Get An%C4%81tman Hinduism essential facts below. View Videos or join the An%C4%81tman Hinduism discussion. Add An%C4%81tman Hinduism to your PopFlock.com topic list for future reference or share this resource on social media.
An?tman in Sanskrit means that "which is different from atman" or "non-self". In Hinduism, the former definition is found in some texts, while in Buddhism, an?tman or anatt? means non-self.
Advaita concept of An?tman
According to ?r? Candra?ekhara Bh?rat? of ?ringeri, Shankara does not use the term an?tman to mean non-soul or anti-soul. The ?tman is formless and partless whose true nature cannot be perceived, while the an?tman has form, has parts and whose nature can be perceived. An?tman, a creation of Brahman which is non-different from Brahman and has no existence apart from Brahman. To comprehend the difference between ?tman and an?tman is to become liberated.
In order to realise the self-existent eternal Atman, the seeker after Truth uses "Neti, neti", that is "not this, not this" on Anatman, to reach that which remains as Atman.
Buddhist concept of Anatman or Anatta
Buddhists believe that there is no permanent underlying substance called self or soul (?tman) in human beings. They believe that anatt?/an?tman (non-self), impermanence and dukkha (suffering) are the three characteristics (trilakkhana) of all existence, and understanding of these three constitutes right understanding. "The an?tman doctrine was in no sense an addendum, since it was fundamental to the other two doctrines; that is, because there is no real human self, there is no duration in human experience; and because there is no duration in human experience, there is no genuine happiness."
^Monier Williams, Monier-Williams Sanskrit English Dictionary, Oxford University Press, Article on Anatman, Quote: anAtman m. non-self, another; something different from spirit or soul
^Anatta, 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")."
^[a] KN Jayatilleke (2010), Early Buddhist Theory of Knowledge, ISBN978-8120806191, pages 246-249, from note 385 onwards; [b] Steven Collins (1994), Religion and Practical Reason (Editors: Frank Reynolds, David Tracy), State Univ of New York Press, ISBN978-0791422175, page 64; "Central to Buddhist soteriology is the doctrine of not-self (Pali: anatt?, Sanskrit: an?tman, the opposed doctrine of ?tman 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, p. 2, at Google Books to Brihad Aranyaka Upanishad, pages 2-4; [d] Katie Javanaud (2013), Is The Buddhist 'No-Self' Doctrine Compatible With Pursuing Nirvana?, Philosophy Now
^John C. Plott et al (2000), Global History of Philosophy: The Axial Age, Volume 1, Motilal Banarsidass, ISBN978-8120801585, page 63, Quote: "The Buddhist schools reject any ?tman concept. As we have already observed, this is the basic and ineradicable distinction between Hinduism and Buddhism".
^Anatta, Encyclopædia Britannica (2013), Quote: "Anatta in Buddhism, the doctrine that there is in humans no permanent, underlying soul. The concept of anatta, or an?tman, is a departure from the Hindu belief in ?tman ("the self")."