Eastern Philosophy and Nietzsche | Buddhism and Hinduism
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 06. 2024
- There are some good reasons to believe that Nietzsche was interested in Eastern philosophy during his lifetime, especially in Buddhism and Hinduism.
Both Hinduism and Buddhism are of interest to Nietzsche not in themselves, but as alternative positions from which to continue his attack on Christianity.
Although Nietzsche considers these philosophies as nihilistic (wrongly), he does indicate their profundity. It seems that he studied this material closely and appreciated it greatly.
Throughout Nietzsche’s books and notes, he refers to different aspects of Eastern philosophy on more than four hundred occasions, and in several of these he claims to be interested in it.
⭐ Support this channel: / eternalised
📨 Subscribe with email eternalisedofficial.com/subsc...
🎦 Subscribe to the official clips channel: / channel
📺 CZcams Member Perks: / @eternalised
☕ Donate a Coffee: ko-fi.com/eternalised
📘 PayPal www.paypal.com/paypalme/etern...
🛒 Official Merch: eternalised.creator-spring.com
📚 My Personal Library: eternalisedofficial.com/library
━━━━━━━━━━━━━
📚 Recommended Reading (High Quality and Best Translations)
▶ The Birth of Tragedy (1872)
amzn.to/3uohsRi
▶ Human, All Too Human (1878)
amzn.to/2PDOmP7
▶ The Dawn of Day (1881)
amzn.to/3dyAE87
▶ The Gay Science (1882)
amzn.to/36rijIf
▶ Thus Spoke Zarathustra (1883)
amzn.to/2F89V55
▶ Beyond Good and Evil (1886)
amzn.to/2DDjLLL
▶ On the Genealogy of Morals (1887)
amzn.to/3jj0izq
▶ Twilight of the Idols or How to Philosophise with a Hammer and The Antichrist (1888)
amzn.to/2Ol1Miq
▶ Ecce Homo (1888)
amzn.to/39L9j1E
🎧 Prefer Audiobooks? Get a 30-day Audible Plus FREE trial:
▶ amzn.to/332zPzN
━━━━━━━━━━━━━
📺 Odysee ➔ odysee.com/@eternalised
📺 Rumble ➔ rumble.com/c/Eternalised
🐦 Twitter ➔ / eternalised1
📷 Instagram ➔ / eternalised_official
📘 Facebook ➔ / eternalised
🎧 Podcast ➔ anchor.fm/eternalised
━━━━━━━━━━━━━
⌛ Timestamps
0:00 Nietzsche on Buddhism
1:44 Why Buddhism isn't nihilistic
4:56 Nietzsche praising Buddhism
5:48 Similarities Nietzsche and Buddhism
6:51 Nietzsche on Hinduism
13:02 Similarities Schopenhauer and Nietzsche
13:36 Schopenhauer praising Hinduism
14:48 Similarities Zarathustra and Shiva
15:18 Nietzsche's India
15:46 Nietzsche glorifying Eastern Philosophy
━━━━━━━━━━━━━
Sources
Ian Withy-Berry Nietzsche and Buddhism
Smith, D. (2004). Nietzsche's Hinduism, Nietzsche's India: Another Look. Journal of Nietzsche Studies, (28), 37-56.
Elman, B. (1983). Nietzsche and Buddhism. Journal of the History of Ideas, 44(4), 671-686.
━━━━━━━━━━━━━
🎶 Music used
1. Asian Drums - Kevin MacLeod
2. Himalayan Atmosphere - Kevin MacLeod
3. Ripples - Kevin MacLeod
4. Indore - Kevin MacLeod
5. Cambodian Odyssey - Kevin MacLeod
6. Finding Movement - Kevin MacLeod
Subscribe to Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)
/ kmmusic
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
━━━━━━━━━━━━━
As an Amazon Associate, I earn from qualifying purchases at no additional cost to you.
Thanks for watching, I appreciate it!
#nietzsche #buddhism #hinduism
Enjoyed the video? Please give it a like
Support this channel: www.patreon.com/eternalised
CZcams Member Perks: czcams.com/channels/qos1tl0RntucGGtPXNxkkA.htmljoin
Donate a Coffee: ko-fi.com/eternalised
PayPal: www.paypal.com/paypalme/eternalisedofficial
Official Merch: eternalised.creator-spring.com
HELLOW : - what is the picture used at 1:52 of your video? would you by any chance still have the reference -- Also love your take on Nietzsche Ty :D
@@hushhboyy3591 Hi. Thanks, the painting is Unity by Vrindavan Das
Would you explore Nietzsche's thought on Islam in the future video? I find this is as least studied topic even though Nietzsche had significant commentary about Islam in Anti-Christ and The Genealogy of Moral if I'm not mistaken. Please let me know.
I don't understand the meaning of the phrase "Eastern Philosophy."
When I was taking philosophy in college, we were taught that "people talk about 'their philosophy' and this is a misnomer. "Philosophy" isn't a set of ideas; it is a means of pursuing truth through establishing facts and logical relationships... It is an idea formalized by Greeks such as Aristotle who stated ideas like 'we cannot hold that x and not x are both true in the same way at the same time' and so on."
If this is no longer taught as truth, why?
If it is, what? In what way is Buddhism dependent up on facts and logic?
I don't see it.
Philosophy really hurt my head while studying what life is, what reality is or what truth is. I got into an emotional roller coaster. Grew up as a Christian, became an existential nihilist, got into Bhudism then studied Stoicism, only to get deluded by various interpretations of truth. Welps, I'm a fool not to try meditation sooner. Life is beautiful!
I was an atheist most my life until I found God and got sober. Meditation and philosophy saved my life
@@nikolaim4274 Blessed are you, my friend.
You are just one step away from krishna.Thats my opinion.
Silent..gives answer.."WHO AM I" Ramana Maharshi..goodluck
Buddhist philosophy is real and best philosophy...✨
i don't why most buddhists deny but the noble truths and eight fold paths are already present in upanishads and smritis of many sages which were known way before buddha was born
Cause differences cell. Don't forget Brahmins were the disciples of buddha.
Coz if they accept it. The it will be proved that bhuddism is an offshoot of hindiusm. Bhuddism isn't some new philosophy realised by buddha. There were many buddha before gautama in hindiusm.
@@bhaveshtochabbra6853 the point is Hinduism, Buddhism and Jainism are from India and nowhere else , and we should be fking proud of that
The buddha makes the Poos still seethe to this day. Chronology of eastern teachings
Vedas:
The Jews of the East are called Brahmins and they are saying that to please blue gods during their orgies, the Jews, I mean the Brahmins , have to kill horses and cut very special woods in order to burn it and dance around the fire while chanting '''''''''magical & sacred''''''''''' sentences called '''mantras'''. Brahmins live off the royal families and have a comfy life, spending their day doing rituals mandated by the king, because the local Brahmin told him that the gods were somehow not pleased with the local king, until the king does what the brahmin recommends...
At this point karma, rebirth and meditation are not in the Vedas and do not matter. The only way to live the holy life is to be a born a Brahmin and do rituals around a fire and killing some animals once in a while. Brahmins rave about sacrifices.
Buddhism and so on
Then Buddhism, Jainism and some materialist gurus came along and said the Vedas and Brahmins are full of shit. Sainthood is not hereditary for instance. Buddhists introduce karma, aggregates are not self, and very precise meditation and their only goal is to ''end suffering''. They do not give a shit about politics. The Brahmins get super triggered and write the Upanishads as a counter attack.
The origin of the hindus and the buddhists isn't super clear. THe latest theory is that the brahmins were some indo-aryans and settled on the north west of India. The futur buddhists and jains were living at the Norf east of India. In the South there was some bums, whoever that was, and nobody cared. As the aryans moved towards the east, they encountered the futur jains and buddhists which later mogged the vedas big time.;
Middle Ages
Some Brahmin ard called Patanjali decided also to write a manual on meditation. Since Brahmins made that shit up in a rush in the Upanishads , they can't pad their manual with custom teachings, so they copy word for word the buddhist manual. But this time they call it ''''''''''yoga'''''''''''''''and they use ''''''''''''''the breath''''''''''' in order to ''''''''''''''reach Brahman'''''''''''''''.
In the middle ages, a Poo called Shankaracharya was still triggered by buddhism from 1000 years ago so he tried to refute it by saying '' lol buddha did not use sanskrit so what he says is just wrong bro''. To this day, the Poos still use this midwit to ''''''''''''refute'''''''''' buddhism and sometimes jainism.
Renaissance
Buddhism has been dead for several centuries and what is left is various Brahminical-buddhist intellectuals struggling to differentiate Vajrayana, Mahayana and Hinduism, saying each one is different and better from the others. They make up lots of contrived mental gymnastics, but since they all reject the buddhist claim that ''contionned things rise and fall, so they don't have a true nature'', they don't have much room to differentiate themselves, their teachings get more and more confusing and more and more the same. At this point in buddhism, buddha is literally the ''''acosmic essence of the universe'''' and to get enlightened you have to do some rituals, following the orders of the newly introduced concept of the local Vajrayana guru [the buddhist equivalent of a brahmin] while saying some mantras to connect to the ''primordial mind'', ie the ''the buddha'', because ''you just have to see that you were already enlightened all this time, you just don't know it yet''.
“I imagine future thinkers in whom European-American indefatigability is combined with the hundredfold-inherited contemplativeness of the Asians: such a combination will bring the riddle of the world to a solution.”
- Nietzsche
I to adored that quote
Such a combination will bring
the suffering of the world to nirvana.
The eternal bliss of nirvana
Lies in my mind at rest.
Be still and das whole universe will surrender.
Be still and know that I am god.
God is in us-
De author of our dream.
In my dream,
I fly outer space.
This is needed more in India, where the culture is too closed in its prejudice of its scriptures and superstitions for peoples securities alone, rather than find a way out for true liberation. India needs to imbibe the western Indefatigability, but first west needs to contemplate Eastern philosophy more openly, rather than judging anything by its cover, so that India can follow the west and Europe too later, (which has been happening till now after the British influence).No harm intended, but only too much hype negated about the too much hype demanded of Easternisation of the west.👍
@@drrameshshrink DW G. I will secure that bag. - fellow indian
Alan watts?
Beautiful, as a student of Comparative Religion with a special intrest in Hinduism and Buddhism, Nietzsche and Schopenhauer resonate most with me of all Western philosophers. I see great similarities between Nietzsche and the Buddha Dharma. Especially it should be pointed out that non-self and emptiness are not hopeless nihilism, they are the ultimate life-affirmation. I wish Nietzsche would have been able to delve deeper into the Vedic and Buddhist traditions. Schopenhauer was right about the Upanishads as the greatest philosophical works ever written. Do you know whether he mentions the Gītā explicitly in any of his major works? This video was a very accurate representation of Dharmic philosophy, well-researched! I would really like a video from you on Schopenhauer and Hinduism and Buddhism that goes more in depth.
Thank you Noah, I'm glad it was useful! I am not sure about Schopenhauer as I haven't researched him much. I definitely plan on making a video on him in the future, and certainly of his connection with eastern philosophy. That'd be interesting.
I would also argue that marcus aureilus had alot of ideas which resonate with hindu philosophy
With that list of interests, I encourage you to read Spinoza, Pseudo-Dionysis the Aereopagite, and Plotinus as Western philosophers that independently came up with metaphysics similar to the dharmic religions.
There's no Buddhist, there's no hindu, there's no Buddhism and there's no Hinduism. There's a state and only that state is what matters.
Upnishads are full of lust and misogyny and stupid superstitions, their philosophy are nothing but drug which make their followers a burden on society and junki
The Buddha's revolutionary ideas preached more than 2500 years ago are now being accepted my intellectuals and scientists, who are bound to be overwhelmed at the surprisingly honest and sincere nature of the Buddha's marvellous teachings. Buddhism appeals more to the intellect than emotion. His teachings on impermanence, suffering, non-self, dangers of sense pleasures and the unstable, agitated nature of the human mind can be related to each and every individual in the world.
@Aman Jha 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 whatsapp university student knows nothing. Hinduism gave nothin' to the world expect castism. Lol
@Aman Jha Hindu word is exonym, it was given to you by invaders. lol
The word hindu is persian language in persian hindu means "chor" "Dacoit" and "slave".
Btw, vedas are rejected by Buddha himself cos its casteist. Source pali cannon.
And vedas in sanskrit means knowledge, so back then priestly cast considered that my havan and pakhandvad they are receiving knowledge or vedas. And their knowledge or vedas are divine and no one can question it.
So, in the name of vedas Priestly cast killed cows, imposed untouchability, started discrimination, segregated ppl in upper and lower cast, did incest, debauchery, did animal sacrifices, etc.
U can even google it whether all those stuff were prevalent in time of vedic era or not? Lol
And Buddha rejected Brahmanism aka Cast system. Source is Tipitaka.
@Aman Jha czcams.com/video/EII_eOAWIC0/video.html
Ani "Bhimta" mahanje JIJA JI.
Me tuzhya bahini shi ajun bhetloch nahi, tichya sobat lagna kasa karin mag me????🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Me tuzha brother in law kadhi pasun zhalo re?? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@Aman Jha Tuzhya Bahini la kon navra bhetat nahi vatta, mahanun mazhy pathi padli ahe. Lol
U can call me bhimta, im glad. Lol
@Aman Jha Me source det rahilo tar hinduism la nagdach karun takin anni tula pan. 😂😂
Instead of choosing Buddhism to study, he should have practiced a meditation method of budhha..
(Secrets of sanatan dharma) available on Amazon and kindle. This book will change your life
@dave why are you laughing. Hinduism is good religion I'm also practice meditation and yoga.
Hinduism teach dharma,karma,samsara, athma,yoga,theyana and nirvaana
He should have studied on Sanjaya Belatthiputta the og Socrates who claimed who knew nothing but in fact was very wise
Bro pls guide me, I wanna study hinduism@@nogodnatureonlyrealgodands5110
I am a Indian graduate philosophy student and I must say that this video was pretty accurate.
Thanks! I appreciate that.
did your parents beat you up for not being doctor
@@Shadow1986 I DON'T THINK SO
EVERY PARENTS ARE NOT SAME.
@@rimondas6729 ofcourse not. But how many indian parents do you know that brag to Sharma Ji about his kids philosophy degree?
@@Shadow1986 parents are just concerned about their childrens and engineering/doctor is the best option available for middle class family in a developing country with 1.2 billion human population.
Parents don't know exactly what to do and they follow others footsteps.
But I understand your point of view🍃
Fascinating! Always wondered why Nietzsche mentioned eastern philosophy so much.
Thank you for watching! :)
I think you have to learn the culture behind a philosophy, language and perspective to get full meaning behind any word, something like what wittgenstein would say, the game in which language developed in the east is vastly different.
This is probably the first time I've seen a video on this! Amazing job.
Thanks so much!
A similar video you could do is one on Heidegger and eastern philosophy, that even though he did not cite it, through his corespondance and some of his students from the Kyoto school it is now widely accepted that he was very much influenced by it, more precisely by Laozi and Zen
(Secrets of sanatan dharma) available on Amazon and kindle. This book will change ones life
Such a good work of research & presentation 🙌👌. Do upload more videos like this as an Indian & a reader of Nietzsche I'm pleased by this piece of art.
Thank you! I'm glad you enjoyed it. Will try to upload more videos like these! :)
I love this. Even as an 'atheist', Buddhism seems appealing to me, maybe it's more of a way of life. Great video!
Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it
As long as you are a good and generous person many good things will come ☸️🙏🏼
Because it isn't appealing to another world to come. It deals with the here and now.
Well Buddhism is atheistic, there is no God in their beliefs.
@@conversationcorner1837 Well no Buddhism does concern with the next worlds to come teaching that our actions have Karmic consequences in this world and the next.
Great work!
JUST TO LET YOU KNOW " CASTE " IS A PORTUGUESE WORD AND VARNA IS THE SYSTEM AND IT'S NOT MERELY DEPENDENT ON BIRTH BUT BOTH BIRTH AND KARMA
Fantastic!! I have read Nietzsche for a few years and recently have been deeply interested in eastern philosophy, particularly mindfulness and enlightenment. Reading Nietzsche in the view that he is actually advocating for the spreading of Enlightenment in the West has given me many fascinating insights. Personally, I cannot interpret 'On the Geneology of Morals III.14' in any other way than to think he is talking about Enlightenment.
Thanks! Those are great insights. Yeah he plays with a double edged-sword, in favour of Enlightenment ideas, but talks about the inevitability of the decline of Christian values. The genealogy of morals is a fantastic book.
Excelllent!! Really enjoyed this one.
Thank you very much for the support!
Bruh i wanna give you a million likes!!!! This was so comprehensive i loved every second of it.
Thanks for the great video. You have a great channel, I just subscribed. Just one question: Where does the last quote come from?
Thanks. It is a quote made in 1876 by Nietzsche which is most likely stated in his letters, I haven't been able to track which one though.
2 mins in and im hooked 👽 love this! keep it up 🫶🏻
Loved this, commenting for the algorithm.
(Secrets of sanatan dharma) available on Amazon and kindle. This book will change your life
Can you make Oppenheimer and Hindu philosophy of Dharma?
Great idea, will keep in mind!
Nietzsche was much more appreciable of Hindu text Manu Smriti than Buddhism or any other oriental philosophy.
@@Mohit-ct2xj Nietzsche had nothing to do with Hinduism or Buddhism. He hated religion.
@@heartdriver1140 Nietzsche had a high opinion of Islam, he did not hate religion. Religion for him was the highest form of Art, every single religious thinker who has studied Nietzsche had admired him however grudgingly, and every single atheistic/rationalist thinkers who read him were terrified if him and loathed him. Get your facts right. "Nietzsche hated religion" Lmao? WTF
@@blackpathos5791 " i always wash my hands after coming in contact with a religious person" ~ Nietzsche
Doesn't seem like a fan of religions. Lol!
I am an atheist and I've been reading Nietzsche for 3 years and I can assure that man not only did hate religion but despised every organised human sector. And he never ever praised Islam in any sense of the word. 😂
Great video! There's also some interesting parallels between Nietzsche and Buddhism regarding epistemology.
Thank you very much for checking out my videos! That sounds interesting as well :)
The more I gain any insight into Buddhism, the less I sense that I know. In many commentaries its not really possible to say that the writer's understanding of buddhism was correct or not, although there are commentators who clearly get it wrong.
Nirvana means extinguishment - probably of craving and aversion in respect of the 8 worldly winds of pleasure/pain, loss/gain, praise/blame, fame and disrepute.
But this formulation does cast buddhism in a negative light. And buddhist practice encourages cultivation of the 4 abodes of kindness, compassion, joy (including in the achievements of others) and equanimity. Equanimity is important philosophically, because it represents an overcoming of polarised thinking, whereby a concept such as goodness, presupposes(and therefore causes to exist) a concept of evil.
The question of what the enlightened person does with their life has long been a matter of debate. But the most common proposal is to commit to bringing all other beings to enlightenment. This is accepted as being impossible - which resolves the issue of goal directed behaviour as it requires the person to enter a sort of flow state, accepting and reacting to the present within a framework for understanding that one's purpose is eternal.
But buddism doesn't require this. Its just that if one chooses goal directed activity, which inevitably divides the world into desires for the goal and aversion to what obstructs achieving the goal, one inevitably generates karma, that is the positive side of goal achievement and the negative consequence of removing obstacles.
IMO the concept that karma follows an individual to their own specific rebirth, is unsustainable. But it is also obvious that the patterns of human behaviour repeat themselves endlessly and buddhism best understood explains this very well.
Nietzsche may have missed these points. Certainly if one understands it simply as directed to the negation of the self, this is a simplification that misses much subtlety.
Can you please tell me which software do you use to make youtube videos such as this one where there are shown image after image? Thank you
Sure! I use Sony Vegas, those are transitions you can make in the timeline history overlapping images.
Would love to see more videos on eastern philosophy.
Its simple, if i tell you that whatever you are doing today is either pre- destined and would have happened anyway so their is no free will , if you do something it was destined and if not than so it was. You might conclude that nothing matters in reality , whatever you do their is no satisfaction of doing something ( if you get what i am saying ), one would feel nihilism is the truth. Its one way of perceiving it.
But, the correct way of looking at it, is that it does free you from the burden of karma ( good or bad ) , your responsibilities as a being and brings in eternal happiness.
But if this view can lead to extremist thinking, one might lead towards evil behaviour and fearlessness of repercussions in a true way ( since mortal punishments in name of law like imprisonment etc seem stupid and only affecting the body ).
Thus, they tried to give the true understanding of life in a regularised and controlled way with the teachings of dharma and correct way of leading mortal life , so that humans don't start behaving like animals ( which we are ) and the civilised society remains in existent.
It is very important that one understands the inherent nihilism but at the same time has enough value and courage to follow the path of humanity and righteousness ( dharma ) voluntarily.
Very risky not gonna lie.
Very interesting. Thanks for this! :)
Beauty of knowledge
This is because that is.
This is not because that is not.
This and that:
You are in me
Because I am in you;
We are 1.
This is das fundamental law of Buddhism because it gives rise to 4 noble truths:
1. Illness exists because of
2. Illinterbeing.
3. Wellness exists because of
4. Wellinterbeing.
very interesting. thank you !
Thank you very much!
Would love some videos on Zen Buddhism. Great job on this one btw.
Absolutely! Will be working on that as well. Thanks!
(Secrets of sanatan dharma) available on Amazon and kindle. This book will change ones life
good video, thanks
Would Love More videos on Indian Philosophy especially on Nayay, Buddhism and etc.
Call buddhism a Indian philosophy one more time!
@@karsim83 It is
@@karsim83 Buddhism is indeed a Indian philosophy and we are proud of it
So get Lost
@@activecutiepie budhism is an indo aryan philosophy of upper castes
@@sambhavraichand2601 wtf...hinduism is uppercaste and mostly stupid philosophy but Buddhism got developed outside India more
It's unfortunate to see this video doesn't delve further of Nietzsche's thoughts conflated with the recurring contradictions between Buddhist teachings and Vedanta/Hinduism teachings despite both are into fold of Dharmic traditions, I personally find this video to be patronising Hindu values too much, despite certain sects of Buddhism, especially of Vajrayana sects from Tibetan to even Japanese Vajrayana Buddhist sects are known to have violent militancy and the notion of Dharmic Warriors against intrusions within either Kalachakra or Japanese Imperial propaganda brought by the Buddhist Loyalists since Meiji restoration to WW2
Hinduism as we know today probably came out of Mahayana Buddhism. Even Ramayana and Mahabharat are inspired by jatak Katha of Buddhism.
@@nowwhat6716 lol the Mahabharata and ramayan which are atleast 4000 years old came out of Buddhism which is at max 2500 years old, how stupid can one be?
@@nowwhat6716 , this is what happen when you associate yourself with Bhimta Organisation.
Meanwhile, Hinayani Monks were complaining to Chinese Kings that Mahayani Bhuddhist are corrupting Buddhism with Brahmin religion.
What's wrong in having militant in trying to protect yourself. It seems you don't know the difference b/w attacking someone and defending oneself.
how about a video george boole, charles babbage and demorgan's philosophical views with that of indian logic and thought?
i came across this due to the letter of mary boole on indian thought and western science in 19th century also ganeri had shared a similar opinion on that you can look his work and also that of BK matilal
Interesting
Yup, computer logic developing from nyaya school of thought of india.
Nietzsche is right in seeing Budda or Buddhism as incomplete. Buddha values the passion of Compassion, where the ilife energy within the instinct gets transformed into Compassion towards others, Nietzsche seems to value Lust itself as root of all life energy and as equally important as compassion, if not more, and hence lust as a never ending energy even when a person seems stuck in deep depressive mood, and that the hope for a Positivism also keep existing. And all one needs then is, more experiences in life to be able to change the cognitive processes inorder to convert the Lust into compassion and creativity, which is a positive state. Even when some bit of minimal suffering can still exist in such state of compassion as Buddha suggests. For Buddha, compassion seems as the end to all suffering for Nirvana or Enlightenment while what he mainly wanted is a Clarity of thought in mind to be able to see the illusion from Reality, (ie separate wheat from the chaff) and also that the Path to be spread to all till one is a Buddha himself. And hence, he seemed also to be just appearing also some sort of Decadent one like Socrates, Plato or Christianity because he is defining Nirvana only as negating even the negative illusions and Nirvana as appearing a different experience outsude of the world. While there is definitely a positive experience within state of Nirvana too for the one who experiences it in the world.
Because it appears Buddha was not clear of what is next to NIRVANA, to celebrate the eternal process of life, as Osho does with lot of respect to Buddha first that Buddha be available to a true Zorba the pleasure and happiness seeker who is in search of Truth and meaning and purpose of his life, who sees Instinct as never dying, even for the Enlightened and hence would only appear to lay people or even philosophers as negating life itself when the instinct and positivity of it as being negated, in the service of COMPASSION AND CLARITY over instincts. To both Truth seekers and also pleasure seekers, initially .But this is a illusion as the instinct only becomes minimally important or utilised as the peron wants after THE CLARITY and the Life energy actually gets transformed simultaneously into instinct as well as CREATIVITY/Compassion, as and when the person seeks. What Nietzsche was doing is he is seeing the same Truth in a completely different dimension of positivism from the angle of instinct, which is the also right thing to do, like osho does, along with importance of a need for compassion and a clarity, to be free from suffering and also be creative and still carry on with life processes. It is all about mastering ones individual needs first and not being anti instinct anytime as understood of Buddha or being totally in favour of instinct alone, as understood of Osho&Nietzsche.
And Osho was able to have practically tried to create a commune with similar moral and Ethical codes, to his commune without being against lust, but valuing also the importance of Empathy and compassion as highest values, in order to achieve a Friendly nature to each other in such a commune, more than just an experimentation for men or women to live together out of using their core Life energy, lust. But because, everyone is at different level of their evolution, the idea of a commune as he planned failed, even though the hope for Zorbas to become Buddhas still exist in the compassionate and rightly rebellious souls. Only then lust would also find its balance and its ways to different forms of creativity in a balance and its stability, as the purpose existing in Humans and not just make Money and be merry alone, until an artistic way of creativity is attained.
This state, Nietzsche calls the Superman and finding the innocence back of the inner child, and also valuing Arts like Music, theatre, poetry, painting and literature ietc etc n the background of valuing Philosophy.. Hence Nietzsche has definitely taken Buddhism to higher levels than it was, and into the practical Buddhism or Zorba the Buddha, as osho says 👍
Nah. You have not got it. Neither did Nietzsche. He did NOT take Buddhism to a higher level at all. He had a very poor understanding of it, just like many other Western Philosophers of the time. Nirvana isn't an otherworldly experience. It is simply the Permanent Extinguishment of the 3 Poisons, namely Greed, Hatred and Ignorance, which happens in this very lifetime, in this very world. When a person attains Nirvana, Dukkha stops. That's it. And it's Complete as well. There's nothing Left after that ...
@@DipayanPyne94 True whatever u said for the western people. For the East, Nietzsche helps. Thats whqt he said. When the west meets the East and vice versa, the CLARITY IN THOUGHT improves and the way to extinguishing the 3 poisons improve
@@drrameshshrink No. You are wrong again. There is absolutely no need of Western Thought of any kind to get rid of the 3 Poisons. The Pali Canon already contains all that is necessary and sufficient for the removal of the 3 Poisons. And just so you know, the 3rd Poisons, Ignorance, is something specific, as we are talking about Buddhism. So, Buddha's own idea of ignorance or delusion is what I am talking about. But anyway, my point is that Western Thought has absolutely no role to play in Buddhism. Buddha covered everything that is needed for Nirvana ...
@@DipayanPyne94 You may be wrong too to the superstitious Eastern world who is fighting against Lust foolishly (especially the Muslims, Hindus and the Buddhists and the Monks) in order to come out of the Greed, Ego(hatred) and Delusion. Clarity in Thought or MORALITY to oneself (rather yhan to the outside world) doesnt need one to fight against the Humans basic instinct, to be free of 3 poisons. Removal of 3 poisons happens naturally through Samsara and Right conduct in everything. This is where Nietzsche has a role to understand the value of sensibility and creativity or a Honest rebelliousness too, to understand for the real seekers. Some people don't see the need of Rebelliousness or the Right conduc in a society and feel finding a Monk life is better. Its their choice. But message of Buddha is SAMSARA can be NIRVANA that makes one be a Tathagatha
Again, an extremely poor understanding of Buddha on your part. You have not read the Pali Canon properly at all. Let me explain.
First of all, Buddha praised even Lay People, not just Monks. He knew that it is too difficult for a lay person to get rid of worldly attachments. That's why, he didn't teach Monastics and Lay People in exactly the same way. It's just that he didn't believe that it is not possible for Lay People to be Fully Enlightened, given their attachments.
Anyway, it is absolutely necessary to get rid of Lust to be Enlightened. This is not because there is something Yucky about it, but because it goes against the idea of 'Non Attachment'. So, there is nothing superstitious in any way, shape or form about it. It's completely Pragmatic. The only problem is that most Humans can not get rid of worldly attachments, as it is very difficult. I mean, Buddha, after all, attacked certain Evolutionary Instincts like no one else. This is extremely difficult for an ordinary human. Anyway, I digress. The only major problem is that humans will not be able to procreate if they kill their sexual desires. They will all be Equanimous and Peaceful, but not be able to procreate. So, people should think about Nirvana only after they have procreated and taken care of their children. I wonder why Buddha didn't think about this. Or, maybe he did. If yes, then he probably believed that not everyone will be able to ignore family life and the population crisis will never happen in society ...
Anyway, Nietzsche or any other Western Philosopher can add nothing to Buddha's teachings. Why so ? Well simply coz he covered everything that a person needs to become Enlightened. That's Necessary and Sufficient.
Having said that, I totally agree with you that the Teachings of Nietzsche are Very Valuable. We do need them. But, we certainly don't need them to achieve Nirvan. For that, Buddha alone is Necessary and Sufficient ...
I am a Hindu Brahmin and I love this so much. Been reading alot of nietzsche
Y u want to say urself as hindu if u already considered u are castist.
Just say u are brahmin so the world would know that hinduism is nothin' but castism. Lol
@Roche Ferero 🤣🤣🤣🤣 thanks for proving hinduism is casteist and thanks for justifying 22 vows of BABASAHEB. Lol
In this decade, more than 2 million hindus would leave casteist hinduism and would Become Atheist, Buddhist.
Glad that u didn't say that there is no casteism in hinduism. But u accepted that there is caste in hinduism. Thanks very much. 👍
@Roche Ferero The word hindu simply didn't existed at the time of Buddha. Lol
The word hindu is persian word, its exonym which u got in 18th cen. Lol
The word hindu in persian language means "chor" "dacoit" and "slave". 🤣 lol
And there was no brahmin in Buddhist shaka. Lol
There were baman and shaman ppl in buddhist sangha.
Baman were intellectual and shaman ppl were the promulgator of Dhamma. U have zero knowledge of pali and saying u know buddhism. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
GO READ PALI FIRST. LOL
@Roche Ferero Alll buddhist script are in pali language. Pali hi nahi ati aur buddhism ka gyan pelne lage. 🤣🤣🤣
@Roche Ferero and nietzsche said, "god is dead". Ur ram, ganpati, vishnu, mahesh, brahma, etc are all dead. Lol
Enlightening.....
I'm from India,, and this video strikes me so hard that I replay it twice,, woooooow!! What a connection! Woww❣
@@pranavtendolkar8578 Not Upanishads. From Buddhism ...
@@pranavtendolkar8578 No. You are highly mistaken. Buddha taught Anatman and Non Self, neither of which exist in Hinduism. He explicitly rejected the Vedas and criticised Brahmans. And there is so much more, such as the Impermanence of Everything. Long story ...
@@pranavtendolkar8578
Pranav, first of all, the dates of Patanjali and the Upanishads are uncertain. There certainly are many Upanishads that are post Buddha. Many Indologists have pointed this out. The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad is probably Pre Buddhist and so are some of the very Early Upanishads. But many other Upanishads are post Buddhist. You see, there is NO mention of the Upanishads in the Pali Canon. There is only a mention of the Vedas, that too, only 3 of them, not 4. So, Buddha definitely knew about the Vedas, but the Upanishads ? Well, it's a historical mystery. Also, just so you know, Buddha learnt from people like Uddaka Ramaputta, Alara Kalama and Kondanna. These (and probably some more) are the people that he learnt from.
Anyway, let's keep history aside, for now. You are wrong about Anatman. Anatman is NOT Permanent. You know why ? Because Atman itself refers to a Permanent Self. So, when you add An before it, it becomes 'Impermanent Self'. Buddha didn't teach Permanency.
Buddha's Core Metaphysical Teachings are very different from the Upanishadic Teachings. Even Dukkha, according to him, arises when people Cling to anything in the world. So, you see, his teachings are definitely not an Extension of any School of Thought. He rejected the Vedas, and, the Extreme Asceticism of Jainism and Sensual Indulgence. He started something new. You can't call it an offshoot of Hinduism, coz it is not ! He even rejected the Caste System of Hinduism and even criticised Prayers and Rituals. And so on.
And you believe that his teachings are an Extension of Multiple Schools of Thought ? Nah. Just not true ...
@@pranavtendolkar8578 Hold on. I am quite busy. Have read your responses. There are many mistakes in them, yet again. I'll be back soon to correct them ...
@@DipayanPyne94 mukya Upanishads are 10.. they are pre Buddhist only....
Many Indologists support this
I wonder if Jungs term of The Greater Personality in man, and Nietzsches Übermench, is the same.
Karma in BUDDIsm in its original form (Pali text) doesn't deal with next life.its talking about rule of cause and effect.
whoever did this, you deserve an accolade. very well done.
Good stuff
if anyone want to understand hinduism start with geeta and then upnishads with self realisation please dont do word to word rot learning and reading like what scholars of abhramic religion do
"Will bring the riddle of the world to solution" sad that in that journey of his hadn't got hold of the Riddle....
good job
We still haven't answered the riddle of the world, by those of us who cross polinate our knowledge with both eastern and western philosophy, unless it's to simply observe how the human world continues to play out it's predominate belief systems to whatever may be their natural conclusion - meanwhile, the rest of life, apart from the human mind (Earth and it's natural inhabitants including water) continues as best it can in the midst of our human interferences, seemingly without worrying about the meaning of life, other than to lead by example as if to say, the meaning of life is to live as best one can in whatever conditions one finds oneself in, and to be true to one's nature, sharing the resources and bounty of the mother of us all, Earth. I hope any new philosophy of life is honouring of our planet, the source of life. If there is a heavenly father, it has to be old Sol, or in English, Sun, who potentiates the life of the mother.
Master both your emotions and your intellect. The intellect comes to true conclusions by following logic and the scientific method (of integrating observations together). But your intellect will not work properly if you're putting yourself through negative emotions. For example, if you feel anger, your thought will circle around the person or subject that you perceive to have hurt you.
Hindus believe in Self,the Atman.Adi Shankaracharya did immense work proving it.
Moreover most of the German philosophers stole philosophy from India.
Interesting, which are these German philosophers you speak of?
@@Eternalised I feel Hegel.Schopenhauer was influenced and was vocal about it.German idealism was also drafted considering Upanishads as substratum to some extend.
Although I can't say it in details as I am not a student of philosophy.Just shared the notion of it.
Germans didn't stole, they were inspired and acknowledged the beautiful verses by several kinds of Vedas' philosophies of life.
@@bhaskarjyaachatterjee Schopenhauer has called upanishads the greatest philosophical texts ever written for fuck's sake
Nice video
It seems to me, that Nietzsche rejects christianity and buddhisme on exactly the same ground. They both reject this life.
YOU are the atman🧘🏼♂️
(Secrets of sanatan dharma) available on Amazon and kindle. This book will change your life
5:31 hello Frank Zappa
I wonder what did he think about charvaka the og nihilistic philosophy
There's difference between materialistic and nilhistic philosophy
Life is beautiful. This is the truth 😊
Vedanta and Buddhism are essentially speaking the same truth in different ways… poor Nistzche interpreted both wrong…
What you say is wrong too
I am currently the Japanese Philosopher Kenji Nishitani's book religion and nothingness which responds to the mainstream western philosophy of existentialism with the Buddhist concept of sunyata , basically he thinks that Nietzsche has only arrived on the field of nihility on which humans should build the values of their life, while Nishitani thinks we should go further to the field of emptiness, where nothingness and being are one...I am not good at explaining ideas but you can have a look at his ideas if you are interested in Eastern Philosophy and existentialism
Wow that's very interesting. I'll certainly take a look on Kenji Nishitani.
Yes they called that split concept tathata or suchness/thusness.
(Secrets of sanatan dharma) available on Amazon and kindle. This book will change ones life
he said he is Dionisos too
so you need to read him in context of this too
not only by own imagination what he ment
It baffles me how ubiquitous in the west and even in the east is the view that buddha-dhamma points to a kind of positive transcendent state, when it denies it categorically. It took me long to realize that, through deep study of the canon and listening to thai forest monks expositions of the dhamma. People keep projecting their most fundamental desire (that of happy continuous existence) onto nibbana as some kind of eternal bliss, when the ultimate result of nibbana is parinibbana that implies complete absence and cessation of all the causal factors that constitute consciousness that inevitably lead to dukkha, a perspective that is not very different from death in the modern scientific view. its mereological nihilism (that is, there is no individual beyond the configuration of impermanent phenomena, so nobody is being annihilated after the ultimate cessation). So yeah, although the particular interpretations of some aspects of buddhism by Nietzsche were misguided, the final logical conclusion is correct, buddhism ultimate aspiration is completely life denying.
I did't know that India changed its name to east, anyways ..
Amazing book
Brahmavidya (Supreme Science)
When the Buddha started to wander around India shortly after his enlightenment, he encountered several men who recognized him to be a very extraordinary being. They asked him: "Are you a god?" "No," he replied. "Are you a reincarnation of god?" "No," he replied."Are you a wizard, then?" "No." "Well, are you a man?" "No." "So what are you?" They asked, being very perplexed. Buddha simply replied: "I am awake." Buddha means “the awakened one.” How to awaken is all he taught.
It is a man's own mind, not his enemy or foe, that lures him to evil ways.
This is why the West has Troubles with what they call “Buddhism” actually Brahmavidya. No Accountability for mind and Body
Those who worship don’t know, Those who Know don’t worship.
“There are two extremes, monks, which must be avoided. What are these extremes? A life given to pleasures, dedicated to pleasures and lusts - this is degrading, sensual, vulgar, unworthy, and useless. And, a life given to self-torture - this is painful, unworthy, and useless.” We must, said the Buddha, follow the Middle Path “which leads to insight, which leads to wisdom, which produces calm, knowledge, enlightenment, and nibbana” (Samyutta Nikaya 56).[2] The Buddha’s teaching is often called the “middle path” because he taught that one should shun all extremes and instead live a life of moderation.
The Three Treasures
The ideal of the Middle Way is to live a life of harmony and equilibrium, free from self-centeredness and awkward self-consciousness. By practicing the Middle Way, we obtain the insight of the Buddha. Most people find that practicing is easier with some structure and community. These are provided by the Three Treasures in which all Buddhists take refuge: the Buddha, the Dharma, and the Sangha.
What is the Lotus Sutra
The Lotus Sutra is one of the most important sutras in Mahayana Buddhism and was likely written down between 100 B.C. and 200 A.D. Already well known in India, the sutra became more famous and influential when it was translated into Chinese by Kumarajiva in the year 406. After Chih-i founded the T’ien-T’ai School in China, based on the teaching expounded by this sutra in the sixth century, it was considered one of the canonical sutras of Chinese Buddhism. After the T’ien-T’ai School of China was introduced to Japan by Saicho and became the Tendai Sect, the Lotus Sutra became loved as literature among the people.
The sutra is named the Lotus Sutra because the lotus symbolized the oneness of cause and effect, specifically the cause of aspiring to enlightenment (Buddhahood) and the effect of attaining it, since the lotus is a flower that blooms and seeds at the same time. It also symbolizes the purity of Buddhahood, blooming in the midst of our ordinary lives just as the lotus blossoms in muddy pond water.
The Teachings of the Lotus Sutra
The Wonderful Dharma of the Lotus Sutra is that all living beings, whether they realize it or not, have the capacity to become enlightened. Everyone, without exception, can unlock the perfect wisdom and great compassion that reside in the depths of life. The Lotus Sutra also teaches that the life of a Buddha transcends our ordinary way of thinking and is beyond birth and death.
I've never understood what the Buddha did that was so impressive to make others wonder if he was a god. Could you explain please?
Woah.
how can study more on their views on Hinduism? (I am trying to understand various aspects of Hinduism, specially Shiva always intrigues me)
It is all mythology and caste based
Vedanta is important in hinduism so look into it more and geeta is also good
@@timetoreason7090 no it's not dude you just gave the most dumbest take ever
@@timetoreason7090 read advaita vedanta
@@islamandchristianityhater5713 read manusmiriti, vedas and geeta. All about cast, life today according to prior life karma and bullshit.
4:16 sad
Matter of taste.
I sometimes wonder how the world would've been if truly deserving people had Internet access in their times. Who knows the riddle Nietzsche's referring to maybe would've been solved.
Why doesn't anybody ever mention the elephant in the room?: Buddha says that all life is suffering and illusion, all pleasure is but the temporary release from suffering and that the goal is to achieve liberation from the sensory world of pain through transcendance/non-attachment. Schopenhauer (as the greatest of Western philosphers IMHO) accepts those ideas completely and explain how our brains manufacture the world of the senses in his masterpiece, "The World as Will and Representation". Nietzsche (before he went insane) initially worshipped Schopenhauer but then he got off on his life-affirming kick about how everyone should gleefully embrace eternal repetition of suffering in the quest for superman...." I won't bother trying to explain it because it's total nonsense, but of course life-affirming charlatans like Nietszche and Hegel are much more highlly esteemed in academia than Buddha or Schopenhauer, who apparently had the unpardonable bad taste of telling the truth!
In my opinion, both Nietzschean and Buddhist philosophies are life-affirming. Nietzsche primarily used Buddhism as a tool against Christianity, which he abhorred for it's slave morality. He did however had a great interest on Eastern philosophy, mostly from reading Schopenhauer, but ultimately deviated from his pessimistic philosophy to a more life-affirming one.
@@Eternalised Lots of people seem to agree you but how is "All life is suffering" life -affirming? And why would anybody need moksha (liberation from the cycle of birth and death) if life were really a good thing?
@@2Hot2 I believe that suffering is inherent to the human condition, that doesn't mean we need to fall into despair. We perceive suffering as something bad and happiness as something good, but we need to move away from our perceptions and see them as intrinsic to living.
"Happiness is the meaning of life" is a common line most people would agree on. However, put this way, it is a kind of ambiguous term, once you strive for it - you lose happiness as you anxiously crave for it. As long as one doesn't pursue happiness, he is happy. It isn't a goal, ultimate truth or meaning of life, but rather part of the process; to find meaning in the pursuit of meaning.
Suffering is very much needed in order to feel happy, they are the opposite faces of the same coin. Jung puts it well: “No tree, it is said, can grow to heaven unless its roots reach down to hell.” Nietzsche shares the same thought:
“But what if pleasure and pain should be so closely connected that he who wants the greatest possible amount of the one must also have the greatest possible amount of the other,- that he who wants to experience the ‘heavenly high jubilation’ must also be ready to be ‘sorrowful’ unto death?”
(Nietzsche, The Gay Science, §12)
@@Eternalised Well you think like Nietzsche (or Camus in Sisyphus), who believed that we should embrace suffering, and I think like Buddha who believed that suffering is bad (which is certainly a reasonable point of view) and can be transcended through non-attachment. I wouldn't say that Buddhism is related to despair, in many ways it's liberating: for example, I don't fear death, and I don't worry about the eternal propagation of humanity, which are big sources of anxiety to lots of Nietzscheans. It's also relevant to the question of whether or not to throw kids into the world. Anyway, it's a nice break from work to talk philosophy, thanks!
@@2Hot2 Yep. That's a great philosophy as well. Also good view on life. I try to explore as many different ones as I can. Great talks!
actually it is not shiva that wears a necklace of skull but kali
gr8
I don’t get it. Put me back in and maybe the next lifetime will be different but so far My desire to understand just makes my head hurt
well your video was great but there is one misconception that you have ' chandala ' is not associated with any caste system ;it is one of the evil spirits in hindu mythology so please correct it.
You know, I am an Indian, but nietzche is kinda fanboying india a lot
If only he realized how close his philosophy was to buddhism and let go of his borderline obsession on shopenhauer, ad hominems and viewing life from an ego centric perspective which we would call now a "stuck up"
Even Buddhism and Hinduism developed out of samkhya philosophy which is oldest hindu philosophy
Do check out
Glory to east❤
Brahmin from India are flocking in comment section saying, enlightening, so true.
Btw Nicha also praised Hitler. But most brahmin like Hitler too
The reservation excludes Brahmins in areas in which they are under-represented such as education and employment. Brahmins oppose reservation to achieve goals such as bridging inequalities in employment and pay, increasing access to education, and redressing existing injustices, prejudices or obstacles against Brahmins. The reservation purely targets the Brahmins by discouraging them for increased participation. Brahmin drawback is the societal drawback that disadvantages Brahmin people over non-Brahmin people in societies, if they are under the same social, political, or economic circumstances. Current innocent Brahmin people must not bear a collective responsibility for the harm which had resulted from historical casteist treatment of people belonging to other groups. Discrimination against any individual on the basis of their Brahmin origin is unjustified. Reservation is discriminatory, discarded meritocracy and is driven by lower caste vote-bank politics.
Nietzsche could have concluded further if he had not ignored the Shrimad Bhagavad Geeta.
Gita is nothing but a summarised version of Upanishads.
Nietzsche was all about living for this world.....Buddhism/Hinduism are about the next, even if it's Nirvana.
@@pranavtendolkar8578 As opposed to what?
@@pranavtendolkar8578 Wait, God does not mean "deity" but "principle"? The Atman is a principle? Anyway, Christianity is about living in the world, it's about being active by loving your neighbor, although Jesus never had a neighbor like the one I live next to.
@@pranavtendolkar8578 Ok
I always hear that Schopenhauer got Buddhism wrong, but never what exactly. How bad can the translations be? Moreover, even though he was not open about it, he considered himself a Buddhist. He had a statue of the Buddha and referred to himself as one in private letters. Now, what really troubles me is this obsession to place Nietzsche in a pedestal. This notion of trying to be on the "good side" of Nietzsche, as if having the approval of that scoundrel is a banner to cherish.
I must admit that this video gave me a more positive view of Nietzsche, but it does not disregard his legacy. I don't know how can anyone utter "revaluation of all values", ubermensch and such without feeling like a fool.
Nietzsche has damaged generations with his subversive sophistry against truth and morality, that is his major legacy above all else. His stench is one of the phantoms of modernity, that one ought to avoid.
If you want a middle way between western nihilism and Buddhism (which is not nihilism) then that is Shaivism (Cult of Shiva).
Ooh dear. His eternal recurrence has nol relation to the karma at all.!
You can't misunderstand an idea or philosophy and then use it to bulster your own philosophy. He was a neat dude, but Fred was not in his element when talking about eastern philosophy.
You need punctuation my friend. Let the ideas breathe in pauses instead of shooting them out like an endless stream of MG42 bullets. It's philosophy not an assembly line spitting ideas.
Wrong opinion
Cope.
Keep rolling your eyes.Maybe you’ll find a brain back there.
@@Sehra.himanshu sheep
@@bobharris5093 soy
Laws of Manu are inevitable.
Yes
It's impossible to make sense of buddhism with "conceptualization".
No. Without conceptualization, you can not have Knowledge of any kind ...
Buddha's teaching, everything that is good in the world, will end in suffering, so don't crave for good things, be neutral. Nietzsche's teachings, good and bad are both part of life, so don't hate good, enjoy as it may come, because we have only this life! His teachings against Christianity, which was born through slaves of Rome, the slaves don't have much in this life, the teachings that, something good will happen in after life, become attractive. However, 99.99% Buddhists beleave something similar, if you do good your after life will be good, which is not Buddha's teaching.
Iam a Indian Psychiatrist. Nietzsche is too brilliant than Bhagawadgita or Krishna as God, and when not considered as Human.However Krishna when considered as human birth had the role to tell a Human what makes him of turning a Superhuman. Buddha is same too, and Bhagawadgita says, rarest of the rare are such souls who realise Truth totally, and reach same level as him. While Buddha takes a path so different from how Krishna appeared who was portrayed as Divinity having taken birth as human form with hardly human qualities anywhere, while Buddha was totally like a normal human in order to tell the value of compassion and humility amidst various challenges to face of the world, and to get enlightened as a human being and become a Superman. Nietzsche is brilliant in finding short among the scriptures of Vedas and Manu or the story of Shakuntala or in Buddha, so that Nietzsche himself is the Superman he himself mentions. However, Buddha and vedas have their own role, before being able to understand Nietzsche, as to what he is and not many may just see him yet. I agree with Nietzsche that best of East (East includes India, china, korea and Japan, among the many) and west has a wa to show the solution to the riddles individually, but only if the world doesnt get lost in Materialism too much by the end of 21st century. Main change Indian society needs is 'TO BE ABLE TO LOVE AND MARRY' and not glorify its arranged marriage ans family system without getting divorced much, but at the cost of a Independence to think for themselves as men and women, and in following scriptures opportunistically and blindly and yet strangely not see themselves as weak enough to believe everything that comes their way as their karma only blindly without even enough effort in right ways, rather than opportunistically.👍
Yeah 💯
@@Sehra.himanshu iam glad, someone replied. Can u tell more about urself to have discussion going. I find Osho also same as Nietzsche, and still i believe Marriage has a value, ie samsara is Nirvana as one of the main ways to grow ethically in life, provided one embraces the purpose of it, consciously and by himself and not as induced by social beliefs or parents blindly, the beliefs which till now have been leading to opportunistic living. 👍
@@drrameshshrink hey if you wanna have discussion .... the the owner of this CZcams channel have created a group in discord app just install the app from google play store and join the link in given in the description (it's called in persuit of meaning ) ..it's pretty much active 😃
@@Sehra.himanshu sure. Will try to see what it is. But Truth is an Experience, not just a philosophical debate to attain. It depends on individual need, which varies. Are u Indian and a male?
@@Sehra.himanshu Are u married? They say, Nietzsche was a loner and chose Music over Women, when he himself has supported the Moderation of instinct and spiritualisation of it, and that its a great quality actually in him? He was very much for life and all its pleasures and its innocence and its creativity, even though when they are just short living too and was against Nihilism and that is exactly why he is a great Existentialist too..
Nietzsche in the hands of a woker becomes a weapon. Yes, woker.
I enjoyed your discussion of Nietzsche and the Laws of Manu, but, and I don't mean to throw shade where it isn't due, the first seven minutes of this video are remarkably similar to the video that I made, and you commented on, by the name of "Nietzsche and Buddhism." Even at times, they are identical word for word.
I see that you have attributed Elman, but a number of the ideas I got for my video, and that you have carried into yours, have come from the other works I researched, like the similarity between "eternal recurrence" and samsara which I drew from McDonald. It seems beyond likely that you have taken the ideas directly from my video.
And, as far as your discussion on Nietzsche and Buddhism specifically went, it didn't add anything new that had not existed in my own work. So you neither credited my video nor added your own commentary. Is that not the definition of plagiarism?
Your work was definitely an inspiration, I did comment on your video that it was helpful with my research and I took some fragments from your video that I found of Buddhism, re-wording them or not, they'd still be in your video (re-wording would just be a form of evading). I added my own commentary and credited the sources I read, I have added you to the sources as well. Plus I added Hinduism to get a more holistic view of Eastern philosophy as well, which comprises most of the video.
I took the Eternal Recurrence idea and Samsara from the original sources I researched not McDonald as you say (Elman, B. (1983). Nietzsche and Buddhism. Journal of the History of Ideas, see page 672). I'd call this fair use.
(Secrets of sanatan dharma) available on Amazon and kindle. This book will change ones life
Sad
Why did Nietzsche regard Christianity as Nihilistic in the first place
Nietzsche believes that Christianity is nihilistic for two reasons:
1. It is a system which originated with its highest value as Truth (God). This set the conditions of possibility necessary for the birth of the Enlightenment, which lead to Nietzsche's famous proclamation "God is Dead", meaning the decline of the Christian values. In short, Christianity developed a self-destructive tool from its very beginning, ending up devouring itself.
2. Nietzsche believes Christianity negates life, and looks up to the afterlife. This negation of life is born out what he calls a slave morality (whose main cause is resentment). It proposes obedience and turning the other cheek, while Nietzsche proposes a master morality that does not intend to suppress others, but rather create new values and ways of life and focusing on this life.
@@Eternalised
I see. So he claimed that Christianity was Nihilist by way of some Christians having iconoclast tendencies which birthed the secularism of the West. I'd argue that the main perpetrator of this tendency was Thomas Aquinas, who argued that the fundamental presupposition that saves us from solipsistic collapse was merely the human experience, and that it is by logical reasoning that one comes into the conclusion that God exists.
This is in contrast to other Christian traditions that state that the fundamental presupposition that justifies our trust in our external experience is God and that God is the starting point for all logic, more or less. I think that it is thanks to this philosophical distinction within Roman Catholicism that allowed for the radical iconoclasm and rationalism of Protestantism to emerge and eventually take shape into the Enlightenment and the skepticism of Religion. Because we don't see this disenchanted Nihilism in Eastern Orthodoxy for example.
I'd say that I disagree with Nietzsche, but also that there is quite some wisdom in his observation that there is an ouroboric aspect to Christianity in some way.
@@aramkaizer7903 Great comment! Enjoyed it. You have some good points, I'll be exploring :)
@@Eternalised
Thank you.
@@pranavtendolkar8578
You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
Dude there is not much difference between buddhism and hinduism. The concept of Atma is same as no soul. Both believe in one central soul : Atma, BHrama, Conciousness. In Upanishad the sanskrit text empasises on Jeevantma which is "Samkhya" concept. You need to read the text in details to grasp these things.
Nietzsche! 😑🙄😑
I am writing this not as a defender of Christianity as the only religion, but more from a secular view point, the caste system of Hinduism is really one of the worst things that a large portion of people in India have the misfortune of experiencing. I know that by law people aren’t supposed to be discriminated but in actuality they still have a whole layer of society who get routinely discriminated and who have artificial obstacles in society which treats them worse than anybody. The shame of India.
Yes but thats because of your views on justice and the self. Indian philosphy in general rejects the self, it says that you are whatever you are because of other things, you dont exist without other things so your purpose in life is to make the system better and not do pleasurable or things you wanna do. There is concept of dharma in hinduism, you must do what you are supposed to no matter what happens and how you feel about it. And the caste system worked well for what it was meant, it produced one of the greatest civilisations and one of the richest ones.
Now obviously i dont agree with the basic principal of hinduism very well so i reject the caste system and a case could also be made that it is not the best way to achieve societal good, since people are specially gifted, though in olden times it wouldnt have mattered much, only the knowledge you had access to from your parents and practice would matter.
Also caste loses value every decade in india. I dont think a lot of kids even know what caste they belong to now, they dont care. Within 3-4 generations, it will be history
gtfo fanatic this aint the place to spread bs
@@Someone-nv1cj yes
Nothing came before Sanathan Dharma..Remember this..Buddhism came from Hinduism's...
The speaker sounds like he's got mouth full of food and one wonders if he really knows what he's saying or simply reading!
hmmmm...
czcams.com/video/fwJvbNh1Ny8/video.html
The "Indian Philosophy" is the mother of all philosophies in the world. India was the land of Thinkers. "Sanatan Dharm" was a religion for seekers. We didn't seek God, we seek THE TRUTH.
"Rig Veda" teaches us about life. "Atharva Veda" teaches us preventive and protective Medicine. Then, comes "Brahmanas" and "Aranyakas" which explains the Vedas. Then, the most important "Upanishads" which teaches about the philosophy of life.
6 school of Indian philosophies - Samkhya, Yoga, Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Mimansa and Vedanta.
These 6 philosophies have it all, from phenomenology, existentialism, nihilism, materialism etc ...from "Law of atom" Law of Karma to Meditation and Yoga.
Then comes Shramana or Heterodox philosophy that gives rise to Buddhism, Jainism, Ajivikas(Fatalism - doctrine of Fate - predetermination), Ajanas, Charvakas (Lokayat - Materialism).
This is all 2000- 2500 years before European thought emerged. Whatever you can think of, has already been thought of by ancient Rishis of Sanatan Dharma. I didn't even touch the Sutras, shastras and Smritis which came after 500 BCE.
The Religion of Philosophy/Truth/Seekers, Sanatan Dharma.
You clearly know very little. It is sad to see another fellow Indian display a thorough lack of knowledge about the subject matter ...
@@DipayanPyne94 my assertions are backed by facts . Before judging any other person, you are supposed to either present counter argumentative facts or invalidate the assertion itself. You have done nothing but blurted some useless words. Come again kid.
Good. I was expecting such a response. I wanted to start off with something bombastic, coz you have clearly made mistakes. Let's understand.
First of all, the word 'Philosophy' itself is Western. Why so ? Coz it has Greek Roots. What does it mean ? Well, Philo means Love and Sophia means Wisdom. So, Philosophy means 'Love of Wisdom'. Wisdom, according to the Ancient Greeks, is a Product of Rationality. I'll come back to this.
Right now, let me correct a mistake of yours. You said that Indian Thought began 2000 - 2500 years before European thought. Well, this is obviously False. Why ? Coz European Philosophy started with Thales (from the 7th century BC), the First Philosopher from Ancient Greece. You know the most Important thing that separates Philosophy from Religion ? It is NATURALIZATION. The Greeks were the first people to come up with a Completely Naturalistic Take on Reality. The Greeks separated 'Philos' from 'Mythos' (Philos implying Reality and Mythos implying Storytelling).
This didn't happen in India to the same extent. You talked about the Vedas, right ? Well, the Vedas are barely Philosophical. There is a whole lot of Gods, Goddesses and other Mythological stuff in it. Now you might say that the Gods were just Symbols of Real Life Phenomena/Events/Concepts. But, Philosophy does not care about Interpretations. Philosophy is about LITERALISM. No place for Metaphors/Allegories (they can only be used to explain a concept better). So, the Vedas are gone, because there is a whole lot of Mythical stuff in it. Even KARMA is NOT 'Completely' Philosophical Idea. It is connected to the Mythical Idea of Rebirth. It's NOT Naturalistic. Indians have always believed in it, unfortunately. The problem is that the version of Karma that Indians believe in is 'Deterministic'. Well, no Evidence whatsoever for any such thing. I mean, if asked 'Why do Bad things happen to Good People ?', many Indians would reply 'Because of Karma in a Previous Life'. Well, there you go, Myth again, instead of a Naturalistic Explanation.
You see, the Ancient Greeks were the BEST Thinkers. Even better than the Indians. You know why ? Coz NO Indian Philosopher divided the Soul into 3 Parts, namely Rational Part, Emotional Part and Appetitive Part, with the Rational Part being the ONLY really Healthy and Reliable Part. The Greeks did this. Plato and Aristotle are the Champions of Rationality. When Aristotle finished the first systematic study of Logic in Human History, Logic barely even existed in India. Buddha, from the 5th century BC, had been dead for sometime and all the Rationality in India was EMPIRICAL. No Indian ever divided Reason itself into Pure Reason and Practical Reason. Logic took off in India, MUCH Later. The Buddhists were the First Logicians from India and they probably learnt 'Purely Rational Argumentation' from the Greeks, post Alexander in India. For evidence, go through the works of several Indologists/Scholars. One of them is the book 'The Shape of Ancient Thought' by Thomas McEvilley. You can check out his video on CZcams.
You see, Indian Philosophy, during the BC era, was NOT Perfectly Naturalistic. Plus, 'Reason' itself was NOT considered the 'Ultimate'. Even the Chaarvaaks, like Ajita Kesakambali, were Empiricists, NOT Rationalists. Buddha was also an Empiricist, NOT a Rationalist. If you go through his 5 Aggregates, you will see that not once did Buddha recognize the importance of Rationality. Why is that ? Because even in the 5th Century BC, Reasoning itself was not considered the 'Only Reliable Part' of the Soul. It happened only in Ancient Greece, with Socrates starting the whole thing. Plato and Aristotle continued the Socratic tradition and their contributions to Philosophy are UNPARALLELED in Human History. That's why, the European Philosophical Tradition is considered by some, like Whitehead, to be a Bunch of Footnotes to Plato.
The Greeks were the Masters of Abstraction. They Abstracted to such an Extent that the Indians do not come even close. Back in Ancient Greece, Philosophy was considered to be the Academic Study of Anything. That's why, Maths, Physics, Biology, Medicine, Ethics, Aesthetics etc were all considered to be a part of 'Philosophy'. I mean, look at the Fathers of Most Fields of Knowledge :
1) Father of Logic - Aristotle
2) Father of Biology - Aristotle
3) Father of The Scientific Method - Aristotle
I mean, Aristotle wrote on 18 subjects and is the Father of 8 or something Fields. He alone !
4) Father of Geometry - Euclid
5) Father of History - Herodotus
6) Father of Medicine - Hippocrates
Most Fields have Ancient Greeks as their Fathers.
Indians have only 2 Fathers :
1) Father of Linguistics - Panini
2) Father of Plastic Surgery - Sushruta
We Indians have had Legends like PANINI, BUDDHA, Bharata, Tiruvalluvar, Patanjali, Chanakya, Nagarjuna, Dignaga, Vasubandhu, Aryabhata, Brahmagupta etc.
However, Ancient Greece had BETTER LEGENDS like Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, Euclid, Archimedes, Hippocrates, Apollonius etc etc.
Why is that ? One word Answer : REASON/RATIONALITY
Since Socrates, Plato and Aristotle considered the Rational Part of the Soul to be the ONLY Reliable Part for Wisdom, they (and other Greeks) CULTIVATED Reason like NO ONE ELSE !
The Greeks became the Masters of Methodology, Abstraction and Linearization. That's why, they Laid down the Foundations of Maths and Science.
Why is the Western world so successful in Almost every Field today ? Because it has Evolved Continuously from Ancient Greece. Any culture that has Ancient Greece as it's Foundation is destined to succeed, sooner or later.
The Greek Philosophers were so amazing that there is a special phrase reserved for them : THE GREEK MIRACLE.
India was Amazing too ! There's no doubt about that ! If you were to go back to 5th century BC, you would find Buddhists, Jains, Brahmans, Chaarvaaks, Ajivikas, Ajñanas etc etc arguing with each other. However, none of them were arguing along Purely Rational Lines. The Nyaya School started MUCH later in India, coz as already mentioned by me in one of my previous paragraphs, the First Logicians from India were Buddhists, and then, Hindus, Jains and others learnt from them.
The History of Ideas is very Greek Centric, coz every Major Idea was discussed in Ancient Greece. Even those Ideas that didn't exist in India were discussed in Ancient Greece. Examples ? Well, Innatism (if I am not mistaken), Pure Reason, Ethical Dilemmas (like the Euthypro Dilemma) and so on. Only Ideas like Vipassana, Dhyana, Pranayama etc didn't exist in Ancient Greece. But, the Framework for Knowledge in ANY field is STILL Greekish and will FOREVER be so. Why ? Coz the Ancient Greeks did something which will never ever be paralleled by Humankind, EVER AGAIN ...
Anyway, I have said enough. I know you will not be convinced so easily. You will have to read a LOT ! If you do so, you will realise what I am talking about and end up correcting your mistakes ...
@@nightcall5938 What happened mate ?
@@DipayanPyne94 Man you completely blown that Indo-centrist into sordid junks of smithereens