What doctrine in Buddhism challenges the concept of individual rights as presented in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)?

The doctrine that challenges the concept of individual rights as presented in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) is Anatta, which refers to the "no-self" doctrine in Buddhism. This principle posits that the concept of a permanent, unchanging self is an illusion. In Buddhism, the self is seen as a collection of ever-changing physical and mental components rather than a fixed identity.

This understanding of self has profound implications for the idea of individual rights. The UDHR is based on the notion of an individual as a distinct entity with inherent rights and freedoms. In contrast, the Anatta doctrine suggests that clinging to the notion of a permanent self can lead to suffering and attachment, thereby questioning the emphasis on individual autonomy and rights as absolute and inviolable.

In a broader Buddhist context, the focus is on collective well-being, interdependence, and the alleviation of suffering for all, which may not align neatly with the Western emphasis on individual rights as enshrined in documents like the UDHR. This makes Anatta a critical concept in understanding how Buddhist perspectives on the self can challenge normative views on individualism and rights.