(56) Leffman, Lalitavistara, p.426

　　   (57) Maadhyamikakaarikaa, 15.10

　　　　　　　　　　　　  P.422

　　   hallmarks of the concept of attaa-can be no means by

　　   associated  with the Upani.sadic  Aatman-Brahman, it

　　   is but natural  that the Nikaaya  criticisms  do not

　　   contain  any reference  to the Upani.sadic  concept.

　　   The post-canonical  early Buddhist  texts also never

　　   confused  attaa  with  the  Aatman-Brahman   of  the

　　   Upani.sads. In the Vajracchedikaa Praj~naapaaramitaa

　　   (58) aatman  is used  together  with such  terms  as

　　   jiiva, sattva  and pudgala.  All these terms are put

　　   in  the  same  category   and  are  used  to  denote

　　   different  aspects  of the same ego-centric  entity.

　　   'Sacet Bodhisattvasya sattva sa.mj~naa pravarteta na

　　   sa bodhisattva iti vaktavya.  Tat kasya hetoh? na sa

　　   Subhuute bodhisattvo  vaktavyo yasya aatma-sa.mj~naa

　　   pravarteta, sattva-sa.mj~naa  vaa jiivasa.mj~naa vaa

　　   pudgala-sa.mj~naa va pravarteta'.'If in a Bodhisattva

　　   the perception of a being should take place, then he

　　   could  not be called  a Bodhisattva.  And why? He is

　　   not  to  be  called   a  Bodhisattva   in  whom  the

　　   perception of a soul, or a being, or a living being,

　　   or a person would take place'.  (59) Similary in the

　　   early Maadhyamika literature we read:'Ko 'yam aatmaa

　　   yo 'ha^nkaaravi.saya.h', which may be translated  as

　　   follows: What is this aatman  that is the domain  of

　　   ego? (60) Here  aatman(Pali: attaa) is characterised

　　   by aha^nkaara.  In this context  we may refer to the

　　   definition of 'upadhi' in sopadhi'se.sanirvaa.nam as

　　   given  by  Candrakiirti(61)  in  the  Prasannapadaa:

　　   tatra  upadhiyate  asminn  aatmasneha  ity upadhi.h,

　　   upadhi  'sabdenaatmapraj~napti-nimittaa.h   pa~ncop-

　　   aadaanaskandhaa ucyante'. Here the concept of aatmaa

　　   is  held  to be caused  by the  five  aggregates  of

　　   attachment.   The   same   idea   is  expressed   by

　　   Buddhaghosa   (62)  while   defining   'attabhaava'.

　　   'Attabhaavo vuccanti sariiram. Khandha-pa~ncakam eva

　　   vaa,  tam  upaadaaya  pa~n~natti-matta  sabhaavato'.

　　   Conze  translates:  'Personal  existence  means  the

　　   body,  or  the  five   Skandhas   together,  because

　　   dependent  on them this mere concept  cones  about.'

　　   (63) Thus  it is clear  that  these  early  Buddhist

　　   texts  while discussing  the concept  of attaa never