something  there is, though  it is not the empirical

　　   self.  In  another  place  (16) he  refers  to  this

　　   empirical  self and states that it is the false view

　　   that clamours for the perpetual continuation of this

　　   small  self, which  the Buddha  refutes.  This, (17)

　　   according  to Radhakrishnan, also  agrees  with  the

　　   statement of the Buddha that the self is neither the

　　   same  nor different  from  the skandhas.  He further

　　   states  (18): " It is also clear  that the reduction

　　   of the self to a number of skandhas is not ultimate.

　　   If the self is merely an impermanent  compounded  of

　　   body and mind....then  when it disappears then there

　　   is  nothing  which  is  delivered...Freedom  becomes

　　   extinction.  But Nirvaa.na is timeless existence and

　　   so the Buddha admit the reality of a timeless self."

　　　　  Radhakrishanan  appers to be of the opinion that

　　   the term 'attaa'  which  he translates  as self  has

　　   been used in two different  senses.  One meaning  of

　　   attaa is the small self or empirical  self which the

　　   Buddha rejects through the doctrine of anattaa.  The

　　   other implication of the term attaa is the ture self

　　   which  is same as nirvaa.na  and is accepted  by the

　　   Buddha.  It is the identity  of this  true self with

　　   other things that the buddha rejects.

　　　　  We may now discuss the opinion of Rahulo who re-

　　   presents the other group

　　   ────────────

　　   (14) Indian Philosophy, Vol.  I, P.386 (George Allen

　　　　   & Unwin, London, 1977)

　　   (15) Ibid. p.386

　　   (16) Ibid. p.388, note 1

　　   (17) Ibid. p.387

　　   (18) Ibid. p.451

　　　　　　　　　　　　  P.398

　　   of  scholars.   While  explaining  the  doctrine  of

　　   anattaa Rahulo (19) refers to the different concepts

　　   of aatman, even the concept of Brahman-Aatman of the

　　   Upani.sads  and holds that the buddha  was unique in

　　   rejecting all such doctrines through the doctrine of

　　   anattaa.   "  The  idea   of  an  abiding,  immortal

　　   substance  in man  or outside, whether  it is called

　　   Aatman, I, soul, self, or ego, is considered  only a

　　   false  belief, a  mental  projection.  This  is  the

　　   Budhist doctrine of anttaa (20).  So it appears that

　　   by the doctrine of anattaa  the Buddha  was  denying

　　   attaa  "  which   was   accepted   by   every  other