The History of Buddhist Thought c16.28

c16.28

The first place where we find the express denial of an ātman mentioned is in an analysis of *upādāna*, grasping. *Upādāna* is divided into four kinds, (1) the grasping of sensual desire (*kāma*), (2) of heresy (*diṭṭhi*), (3) of mere moral practice and rites (*sīlabbata*), and (4) of the doctrine of an ātman (*attavāda*).² This shows that when this formula was made, the doctrine of an ātman was expressly taught, but it tells us nothing about the school that held it, and as there is little trace of upanishadic doctrine it is unlikely this was being opposed. It is more likely to imply opposition to Mīmāṃsā as held by the descendants of the class of brahmins whom Buddha opposed. Their position later on is represented by Kumārila, who has a long section in defence of *ātmavāda*.³