Question 43:
How does Anatta relate to the concept of "Buddha nature", which is perhaps a totally other sort other ATTA, in a sense a supra mundane sort of "ego" very different of course from the "normal" ego, which is perishable?
And is it then comparable with what is. in Hinduism, called Paramatman (Paul Brunton's Overself)? From Alex
Eijgenraam
Answer:
Much of the confusion concerning these terms is that they are defined differently in the various religious traditions, and in various contexts and by various teachers within a tradition. The terms have been translated from Sanskrit or Pali to other languages and eventually to English, and in these translations, different shades of meaning are given to the terms due to the contexts and limitations of the particular language and the translator’s spiritual understanding and viewpoint.
“Buddha Nature” is generally a Mahayana Buddhist term which is defined variously as the seed of
Buddhahood in every being which is activated when defilements and illusion are destroyed, the inherent pure nature in every being which is obscured by ignorance/illusion, as the cause or potential for attaining
Buddhahood, and as the Buddha’s divine knowledge which pervades all beings. Buddha Nature is the translation of the Sanskrit term Thathāgatha Garbha, meaning literally Buddha womb, embryo, matrix or source. Different schools of Mahayana Buddhism have different definitions or perspectives of the term.
Some consider it to be the originally pure nature and others consider it only as a potentially pure nature to arise in the future – that is, they views differ with respect to time.
Atma, or Atta in Pali, as defined in Buddhism, means the personality, ego, soul or self in the conventional sense. Anatta means there is no permanent personality, ego, self or soul. Buddhists agree with the concept of Anatta that the individual personality, ego or self changes constantly over time, and does not exist upon attainment of Nirvana, and therefore is impermanent and thus unreal. However, a confusion arises due to the different meanings of “soul.” Anatta means that there is no “soul” as defined as an individual, personality or substance that is immortal or eternal. However, Buddhists agree that there are energies (karmas, memories, skills, mental and spiritual development, etc) that transmit from one birth to the next. If these energies can be defined as “soul,” then this type of soul exists in samsara, from birth to birth, even within a conservative Theravada viewpoint. Atma as defined in Hinduism, is the same as
Paramatman - the Absolute, the Source, formless all-pervading Divinity, uncreated and deathless – except that Atma is the concept of Paramatma in relation to the individual person. The term Atma also is used in the context of Hinduism to mean the individual self or personality. The different meanings of Atma within Hinduism may have contributed to the apparent inconsistency between Buddhist and Hindu teachings.
So Buddha Nature is consistent to some degree with Hindu spiritual definition of Atma, but the degree of consistency varies among the different schools and traditions of Buddhism. For Theravada Buddhists, the scriptural references closest to the concept of Atma is that of consciousness nonmanifesting and luminous, and defiled by incoming defilements (Anguttara Nikaya 1:10, Digha Nikaya 11, Majjhima
Nikaya 49) and the term “bhavanga” translated as “ground of becoming,” in the Abhidhamma. For
Mahayana Buddhists, the Lankavatara, Avatamsaka, Mahaparinirvana, Srimaladevi, and
Thathāgathagarbha Suttas describe or discuss concepts of Buddha Nature.

One way to describe the concept of Atma, Paramatma, and Anatta which illustrates points of view is to consider an analogy of a balloon. A balloon is filled with air, but when the knot gets undone, the air in balloon flows out and the size decreases, and when the balloon is empty it falls away. Some view the air from the balloon as the same, not different from, the ambient air; it was just enclosed by the balloon temporarily. Others view the air from the balloon as having been separate from and now joining with ambient air. Still others would say the air in the balloon disappeared. Similarly, the form (body) is filled with mind, and when ignorance gets undone, attachment to form/body subsides and decreases, and after the mind is enlightened the form/body is no longer useful, so it falls away. Some would view the enlightened mind (Atma) as not separate from and now joining with Paramatma, but instead as the same as Paramatma; it was just enclosed by ignorance while in samsara, the world of time and space. Others would view the enlightened mind as having been separate from and now joining with Paramatma. Still others would view the enlightened mind as not existing.
It is a matter of perspective as to whether Buddha Nature or Atma is all pervading or not, whether it is original existing purity or just a potential in the future, or whether it exists or not. These perspectives are based on time and space, the only world which our minds can grasp. However, Nirvana, Ultimate
Reality, is beyond time and space. So we cannot say that one view is correct and another is incorrect.
The different perspectives are each pathways to Nirvana, and each person must choose which pathway is best suited for him or her.