning phenomena to be permanent, happiness, and self, when in their intrinsic nature they are impermanent, suffering, and non-self. “Unable to straighten out the principle of conditionality”: because they do not give up their assumptions of permanence, etc., they are unable to straighten out their own views regarding conditions, and therefore they become tied in knots by way of the bodily knot of dogmatic adherences.21

8

Majjhima Nikāya
115. Many Sorts of Elements

“But, venerable sir, in what way is a bhikkhu worthy to be called skilled in dependent origination?”

“Here, Ānanda, a bhikkhu knows thus: ‘That is when this is; that arises with the arising of this. That is not when this is not; that ceases with the cessation of this. That is to say: “It is with ignorance as condition that formations have positive being; with formations as condition, consciousness; with consciousness as condition, name-and-form; with name-and-form as condition, the sixfold base; with the sixfold base as condition, contact; with contact as condition, feeling; with feeling as condition, craving; with craving as condition, clinging; with clinging as condition, being; with being as condition, birth; it is with birth as condition that ageing and death have positive being, and also sorrow,..

[…]

He understands: ‘It is impossible, it never happens; that a person whose view is perfected should treat any dhamma as self—no such possibility is found’, and he understands: ‘It is possible that an ordinary man should treat any dhamma as self—such a possibility is found.’

9

in this sutta the factors of the paticcasamuppada are given with an explanation of each link. In the section on upadana it is said: There are these four kinds of clinging: clinging to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, clinging to rules and observances, and clinging to a doctrine of self.
https://suttacentral.net/mn9/en/bodhi?l … ight=false
Majjhima Nikāya
9. Right View

friend, might there be another way in which a noble disciple is one of right view…and has arrived at this true Dhamma?”—“There might be, friends.

“When, friends, a noble disciple understands clinging, the origin of clinging, the cessation of clinging, and the way leading to the cessation of clinging, in that way he is one of right view… and has arrived at this true Dhamma.

“And what is clinging, what is the origin of clinging, what is the cessation of clinging, what is the way leading to the cessation of clinging? There are these four kinds of clinging: clinging to sensual pleasures, clinging to views, clinging to rules and observances, and clinging to a doctrine of self. With the arising of craving there is the arising of clinging. With the cessation of craving there is the cessation of clinging. The way leading to the cessation of clinging is just this Noble Eightfold Path; that is, right view…right concentration.

“When a noble disciple has thus understood clinging, the origin of clinging, the cessation of clinging, and the way leading to the cessation of clinging…he here and now makes an end of suffering. In that way too a noble disciple is one of right view… and has arrived at this true Dhamma.”