“Everything that arises also passes away, so strive for what has not arisen.” - Buddha

(1) All things come into existence and go out of existence.
(2) While things exist, they undergo constant change.

The 12
Links in the Causal
Chain of
Dependent
Arising

The Buddhist view of reality stands in between the extremes of theories that postulate a transcendent absolute reality (e.g., Brahman in Hinduism) and those that postulate that nothing exists (metaphysical nihilism).
“From the point of view of dependent arising, things do exist , but only as complex, interdependent, changing processes.” (Holder, p. 26)

“‘Everything exists’ – this is one extreme. ‘Everything does not exist’ – this is the second extreme. Without approaching either of these extremes, the Tathagata teaches dhamma by the middle.” (Buddha, in Holder, p. 83)

All Things are
Impermanent
There is
No Self
There is no permanent self or enduring mind.

“For the Buddhist there is no atman or essential self underlying the changing stream of events which constitute the mind-body complex. The
Buddhist doctrine of no-abiding-self (Pali: anatta; Sanskrit: anatman) provided a stark philosophical contrast to brahmanical notions of a substantial self (atman).”
– Richard King,
Indian Philosophy , p. 78)

Buddhism maintains that a person is a dynamic aggregation of five different elements (skandhas), together called Nama-Rupa
Vinnana
Sankhara
Sanna
Vedana
Rupa
Consciousness
Dispositions or Tendencies
Perception or recognition of sensation
Feelings or Sensations
The Physical Body

(1) “The self” is not anything other than the five skandhas (individually or collectively considered).
(2) None of the skandhas is permanent.
Therefore
(3) “The self” is not permanent.

The Five Elements ( skandhas
) constitute “the individual person,” though not in any substantial sense. “Self” is simply a name given to the aggregate of skandhas.
There is no soul or permanent self residing in or behind the skandhas.
There is no “atman.”

Buddhaghosa, 5 th century CE
Buddhist Philosopher
“The words ‘living entity’ or ‘ego’ are but a mode of expression for the presence of the five aggregates, but when we come to examine the elements one by one, we discover that, in the absolute sense, there is no ‘living entity’ there to form the basis for such figments as ‘I am’ or ‘I’’ in other words, that in the absolute sense, there is only
Nama and Rupa.” - Buddhaghosa

“Why do you assume a
‘person’? Mara, you have adopted a wrong speculative view. This is only a heap of processes. There is no person to be found here.”
“Just as the word ‘chariot” refers to an assemblage of parts, so, ‘person’ is a convention used when the aggregates are present.”
(Holder, p. 87).

In some branches of Buddhism, something similar or functionally equivalent to atman seems to be affirmed.

Mahayana Buddhism

In Mahayana Buddhism, the “Buddha-nature” typically refers to an innate potentiality in all sentient beings for becoming enlightened.
In several scriptures, though, the Buddha-nature appears to refer to an underlying ontological reality, a single essence shared by all sentient beings. It seems to be functionally equivalent to a transcendental Self.
This Buddha-nature is said to be uncreated, immutable, and immortal.

Tantric Scripture exalts the “beginningless
Self,” “the Self of primordial unity,” and “the
Supreme Being,” each in contrast to the empirical or phenomenal self. ~ Jeff Hopkins
( Mountain Doctrine , pp. 279-294)

“Permanent is the Self; the Self is thoroughly pure. The thoroughly pure is called ‘bliss’. Permanent, blissful, Self, and thoroughly pure is the one-gone-thus
[i.e. Buddha].” ~ Jeff Hopkins
(
Mahāyāna Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra
, Trans. Hopkins in
Mountain Doctrine , p. 129)

“The Buddha-nature is eternal bliss, the Self, and the Pure. Buddha-Nature is not noneternal, not non-bliss, not the non-Self, and not non-purity”
~ Buddha
(Mahayana Mahaparinirvana, Trans. Kosho Yamaoto in
Mahanaya Mahabarinirvana, vol. 8, p. 23)

Can this Buddhist view of a transcendent Self be reconciled with the anatta doctrine?
Yes.
Anatta can be interpreted as
“no individual, enduring self” or “no individual soul.”
The term “atman” in the
Upanishads sometimes refers to the individual soul, sometimes called jivatman.

Within the framework of Buddhism,
Anatta can mean (i) no permanent individual self or (ii) no permanent self of any sort.

( Essence of Zen , p. 63)

• So the Buddhist anatta doctrine may be compatible with the conception of
Atman affirmed in Advaita Vedanta, namely a single, pure undifferentiated consciousness.
• This may explain why bhakti vedantins accused Sankara of being a crypto-
Buddhist.

The Goal, The Attainment

Nirvana - “to be blown out.”
What is blown out?
“A man comes to believe in his essential nature, to know that what exists is the erroneous activity of the mind and that the world of objects in front of him is non-existent. . .this is called gaining nirvana.”
Asvaghosa (2 nd century CE Buddhist philosopher)

Nirvana is “an indefinable state, independent of all worldly ties, beyond all earthly passion, freedom from all egotistical, false ideas, - in short, it is the exact opposite of everything known to the conditioned, individual existence between birth and death.”
Von Glasenapp, modern Buddhist commentator

Nirvana is the blowing out of . . .
Dukkha
False Ego
Greed – Hate - Delusion
Craving for Identity and Permanence

Nirvana does not mean unqualified cessation of existence, annihilation, or extinction. Only the extinction of a false ego.
What remains after such extinction?
“Bliss, yes bliss, my friends is nirvana.” - Buddha
As in Vedanta, “bliss” ( ananda ) does not mean a temporary pleasant or happy feeling. It just means satisfaction, fullness, completeness, or not needing. This state is compatible with pleasant and unpleasant experiences.

Nirvana and God
While nirvana may be described as an ultimate reality, it is not a personal Supreme being or creator. It is not God as understood in the theistic traditions of the east and west.
Nirvana plays a functional role similar to God in the theistic traditions. It is spoken of with language parallel to God in the theistic traditions:
Imperishable and the Eternal
Immovable or Unchanging
Power
Secure Refuge and Shelter
Peace
Truth

Nirvana most closely resembles nirguna Brahman of the
Vedanta traditions and God as understood in the mystical traditions of the west as a being beyond all positive description.

“There is, O Monks, an unborn, neither become nor created nor formed.
Were there not, there would be no deliverance from the formed, the made, the compounded.”
– Buddha

Physical Death
The skandhas, which together constitute an individual personality, are severally and collectively impermanent. Hence, they cannot survive death, individually or collectively.
At the time of death, the nama-rupa disintegrates. The individual psycho-physical person that once existed, no longer exists.

Not any soul or enduring mind.
The doctrine of anatta prevents this understanding of rebirth.

Buddhaghosa considers it a “confusion” to suppose that rebirth involves a “being’s transmigration to another incarnation. . . .a lasting being’s manifestation in a new body.”
(Buddhaghosa, Visuddhimagga 17.113-114)

First Approximation
One’s individual karma survives the death of the self, and provides the basis for the emergence of a new personality.
What is reborn is a cluster of dispositions or tendencies that constituted the character of the formerly living person. The person has ceased to exist with death, but his or her character persists and becomes integrated with a new psycho-physical person.

"There is rebirth of character, but no transmigration of a self.
Thy thought-forms reappear, but there is no ego-entity transferred. The stanza uttered by a teacher is reborn in the scholar who repeats the words” ~
Buddha, The Gospel