RSivan Qra

 

did Buddha reject Atman?

This topic or ATMA versus ANATMA is misunderstood by many.

Especially westerners love to point to this as a major difference between Hinduism and Buddhism. There is a increasing tendency in Western academia to demonise Hinduism and glorify Buddhism - driving a wedge between the two sister Dharmas.

The Buddha never rejected the Vedāntic concept of ātman.

Let us read the Pali text. — Annattalakhana Sutta Mahavagga 1, 6, 38

And the Blessed One thus spoke to the five Bhikkhus: 'The Body (Rupa), O Bhikkhus, is not the Self. If the body, O Bhikkhus, were the Self, the body would not be subject to disease, and we should be able to say: " Let my body be such and such a one, let my body not be such and such a one." But since the body, ‑ O Bhikkhus, is not the Self, therefore the body is subject to disease, and we are not able to say: " Let my body be such and such a one, let my body not be such and such a one." '…………..

'Therefore, O Bhikkhus, whatever body has been, will be, and is now, belonging or not belonging to sentient beings, gross or subtle, inferior or superior, distant or near, all that body is not mine, is not me, is not my Self: thus it should be considered by right knowledge according to the truth.

So the Blessed One is reiterating exactly what the Vedānta says — the body and everything associated with it - thoughts, feelings, memories etc are not the SELF - they are the percepts of the Self.

In Vedānta the primary problem of human birth is Avidya — cognitive error or nescience. This cognitive error leads to the creation of identities – Asmita - this clutching to identities such as parent - child, male, female, trans, high class, low class, middle class, teacher - pupil etc are all delusions, and attachment to these identities is productive of duḥkha — grief, sorrow, neurosis.

In the Yoga sūtras Patañjali says that Avidya is characterised be seeing the non-self (anātman) as Self (ātman.)

So anātma = object and ātma = subject. So just as the Blessed One said - confusing the body/mind with your own Self rather than merely the body that YOU inhabit, is what is known as Spiritual Ignorance, nescience or Avidya.

For someone to say - “There is no Self” or “I looked everywhere in my body and mind and could not locate a Self” – is a sign of insanity - because as long as a person has a sense of “I” …. Self-identity exists. Otherwise one is denying one’s own existence.

What many are conflating with the Vedāntic concept of ātman is the doctrine of an early Buddhist sect which was extremely popular for about 1000 years - the pudgala-vādins. They believed there was a homunculus (little person) inhabiting the body called the pudgala - and this accounted for Karma and reincarnation - since in absence of an ātma - explaining karma and reincarnation is problematic.

There are a variety of ideas about the ātman in the different schools of Vedānta and much debate about them.

The dominant school - Advaita Vedānta holds with one single ātman also known as Brahman (the terms are used interchangeably in the Upaṇiṣads) and ultimately in the state of Mokṣa all identity ceases and there is a merging into the Bliss of the Divine Consciousness. The example of the river entering the sea is used.

The Viṣiṣṭhādvaitis believe that the ātmans are separate but not different units of consciousness (prakāra) and they blend with, but do not merge into the Divine Consciousness which is Nārāyaṇa (Brahman)

The Dvaitis believe that the ātmans are many and different from each other and eternally retain their individual identity.