/lit/ - Literature

>>22395927
The Bhagavad Gita

>>22082568
Bhagavad Gita; detach yourself from the world and simply do your duty. Also don't go to therapy, that shit's retarded.

I think someone on 4chan said that the Bhagavad Gita explains Jesus better than the Bible does. Is it true?

Start with the Bhagavad-Gita

What is the cosmology of the Hindus shown in the Bhagavad Gita? It seems that BRAHM is the one and all, but I wouldn't call it monism.There is a lot about virtue and vice, and how one must overcome their hellish passions in order to reach divine heavenliness. What does this mean for the good and the evil if we are built with these internal passions that we choose to act upon? If someone is reborn with their corresponding Karma, does that mean something similar along the lines of what Socrates detailed in the Republic, i.e., reincarnation and virtue?

>Krishna.
Kama it is!
Passion it is! born of the Darknesses,
Which pusheth him. Mighty of appetite,
Sinful, and strong is this!--man's enemy!
As smoke blots the white fire, as clinging rust
Mars the bright mirror, as the womb surrounds
The babe unborn, so is the world of things
Foiled, soiled, enclosed in this desire of flesh.
The wise fall, caught in it; the unresting foe
It is of wisdom, wearing countless forms,
Fair but deceitful, subtle as a flame.
Sense, mind, and reason--these, O Kunti's Son!
Are booty for it; in its play with these
It maddens man, beguiling, blinding him.
Therefore, thou noblest child of Bharata!
Govern thy heart! Constrain th' entangled sense!
Resist the false, soft sinfulness which saps
Knowledge and judgment! Yea, the world is strong,
But what discerns it stronger, and the mind
Strongest; and high o'er all the ruling Soul.
Wherefore, perceiving Him who reigns supreme,
Put forth full force of Soul in thy own soul!
Fight! vanquish foes and doubts, dear Hero! slay
What haunts thee in fond shapes, and would betray!

Buddhist metaphysics unironically made me a vedantin

>>16962259
>Eastern doctrines, and also ancient Western doctrines, are unanimous in affirming that contemplation is superior to action, just as the unchanging is superior to change. Action, being only a transitory and momentary modification of being, cannot have in itself its principle and its sufficient reason; if it does not relate to a principle which is beyond its contingent domain, it is only a pure illusion; and this principle from which it derives all the reality to which it is susceptible, and its very existence and possibility, cannot be found
than in contemplation or, if one prefers, in knowledge, because, basically, these two terms are synonymous, or at least coincide, since knowledge itself and the operation by which it is attained can in no way be separated. In the same way, change, in its most general sense, is unintelligible and contradictory, that is to say impossible, without a principle from which it proceeds and which, because it is its principle, cannot be subjected to it, and is therefore necessarily immutable; and this is why, in Western antiquity, Aristotle had affirmed the necessity of the "motionless motor" of all things. Knowledge plays this role of "immobile motor" precisely in relation to action; it is obvious that the latter belongs entirely to the world of change, of "becoming"; knowledge alone makes it possible to get out of this world and its inherent limitations, and, when it reaches the immutable, which is the case of princely or metaphysical knowledge, which is knowledge par excellence, it itself possesses immutability, because all true knowledge is essentially identification with its object. This is precisely what is ignored by modern Westerners, who, in fact of knowledge, only consider rational and discursive knowledge, therefore indirect and imperfect, what we could call knowledge by reflection, and who even, more and more, appreciate this inferior knowledge only insofar as it can be used immediately for practical purposes ; engaged in action to the point of denying all that is beyond it, they do not realize that this very action thus degenerates, by lack of principle, into an agitation as vain as it is sterile.
- Guénon, personal translation

>>16909636
Seethe harder you brainfarter

>Dionysus led the Kurukshetra War

>>15995238
Der Gita.

>>14122680
They both give similar theological arguments about how only an all-powerful, eternal and immutable entity viz. God is a coherent explanation for the cause of the world's existence and all the pre-established harmony in it, however Advaita differs in that they take the position that when you get down to analyzing the metaphysics of how creation happened that one finds that it's too logically incoherent and paradoxical, leading them to conclude that creation is only apparent but not real and that really God alone exists, effortlessly projecting this vast illusion of creation within Himself like the sun effortlessly emits light; this is already heavily implied in the Upanishads to begin with although Shankara and other advaitins like Gaudapada provide a logical argument for it as well.

4. It is unmoving, one, and faster than the mind. The senses could not overtake It, since It ran ahead. Remaining stationary, It outruns all other runners. It being there, Matarisva allots (or supports) all activities.

Anejat, unmoving. The root ejr implies shaking. Shaking is motion, deviation from one's own condition. It is devoid of this, i.e. It is ever of the same form. And It is ekam, one, in all beings. It is javiyah, faster, manasah, than the mind, characterised by volition etc.
Objection: How can there be such contradictory statements that It is constant and motionless, and yet faster than the mind?
Answer: There is no inconsistency, for this is possible from the standpoint of the conditioned and the unconditioned. As such, It is spoken of as "unmoving, one", in respect of Its own unconditioned aspect. And by reason of Its following the limiting adjunct, the mind, the internal organ characterized by volition and doubt, (It appears to be subject to modifications). The mind though encased in the body in this world, is able to reach such distances as the world of Brahma in a single moment, at one volition; and hence the mind is well known as the fastest thing in the world. When that (speedy) mind travels fast to the world of Brahma etc., the reflection of the conscious Self is perceived to have reached there, as it were, even earlier; and hence It is said to be (manaso javiyah) faster than the mind. Devah, the gods-the senses, the organs of knowledge such as eyes etc., are the devas because of illuminating (dyotana) their objects, na apnuvan, could not overtake; enat, It, the reality of the Self that is under discussion. The mind is faster than these (senses). Because of the interposition of the activity of the mind, (between the Self and the senses), even a semblance of the Self does not become an object of perception to the senses; since, being all-pervasive like space, It purvam arsat, ran ahead--reached the goal even before the swift mind. Though the all-pervasive entity of the Self, in Its real unconditioned state, is devoid of all worldly attributes and is subject to no mutation, yet (by reason of following the limiting adjunct, the mind), it appears, in the eyes of the non-discriminating people, to experience all empirical modifications brought about by the limiting adjuncts, and It also appears to be diverse in relation to the individual bodies. Hence the verse said so. Tat, That; atyeti, outruns--as it were dhavatah anyan, all other fast moveing ones (runners), viz the mind, speech the senses, etc., which are distinct from the Self.