Here is a comparison of Buddha's and Plato's theories on the concept of self:
Buddha's Theory of No-Self:
- Buddha taught that there is no unchanging, permanent self (no atman). He proposed the doctrine of anatta - no-self, asserting that the idea of a constant, singular self is an illusion.
- According to Buddha, what we perceive as self is just a bundle of elements and experiences that are in constant flux. There is no enduring, substantive essence of self.
- He considered belief in a permanent self as a source of suffering. Liberation comes from realizing the impermanence of one's existence.
- The self is a process rather than a fixed structure. There is no underlying substance that connects experiences.
Plato's Theory of the Immortal Soul:
- Plato believed that the self is the immortal soul, created by the Demiurge. The soul exists before birth and after death.
- The soul is unchanging and eternal. While the body perishes, the soul remains constant over time.
- Plato saw the soul as having three parts - reason, spirit, and appetite. But the soul itself retains its identity despite the tensions between these parts.
- Knowledge is innate to the eternal soul. The soul recalls ideas from previous existence through the process of anamnesis or recollection.
- For Plato, the soul is the true self. The body is just a temporary vessel during one's time on earth.
So in summary, Buddha denied the existence of a permanent self, while Plato saw an eternal, unchanging soul as the essence of the self. The self is ephemeral according to Buddha, but immortal according to Plato.