Anatta

I buddhismen henviser udtrykket anattā (Pali) eller anātman (sanskrit) til læren om "ikke-selv", at der ikke er noget uforanderligt, permanent selv, sjæl eller essens i fænomener.^[1]^[2] Det er en af de syv gavnlige opfattelser i buddhismen, ^[3] og et af de tre eksistensmærker sammen med dukkha (utilfredsstillelse) og anicca (midlertidighed). ^[4]

Det buddhistiske begreb anatta eller anatman er en af de grundlæggende forskelle mellem buddhisme og hinduisme, idet sidstnævnte hævder, at atman (selv, sjæl) eksisterer. ^[5] ^[6]

^ Anatta Buddhism Arkiveret 2015-12-10 hos Wayback Machine, Encyclopædia Britannica (2013)
^ [a] Christmas Humphreys (2012). Exploring Buddhism. Routledge. s. 42-43. ISBN 978-1-136-22877-3.
^ "Sañña Sutta: Perceptions" (AN 7.46) Arkiveret 2014-09-28 hos Wayback Machine Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight (Legacy Edition), 30 November 2013
^ Richard Gombrich (2006). Theravada Buddhism. Routledge. s. 47. ISBN 978-1-134-90352-8., Quote: "All phenomenal existence [in Buddhism] is said to have three interlocking characteristics: impermanence, suffering and lack of soul or essence."
^ [a] Anatta Arkiveret 2015-12-10 hos Wayback Machine, Encyclopædia Britannica (2013), Quote: "Anatta in Buddhism, the doctrine that there is in humans no permanent, underlying soul. The concept of anatta, or anatman, is a departure from the Hindu belief in atman ("the self")."; [b] Steven Collins (1994), "Religion and Practical Reason" (Editors: Frank Reynolds, David Tracy), State Univ of New York Press, ISBN 978-0-7914-2217-5, page 64; "Central to Buddhist soteriology is the doctrine of not-self (Pali: anattā, Sanskrit: anātman, the opposed doctrine of ātman is central to Brahmanical thought). Put very briefly, this is the [Buddhist] doctrine that human beings have no soul, no self, no unchanging essence."; [c] Edward Roer (Translator), Shankara's Introduction at Google Books to Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad, pages 2-4; [d] Katie Javanaud (2013), Is The Buddhist 'No-Self' Doctrine Compatible With Pursuing Nirvana? Arkiveret 2015-02-06 hos Wayback Machine, Philosophy Now; [e] David Loy (1982), "Enlightenment in Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta: Are Nirvana and Moksha the Same?", International Philosophical Quarterly, Volume 23, Issue 1, pages 65-74; [f] KN Jayatilleke (2010), Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge, ISBN 978-8120806191, pages 246-249, from note 385 onwards;
^ John C. Plott et al (2000), Global History of Philosophy: The Axial Age, Volume 1, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120801585, page 63, Quote: "The Buddhist schools reject any Ātman concept. As we have already observed, this is the basic and ineradicable distinction between Hinduism and Buddhism".

[britannicaanatta-1] Anatta Buddhism Arkiveret 2015-12-10 hos Wayback Machine, Encyclopædia Britannica (2013)

[2] [a] Christmas Humphreys (2012). Exploring Buddhism. Routledge. s. 42-43. ISBN 978-1-136-22877-3.

[accesstoinsight.org-3] "Sañña Sutta: Perceptions" (AN 7.46) Arkiveret 2014-09-28 hos Wayback Machine Translated from the Pali by Thanissaro Bhikkhu. Access to Insight (Legacy Edition), 30 November 2013

[4] Richard Gombrich (2006). Theravada Buddhism. Routledge. s. 47. ISBN 978-1-134-90352-8., Quote: "All phenomenal existence [in Buddhism] is said to have three interlocking characteristics: impermanence, suffering and lack of soul or essence."

[6sourcesatman-5] [a] Anatta Arkiveret 2015-12-10 hos Wayback Machine, Encyclopædia Britannica (2013), Quote: "Anatta in Buddhism, the doctrine that there is in humans no permanent, underlying soul. The concept of anatta, or anatman, is a departure from the Hindu belief in atman ("the self")."; [b] Steven Collins (1994), "Religion and Practical Reason" (Editors: Frank Reynolds, David Tracy), State Univ of New York Press, ISBN 978-0-7914-2217-5, page 64; "Central to Buddhist soteriology is the doctrine of not-self (Pali: anattā, Sanskrit: anātman, the opposed doctrine of ātman is central to Brahmanical thought). Put very briefly, this is the [Buddhist] doctrine that human beings have no soul, no self, no unchanging essence."; [c] Edward Roer (Translator), Shankara's Introduction at Google Books to Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad, pages 2-4; [d] Katie Javanaud (2013), Is The Buddhist 'No-Self' Doctrine Compatible With Pursuing Nirvana? Arkiveret 2015-02-06 hos Wayback Machine, Philosophy Now; [e] David Loy (1982), "Enlightenment in Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta: Are Nirvana and Moksha the Same?", International Philosophical Quarterly, Volume 23, Issue 1, pages 65-74; [f] KN Jayatilleke (2010), Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge, ISBN 978-8120806191, pages 246-249, from note 385 onwards;

[johnplott3-6] John C. Plott et al (2000), Global History of Philosophy: The Axial Age, Volume 1, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN 978-8120801585, page 63, Quote: "The Buddhist schools reject any Ātman concept. As we have already observed, this is the basic and ineradicable distinction between Hinduism and Buddhism".

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]