Non-Self in Buddhism

Non-Self (Anatta/Anatman) in Buddhism is an important core teaching and concept. Dukkha (suffering) comes from our clinging and craving that is due to belief in a permanent, unchanging, and independent 'self'. This doesn't mean you don't exist right now, however, but that we are all subject to change and impermanence. When we can fundamentally understand that, we strip away the layers of delusion and are able to reside in our natural state which is Nirvana.

Learn more in my articles:

[monet]

The best video I've seen on this subject.

[sshine]

Best video I seen so far on the subject!

[BlueTronic-dn]

Thank a lot clearly explain I understand now

[joncastro]

Excellent, straight to the point, thanks!

[Banda-lj]

Other than Rupa nama of the five skanda belongs to the mind part.Clinging give rise to ego which leave room for 'i ' to exist.👃

[parakramaamarasinghe]

You can experience the impermanence nature and suffering your self by practicing in the correct way and obtaining the udayawaya wishdom or seeing arising and vanishing of five aggregates .

[MrSA]

Vedanta which is a Core Hindu teaching says we are all one. So there is no individual self. I agree. But then what the heck is the Atman?

You did a great job with this video. Thanks 🙏🏻

[hawkkim]

Events happen. Deeds are done. There is no individual thereof.
- Buddha 2500 years ago -

Buddha was a radical at that time.

[zendog]

The impermanent changing self, or the ground of being can be referred to as our Buddha nature. The witness of change is permanently impermanent. Self is transient not solid, it’s fluid. Like the wave that is impermanent is always water.

[mahakalabhairava]

“My teachings are (to be called) Brahmayana [Path to Brahman/Absolute/The-One]” –[Samyutta Nikaya, Mahavagga verse 4] ~ Gotama Buddha. Buddha never denied Brahman or Self. He just defined Self as what we usually know as Buddha nature. That is the true Self. The body isn't the Self, and therefore called Anatman. Anatman doesn't imply a lack of self. Buddha only denied the transmigratio of a soul or conciousness from one body to another.

[blightnitetech]

I follow both Buddhism and Hinduism, and as per what I've noticed, even Hinduism has the belief of non self. In Bhagavat Gita chapter 2, there's a verse which says "Whoever has abandoned desires, and moves about without attachments, and the sense of 'I' and 'mine'- he attains peace." What I can interpret is that the sense of 'mine' refers to thinking objects as permanent and the sense of 'I' does refer to the self. In few branches of hinduism the consciousness which moves between the impermanent body is called the soul and soul is not a permanent entity...

[armansrsa]

How do budhists learn this concept? how can we let go of the self?

[Annkeo]

Not self, non self, no self seems to be harder to understand than saying no permanent self or no self attachment or uncontrollable self. Is there any deeper meanings of saying no self? Are there any differences between not self, non self, and no self?

Another example of non self is data (karmic results) transfer from one computer to the new one. It is not physically touchable but you can see it. Once you disassemble a computer, it is no longer called a computer.

[That_Freedom_Guy]

Hey, if it doesn't exist, then there is nothing to lose. If there is nothing to lose, then there is nothing to worry about. 😄

[david-jrfn]

In what are these karmas stored, In what are they transferred

[bernardliu]

What is reincarnated if there is not a self, nor a soul ?

[MrSA]

Thanks for the teaching. Im still not clear on the difference between the Buddhist teachings and what the Hindu’s say about it. Hindu’s teach there is the Atman just wondering what the Buddhist say about that?

[davidgodshall]

Would we find a permanent-separate "self" if we examined every sentient being that ever existed with a high power microscope? Nope.