Anatta doctrine of Buddhism and ultra fork (1).

Anatta doctrine of Buddhism have raised two main reason scholars today. In view of the major trends, egolessness (anattà) means to deny the existence of an invariant junction, both at macro and micro levels. However, the scholars with orientation in the Vedic tradition, as well as those who believed the philosophy often hang to think otherwise. They tend to believe that the primitive Buddhism is a systematic expression Vedic thought ahead of time.

In their view, Buddhism is Falling (with capitalized N); the fell is inconsistent with any part of the human experience, which separately or assembled, that it transcend both categories. Such is the content we have referred in the title of the essay as "the super ego". In this lecture, we plan to discuss doctrine anatta (anattà) of Buddhism and, through the light of this discussion to see the justification of super ego have stayed or not.

In a speech before we got to that Buddhist doctrine of anatta is the result from the response is highly critical of the mutual opposition between ucchedavàda (theory of the removal or temporary false ego) and sassatavàda (Pan-often hang or fall often constant). This is a two-line philosophy that attempts to explain the nature of human beings on the basis of a fall in the material and the metaphysical in the fall. If say negative terms, this means that Buddhism eliminates the consistency of a temporary false ego (ucchedavàda) and the ego in arcane clues of human spiritual experience. In more positive terms, what it wants to convey and on any platform for which it is seeking to up the cost of the two issues that we intend to discuss in the first part of this presentation. For the specified purpose, we first consider the meaning of that word '-atta ' and the ' anatta-anattà ' is used in the Pali organ. Thorough research in the context of the Bible article has proved that, at least it is also used in the four that are linked together.

The first meaning of anatta (anattà) is not an independent existence, and therefore does not have an entity of its own. She has demonstrated the close relationship between anatta and pratītyasamutpāda (paticcasammuppada); as the Catechism pratītyasamutpāda advocates that nothing was born run without depending on the cause, and it also eliminates the possibility of an independent existence of all things. As for the factor of human personality are different depending on which students run (paticcasamuppannà pancakhandha), so there was not the nature of a falling real variables, or the existence of a junction exists by force of its own.

The second meaning of the meaning of anatta is focused in the Buddhist doctrine of impermanence. We see this through the song of Cha-chakka of Central Investment:

"If anyone's eye view (or see) as falling, the stance does not stand firm, because the start-up and the disappearance of the see is obviously from experience. For a problem born and disappear, if one thought ' my ego is born and takes away ' (think so) must also be transformed by âý ngươì. Therefore, there should be the see the show as the fall. As such, the eyes or the find proved to be egolessness. "

And analysis as well as on the five senses. Let's take another example: the life can be viewed as falling? If it is there then a pleasant feeling gave way to a feeling of discomfort, one must accept that the fall of ngươì 's changed, if not disappear altogether.

A third meaning in that sense from the broker, is understood to work separate jobs. The meaning arises because by the teachings of the Buddha «across the planet there is life sensitive aggregates»; However my Pali organ identified repeatedly implied we shouldn't be saying that there is a sense of secluded life brokers are feeling its life span.

The meaning of anatta can be used words are drawn from the Culasaccaka of Central, where recorded the famous debate between the Buddha and Dr. layman Saccaka. The topic of debate is the Buddhist doctrines of anatta. Basics of Saccaka is set on the premise that as all kinds of seeds or plants produce and release depends on the soil, also with regard to any activity whatsoever whether in good faith or that the human right violations are entirely up to the five aggregates (khandhas-five aggregates). For that reason, conclusion Saccaka aggregates constitute the human ego. To uncontested views, Saccaka asked Buddha that is the King of Kosala (Ali-all-la) or Magadha (Ma-masterpiece-da) has the power or the power to his people led him to be sentenced to the death penalty for the perpetrator deserves punishment, banished the frightening element expelled. When Saccaka accepts that indeed, the Buddha went on to ask him: "When he confirmed the five aggregates is he, he had jurisdiction over them, he can control them so that he can say ' let the five aggregates are like this, let the five aggregates of me not like this '?" Saccakakhông may be a satisfactory answer, sadly admitted that he had misunderstood the issue.

For our goal to be the most significant here is that the Buddha use to crack Saccaka. Argument is based on the judgment that if there's anything that's called falling (atta) of man, one must have full control of it. This ideology also enunciated in a lot with a little. Let's read a typical quote:

«For example, if the physical body is free to watch the ego, so it cannot be subject to suffering, (with the imposed result) it must be able to say: ' let my body like this; Don't let your body I like kia. Because of this physical body is not there, so it's subject to suffering»

Clear passage also proves that Buddhists understand fork (atta) as something that one must have complete control of it, forcing it to operate. If there is something that could be called my own ownership, then I certainly can use the object's full power. This is the definition of owner, and the definition would involve the idea that because we do not have a full right of his possessions so we are obsessed by the same things.

Indeed, the main idea of this fall that form the focal point for the logical connections or relationships between organic properties (Indian-French triangle tilakkhana) of all existence; It is impermanent (anicca), suffering (dukkha) and anatta (anatta). The way that the two characteristics that caused the thought egolessness are denoted as follows:

«Anything impermanent, the time line (yad anicacam tam dukkham); any line that does anatta (yam dukkham tad anattà)».

A question arises here as to why thought egolessness back are as resulting from after the fact. It will become clear if we assay the three characteristics of all we hưũ in the order reversed. When surveyed in the background like the work will become more transparent, I can't see anything that I own or belong to me (atta), because the things that I see that is suffering. Why is that? Because the thing that I think the wrong way as my hưũ fan not operating the way that I want it to operate. Why is that? So for anything that I envisage the wrong way is my hưũ are the subject of non-stop service (anicca).

From the practical viewpoint vưà stated, ý that Wednesday about the egolessness becomes important; However it looks like the Buddhist thought in later development as well as many current articles on Buddhism did not set the proper attention to it. Ðáng maybe this could prove an important shift in Buddhist thought: stresses from Buddhism as a religion to Buddhism as a philosophy.

Now, let's look at how that catechism egolessness is explained in relation with human characteristics. Buddhism human analysis effort by experiments in a number of ways, including the best known method is the analysis of (human) into five groups (skandha): it was good (rùpa-corporeality), Shou (vedannà-feeling), idea (sanna-perception), onions (Sankhara-mental formations) and consciousness (vinnana-consciousness). According to the Buddhist point of view, the entire real world tests are included in the first year, and so the entire experience we also explain in the contact with them. From here Buddhism advocates that if there is any metaphysical theory (àtmavàda), of course the dogma are derived from the relationship with the five elements of nature to this ngươì; the source of all hypotheses are based from. Let's take the Group Thursday, news feed aggregates, as an example. If the formula is assumed as such theories, can manifest in four ways:

(1) the Formula is similar to the falls (vinnànam attato samanupasati) as in the case of the lưả of the tree lights are identical to its visual appearance;
(2) The fell occupies the hưũ formula, like the shadow tree,

(3) in the fall, like incense in the United States;

(4) Fell in consciousness, like pearls in a small box (four groups may also have similar observations).

So, for a total of twenty possible relationship between the five aggregates and the fall. This is the Buddhist way of explaining what is known as sakkàya-ditthi-samudaya-, that the origin of the belief mistake about an entity called «falls» (atta).

Anatta doctrine of Buddhism works as a remedy to put an end to this false belief (sakkàya-dithi-nirodha). Efforts to accomplishing that by a process of reverse, i.e. by denying each of the groups (aggregates) as an entity that fell to to remove all potentially lead to the initiation of the notion. Final conclusion of the above disclaimer is there any group of five aggregates, i.e. what constitutes the empirical human being, can be assimilated as the fall of man.

The next question was born here is if every one group cannot be assimilated, so a combination of these provides the Foundation for a similar bill or not? To be honest, eloquent argument to contact ability of a such a conclusion was a Buddhist monk named Khemaka developed as recorded in the Samyutta Nikaya's Khemaka (Episode III). The content could be summarized as follows: the monks had developed the intellectual property bar (look really deep down) into the essence of the five aggregates to the extent that the could not even see the falls (atta) or anything to fall (attaniya) to be aware of any group of the five aggregates. However, Khemaka has secretly believes there is a fork in the combination of the five groups. This belief is by convincing that there is in each group can be found in the combination of them, because that combination for what each group does not exist. For example, when we talk about the fragrance of Lotus white or green, arguing he is as follows-we cannot say that the fragrance of Lotus petals, colours of Lotus or Lotus root. correct answer is that the smell in the shower of the entire Lotus in the same way, when it comes to fall we do not say that the fall could be found in the components of a people when they are isolated separately. The ego that it evaded us when we seek in each group then surely can detect in the year group. This argument seems to be based on the recognition that the master does not merely set of its elements, which overall is achieved when the components of the same ones this carries the structure of a particular order meant that there was a difference in quality between each part is separated individually and organized collection of them, i.e. the overall.

However, on the part of the venerable Khemaka, though there are strong arguments, Agency concluded that doesn't make him qualified to achieve the ultimate. From the Buddhist perspective, this proves that the conclusion of Khemaka is misleading. Why like that? The following remarks will illustrate the point. Evident that the Buddhist human, experimental analysis on the year group (skandha) in order to demonstrate that there is any group of them can be identified as an entity existing properties there. However, Buddhism does not assert that the human is a collection of single of the five aggregates as well as a wall is not just a set of bricks. What is confirmed is that the individual, is a master of the five aggregates as they were composed according to the principle of pratītyasamutpāda (pancakhandhà paticcasamuppana-Jing Samyutta, volume III), and what is Buddhism removed is not the concept of human capital is called humanity (puggala), which is the current fall in the human response to the definition of about the ego (atta). Thus, Buddhism does not oppose the concept of humanity, if humanity is not to be understood as an entity separate from the master of the five aggregates is made properly, nor is the nature survive forever with time, nor is the broker in the five aggregates. Humanity (puggla) was a master of the five aggregates are combined according to the principle of reason and charm them eternally in a State of change.

So in the sense that the combination of these five groups were identified as the ego of one? The four definitions of anatta (anatta) discussed above, in order to serve the purpose here, let's observe the idea of falling through which people don't have power or control. Observed in the context of such a meaning, the matter will become clear. The five aggregates is though they are captured separately or in combination are not operated according to the way people want them to operate, because people don't have power or full control of them. Therefore, even when they are linked together, this group also can not be homogeneous culture as man's ego. For us, it seems that this is the only reason why that conclusion of the venerable Khemaka is said to be wrong-a conclusion did he not privileged evidence are ultimate. So here we have two main conclusions: first conclusions, each of a group of five aggregates cannot be identified as an entity may fall as Prime Minister; the second conclusion is that the five aggregates in combination can not be identified as an entity there. The next question to arise here: there is one entity that fall at the top or in addition to the five aggregates or not? This question type is not set up, nor question the tenets of Buddhism. The Buddha's silence on the issue is apparently for two reasons: first, according to Buddhism, the master of a human experiment is contained in the five aggregates (pancakhandhas). Second, Buddhism does not admit a metaphysical reality, whether intrinsic or transcendent, which is seen as the foundation of a world of sensory experience.

However, as we have stated from the beginning of this article, the contemporary scholar of Vedic religion sexual orientation and those who believe in the philosophy that is usually constant based on the uniformity of Super religion often raised the question being discussed; and the question has to be raised to be answered in the affirmative. Here, s. Radhakrihsnan, in his philosophy of India, remarked that the above question is related to two other questions: it is whether or not an absolute reality detached from this world, and there is no evidence or Nirvana? From this he concluded that the three questions of three different aspects of the same fundamental problem. S Radhakrishnan decided further that, if the answer of the first question is in the negative, the inevitable consequence is: Nirvana is not there. According to us, there is no logical connection between the two clauses, is the question of Nirvana; Therefore, we intend to restrict the discussion here in the first question: whether or not a piece of falling often hang above or beyond the five aggregates are often transformed?

Those who answer the question stated in vưà be asserted is usually directed to the French post in the three-dollar complaint (Banares) in order to strengthen their interpretation-the fundamental theory behind the explanation that, when Buddha said that the five aggregates is anatta (anatta) this is not a Piece of falling that aimed to point out the fact that there is a group of the five aggregates can be identified as the Foot falling out of us, because we are the object of impermanence and the impermanent nature of hidden functions in it. What Carries it outside of the five aggregates and can only detect it transcend the five aggregates. For this purpose, the process of self-consistency is expressed as: ' this is my (etam mama), this is me (esoham asmi), and this is my self ' (eso me attà) should be replaced by a process of reverse: ' this is not my (netam photos mama), this is not me (nesoham asmi), and this is not my ego (neso me attà) '. The theory continues to say that through the process of this disclaimer which people transcend the five aggregates and the discovery of his Carries. Therefore, if the huyễn falls are impermanent (anicca), suffering (dukkha) to contain and anatta (anatta), which Carries is like having three opposing nature, he is often constant (nicca), happiness (sukha) and the truth about the foot Falling (attà). If people are suffering, because they broke out of his crumpled legs. Therefore, a prime witness Nirvana means «the positive returns to shadow carries».

If the justification on the value, it creates a hugely important questions related to why the Buddha remained silent with regard to this issue; Why is the answer to the problem on the only left that implication or speculation? It also causes a similar important questions about why there is any Buddhist factions would reach a conclusion like that. Consequently, this explanation leads to an uncertain situation will happen, that's all the sects of Buddhism were the main myths foot message of the Buddha. we should note here that, in all schools of Buddhist philosophy, only the Vátìputriyas derivative worth mentioning. This faction who believes in the human that they assume is to separate out the master of the five aggregates. The Vátìputriyas faction said that in the end did not mean they believe in spirits, such as understanding of the religions of India. However, for the masses, the sect has been about Buddhism referring to sarcasm as "the heretic in the middle of Buddhism map» (antaskratìrthaka).

There are some things that can be called in evidence, there is an intrinsic evidence is located in Pali organ against the theory of Super ego. In the Samyutta Nikaya's Khemaka which we would like to mention, on this issue have been recorded: a pretentious name Khemaka nurtured the notion of ' I ' (asmìti) in relation to the five aggregates. And then a hamstring muscles have more knowledge on this question with: Khemaka

«For the notion of ' I am ' that you mentioned this, you said you'd Khemaka something by the notion of ' I am '? Are you saying to ' I ' (body); or into separate ' I ' are Siva (feeling); separate thanks tho' I'm ' (perception); separate idea ' I am ' (mental formations); separate issue ' I ' (consciousness)? ».

From the content of the post, obviously the question arises for Khemaka aims to point out the right look (Chief Justice), which is the notion of ' I ' cannot be applied for or five aggregates, or ' something ' to separate the five aggregates: this coalition identified a clear truth that a fall independent of space can be found either in the five aggregates, or outside them.

A different argument is added to provide support for the theory of super ego based on the speech of the People-carrying heavy burdens in-Samyutta-Nikaya [i]. [1] It is interesting to note that the economic post he talks about the burden (bhàra), who carries a heavy burden (bhàrahàra), which carries the burden (bhàradàna), put the burden of down (bhàra-nikhepana). Here, the burden of the five aggregates; who carries the burden of people; carrying the burden of being thirsty craving; put down the burden is Nirvana. From there, a prime witness who nirvana is called ohita-bhàra, means the person who places the burden down. The event involves the implied burden as well as the people who take it have ignited the speculation that there is a human or a fallen Prime Minister outside of the five aggregates.

A further example of hidden functions seem to a conclusion as to the need to cite here is «lectures on What is not Of Thee», in the Samyutta Nikaya (tậpIII); There, for the sake of their own happiness the Buddha advises the master bill-what does removal of the pretentious belongs to them. An allusion to the five aggregates, since there is a group of them can be identified as the intersection (atta) or something is in the fall (attàniya). OK it seems to imply that even though the five aggregates do not actually belong to them, but there's something outside, a kind of transcendental ego, something that is not identical to any other group of the five aggregates, really belong to them.

Now a question born here is there are two items of which we have just quoted give positive evidence for the theory of Super Ego? Or are we just rely on two separate statements, which contrasted with a huge volume of books offer plenty of evidence settled against the theory? We believe that this kind of declaration like that need to be understood in the context of each particular teachings of the Buddha, to the way in which his sermons need to be mastered. Here we would like to point out a distinction is drawn between two kinds of lectures, it's nìtattha and neyyatha [2] [ii]. Nìtattha refers to the statement that their meaning is «draw, take out» (nìta + attha), meaning to be understood as the clause is clear and definite. Neyyatha aim point to statements that their meaning is «are drawn, are removed (neyya + attha), meaning that they are interpreted in conformity with the basic tenets of Buddhism. As A.K. Warder remarked, the distinction referred to here can be interpreted as a universal way to say to the differences between direct and significant indirect meanings or hints [3] [iii]. This distinction is extremely important so that if one does not pay attention to it is going to misinterpret the Buddha's teachings right. from there, one can speak in a powerful way that: «anyone who claims the meaning of nìtattha lectures, as well as the significance of neyyattha's lecture and vice versa, who has made a false statement in respect of Germany The Religion» [4] [iv]. We believe that two of the above mentioned as well as many other business if there are similar properties need to be understood in the context of the like; they need to be approached not as these statements clearly identified, that is statements need to be explained (neyyatha) in the light of the basic teachings of Buddhism.

One other passage very often are the advocates of the theory of Super Fall cited the passage in which the singer asks the name Buddha travel Vacchagotta the ego exist or not. For the questions of this type, the Buddha always kept quiet [5] [v]. The silent peace of the Buddha has been interpreted in two ways. Oldenberg's opinion, this demonstrates that the Buddha did not believe in any sort of falling out and if He evaded the questions raised to Vacchagotta is not causing consternation for the listener with a weak mind [6] [vi]. In contrast, s. Radhakrishanan said, he could not agree with the view of Oldenberg, and claim that the Buddha had knowingly conceal the truth. S. Radhakrishanan to «logical conclusions to problems would have to be something, though that is not an empirical ego» [7] [vii]. We may not agree with my interpretation of s. Radhakrishanan by because, as recorded in the same trading post falls, the Buddha explained with mock Religion Ananda why He decided to keep quiet when you can artist asked Vacchagotta fell exists or not. I would like to quote here the Buddha's explanation to clarify the stance that I advocated, it is not the Super Falls outside the junction experiments:

This A-Nan, when asked whether or not there ' Vacchagotta? ', if we say, ' there ', then We really will be one of the advocates general are constant (sassatavada); But if we answered ' no, ' then we would fall so will be one of those who advocated the theory of killing (ucchedavada). And when asked whether there ' Vacchagotta ', if I answered ' yes ', that would fall in line with the knowing that all things are falling out or not? » «What» ladies Not Religious; «If we say ' no ' fall, are permanently bewildered Vacchagotta will become confused, and will think ' before my ego had not existed, and now it's no longer available anymore?».

So, if there are any conclusions can be drawn from this answer, which is that Buddhism is not subscribed to the theory of the ego is to advocate both by common theoretical constants (sassatavàda) and the novel the killing (ucchedavàda).

We now consider the problem of Transcendence in the light of a review of the category of Buddhist Epistemology. In this relationship, we should be aware that Buddhism not only recognizes the many different meanings of the perception, but also acknowledges the different levels of it. Besides the knowledge of common sense by some perceive as consciousness (vinnana-bara, consciousness) and idea or perception (sannà-sensory perception, the), Buddhism also speaks to a greater sense of mission, which is designated by the term cognition as WINS or the know through meditation (abhinnà-higher, knowledge), or the whole city knew the killing (parinnà-comprehensive knowledge), or touches the Satori (annà-gnosis) and the intellectual property rights or the know as facts about the nature of all things (panna--wisdom) [8] [viii]. If the first level of awareness is limited and influenced by the subjective nature of the US, the second level of awareness from the conditional factors and limitations. The second type of perception through which is believed to be ngươì can see the truth as the truth of things (yathàbhutam pajànàti). For the meaning of the Buddhist consciousness not only admit the group idea or perception (sensory-perception) but also the subject of perception (extra-sebsory perception) [9] [ix]. To serve the purpose of this research paper, we need not go into detail. What is significant here is that, although Buddhism recognizes the significance and different levels of awareness, Buddhism never said that the Super Ego (or the Foot Fall) beyond the ego experience (i.e., the fall is not really) can become the object of perception. If anything becomes the object of tri-mode, i.e. the perception offers a true insight and knowledge into the nature of reality (yathàbhùtananadassana), then it's the five aggregates (human experience) but not the elusive Intersection in excess of the five aggregates. From a practical standpoint, the theme throughout the Buddhist teachings of the five aggregates has become the object of tri-mode (pancakkhandhà abhinneyya parinneyya) [10] [x]. For that reason, the Buddha has put the following question to the hamstring muscles: «the pretentious proportions, what needs to be logically awareness across the tri form?». And the answer is given by the Buddha himself: «That is exactly in the aggregates (i.e. people)-need to be answered that way» [11] [xi]. So, obviously, for Buddhists, the object of knowledge WINS is not a subliminal reality over which is the phenomenal world. Meaning Buddhism to exclude the possibility for any metaphysical reality would be viewed as an absolute basis for all existence, regardless of what is its title: universal soul, The Starter, or the Super ego.

Another aspect that needs to be considered here is the experience gained through the high levels of the mind in meditation. Here we mention the teachings of meditation (Jhàna) of Buddhism. Meditation Buddhism recognizes the eight (or nine) levels of meditation, in which each level of meditation typical serial hub for a higher level of integration of the mind. That's a process that past discrimination heart which eventually was merged until the mind was reach superhuman levels during the decanting filter soul. A question that arises here is the Prime witness how meditation experience can get a glimpse of his carries that usual which is obscured; and the experience of meditation can be explained as the Assembly or with the authority of the metaphysical reality or not? In relation to this, I would like to quote a comment of the cleric out of Germany, Germany Gnanaponika, to throw light on the specified question: «a mind filled with pious origins, the bigotry of beliefs and ideas about a fall, soul, God, or any kind of an absolute entity is the experience of meditation with explanations of coma say, prayer in nature and the mystical soul. Such experiences typically are the mystic and theologian explained as revelation or United with the divinity; or it is considered as manifestation of the fallen true and real human variables» [12] [xii]

Why Buddhism does not interpret the contents of the experience of meditation according to the mystical and metaphysical have been suggested a clear way in the post of Minister of the Anupada; There, we find the analysis of the nature and content of the experience gained through meditation, Religious Property by false-benefits-to develop the presentation. These are interesting to note here is that the content of each level of meditation is to keep the Group adequately without leaving any space for anything belonging to the mystical and metaphysical. Thus, from the viewpoint of Buddhism, experiences in meditation can be explained by psychology as any mundane experience. Even more significant is the recognition that the psychological components of each level of meditation is said to be born to run in full awareness of the Position: «is fully aware of the run of them (vìdiatà uppajjanti), durability (vìdiatà upattanhanti) and disappearance (vìdiatà abbhattham gacchanti); and then the time came to the conclusion that the psychological factor is not available (ahutvà sambhonti), and from there they disappear (hutvà pativenti). Trading post also stated that because of the false echo Religious Property is benefits-our-charismatic (anupàya), which they do discomfort (anapàya), not to close them (anissita) also do not love them, so the false Religions come to the conclusion that there is a greater freedom the same stuff (nissarananti uttarim atthi pajànati).

Thus, the explanation on the nature of the practice experience verification of three factors: first, the content of the experience of meditation can be analysed to the fullest without leaving a shelter would. Second, the element of student run and disappear in the full recognition of practitioners. Finally the event that it does not constitute in itself the liberation, after all, because for Buddhism, experiences in meditation also impermanence, egolessness, condition and belong to the coast (paticcasamuppanna). The express mandate of the nature and content of the meditation experience clearly demonstrated that meditation experience could not be handled in the field of mystical or metaphysical; means providing evidence for the existence of the Super ego. Of course, with the view of this fact, Buddhism seems to be completely unknown to the that can occur by the misleading explanation about yourself on the basis of the theory of metaphysical or mystical. This seems to explain why people meditate advice should consider the contents of the experience of meditation in the light of the properties for all the existing (or Indo-French Triangle tilakkhana), which is impermanence (anicca), suffering (dukkha) and anatta (anttà).

The next aspect that needs to be observed in order to go to the final solution to the problem of Super Ego is the experience of Nirvana (Nibbàna). This is the theme that we intend to present the lecture on Nirvana. However, with regard to our current objectives, indeed very necessary to raise here a key aspect of the experience of Nirvana; I would like to mention the position of the Tathāgata (Tathagata), i.e. people who have privileged evidence Nirvana in the relations with the five aggregates (Samyutta IV). The first problem, that of relations with the five aggregates, suggesting that As a hybrid (Tathàgata) not identified Himself with any group in the five aggregates or the human element. The second problem, which does not have relations with the five aggregates, suggesting that As not to assimilate him with anything in addition to the five aggregates, i.e. something transcendent in aggregates, such as the Super ego. Both problems which meant that functions As a hybrid is the escape from all categories of the assimilation with the fork. From this, one may not come to the conclusion that a prime witness who nirvana is self-identical with Nirvana as evidenced clearly in the first sector of the Central [13] [xiii]. According to Buddhism, the assimilated so that is a serious form of spiritual enslavement. In the content of the Buddhist doctrine of anatta, the announcement of the Upanisads (Upanishads) as «I'm Committed, as Brahman or Lord's Is the form» with the fall (asmimàna). In view of the rescue, as long as that work with the fork still existed until he shall have no freedom. From the story of the pretentious Khemaka which we refer throughout this presentation, it must have become clear.

All the above has demonstrated clearly the experience of Nirvana nor provided evidence for the theory of Super Ego, which fell beyond the ego experience; and ideally the rescue as Primitive Buddhism advocates, which is a contemporary scholar of research, there is no equivalent to the fall of the Upanisads. In the context of this study the conclusions of the Radhakhrishanan that the original Buddhism are just statements of the ideology of the Upanisads new from a perspective that needs to be processed again. Because such as Helmuth Von Glasenapp, of course that the Primitive Buddhism Upanisads (Upanishads) have many things in common in terms of doctrines such as Karma, Rebirth and Liberation across the observers by wisdom (wisdom pubs). However, H.V. Glasenapp said, adding that because the thought this was some contemporaries, such as DAO Jain ..., with approval, then the result is impossible to determine what influence Buddhism [14] [xiv]. Although the Upanisads before Buddhism, that doesn't necessarily say that Buddhism is a long development out of the Upanisads. In the history of thought, a popular event that everybody knows, many new ideas arise not merely a decanting filter further sophistication of ancient thought, that could be a reaction against them, meaning that a dialectical opposition against them. In both cases, the effects of what was ahead for the emergence of what came later was unable to refuse; However, the differences in the two types of effects is also not to be confused. As we have commented in the first part of the presentation, Buddhism appear not a lasting development of the novel often hang (sassatavàda) or the theory of the kill (ucchedavàda) which is a response to that criticism about their mutual opposition.

This brought to a conclusion in relation to the research of the serious anatta doctrine of Buddhism. Such is the anatta doctrine of Buddhism has provided a new perspective on the concept of humanity and has set up a platform for spirituality has no soul — if the soul is understood as an existing entity that fell in deep secret of the soul. As to the comment by Edward Conze, Buddhist's specific contribution to the philosophy of religion lies in its emphasis on the doctrine of ' anatta ' [15] [xv]; and other contributions of Buddhism to the philosophy, psychology and ethics stems from this fact. Because if the Buddhist philosophy attempts to demonstrate why the idea of a fallen General as the mistake, its psychology demonstrate how it is present, the ethics of it demonstrate how to pass it, and the final goal, Nirvana, proving the latter State, in which the ego is totally excluded. This does not imply that the doctrine of anatta Buddhism makes Buddhism becomes higher or lower for different views of life. The work we do is educational exercises for schools, and legitimate effort to bring up our logic is intended to point out the wrong spot and not similarities with Buddhism.END=VIETNAMESE TRANSLATE ENGLISH BY THICH CHAN TANH.MHDT.WORLD VIETNAMESE BUDDHIST ORDER=VIETNAMESE BUDDHIST NUNS=GOLDEN LOTUS MONASTERY=AUSTRALIA,SYDNEY.NAM MO SHAKYAMUNI BUDDHA.( 3 TIMES ).