The experience of "Anatta"

[srkris]

@Farid

How it is misrepresented and what did Buddha really mean?

You can see the discussions in these two threads below where I’ve spoken about the misinterpretation - if you have any follow-up queries about it I am happy to clarify but I don’t want to invite any of the same arguments all over again.

Can a Stream Enterer or even an Arahant have a soul?

I’m re-posting this piece with a couple of small corrections as I accidentally deleted the earlier reply. I’m surprised no one has so far mentioned manomaya-kāya - Mind-created-body. manōmaya-kaya is described as a body ‘obtained’ (realised is better) by the practitioner at the stage of the fourth Jhāna. However, also know as the Body of Virtues it is present in, associated with, all of us. So yes, there is a soul, albeit one that’s impermanent and, ipso facto, capable of spiritual development…

Pali translation questions about "no self"

In other words there is no such text to support your claim. Rather its something you think the Buddha thought, because of your own logic. Of course its quite possible the Buddha didn’t think the way you thought, and so you would disagree with him. Based on what the earliest text say, the Buddha didn’t take the atta as axiomatic. Rather the thought doing that was part of the problem to begin with.