Hi,
Why in Pāli it is said "rūpaṃ anattā, [...] viññāṇaṃ anattā". And not "rūpaṃ anattaṃ, [...] viññāṇaṃ anattaṃ"?
Moderator: Mahavihara moderator
piotr wrote:Why in Pāli it is said "rūpaṃ anattā, [...] viññāṇaṃ anattā". And not "rūpaṃ anattaṃ, [...] viññāṇaṃ anattaṃ"?
Dhammanando wrote:And so unlike 'anicca' and 'dukkha', 'anattā' in the above passage is not modified to agree with the neuter 'viññāṇaṃ' because structurally 'anattā' is not an adjective. Rather it is a noun employed predicatively.
I thought that anattā was an adjective here — since most of translators renders it as "not-self", or "nonself".Registered users: Bing [Bot], BlackBird, BuddhaSoup, fivebells, Google [Bot], greggorious, K.Dhamma, kiwi, reflection, retrofuturist, thaijeppe