What about it?
And I have nothing much against Schopehnauer, I did enjoy reading him when I was a kid.
As I’m sure you’re aware, an argument that uses the character of the opponent to refute a proposition is an ad hominem fallacy. Jesus counseled people to follow the righteous teachings of the Pharisees, while not doing what they did.( Matthew 23 ) Applying that principle to Schopenhauer, his philosophy could be true even if his character was flawed.
I am currently reading the Upanishads and from what I have been able to gether so far:
“The Upanishads emphasize the oneness of the Soul and God and the value of both faith and works as means of ultimate attainment. However, the general teaching of the Upanishads is that works alone, even the highest, can bring only temporary happiness and must inevitably bind a man unless through them he gains knowledge of his real Self.
To help him acquire this knowledge is the aim of the Upanishads.”
Have you seen this: Vedic Christianity – Vedic Muse
Christianity as Bhakti Yoga
The main components of a Bhakti religion are generally as follows:
● God manifesting as a Personal God with attributes
● God incarnating as a physical being
● Focus on Love in the relationship between incarnated God and the devotee
● Seeing the Beloved reflected in all beings and treating them as such
● Practices of studying the life of the incarnation, singing praises, chanting, prayer, and
contemplation
● Reliance on the Divine Being to navigate short-comings and struggles of the individual
practitioner
The tenets of Christianity follow this devotional (Bhakti Yoga) outline closely. These ideals and practices are as old as religion and older than any single religion.
The Rig Veda says:
The human body is the temple of God.
One who kindles the light of awareness within gets true light.
The sacred flame of your inner shrine is constantly bright.
The experience of unity is the fulfillment of human endeavors.
The mysteries of life are revealed.
1 Like
No, I hadn’t seen that. But, based on the teaching of 19th century sages Sri Ramakrishna and Swami Vivekananda, I recognized the compatibility of Bhakti yoga with Christianity with the caveat that Christian orthodoxy recognizes Jesus Christ as the unique incarnation of God while what is referred to as Hinduism in the West (Sanatana Dharma) accepts multiple incarnations. Since nondual reality, is without name and form, Advaita Vedanta recognizes no incarnations.
1 Like
As I said, it was interesting when I was a kid. Not sure what you fail to understand about that. No fallacies here.
Then what I said about we all being incarnations or none of us could align with with Advaita Vedanta and Sanata Dharma?
Odd things to read as a kid 
Most philosophy is juvenile, in terms of intellectual level it is written by kids and for kids. Go to the philosophy section of your local book store and pull random books, you’ll see what I mean. It’s Sesame Street time. Schopenhauer and later Nietzsche at least tried to be edgy enough to separate themselves out from many of the others, and it worked for what they intended namely it got them attention. But a normal person grows out of their silly emo phase when they become an adult.
Not surprising why the woo woo eastern religious stuff would appeal to that particularly nihilistic group.
Yes it could.
It appears that HumAnize was a precocious philosophical prodigy who now looks down on most philosophy from a superior point of view. Personally, I only recently completed reading the complete works of Schopenauer and I found him to be a brilliant mind who’s seemed to encompass the knowledge of his time.
Yes, I’m still at it 
.
…I, have not been reading Schopenhauer.
.
I think most Western philosophers’ pessimistic nominal insights grates against my optimistic phenomenological epoches worldview.
Cheers brothers. Everyone loves Sesame Street time.
I understand where you’re coming from. Schopenhauer’s philosophy does tend to dwell on pessimism, which might not resonate well with an optimistic worldview rooted in phenomenology. Schopenhauer is often regarded as a pessimistic philosopher, primarily because of his views on the nature of existence and human suffering. He posited that the fundamental nature of reality is not rational or orderly, but rather driven by an irrational force he called the “Will.” This Will is insatiable and relentless, continually seeking satisfaction and expression. However, seeing the way that history has played out, the are many who suffer not only an insatiable and relentless Will, but equally insatiable and relentless human beings.
Reading his insights and exploring diverse philosophical perspectives can perhaps give us valuable understanding, even if it doesn’t align perfectly with our personal outlooks. I always think that maybe there are aspects of Schopenhauer’s work (and others ) that could challenge or enrich my understanding of phenomenology in unexpected ways.
Essentially, until I retired, I was fully immersed in nursing and caring for the dying. I tried in the early years of ILP to communicate with others about the nature of existence, because I was experiencing life at one of its extremes, having in the army experienced other extremes. Other people here may be academics who ridicule my attempts to position myself in the world, but in the face of human suffering, you can either face it or try to rund away from it. My experience is that the latter doesn’t work.
Hello Magsj I don’t see how phenomenology leads to optimism. Please explain.
Mythologized, what Schopenhauer called the Will Ramakrishna worshipped as Kali the divine Mother. She is Mother Nature who nurtures and devours her children. Nature is God incarnate. Liberation comes when we see that is who we are.
In other words, the phenomenal world is a projection of consciousness which is ultimately all that is. Optimism and pessimism seem to lie downstream in our feelings relative to the way we see the situation existentially.
This reverence is expressed in many indigenous traditions, which differ only because of cultural variations. Christianity makes nature evil in many ways and our own nature a problem. One way to revere nature as God incarnate is to think holistically, which is encumbered by our society’s exploitative irreverent approach.
What has occupied my thoughts is the idea that we have to embrace both perspectives of our physical existence, the fact of nature nurturing and devouring simultaneously, and the call to transcend this fact spiritually.