Editing Ātman (Hinduism) (section)

===Buddhism===
{{See also|Anatta|Buddha-nature|Shentong|Sunyata|Precanonical Buddhism}}

Applying the disidentification of 'no-self' to the logical end,{{sfn|Jayatilleke|1963|p=39}}{{sfn|Harvey|2012|p=59–60}}{{sfn|Bronkhorst|2009|p=25}} Buddhism does not assert an unchanging essence, any "eternal, essential and absolute something called a soul, self or atman,"{{refn|group=note|name="Atman_Buddhism"}} According to Jayatilleke, the Upanishadic inquiry fails to find an empirical correlate of the assumed [[Atman (Hinduism)|Atman]], but nevertheless assumes its existence,{{sfn|Jayatilleke|1963|p=39}} and, states Mackenzie, Advaitins "reify consciousness as an eternal self."{{sfn|Mackenzie|2012}} In contrast, the Buddhist inquiry "is satisfied with the empirical investigation which shows that no such Atman exists because there is no evidence" states Jayatilleke.{{sfn|Jayatilleke|1963|p=39}}

While [[Nirvana]] is liberation from the ''kleshas'' and the disturbances of the mind-body complex, Buddhism eludes a definition of ''what'' it is that is liberated.{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=99 with footnote 12}}{{sfn|Bronkhorst|2009|p=25}}{{refn|group=note|name="Atman_Buddhism"}} According to Johannes Bronkhorst, "it is possible that original Buddhism did not deny the existence of soul," but did not want to talk about it, as they could not say that "the soul is essentially not involved in action, as their opponents did."{{sfn|Bronkhorst|1993|p=99 with footnote 12}} While the [[skandhas]] are regarded is impermanent (''anatman'') and sorrowfull (''[[dukkha]]''), the existence of a permanent, joyful and unchanging self is neither acknowledged nor explicitly denied. Liberation is not attained by knowledge of such a self, but by " turning away from what might erroneously be regarded as the self."{{sfn|Bronkhorst|2009|p=25}}

According to Harvey, in Buddhism the negation of temporal existents is applied even more rigorously than in the Upanishads:
{{blockquote|While the ''[[Upanishad]]s'' recognized many things as being not-Self, they felt that a real, true Self could be found. They held that when it was found, and known to be identical to Brahman, the basis of everything, this would bring liberation. In the Buddhist ''[[Buddhist texts|Suttas]]'', though, literally everything is seen is non-Self, even [[Nirvana]]. When this is known, then liberation – ''Nirvana'' – is attained by total non-attachment. Thus both the ''Upanishads'' and the Buddhist ''Suttas'' see many things as not-Self, but the Suttas apply it, indeed non-Self, to ''everything''.{{sfn|Harvey|2012|p=59–60}}}}

Nevertheless, Atman-like notions can also be found in Buddhist texts chronologically placed in the 1st millennium of the [[Common Era]], such as the Mahayana tradition's ''Tathāgatagarbha sūtras'' suggest self-like concepts, variously called ''Tathagatagarbha'' or ''[[Buddha nature]]''.{{sfn|Williams|2008|p=104, 125–127}}{{sfn|Hookham|1991|p=100–104}} In the Theravada tradition, the [[Dhammakaya Movement]] in Thailand teaches that it is erroneous to subsume nirvana under the rubric of ''anatta'' (non-self); instead, nirvana is taught to be the "true self" or ''[[Dharmakaya|dhammakaya]]''.{{sfn|Mackenzie|2007|pp=100–5, 110}} Similar interpretations have been put forth by the then [[Sangharaja of Thailand|Thai Sangharaja]] in 1939. According to Williams, the Sangharaja's interpretation echoes the ''[[tathagatagarbha|tathāgatagarbha]]'' sutras.{{sfn|Williams|2008|p=126}}

The notion of Buddha-nature is controversial, and "eternal self" concepts have been vigorously attacked.{{sfn|Hubbard|Swanson|1997}} These "self-like" concepts are neither self nor sentient being, nor soul, nor personality.{{sfnm|Williams|2008|1p=107, 112|Hookham|1991|2p=96}} Some scholars posit that the ''Tathagatagarbha Sutras'' were written to promote Buddhism to non-Buddhists.{{sfn|Williams|2008|p=104–105, 108–109}}{{refn|group=note|{{harvtxt|Williams|2008|pp=104–105, 108–109}}: "(...) it refers to the Buddha using the term "Self" in order to win over non-Buddhist ascetics."}}{{sfn|Fowler|1999|p=101–102}}{{sfn|Pettit|1999|p=48–49}} The Dhammakaya Movement teaching that nirvana is [[Atman (Buddhism)|atta (atman)]] has been criticized as heretical in Buddhism by [[Prayudh Payutto]], a well-known scholar monk, who added that 'Buddha taught nibbana as being non-self". This dispute on the nature of teachings about 'self' and 'non-self' in Buddhism has led to arrest warrants, attacks and threats.{{sfn|Mackenzie|2007|pp=51–52}}