The role of the Mahayana philosophical worldview in the formation of the spirituality of the new human

Abstract

This article examines Mahayana philosophy as an integral worldview system possessing a high transformative potential in the context of shaping the spirituality of the “new human being.” The study employs qualitative research methods, particularly focus group discussions and expert interviews conducted with practitioners and scholars from six countries: Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Singapore, Austria, and the United States. The focus group aimed to identify the essential potential of Mahayana philosophy through three core questions: (1) What are the fundamental principles of the Mahayana worldview? (2) What is its value in fostering the spirituality of the new human being? (3) Which Mahayana tools can be adapted to modern spheres of life? The research also employs a comparative approach, enabling the juxtaposition of Mahayana’s categorical foundations with those of Western traditions in philosophical anthropology and post-nonclassical ethics. The analysis reveals the axiological, ontological, and anthropological components of Mahayana phi losophy. Its key ideas — emptiness (śūnyatā), dependent origination (pratītyasamutpāda), and compassion (karuṇā) — shape a cognitive-ethical model of the subject capable of self transformation, internal responsibility, and engagement in building a humane society. Particular attention is given to such practical tools as the six-times daily self-observation diary, integral yoga, and transcendental meditation. The article presents the following conclusions: (1) Mahayana’s worldview core forms an integral anthropological model of the open subject, consistent with transcendental philosophy, phenomenology, and post-nonclassical epistemology; (2) empirical materials enabled the reconstruction of multilayered interpretations of Mahayana subjectivity; (3) Mahayana’s transcultural potential positions it as a philosophical resource for humanitarian policy; and (4) Mahayana can be interpreted as an ontology of nonviolence and ethics of care, relevant to the formation of new cultural identities in Central Asia.