Dinesh's photo

this photo by Dinesh

Comments

Dinesh ^club

. . . Schopenhauer’s Oriental sources in the Schopenhauer Archive in Frankfurt in the mid-1990s, I was struck by a note the young philosopher had scribbled into his copy of a Latin translation of the Upanishads – Indian seminal philosophical texts – that had been published in 1801 under the title Oupnek’hat:

The line that startled me begins with the sacred Indian world OUM that translator Anquetil-Duperron equated with God (Deus). That Schopenhauer would replace Anquetil’s “Deus” by “Brahm” was to be expected; but what in the world had “Oitto” to do with the Indian Upanishads, some of which are older than Buddhism? Having specialized in Chinese and Japanese religions, I gathered that “Omitto” refers to the Buddha of Infinite light Amitabha who is known in Japan as ‘Amida’ and in China as ‘Amituo’. The note indicated by Schopenhauer’s handwritten cross-reference confirmed this,. But Anquetil’s footnote to “Deus” which attempted to explain why OUM is the equivalent to God, led to even more confusion since it furnished an explanation linking Omitto to the Egyptian god ‘Phta’ Both my consternation and Books of Solomon, that ancient Chinese Jings (classics) the sacred Indian Vedas, and the Person Zend Avesta are transmit ‘the same dogma’ and that this doctrine made its ways under the name of ‘doctrina orientalis,’ from India to persia, and from Persia to the Greks and Romans. In support of this thesis, Anquetil cited numerous European histories of philosophy asserting the existence of an extremely ancient ‘Oriental Philosophy.” ~ Page 2 (Preface)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abraham_Hyacinthe_Anquetil-Duperron

17 months ago. Edited 17 months ago.

Sign-in to write a comment.

		Page color
		Comments Panel
		Screen Margins
▼▲
		Widescreen

← Among Dinesh's photos

See also...

Keywords

Authorizations, license

this photo by Dinesh

Ξ	Frame Options
3 - +