Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
“Our essence of Mind is intrinsically pure. If we knew our Mind perfectly and realised what our Self-nature truly is, all of us would be enlightened.” (Bodhisattva Sila Sutra - ca 450 BC)
At around the same time the concept of Selfrealisation bloomed in the philosophical circles of Greece under the heading “know thyself”, and became famous through Socrates who claimed “Knowledge is inherent in man, not outside. Wisdom is learning to recollect”
In the Orient this was apparently taken seriously, as – particularly in India, Tibet & China – it brought about a variety of teachings & schools as well as methods & approaches attending the different needs and temperaments of the aspirants of Selfrealisation.
That “know thyself” made it in the Occident barely beyond philosophical exercises, is probably because it established in the same period the ratio of dualism which subjected knowledge to the feedback mechanism of the intellect. This is not to say that eastern aspirants do not use intellectual techniques, but they are taught how far to utilise them (which is not all the way to the beginning) whereas western thinkers think that they have to think all the way to the end.
"That “know thyself” made it in the Occident barely beyond philosophical exercises, is probably because it established in the same period the ratio of dualism which subjected knowledge to the feedback mechanism of the intellect. This is not to say that eastern aspirants do not use intellectual techniques, but they are taught how far to utilise them (which is not all the way to the beginning) whereas western thinkers think that they have to think all the way to the end. "
No. There are historical reasons, in that you are correct. Yes, Zoroastrian thought was an influence in what you are claiming, but the definition of "self" is not directly translatable between cultures. The sophists exposed the gods of the city states as having no consistency between regions, and unworthy of worship. Instead, they proposed taking the essence of the ideals expressed by those fetishes, and using those as a basis for a more encompassing higher realm. Logic was the tool for tearing down the status quo (which REALLY pissed a lot of important people off). Knowledge, in the form of Sophia, became the new diefic force. There is more, but off-topic.
In Eastern thought, "self" is a chimera and not ego. Passivity and the dismissal of the external in favor of work on an internal development in hopes of release of that expression of "self" from Saṃsāra were more important within the culture.
Atman is a person’s true self, which is infused with or is entirely coterminous with the universal spirit of Brahman, thus lying beyond the phenomenal, changing reality we perceive. It is vaguely similar to the Western concept of the soul, as each person “possesses” or partakes of the atman, but it differs from a soul in that the atman is not entirely unique to an individual; some Hindus believe that all individual atman are joined to the separate and superior Brahman, while others believe that each individual atman is Brahman itself.
Last edited by waechter418; 11-28-2019 at 08:28 PM..
Yep. Different definition of "self" than in Western culture, where the self is independent and seeks connection or reconnection. Some now recognize the distinction, at least to some extent. Some may not, but may eventually. All the variations are interesting and have thought provoking models.
“Our essence of Mind is intrinsically pure. If we knew our Mind perfectly and realised what our Self-nature truly is, all of us would be enlightened.” (Bodhisattva Sila Sutra - ca 450 BC)
At around the same time the concept of Selfrealisation bloomed in the philosophical circles of Greece under the heading “know thyself”, and became famous through Socrates who claimed “Knowledge is inherent in man, not outside. Wisdom is learning to recollect”
In the Orient this was apparently taken seriously, as – particularly in India, Tibet & China – it brought about a variety of teachings & schools as well as methods & approaches attending the different needs and temperaments of the aspirants of Selfrealisation.
That “know thyself” made it in the Occident barely beyond philosophical exercises, is probably because it established in the same period the ratio of dualism which subjected knowledge to the feedback mechanism of the intellect. This is not to say that eastern aspirants do not use intellectual techniques, but they are taught how far to utilise them (which is not all the way to the beginning) whereas western thinkers think that they have to think all the way to the end.
Know thyself is different from knowledge of self.
The former is revealed by the divine.
The latter is often just BS I convince myself is true about me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
