AnyBook4Less.com	Find the Best Price on the Web Order from a Major Online Bookstore
Home  |  Store List  |  FAQ  |  Contact Us  |
Ultimate Book Price Comparison Engine Save Your Time And Money Keyword AuthorISBN

Title: Self & Non-Self in Early Buddhism by Joacquin Perez-Ramon ISBN: 9-0279798-7-1 Publisher: Walter De Gruyter Inc Pub. Date: 01 December, 1980 Format: Hardcover List Price(USD): $98.55

Your Country USA Canada United Kingdom Australia Austria Belgium France Germany Italy Netherlands Switzerland Currency AutoUSD CAD GBP EUR AUD CHF Delivery Only cheapest delivery All delivery options Include Used Books Are you a club member of: Barnes and Noble Books A Million Chapters.Indigo.ca

Average Customer Rating: 3.67 (3 reviews)

Rating: 5
Summary: accurate book that scares Nihilists and Anihilationists.
Comment: Out of 2317 books on Buddhism that I own, this book ranks as top 10 outside of the scriptures themselves. If you notice the diatribe 1 star review below, no evidence is given to refute the 1000s and 1000s of Suttric quotes given by Perez proving that Buddhism deplored nihilism and most especially Theravada notions of empiricall emptiness.

The entire Doctrine of ANATTA AN(not) Atta'(True Self, Attan, Atman) is the netti netti ( not this, not that) doctrine to demonstrate to the monks that which cannot be construed as the everlasting self as such.

Know you and know you well that nothing is refuted in the entirety of Buddhism other than that the Attan (true self, deathless) cannot be associated with the Khandhas ( 5 aggregates of phenomenality). To prove otherwise is imposible by scripture.
There are opinions and conjecture, and there are facts and quotes from Sutta ( Nikayas). Those who embrace the notion of no-self empircally have not one dot of evidence to back them up in Scripture period.

Nowhere within the Scriptures of Buddhism is the True Self denied, but
only that is must not be identified with the transitory
and ephemeral aggregates of phenomena. Such that forms, feelings,
perceptions, impulses, and mental machinations of the
mind are temporal, unreal, arise and pass, and are of the realm of
phenomena and cannot be construed as what is everlasting,
best, real, and most dear of the True Self and therefore must not be
identified with the Attan as such.

Even now the world standard for Pali-English translation reference being
the new "A Dictionary of Pali" by Margaret Cone
states about the Attan (atta): [Sanskrit Atman], The self, the soul, as
a permanent unchangeable, autonomous entity; p.70, Pali
Text Society

Without an entity that fares on, there are no grounds for rebirth,
nothing which could be perfected, and Buddhism flies apart
at the hinges without a basis. Since there is nothing of any substance
of the aggregates which can recollect previous lives,
and nothing everlasting within such temporal phenomena to be perfected
to dwell within Perfection;

There cannot be assumed even loosely that Buddhism can exist without the
concept of the Attan, so offhandedly rejected by
sectarian nihilism which runs contrary to sutta.We are more interested
in what the Buddha said than what he didn't say, and
as it pertains to the Attan, nothing is rejected but temporal
aggregates, not the Attan.

The greatest mistake made after the passing of Gotama Buddha was the
arising of the non-doctrinal notion that Buddhism
somehow preaches empirical-extinction. The much discussed doctrine of
Anatta [an (not) Atta (True Self)] which occurs a
little more than 240 times in the entirety of the Buddhist Nikayas is
used only to describe that which cannot be identified
with or clung to as genuinely real and everlasting, or possessed of the
True Self in its proper identity.

In some secular translations, the Atta has been translated in its
various forms and compounds as a reflexive, i.e. oneself,
himself, themselves; but no such reflexive terminology exists within the
Pali language in which the Buddhist canon is
recorded. The Atta (True Self) or the Attan, both in standalone and
compound occur more than 23,000 times within scripture.

DN 2.157 Therefore Ananda, stay as those who have their True Self as the
illumination, as those who have their True Self as
supreme refuge, as those who have no other as the refuge; as those who
have the true law Dharma as the illumination, as
those who have the Dharma as refuge, as those who have no other refuge.
KN 3.78 And whoever, Ananda, either now or after my end will stay as
those who have the True Self as the illumination, as
those who have True Self as refuge, as those who have no other as the
refuge...they among my bhikkhus shall reach the peak
of immortality, provided they are desirous of training their True Self.

AN 1.81 There is monks, an unborn, an unoriginated, an unmade, and an
unformed. If there were not monks, this unborn,
unoriginated, unmade and unformed, there would be no way out for the
born, the originated, the made and the formed.

Bravo to Perez for pulling back the horror in refutation against Sectarian Nihilism not found in Buddhist Sutta.

Dr.of Buddhology S.A.

Rating: 1
Summary: Words of Caution
Comment: I feel strongly compelled to caution readers against this book. Although there were many schools of Buddhism, it was the Theravadan Tipitaka (the rough equivalent to a Buddhist bible) that was passed down orally, written in Pali around 2000 years ago, and managed to survive until the present day. The Tipitaka is considered to be the earliest known exposition of Buddhist teachings and philosophy. Within the Tipitaka, the Buddha is repeatedly portrayed as teaching that there are three rudimentary truths of experience: impermanence, suffering, and non-self. The realizations of these truths are considered to be among the conditions that are necessary for enlightenment. In his book, Joaquin Perez-Ramon chose to tackle the third of these facts, that of non-self. Mr. Perez-Remon constructed his manuscript using a hypothesis, that the anatta doctrine "has no absolute value" and that these early texts "...not only does not annul the reality of the self, but reaffirms it..." Mr. Perez-Remon acknowledges that his hypothesis is in contradiction to what are considered the accepted teachings of Buddhism. In exploring the texts to support or negate his hypothesis, Mr. Perez-Remon singles out many of the occurrences of the terms and concepts of both self (atta) and non-self (anatta). Unfortunately (and this is where the Mr. Perez-Remon's book seems to have gone awry) he used translations (of his own making? - see his "Preliminary remarks") that starkly highlighted the words and concepts he was examining, creating rather new meanings to the original writings. These new meanings were occasionally harmless, but more often than not, actually served to contradict commonly accepted Buddhist philosophy on this subject. Mr. Perez-Remon's excellent documentation however, allowed a side-by-side comparison to other translations. Works by translators such as Bhikku Bodhi and K.R. Norman, provide a far more plausible and philosophically coherent rendering of these early texts on this crucial Buddhist concept. Mr. Perez-Remon compounds his dubious translations with assertions and rationalizations that serve only to support his hypothesis. For example, he reasons enlightenment must liberate something (the self), rather than recognizing that enlightenment is the dissolution of the (mental construct of a) self. While inferences may be drawn on what one does not find in the texts, Mr. Perez-Remon pushes this method to extreme, going so far as to assume and assert the Buddha's convictions in a self. Among Mr. Perez-Remon's conclusions, he finds that the different philosophies of self and not-self must be equally valid and require synthesis/transcendence. The end result of Mr. Perez-Remon's work is that much of what is unique to Buddhism is explained away and rendered meaningless. The Buddhist concept of non-self is one that, at least initially, has been difficult for many to grasp and/or accept. Although Mr. Perez-Remon's book is written in an academic manner, I believe that his analysis of this subject is deeply flawed and is misleading to those exploring this concept. I do not recommend his book for beginning or even intermediate students of Buddhism, but only, and reluctantly at best, for those who have a good background in Buddhist philosophy, a challenging attitude, and the resources with which to check Mr. Perez-Remon's work against other trusted materials. I see this book as useful only as an example of how faulty translations and misleading assertions can be used to systematically undermine the concepts of a philosophy, perpetuating the very ignorance that Buddhism seeks to dispel. For intermediate or advanced readers who are seeking scholarly writings on the subject of anatta or non-self, without the misrepresentation found in Mr. Perez-Remon's "Self and Non-Self in Early Buddhism," I recommend Steven Collins' book "Selfless Persons."

Rating: 5
Summary: THE ROSETTA STONE OF ATTA'(TRUE SELF) WITHIN BUDDHISM
Comment: im a Buddhist monk and Pali translator who is also somewhat of an expert on the term ATTA' within Sutta Pitaka scripture. i dont give this book 5 stars but rather 10, out of 1000+ books i have on Buddhism, this one is top 5.When the Buddha affirmed the existence of atta'(true self) against the materialists, he affirmed the reality of something objectively existing to be true. When he denied the atta' against the eternalists, he did not deny the true atta', but the atta' OF the eternalists that is WRONGLY identified with the 5 Skandhas.the anatta'(that which is not self..not to be confused with NO-SELF) doctrine taught in the Nikayas has a relative value, not an absolute one. It does not say that the self has NO reality at all(nowhere within scripture i might add)but that certain things,with which the UNLEARNED man IDENTIFIES himself with, are NOT of the self and that is why one should grow disgusted with them.This book is the CRUX MAXIMUS and the ROSETTA STONE of the ARYA-PUGALA (noble true self) among the 1315 mentions of the ATTA' (true self) uses of that word with Pali Scripture and CORRECT RELATIVE interpretation of the ussage of the term ANATTA' used 343 times within Pali Scripture.what MOST ALL Buddhist dont realise as stated by Perez Ramon is that the term ANATTA' (that which is not self...not NO-SELF) is employed by the Buddha to say what to his disciples what is NOT OF THE TRUE self...not to say that there is NO SELF...MOST IMPORTANT: nowhere...and i do mean NOWHERE.......is it found in the Scriptures that the Buddha DENIES the Arya-atta' (true self).........this is soooooooooooo very very very important point within Buddhism that is VERY MISSUNDERSTOOD.anyone calling themselves a Buddhist should and MUST know what is in this book (IF THEY CANT READ PALI OF COURSE) because NOWHERE is there any other such extensive book on this subject ...period...its a must have..unless you have this ROSETTTA STONE of a book on the subject of the BUDDHIST SELF NO-SELF view...your missing out on the subject and surely dont have a correct understanding of the term and the USSAGE of this within Buddhist scripure..it really IS that important of a book.its expensive i admit..but its worth 10 times that if your a serious buddhist. Buddha:: He for whom the (true) self is not enough (yassatta' nalameko va), Even if the whole world was his, He would not obtain happiness. (The Buddha). Buddha to Ananda:: Do make an firm island out of the true self, Since there is no other refuge to be found for you. (so karohi sudipamattana' tvam) // 1 quote from the Buddha out of 1600+ POSITIVE affirmatians of something which transcends death and either follows Kamma or passes into the Deathless.BUDDHA at time of death::My age is fully ripe, My life is at an end, I shall depart leaving you, I have made a refuge for the self (katam' me saranam' attano).. /// does this sound like the Buddha taught a NO SELF doctrine (emripical anatta)? THIS BOOK IS PURE GOLD WRAPED IN GOLD. must have for any and all serious buddhists! sounds too emphatic. but if understand that i give most all Buddhist books a 1 star rating and have one of the Largest Buddhist libraries in the USA..i would hope this endorsement carries SOME weight. Buddhist Monk S.A.