anattā
Not-self
[ uh-NUT-taa ]
Seeing it in life
Anattā denies a permanent, controlling self. All dhammas — even nibbāna — are not-self.
In short
No abiding self in or behind the five aggregates.
The analysis
Anattā is the claim that no fixed, permanent, controlling self can be found in or behind the five aggregates — not that a person doesn't exist conventionally, but that whatever is called 'I' turns out, on close examination, to be a series of conditioned processes with nothing standing apart from them and running the show. The Buddha's argument in the Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta is structural: if any of the khandhas were truly self, one could command it not to lead to affliction — but form, feeling, perception, formations, and consciousness all lead to affliction regardless of wishing otherwise, which the sutta takes as evidence none of them is a controlling self.
Where it sits
Anattā is the third of the three characteristics, and the one most people find hardest to sit with, since it applies not just to external objects but to the very process doing the examining. Even nibbāna, the unconditioned, is described as anattā — not because it lacks reality, but because 'self' is the wrong category to apply to it, or to anything.
Looking for the fixed 'someone' who is anxious about money — not the tightness, not the thought, not the reaching for the phone, but the one behind all of it, supposedly having the experience — and not finding a stable candidate. Just more process, examined further.
Commonly mistaken for
Nihilism, or a denial that persons exist. Conventional selfhood — a functioning person with a name, history, and responsibilities — isn't denied; what's denied is a fixed, independent, controlling essence underneath that convention.
Something achieved once and then permanently understood. It's typically described as seen progressively, at deepening levels, through practice rather than grasped once as a finished insight.
Anattalakkhaṇa Sutta (SN 22.59).
Related terms