The Vedic Period gave way to several different ideologies such as Buddhism, Jainism, Savism, and Vaisnavism. Many believe this shift from traditional Hinduism was based on opposing claims of causality; identity- the nature of self. The debate of identity and non-identity theorems is evident throughout the Upanishads and historically remembered as the life of Gautama the Buddha. Still at a much later date, a third position of ethnicity termed ‘Ren’, self as community, developed from the teachings of Confucius which complemented Buddhism and Daoism.
The latter Vedic Period of 300 BC to 600 B.C. is dominated by two philosophical views; the traditional Brahmin which deals with the embodiment of the unconditional self, and applied science, the birth of logic. The Upanishads
migrates from the idea of a superior ruler of many gods to monism, a unified whole or universal self-termed ‘Atman’.
Logic developed from competing theories of physical proofs accredited to K [“The birth of logic” (O’Dell).]
Kupperman explains that the Buddhist philosophy sees the world as a “swirl of fragments, linked by causal relation and by other associations (p 22).”
Causality for the Buddhist is a set of
conditions such as striking a match
Causality for the Buddhist is a set of conditions such as striking a match must have the conditions for striking and lighting the match; an action requires conditions to act. In other words, the picture of things is lighting up of a particular combination of immutable atoms (Buddhist Tradition).
The term ‘anatman’ refers to the Buddhist rejection of the traditional Hindu view, “Atman is Brahmin” the main theme of the Upanishads. “The Dhammapada” a Buddhist text, rejects “Atman” and the notion of a “real self” (Kupperman p 22).
Although both Hinduism and Buddhism show contempt to egoism and individualism, nether denies the ego-self or a first person view of the world. Joel Kupperman explains, “The Dhammada” metaphysics is opposite to that of Hindu philosophy. The ego-self does not exist in the absolute sense; not some permanent thing. And second, the self is just a name in the absolute sense, a convenient designation, in other words, the term ‘self” is the name designated as psychotically physical complex that exist in the absolute sense at the same time.
The Vedic tradition is revived by Samkara a thousand years later (788-820? A.D.) The Vedanta sutra chief commentators are Samkara, Ramanuja, and Mafdhva. Samkara expresses in his introduction of the Vendanta Sutra an identity claim of undifferentiated consciousness unaffected by death of the physical body. Samkara supports that reality self (Atman) is existence, knowledge and bliss universal and infinite (O’Dell).
Conversely, non-absolute identity between Brahman and the individual self- an identity claim, the nature of self and it’s relation to the absolute. Gregg Singlar explains, “Samkara repudiates the subjectivism of the Yogacaras (Buddhist idealists). He also holds that the world is non-existent. Our ignorance is born of a confusion of the transcendental subject (Atman) with empirical existence (anatman pg 507).”
 |
Balanced Healthy Monad Illustration of 'Self'
Robbed by Texas Houston Se Texas
Private Dicks - Get A Job
and Stop Killing People
|
 |
Monad Illustration of 'Self'
Illustration After EH attacks
|
|
Nevertheless, self-preservation takes precedence over any other human activity; few philosophers would defend their lives with an abstract theory especially when we consider what is really me, what makes me me- the nature of self.
Thomas Hobbs’s would argue for freedom, an unrestrained will such as the unbridled impulse that drove the Indo-Aryans over the steppe bringing havoc to the biblical frontiers of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. Conversely,
a third concept of identity blossomed in the Far East from the teachings of Confucius, a concept of self-interest best served by serving others- the nature of self (Ren) as community (li).
.png)
Retweet
Favorite
