1. The words atta, attā, anatta, anattā, attha, etc., have very different meanings depending on the context.
- Thus, each sutta needs to be discussed in the context of the whole sutta. The problem with most current translations is that they use just one meaning of “self” with “atta.”
- The same word can be used in different contexts with very different meanings in any language.
- In English, there are cases like this: The word “right” can mean two different things: “you are right” and “turn right.” There are many such words with different meanings depending on the context.
2. I have discussed that in many posts regarding “atta/anatta”: “Anatta – A Systematic Analysis.”
- In the context of the Sabbasava Sutta (discussing wrong views), the mundane meaning applies: “Anattā (Mundane Interpretation) – No “Unchanging Self”“
3. Thus, in the context of the Sabbasava Sutta, the English translation in “Sabbāsava Sutta (MN 2)” happens to give the correct meaning.
- P.S. The Sabbasava Sutta discusses the wrong views prevalent in the time of the Buddha regarding whether a “soul” type entity exists. The Sanskrit word “ātman” or “āthma” (meaning “soul” or a “permanent self”) applies.
- P.S. However, the English translation in the “Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta (SN 22.59)” is NOT correct because it tries to use the same meaning as in the Sabbasava Sutta. See “Anatta in Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta – Part 1“
- The Anattalakkhana Sutta discusses Tilakkhana, which is about the nature of the world in the context of anicca, dukkha, and anatta. Also see “Anatta – the Opposite of Which Atta?” and other posts in “Anatta – A Systematic Analysis.”
