Anatta

In Buddhism, the term anattā (Pali) or anātman (Sanskrit) refers to the doctrine of 'non-self', that there is no unchanging, permanent self, soul or essence in living beings. It is one of the seven beneficial perceptions in Buddhism, and along with dukkha (suffering) and anicca (impermanence), it is one of three Right Understandings about the three marks of existence.The Four planes of liberation(according to the Sutta Piṭaka)stage's'fruit'abandonedfettersrebirth(s)until suffering's end stream-enterer 1. identity view (Anatman) 2. doubt in Buddha 3. ascetic or ritual rules lowerfetters up to seven rebirths inhuman or heavenly realms once-returner once more as a human non-returner 4. sensual desire 5. ill will once more ina heavenly realm(Pure Abodes) arahant 6. material-rebirth desire 7. immaterial-rebirth desire 8. conceit 9. restlessness 10. ignorance higherfetters no rebirth Source: Ñāṇamoli & Bodhi (2001), Middle-Length Discourses, pp. 41-43.While the Upanishads recognized many things as being not-Self, they felt that a real, true Self could be found. They held that when it was found, and known to be identical to Brahman, the basis of everything, this would bring liberation. In the Buddhist Suttas, though, literally everything is seen is non-Self, even Nirvana. When this is known, then liberation – Nirvana – is attained by total non-attachment. Thus both the Upanishads and the Buddhist Suttas see many things as not-Self, but the Suttas apply it, indeed non-Self, to everything.'Monks, this Teaching so well proclaimed by me, is plain, open, explicit, free of patchwork. In this Teaching that is so well proclaimed by me and is plain, open, explicit and free of patchwork; for those who are arahants, free of taints, who have accomplished and completed their task, have laid down the burden, achieved their aim, severed the fetters binding to existence, who are liberated by full knowledge, there is no (future) round of existence that can be ascribed to them. – Majjhima Nikaya i.130 ¶ 42, Translated by Nyanaponika Thera (Nyanaponika, 2006) In Buddhism, the term anattā (Pali) or anātman (Sanskrit) refers to the doctrine of 'non-self', that there is no unchanging, permanent self, soul or essence in living beings. It is one of the seven beneficial perceptions in Buddhism, and along with dukkha (suffering) and anicca (impermanence), it is one of three Right Understandings about the three marks of existence. The Buddhist concept of anatta or anatman is one of the fundamental differences between Buddhism and Hinduism, with the latter asserting that atman (self, soul) exists. Anattā is a composite Pali word consisting of an (not, without) and attā (soul). The term refers to the central Buddhist doctrine that 'there is in humans no permanent, underlying substance that can be called the soul.' It is one of the three characteristics of all existence, together with dukkha (suffering, unsatisfactoriness) and anicca (impermanence). Anattā is synonymous with Anātman (an + ātman) in Sanskrit Buddhist texts. In some Pali texts, ātman of Vedic texts is also referred to with the term Attan, with the sense of soul. An alternate use of Attan or Atta is 'self, oneself, essence of a person', driven by the Vedic era Brahmanical belief that the soul is the permanent, unchangeable essence of a living being, or the true self. In Buddhism-related English literature, Anattā is rendered as 'not-Self', but this translation expresses an incomplete meaning, states Peter Harvey; a more complete rendering is 'non-Self' because from its earliest days, Anattā doctrine denies that there is anything called a 'Self' in any person or anything else, and that a belief in 'Self' is a source of Dukkha (suffering, pain, unsatisfactoriness). It is also incorrect to translate Anattā simply as 'ego-less', according to Peter Harvey, because the Indian concept of ātman and attā is different from the Freudian concept of ego. Anatta or Anatta-vada is also referred to as the 'no-soul or no-self doctrine' of Buddhism. The concept of Anattā appears in numerous Sutta of the ancient Buddhist Nikāya texts (Pali canon). It appears, for example, as a noun in Samyutta Nikaya III.141, IV.49, V.345, in Sutta II.37 of Anguttara Nikaya, II.37–45 and II.80 of Patisambhidamagga, III.406 of Dhammapada. It also appears as an adjective, for example, in Samyutta Nikaya III.114, III.133, IV.28 and IV.130–166, in Sutta III.66 and V.86 of Vinaya. The ancient Buddhist texts discuss Attā or Attan (soul, self), sometimes with alternate terms such as Atuman, Tuma, Puggala, Jiva, Satta, Pana and Nama-rupa, thereby providing the context for the Buddhist Anattā doctrine. Examples of such Attā contextual discussions are found in Digha Nikaya I.186-187, Samyutta Nikaya III.179 and IV.54, Vinaya I.14, Majjhima Nikaya I.138, III.19, and III.265–271 and Anguttara Nikaya I.284. The contextual use of Attā in Nikāyas is two sided. In one, it directly denies that there is anything called a self or soul in a human being that is a permanent essence of a human being, a theme found in Brahmanical (proto-Hindu) traditions. In another, states Peter Harvey, such as at Samyutta Nikaya IV.286, the Sutta considers the materialistic concept in pre-Buddhist Vedic times of 'no afterlife, complete annihilation' at death to be a denial of Self, but still 'tied up with belief in a Self'. 'Self exists' is a false premise, assert the early Buddhist texts. However, adds Peter Harvey, these texts do not admit the premise 'Self does not exist' either because the wording presumes the concept of 'Self' prior to denying it; instead, the early Buddhist texts use the concept of Anattā as the implicit premise. According to Steven Collins, the doctrine of anatta and 'denial of self' in the canonical Buddhist texts is 'insisted on only in certain theoretical contexts', while they use the terms atta, purisa, puggala quite naturally and freely in various contexts. The elaboration of the anatta doctrine, along with identification of the words such as 'puggala' as 'permanent subject or soul' appears in later Buddhist literature.