Sense of self - the reality of imagination
English Dhamma discussion with Ajahn Sujin on Zoom on Sun Feb 1st 2026.
[Vincent:] ...because there's no one, no thing.
[A. Sujin:] There is no one, or is there someone now? [No one.]
That's right, no doubt anymore. So there's no one, but there is seeing right now, isn't there? Can seeing not be anyone? [Seeing is just seeing.]
Why can seeing not be anyone? [Because it's just a conditioned dhamma.]
So it's there by conditions. It arises and is gone instantly, doesn't it? That's why it cannot be anyone at all.
There are realities which arise and fall away: seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching—anything.
All of them are different dhammas, different realities, not anyone at all. Isn't it true that seeing has arisen now and is gone?
[True, seeing is seeing, but still there's a sense of "I" there, a concept.]
Isn't that moment real? Isn't the idea of "I see" when there's seeing—isn't that idea real?
[Irene replied, "The idea of 'I' is imagined."]
So, there is imagination, isn't there? Isn't it just thinking after seeing? So, isn't imagination real? Or, in other words, isn't it a moment of thinking? At the moment of seeing, can there be thinking as well, experiencing the visible object together with seeing?
[No, they cannot happen together at the same moment.]
So, where are "you"—in seeing or thinking? [The "I" is imagined.]
So, at the moment of seeing, there is the idea of "I see." Is that right?
Each moment, conditioned to arise—just to fall away
Can seeing be "I," or is seeing just seeing—not thinking, not an idea? So there are many different moments: seeing, hearing, thinking about "I see" and "I hear," and so on.
That's why we learn to understand each different moment, which is conditioned just to arise—and it falls away.
That's why—be true to the truth, little by little. Learn to become the understanding person, or the reality which can understand the truth of what is there, firmer and firmer.
Seeing just a moment ago—gone. Thinking just a moment ago—gone. Each moment arises and is gone instantly.
That's why the idea of "I" is not right at all. It's wrong understanding—another reality, not anyone.
That's why we discuss what is there right now as it is, little by little. No matter what moment, it's there by conditions; no one's there at all.
So is it Irene's life, or just that which is conditioned to arise-and then it falls, by conditions only? From birth to death.
From the moment of birth, it's taken for "Irene" until the moment of death. Where will Irene be afterward?
So seeing is seeing, hearing is hearing, thinking is thinking, liking is liking. All are different moments of that which is conditioned, arising and falling away instantly.
Each moment is gone, never to arise again, like death
Seeing is there now... ignorance, no understanding of the truth of what seeing is, for just a split-second moment... then gone, conditioning the idea, taking that which experiences objects as "I" all the time.
That's why we learn about what is there in life from moment to moment. What is real is real. It's a dhamma, not anyone at all.
So is it true that from birth to death, it's the way dhamma is—conditioned to arise and then fall away, different moments by different conditions, until the end, death?
Seeing arises and is gone. Can we say it's born and dies? Because each moment is gone, never to arise again, like death.
So, it's not Irene at all; it's just arising and dying. But it's by conditions, no matter what follows this moment on and on, quickly.
Be true to the truth from now on, little by little, each moment. No one is there now, but seeing arises and sees, so seeing is a reality. No one is there, because it's gone instantly.
But if there isn't more careful consideration of the truth, there still will be the idea of "I," because of not understanding the reality of seeing or anything from moment to moment.
How long have ignorance and the idea of self been there?
So, learn again and again to understand a little more of the truth of seeing, otherwise there will never be moments of understanding seeing as not "I" at all.
As long as there's no attention to the nature, the truth of seeing, there needs to be the moment of discussing seeing on and on, until it conditions the moment of attending gradually to the reality which sees as—it's just a reality which experiences an object.
Because only saying that seeing is not "I," and that it's conditioned to arise and fall away, is not enough to let go of the idea "I see."
How long have ignorance and the idea of self been there? For eons and eons, at every moment—seeing, hearing, smelling, on and on, up to now.
And there's not just one moment of seeing. So many different moments need to be learned to understand the truth of dhamma, not anyone.
Each dhamma is real; it has its own characteristic to be realized when the time comes,
when paññā has developed to that degree.
So it's time to learn more about what is there, to understand the truth of it. Because it's so real that it can be realized, not by ignorance, but by a little more understanding of the truth, stage by stage.
Just hearing about seeing, as we are hearing right now, is not enough to realize the truth.
That's why we learn a little more about the truth of what is there right now, at any moment, to have firm confidence in the truth: it cannot be taken for anything; there is no atta at all.
Āsava, the reality of that which is so very subtle
Is there a sense of self now? [Yes.]
Is it real? [Dazhuang said - that which thinks is real.]
So, it's a sense of self after seeing, isn't it? Instantly, unknowingly; that's why we learn to understand that because of ignorance, not understanding the truth of seeing as just the moment of that which is conditioned to see, the idea of self is there instantly.
But it's so very, very subtle that no one is able to know it. And that's the reality of that which is so very subtle, āsava: ditthāsava, avijjāsava, bhavāsava are there.
There are many degrees of akusala dhamma; no matter what kind of dhamma, there are many degrees. The accumulation—the latent tendencies of that which has arisen after seeing and hearing without understanding— is accumulated for eons and eons up to now, in citta.
Atta, the idea that something is there after seeing, hearing...
When there's no right condition for anything to arise, that reality cannot arise, but it's there, ready to come out, ready to arise. As soon as one wakes up in the morning, it's there, ready to arise, to be the very, very subtle attachment to the idea of self.
The idea that something is there, atta, is there after seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, and thinking in life.
Until the enlightenment of the Buddha, enlightened to the truth of everything, what he said was just about each moment in life.
What is there? While one is asleep, what is there? While one wakes up, what is there? At the moment of seeing, what's there? And so on. Otherwise, there cannot be any understanding of what is there at all as it is.
What about ignorance? It arises; it cannot understand the truth of what is there, so it is avijjāsava: no understanding of anything appearing at all.
So this is the sense of self, unknown, after seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, touching, thinking, liking, and disliking.
Learning to understand each moment as different realities
So be true to the truth. Is there any understanding of seeing right now? [Yes, there is.]
Understanding or no understanding of seeing? [Yes, there is understanding.]
Of what? [Of seeing.]
How so? By thinking, considering, or what? [Through learning, hearing the teaching, and studying the teaching.]
Isn't the sense of self there, too? [At the moment of understanding, there's no sense of "I."]
But right now, seeing is there. Is there the sense of self or the understanding of the reality which sees as not-self?
So there is no understanding of seeing, right? So there is the idea, the sense of self, "I see" right now.
[Listening to Ajahn about the Buddha's teaching, then gradually there's some more understanding of seeing.]
Only at moments of understanding, not other moments. At other moments, it is still "I see" because understanding is not strong enough.
So, what did the Buddha say again and again? The three rounds of the four noble truths.
That's why we learn to understand each moment as different realities.
Can there be a sense of self at the moment of seeing, together? [No.]
And what about that which is seen—is it something? [What is seen is just color.]
Can there be anyone like Dazhuang or Vincent in it? [Now, Dazhuang's reply is: Dazhuang's visible object is seen.]
No, visible object is visible object—not anyone, not Dazhuang, not Sujin, not Vincent. That's why we learn a little more about what it is, where it is, how it comes to be seen, and so on.
Without the four primary rupas, could there be that which is seen?
[Without them, there wouldn't be any visible object.]
That's the answer, right? All by conditions. That's why everything is a dhamma; no one is there at all. [Dazhuang still had the idea that there must be someone or something there.]
So, who is that person? Where is that one? [Okay. Ajahn, Dazhuang said they're just names.]
Is the visible object now Dazhuang? [No.]
That's why we have firm confidence in the truth: that which appears to seeing is only the reality which can appear as visible object right now.
Seeing is only one doorway; no one is there at all. So the sense of self is there instantly, taking that which is seen as Vincent or someone else.
Learning about the ultimate truth as it is—so fragile and complex
Is there a sense of self now? Again and again. [Yes.]
Is it real? [Dazhuang asked, "What does real mean?"]
Is it there or not at all? [Dazhuang's still not sure...]
Isn't the sense of self a reality? Is there any sense of self now? ["I" is just an idea, but there must be dhamma there to have this idea.]
So, isn't an idea a dhamma? [Idea is not dhamma.]
So, no idea! But there are so many ideas. How can it not be a reality? How can it not be real? It's so real when it's there.
We're just talking about the sense of self because some mentioned the sense of self. Doesn't everyone acknowledge that there is a sense of self or there is no sense of self at all?
So, what about the sense of self? Isn't it real? Isn't it a reality? Isn't it now? [Ajahn, sense of self is an idea.]
It doesn't matter whether it's an idea or what. Is it real? Is it a reality? [No.]
So, there's no sense of self? The truth is the truth. [Uh...] Yes, go on, please. [Ajahn, please go ahead.] We are learning about the truth, the ultimate truth as it is.
That's why it's so very delicate, very subtle, and intricate. That's why it's not just the words we learn and remember and can follow anytime to give an answer.
But understanding is very important, even regarding the sense of self and the idea of self and so on.
All dhammas are so very subtle. It has to be one's own understanding, one's own consideration. Otherwise, there can never be the understanding of the truth—of the truth at all, rather than just about the idea.
So, what about the idea of self and the sense of self? We'll continue next time. Sawadee ka. [Sawadee krab, Ajahn.]
Mp3 audio file: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1JlQqR3_jVtm3ON4kcI70yBCcm7kiN7CE
Dhamma Foundation's source video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XGJ1QBqaDbQ