Anatta, along with dukkha and anicca make up the three marks of existence; the three fundamental principles of all reality according to the Buddha. Literally it translates as ‘no self’ and is the idea that there is no permanent, fixed, unchanging self or soul.
The concept of anatta is often misunderstood as meaning that things do not really exist and that everything is merely an illusion, but the Buddha was not a Nihilist and did not deny the existence of the self, simply that what we recognise as a person is merely the sum of its parts as opposed to a fundamental unchanging reality. This can be seen in the Pali Cannon in the questions of King Milinda where the sage Nagasena uses the analogy of a chariot to explain the concept of anatta to the King. Nagasena explains that a chariot is made up of parts, and that a chariot is not a distinct thing in its own right, but rather a composite of other things. In the same way, Buddhism teaches that what we recognise as a person, is in fact a combination of constantly changing physical and mental energies, which are categorised as the five khandas, or aggregates. These five aggregates are form, feeling, perception, mental formations and consciousness. Together these elements come together to create what we recognise as a person, but this is a constantly changing entity which develops as we grow, learn, mature etc.
The Buddhist concept of anatta is in direct contrast to the Hindu concept of atman which was rejected by the Buddha who, after much reflection, could find no evidence of any one thing that was constant and unchanging within himself, due to the concept of anicca (impermanence). Therefore, Buddhist and Hindu teachings regarding rebirth are very different. Hinduism teaches that the atman or soul is reincarnated after death into a new body, whereas Buddhism teaches that there is no soul to be reborn into a new life, and that instead it is the mental continuum of karmic energy that passes from one life to another, in the same way that the dying flames of one candle can be used to light a new candle, but they are not the same flame.
Nibbana is “the ultimate goal of Buddhism” as described by Paul Williams which means that it is the highest ideal. Nibbana is difficult to describe because it unconditioned and to describe using conditioned words would take away at it’s significance so in order to understand what it is one must either describe it using the via negativa or employ analogies. Nibbana is the cessation of Tanha(ignorance), the extinguishing of the three poisons (Greed, Hatred, and Delusion) and inevitably the absence of Dukkha(suffering)if one were to describe it it would be using the words of Christmas Humphrey’s who describes Nibbana as “the ultimate realisation” In order to achieve Nibbana one must follow the eightfold path which involves a disciplined and moral lifestyle away from worldly temptations and involving spiritual reflections, once someone has achieved enlightenment they are referred to as an Arhat(literally meaning “enlightened one”)
When an Arhat dies he enters what is known as Para-Nibbana; Para Nibbana is related to Nibbana in that it is a static state of Nibbana, it is the true departure from Samsara. Nibbana is achieved during life so although one does not form anymore Karmic residue and no longer suffers from Dukkha they still must live out the rest of their existence on earth (at times an Arhat can even drift in and out of enlightenment). An Arhat still interacts with conditioned phenomena and is still subject to Karmic consequences. However when an Arhat has reached the end of their life they enter into Para-Nibbana and enter into what is described as an “eternal state of bliss”. However one cannot fully describe Para-Nibbana because it is even more ineffable then Nibbana and discussing them proves difficult because the Buddha believed that the idea of Para-Nibbana needn’t be discussed as it was a waste of time and a distraction from spiritual progress. However in conclusion one can describe the relationship between Nibbana and Para-Nibbana as a sort of graduation from Arhatship, or as they final crossing unto the furthest shore
3(B) Nibbana and Parinibbana can be said to be the same to the extent that they are the same concept of this unconditioned and unfathomable “state of bliss” and that in reality an arhat who has entered Para-Nibbana is still as enlightened as they were in the realm of Samsara and the use of the term Para-Nibbana is merely an instrument to describe Nibbana under a different set of circumstances(or lack there of). However this point bears little validity because in reality Nibbana and Para-Nibbana although very similar are not exactly the same thing. For one Nibbana is merely the cessation of Tanha and not true freedom from the wheel of Samsara because even when one becomes an Arhat they must continue living within the physical realm of Samsara and is still subject to Karmic consequences from past actions before achieving enlightenment, also even an Arhat can drift in and out of enlightenment in their lifetime while Para-Nibbana is a static state. Finally one is can claim and that Nibbana is both the same and different to Para-Nibbana as they are both the same concept however under very different spheres of existence.