The "self" A Big Difference Betw Hinduism And Buddhism?

[♦ ficino ♦]

On Patheos I saw this interesting post.

 

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/gatheringnectar/2014/11/who-is-the-self/

 

The author suggests that the big difference between Hinduism and Buddhism is that Hinduism affirms an occult self, more fundamental than the body, the Atman, while Buddhism denies a coherent "self." My understanding is that the Hindu concept is generally of a "real you" that is deeper than the idiosyncracies of any of your incarnations. The goal is that this "real you" be merged with the divine and escape the wheel of reincarnation.

 

My vague notion of the usual Buddhist take is that since everything is in flux, there is no substantial, coherent self. There's more of a stream of things going by on your mental screen, but the screen is not a real self. When "you" grasp that, you're freed from attachment.

 

I am probably getting a lot of this wrong.

 

Comments on the linked article, or corrections of my confused understanding?

[Orbit]

On Patheos I saw this interesting post.

 

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/gatheringnectar/2014/11/who-is-the-self/

 

The author suggests that the big difference between Hinduism and Buddhism is that Hinduism affirms an occult self, more fundamental than the body, the Atman, while Buddhism denies a coherent "self." My understanding is that the Hindu concept is generally of a "real you" that is deeper than the idiosyncracies of any of your incarnations. The goal is that this "real you" be merged with the divine and escape the wheel of reincarnation.

 

My vague notion of the usual Buddhist take is that since everything is in flux, there is no substantial, coherent self. There's more of a stream of things going by on your mental screen, but the screen is not a real self. When "you" grasp that, you're freed from attachment.

 

I am probably getting a lot of this wrong.

 

Comments on the linked article, or corrections of my confused understanding?

I'm no scholar of these things but I am an avid fan. Atman is usually translated "soul" but taken to mean self.

 

It's my impression that Buddhism just doesn't talk about things in terms of "the self" the way that Hinduism does. Buddha was a regular man who "woke up" when he transcended attachment. It's usually talked about in terms of realizing that the self is not separate from the world, something the two have in common. Buddhism, was after all, Hinduism stripped down for export.

 

Your idea about the self not being real is actually from Hinduism, the concept of maya, or illusion. Each of us is the Godhead playing hide and seek with itself; our true nature is divine, but hidden in the world of maya and the masks that we wear called our selves.

[♦ ficino ♦]

Orbit, this is something I've never quite understood about Buddhism. I thought they positively denied that one has a coherent self. You seem to be saying that Buddhists simply don't talk about the self, which would be a different strategy on their part.

[Orbit]

Orbit, this is something I've never quite understood about Buddhism. I thought they positively denied that one has a coherent self. You seem to be saying that Buddhists simply don't talk about the self, which would be a different strategy on their part.

Hi--I'm not aware of such a denial. But there are many different versions of Buddhism and entirely possible I'm just not familiar with the one that says that. I know about Mahayana and Zen, but there are several other kinds.

 

When you want to know about yourself, the classic Zen retort is "Who is it that is asking?" In Zen, mountains are mountains. As you progress, the mountains are no longer mountains, you realize (they are symbolic constructs, artifacts of your mind and perception). Then the mountains are mountains again. It's the same with the self. It is an illusion on one level and exists on another. The key to Zen is the nondual--where there is simultaneously self and not-self, just being, just experience.

[Bhim]

As you know I'm more the cultural Hindu, and I have little (if any) expert knowledge on the topic. Buy this is pretty consistent with my understanding of Hindu philosophy. The Gita likens the body to a pair of shoes which one discards upon death only to take another one. Most thinks that we think define our individuality are tied to our lives, i.e. our careers, likes and dislikes, even our genetic profile. So it makes sense that the Hindu concept of self abstracts away all of these things.