Theory of Anatt: Historical Development

Introduction:
Anatta or anatman. It is the most fundamental doctrine of Buddhist philosophy from which all
the theories arose. The term anatta (pli) or anatma (skt) is comprised of the term atta or atman
which is preceded by the negative prefix an. The meaning of anatta is thus non-self, non-ego,
egolessness, impersonality. This is the last of three characteristics of existence (ti-lakkhana).1
The doctrine of anatta arose denying the existing view of atta (pli) or atman (skt). In order to
understand the concept of anatman we need to discuss about the origin and development of the
concept of atta in brief. So I would like to draw your attention to the pre-buddhistic philosophy
where the atman concept appears. The theory of soul or atta appeared in vedic hymns and
underwent a long development throughout the passage of time. This development or evolution
took place in a few stages such as deification of the natural phenomena, concept of polytheism,
and tendency towards monotheism.
Deification of natural phenomena (sacrifice to the gods):
At the beginning the early thinkers were astonished at the natural phenomena like Storm,
darkness, the wind, the sun, the stars etc. and thought them as gods having life. This deification
of the natural phenomena has happened in almost all parts of the world. In order to please or
pacify the gods, sacrifices of animals or even human beings were made. We can have a visual
understanding about this sacrificial performance if we see the movies like Apocalyto, Million
years BC etc. made on the prehistoric period.
Subsequently this deification of natural phenomena was transformed into mythological figures,
into gods and goddesses. Now these phenomena have individual identities with their fixed
assignments. Sun was worshipped as god surya, the dawn as usa (a beautiful and shy lady),
who was called Eos and Aurora in the west and Waka-hirume-nomikoto in Japan, the moon as
soma, (Tsukiyomi in Japan) the wind as vayu or vata, Hayachi in Japan, Kato in China, the
storm as Maruts, water as apas etc. and accordingly thousands of gods appeared.2 It is said that
in the Indian mythology more than 30 thousands gods are mentioned. Like India, Greek or
roman mythology also have a huge number of gods placing Zeus or Jupiter at the top. Besides
reading history of philosophy if we read the Iliad and the odyssey two epics written by the
Roman poet Homer, Agamemnon, a play written by Aeschylus, Phaedra written by Seneca etc.

1
2

Nyanatiloka, Buddhist Dictionery.

Nakamura, P. 28

we can have a very interesting idea about the gods. In the Iliad we see them participating in the
war sided by Geek and Troy.
Further development took place when the question about the origin of existence of human
being, nature and universe and cause of death arose in the mind. Now they question the
existence of so many gods and look forward to the origin of them and also the origin of the
nature and the universe. The questions were such what is the one and only essence that has
become manifest in diversity? What is the essence of our existence?3 In fact the actual
philosophy springs from these two questions and begins the journey. Huge debate and
arguments took place in this period and a lot of theories came to exist. Some said water as the
primordial principle, some other say fire, another one say wind, and earth. Up to here there is
a kind of similarity between the Greek philosophy and the Indian one. After that there is
diversion in the direction. In Greek Philosophical criticism, development of natural science,
astronomy and city states made the gods rejected and satirized.4 But still questions arose like
what is the source of these elements. The answer came the cosmic principle or the cosmic soul
or Brahma and every individual has individual soul which is distinct from the body and eternal
and transfers from body to body throughout the cycle of births. The purpose of the individual
should be to meet the cosmic. This is what the Buddha learned from his two teachers. A group
of thinkers held this view. The other group denied this view and believed the body and the soul
are not distinct but same. Death is the end of everything.
Buddhas contemporary thinkers:
The contemporary thinkers of the Buddha also participated in this debate and presented their
own theories. Jains say the soul is identified with life, Finite. Has variable though definite size
and weight. Ajivakas say it is octangular or globular, Five hundred yojanas in extent, Blue in
colour. The Sankhyas say it is plural on the one hand and unique, external pervasive substantial
matter
Other philosophers:
Besides, other ancient and modern philosophers also theorize this concept in different names.
Ancient greek philosopher Plato termed it as The Idea, Plato (428?-347 BC)- The Idea,

3
4

Ibid, P. 84
Ibid, 49

Fichte (1762-1814)- ego or I, Hegel (1770-1831)- Absolute Spirit, Schopenhauer (17881860)- Will power,Bergson (1859-1941)- Intuition.5
Buddhas response to the existing theories:
Buddha appeared in the scene while this kind of debates were going on regarding the nature of
the self and the world. Analyzing the existing views the Buddha brought forth his own theory
of anatta. In the brahma jla sutta sixty two views have been discussed. He categorized all
these views into two broad categories such as: sassadavda who maintained a metaphysical
view of the self, a self which is immutable and distinct from the body (aa jva aa
sarra) and which as such outlasts death and uccedavda who maintained a physical view
of the self, a self which is temporary and identical with the body (tam jva ta sarra) and
which, therefore, gets annihilated at death.6 Both of these views contain belief in the self
although in different way. Buddha denied these two views and commented them as erroneous.
Denying them the Buddha propagates his own theory of anatta. He presented following
arguments to prove the theory as erroneous:
The five aggregates:
Rpa, bhikkhave, anatta, vedan antta, sa anatta, sakhr anatta, viana anatta.7
Bhikhus, matter, feeling, perception, formations and consciousness are soulless.
According to the Buddha an individual is formed with five aggregates namely Rpa, vedan,
sa, sakhr, viana. When the Buddha was asked who am I? what is my real self? he
answered individuality should be understood in terms of combination of phenomena which
appear to form the physical and mental continuum of an individual life.8 In such contexts
human beings are analyzed into five constituents-the pancakkhanda namely rpa, vedana,
sanna, sankhara and viana. These five constituents are referred as nma-rpa. Hence when
these are analysed and examined, there is nothing behind them which can be taken as 'I', Atman,
or Self, or any unchanging abiding substance. This is rather dramatically expressed in a
conversation between Mra, the Evil One, and the nun Vajir. By whom is the person (satta)
produced? asks Mra. Who is the creator of the person? Where is the person who comes into
being? Where is the person who disappears? Vajir points out to him that there is no such thing
as person but merely a collection of changing aggregates (khandha) and she illustrates her
5

Islam, P. 18
Anatta AS VIA Media, in Sri Lanka Journal Buddhist Studies, Vol.1, 1987. P. 2
7
M. Vol 1
8
Malalasekara, P.
6

meaning by the simile of the chariot which is merely the name for a collection of various parts.
In a late work, the Milindapah, the illustration is elaborated in great detail and it is pointed
out that when a person is indicated by giving him a name it does not denote a soul but is merely
an appellation for the five aggregates which constitute the empirical individual. 9 After
explaining the existence within five aggregates Buddha adivised the monks in the following
way
slavatvuso kohita, bhikkhun ime pacupdnakkhandh aniccato dukkhato
yoniso manasi karonto sotapattiphala sacchikareyyti.
.a virtuous bhikkhu should carefully attend to the five aggregates subject to clinging
as impermanent, as suffer-ing, as a disease, as a tumour, as a dart, as misery, as an
affliction, as alien, as disintegrating, as empty, as non-self. By doing sohe may
realize the fruit of stream-entry.10
Impermanace (anicca):
In the Majjhima Nikaya Buddha said
Yad anicca ta dukkha, ya dukkha tad anatt.11
Whatever is transient is unsatisfactory, whatever is unsatisfactory is not self. 12
The theory of impermanence claims that things are neither eternal, nor static, rather changing
every moment. According to the Buddhist doctrine of the nature of things, it mentions three
characteristics (tilakkhaa). The nature of impermanence is the one of them. The three
characteristics are, anicca, dukkha and anatta. In the anattalakkhana sutta he asked the question
to the monks: Is the body (the physical personality) permanent or impermanent? The answer
is: It is impermanent. Is what is impermanent sorrowful or happy? Sorrowful. Of what is
impermanent, sorrowful and liable to change, is it proper to regard it as This is mine, this I
am, this is my soul? It is not. The canonical commentary, the Paisambhidmagga (I 37), adds
that rpa etc., is not self in the sense that it has no core (sra). Since the combination of five
aggregates as nma-rpa is subject to change and suffering we cannot say there is something
permanent or eternal.

Ibid, P. 7

10 S 3, tr. by Bodhi, P. 167

11
12

M. Vol 2. P. 35
Karunadasa,

Paticcasamuppda: Rpa bhikkhave, anatt yopi hetu yopi paccayo rpassa uppdya, sopi
anatt. Anattasambhta bhikkhave rpa, kuto anatt bhavissati. At Savatthi. "Bhikkhus,
form is non-self. The cause and condition for the arising of form is also non-self. As form has
originated from what is non-self, how could it be self?13 This verse refers to dependent arising.
According to this view everything is conditioned by cause and effect. The formula is as
following:
When this is, that is (Imasmim sati idam hoti);
This arising, that arises (Imassuppada idam uppajjati);
When this is not that is not (Imasmim asati idam na hoti);
This ceasing, that ceases (Imassa nirodha idam nirujjhati).
Likewise the self is also conditioned by the cause and effect. It is not free. As Malalasekara
says if there were a self it should be autonomous, but no such thing is to be found.14 Five
aggregates or nama-rupa is resulted from avijja. From this point of view matter (rpa) is not
the self. Were matter self, then the body would not be subject to affliction, one should be able
to say to it Let my body be thus. Let my body be not thus. But this is not possible; the body
is shifting and ever in change and, therefore, ever accompanied by misery and affliction.
Accordingly, it cannot be the self. The same is repeated for the other aspects of the personality.
Existence is nothing but existence depending on a series of conditions; hence their existence is
a conditional one and there is nothing in the universe that is permanent, i.e., independent of
conditions. All things, matter and mind (nma-rpa) have no abiding self-reality. What appears
to be real is temporary existence, an instant in a conditional sequence, the effect of two or more
conditions combined. Karunadasa said The paticcasamuppda, the Buddhist doctrine of
dependent origination, is another term for anatt.15
Theory of anatta:
Sabbe dhamm anattti, yad paya passati; Atha nibbindati dukkhe, esa maggo
visuddhiy.

13

S III 22-23, tr. by bhikkhu Bodhi

Malalasekara
15
Karunadasa
14

"All things are not-self" when one sees this with wisdom, one turns away from suffering.
This is the path to purification.16
All dhammas are without self, is concern, here all dhammas are said as without self, this
includes conditioned dhamma and unconditioned dhamma, nibbana. In the Anatta-lakkhana
Sutta the Buddha says that five khandhas, form, feeling, perception, volition and
consciousness, are not-self, because they are impermanent, changing and bound to disappear,
therefore cannot be satisfactory thus leads to suffering and painful.
The conclusion is, therefore, reached that all these things, whether past, future or presently
arisen, in one self or external, gross or subtle, inferior or Superior, far or near, are all to be
viewed thus: This is not mine, this is not what I am, this is not my self. Then it is added, when
a man realizes that all these things are not the self he turns away from them and by the extinction
of desire he attains release. Here we find for the first time indication of the Buddhas purpose
in enunciating His doctrine. All misery, in His view, arises from the delusion of self which
causes man to strive to profit himself, not to injure others. The most effective healing against
the folly of seeking to gratify longings is the realization that there is no truth in the doctrine of
a permanent self.17
Conclusion: from the above discussion we come to learn that the theory of non-self-emerged
as a direct response to the self-theory that was prevalent during that period. After acquiring
knowledge about the existing philosophy Buddha analyzed all the theories existent at that time
and realized the uselessness of them. Because all those theories in some way or other related
to the self-theory. After that he put forward his own theory, theory of no-self.

16
17

KN, Dhp 20, 279

Malalasekara

References:
A. Primary Sources:
Bodhi (tr.). Anguttara Nikaya. Boston: Wisdom Publications. 2012.
Walshe, Maurice. (Tr.). Digha Nikaya. Boston: Wisdom Publications. 1995.
anamoli and Bodhi. (tr.) Majjhima NIkaya. Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society. 1995.
Bodhi (tr.). Samyutta Nikaya, Vol one and two. Boston: Wisdom Publications. 2000.
Geiger, Wihelm. (tr.). The Mahvasa. London: Oxford University Press. 1912
Narada Thera. (Tr.) The Dhammapda. Taipei: The Corporate Body of the Buddhist
educational Foundation. 1993
B. Secondary Sources:
Nakamura, Hajime. A Comparative History of Ideas. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidas Publishers.
1992.
Barua, B.M. A History of Pre-Buddhistic Philosophy. Calcutta: University of Calcutta. 1921.
Rahula, Walpola. What the Buddha Taught.
Sayadaw U Silananda. No Inner Core: An Introduction to the Doctrine of Anatta. Penag:
Inward Path Publisher. 1999.
Malalasekara, J.P. The Truth of Anatta. Kandy: Buddhist Publication Society. 1986.
Stout, Jerry. A Comprehensive Study of Anatta and its relative Truth within Buddhism.
Texas: Texas Tech University. 2006

C. Electronic Sources:
Wisadavet,

Wit.

Anatt

in

Buddhist

Philosophy.

Source:

http://www.stc.arts.chula.ac.th/CJBS/Anatta%20in%20Buddhist%20Philosophy.pdf. Access
Date: 28.02.2015

Rahula

Ratna.

Concept

of

Non-self

in

Pli

Nikyas.

Source:

http://www.nknu.edu.tw/~jingxue/download/international2/06.pdf. Access Date: 28.02.2015

Thanissaro.

Not

Self

Strategy.

http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/notselfstrategy.pdf.
28.02.2015.

Source:
Access

Date: