What do you think about Ven Thanissaro's view on Anatta?

[mikenz66]

Hi Mike,
You might find the discussion in these threads helpful:

On not-self, existence, and ontological strategies

Note: this essay is an expanded version of an earlier comment; see the comment and subsequent discussion here. It is rather curious that certain commentators, such as Ven Thanissaro, argue that anattā means “not self” rather than “no self”, for the distinction between “not-self” and “no-self” is not found in Pali. Anyway, no knowledgeable translator actually translates anattā as “no self”. Try translating sabbe dhammā anattā as “All things are no self”—it just doesn’t work. It’s a straw man a…

Bodhi vs Ṭhānissaro debate

If you’re not tired of never ending discussion on anatta teachings, then I’d like to point out that Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu has just published an article titled “The Limits of Description : Not-self Revisited” (pdf | html). It contains his expanded reflections on anatta teachings which are a direct response to Bhikkhu Bodhi’s article (Google Books) published some time ago. Both papers are quite long but IMHO worth of reading.