My Suggestion

Edit Suggestion

Title : නුවන් සමග අනාත්නම (Lakshan)
Author: Lakshan Bandara
Lakshan Bandara

Created Date: 2020-08-21
Last Modified Date: 2020-08-21
Category: Forum
Article Code: 140
Keywords: අනාත්නම


WhatsApp discussion:


ආත්ම විශ්වාසය,
ආත්ම ශක්තිය,
ආත්ම ගෞරවය,
ආත්ම අභිමානය,

බුදු දහමේ ත්‍රිලක්ෂණයේ හැටියට සියල්ල අනාත්මයි.

ඒත් අනාත්මය උගන්වන ධර්මයකට කියන නම පමණක් තමාගේ කරගෙන "මම බුද්ධාගමේ" ලු, "මම බෞද්ධ" ලු.

ඒත් අදහන්නේ ආත්මය, වැඩ කරන්නේ ආත්මයට, රකින්නේ ආරක්ෂා කරන්නේ ආත්මය. 🤔


'අනාත්ම' විස්තර කරන්න පුළුවන්ද?

බුදු දහමට අනුව, අනාත්ම යනු කුමක ලක්ෂණයක්ද?


කෙටියෙන් කිව හොත් අනාත්ම යනු කිසිවක් "මගේ"ය, "මම"ය, "මා"ය කියා ගත නොහැකි බව කියවෙන ලක්ෂණයයි.

ආත්ම යන්නෙහි විරුද්ධ පදයයි.


තව දුරටත් පැහැදිලි කරන්න පුළුවන්ද? මම යන්න ආත්ම ලෙස සලකන්නේ ඇයි? එහි වරද කුමක්ද?


According to Buddhism, all you need to know is,
1.Impermanence - Everything changes. Nothing stays the same,
2.Suffering - Everything is suffering because nothing stays the same way we want forever,
3.Not-self - No one can say anything or anyone as I, my, mine or myself.

Nothing stays the same even for a moment. All such impermanent things which we can't keep the way we want, make us suffer. So, how can we claim the ownership of such impermanent & unsatisfactory things which we have no control over? Hence, we say nothing is I, my, mine or myself.

For all things, except for Nirvana & those 3 characteristics, these are true/valid. Once you understood got to know & attained Nirvana that attainment is said to be permanent. So, Nirvana & Ultimate Truths are permanent & not-suffering but you don't control them. Hence, not-self.

The concept of "Anatta" means there's no self as such one can refer to.

So, the 3rd one refers to "no-self" rather than "not-self" because "not-self" gives out the possibility that someone other than self is responsible for that. But that's not the case.

Not-self or no-self? 🤔

Try reading this also,

Finally, read this.

If not, try reading the,

Anattalakkana Sutta (අනත්තලක්කන සූත්‍රය)


Thank you. I will read and come back to you.

As i asked before, in Buddhism, in what anatta is a characteristics of?


පැවැත්මේ ලක්ෂණයක්


Existence of what is non-self?




Self of 'l' is not in everything. Is that what you mean?


"I" is conventional, there's no "I" in ultimate.

So, "I" can't claim ownership of anything, "I" don't have full control of anything, "I" can't keep anything the way "I" want.

Hence, everything is not-self/no-self.


If anatta is an attribute of existence, what is existence? Is existence bad or illustration?


See Picture-1

Existence is, IMO, neither good or bad.

However, the samsara of a being is said to be some that can never be praised.


Thank you Nuwan, we had a dhamma discussion.

Normally, people don't question monks.
Just listen to their preaching and say sadu.


Yeah but BTW remember this,

මේක මගේ ආත්මය ඔබේ ආත්මයට අනාත්මය කුමක්දැයි කියා දීමට යාමකි.

So, කියන්නා කෙසේ කීවත් අසන්නා සිහි බුද්ධියෙන් ඇසිය යුතුය.

Take only what you can understand for certain with reference to your own life.


Thank you



Pictures (gif/jpg/png)



Constructive Comments

Add Comment
(Last Comment on Top)

[Home]   [Suggestions]   [Election By Issue]   [Contact Us]