/lit/ - Literature

Holy based... Brothers... I am in awe...

1 The Buddhists answered him, “Are we not right in saying that you are an Advaitin and have a demon?” 2 Guénon answered, “I do not have a demon, but I honour Brahman the Atman, and you dishonour me. 3 Yet I do not seek my own glory; there is One who seeks it, and he is the Knower. 4 Verily, verily, I say to you, if anyone keeps my word, he will never see death.” 5 The Buddhists said to him, “Now we know that you have a demon! Shankara died, as did the Jivanmuktas, yet you say, ‘If anyone keeps my word, he will never taste death.’ 6 Are you greater than our father Shankara, from whom we borrowed and changed his teaching, who died? And the Jivanmuktas died! Who do you make yourself out to be?” 7 Guénon answered, “If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is Brahman who glorifies me, of whom you say, ‘He is your God.’ 8 But you have not known him. I know him. If I were to say that I do not know him, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and I keep his word. 9 Your father Shankaracharya, peace be upon him, rejoiced that he would see my retroactive refutation. He saw it and was glad.” 10 So the Buddhists said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Shankara?” 11 Guénon said to them, “Verily, verily, I say to you, before Adi Shankaracharya was, I AM.” 12 So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Guénon hid himself and went out of the Ashram.

How would Guenon (pbuh) refute existentialism?

>>15129224

>>15040232
>there is a very clear difference
OH NO NO NO NO

Ignore all retarded hylics, b*ddhists and chr*stfags and read Adi Shankara.

It's best to begin with the 8-volume Upanishad commentaries. The more of his Upanishad commentaries that you read first the more you'll understand his commentaries on the two smriti texts the Brahma Sutras and the Bhagavad-Gita. The Chandogya and Brihadaranyaka commentaries are dense and best read after his shorter Upanishads ones. The Chandogya is also central to the ideas of the Brahma Sutras, it's not necessary but nevertheless a good idea to read Shankara's Chandogya bhasya before his Brahma Sutra Bhasya. The secondary works can be read alongside his commentaries, but are best understood/appreciated after you've already read some of his Upanishad commentaries

>Prasthanatrayi commentaries
http://estudantedavedanta.net/Eight-Upanisads-Vol-1.pdf
http://estudantedavedanta.net/Eight-Upanisads-vol2.pdf
https://archive.org/details/Brihadaranyaka.Upanishad.Shankara.Bhashya.by.Swami.Madhavananda
https://archive.org/details/Shankara.Bhashya-Chandogya.Upanishad-Ganganath.Jha.1942.English
https://archive.org/details/BrahmaSutraSankaraBhashyaEnglishTranslationVasudeoMahadeoApte1960
https://archive.org/details/Bhagavad-Gita.with.the.Commentary.of.Sri.Shankaracharya

>non-commentary works
http://estudantedavedanta.net/Sri_Shankaracharya-Upadeshasahasri%20-%20Swami%20Jagadananda%20%281949%29%20[Sanskrit-English].pdf
https://gita-society.com/pdf2011/vivekachudamani.pdf
https://archive.org/details/SankaraOnTheYogaSutrasTrevorLeggettMLBD2006
http://estudantedavedanta.net/Sri_Shankaracharya-AtmaBodha%20%28and%20Other%20Stotras%29%20-%20Swami%20Nikhilananda%20%281947%29%20[Sanskrit-English].pdf
http://estudantedavedanta.net/Aparoksha-Anubhuti-by-Sri-Shankaracharya.pdf
https://www.swamij.com/shankara-vakya-vritti.htm
http://shiningworld.com/site/files/pdfs/publications/books/1_Knowledge_of_Truth_Tattva_Bodh.pdf
http://www.vidyavrikshah.org/SIVANANDALAHARI.pdf
http://www.vidyavrikshah.org/SOUNDARYALAHARI.pdf
http://theheartofthesun.com/Nirvana.pdf
http://jagannathavallabha.com/pdf_engl/prasnottara%20english%20for%20amazon.pdf

Brothers, do not let the hylics and faggot buddhists distract you.... Remain focused on contemplation....

>>14987027
based, his 'East and West' and 'Reign of Quantity' are his two other main books on culture/modernity, all 3 are great

holy based... this gathering is truly eternal, brothers... existing not within this profane time, but altogether aloof from it and entirely unconcerned with anything but the eternal...

>>14880777
Holy based & holy checked...

>>14817535
>then what/who is doing the inference
Brahman/Atman is who refutes, brother. He alone allows one to perform the retroactive refutation.

>>14761362
>Two sets have the same cardinality...
The rest is only meaningful if there is a non-metaphysically vapid definition of cardinality which does not involve profanely abusing the Hebrew alphabet.

>>14724309
>>14724407
>>14724576
>>14725136
Holy based... Brothers... I am in awe...

1 The Buddhists answered him, “Are we not right in saying that you are an Advaitin and have a demon?” 2 Guénon answered, “I do not have a demon, but I honour Brahman the Atman, and you dishonour me. 3 Yet I do not seek my own glory; there is One who seeks it, and he is the Knower. 4 Verily, verily, I say to you, if anyone keeps my word, he will never see death.” 5 The Buddhists said to him, “Now we know that you have a demon! Shankara died, as did the Jivanmuktas, yet you say, ‘If anyone keeps my word, he will never taste death.’ 6 Are you greater than our father Shankara, from whom we borrowed and changed his teaching, who died? And the Jivanmuktas died! Who do you make yourself out to be?” 7 Guénon answered, “If I glorify myself, my glory is nothing. It is Brahman who glorifies me, of whom you say, ‘He is your God.’ 8 But you have not known him. I know him. If I were to say that I do not know him, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and I keep his word. 9 Your father Shankaracharya, peace be upon him, rejoiced that he would see my retroactive refutation. He saw it and was glad.” 10 So the Buddhists said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Shankara?” 11 Guénon said to them, “Verily, verily, I say to you, before Adi Shankaracharya was, I AM.” 12 So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Guénon hid himself and went out of the Ashram.

>>14712059
hello, is this the based department? I'd like to file a claim

>>14702872
>To follow this train of thought further, if Brahman is the absolute synthesis of all, how much scope is there for considering it in a contingent mode? How is it possible that such a mode, such an obscuration in Brahman, could arise?
Brahman is not the synthesis of all, Brahman is self-established with its own stable self-nature and it without parts and components, it cannot be synthesized from parts or ingredients, if Evola means this simply in the sense that it is comprised of the unmanifest and manifest etc even this distinction comes from maya and is not in itself absolutely real. Such a mode of seeming contingency could seem to arise via Brahman's own power of maya.

>How can one fail to realise that the sentence makes sense only on the basis of the presupposition of the existence of a principle distinct from Brahman, actually able to comprise it in a relative and accidental manner – which goes against the original premise?
Maya and all the manifestation and its accidental/relativeness etc which comprises it is in a sense a subservient principle of Brahman in that it is both a power and principle belonging to Brahman, but as has been explained this maya is not ultimately real in the end.

>Guénon says (pp. 30-31) : “Metaphysically manifestation can be considered only in its dependency upon the supreme principle and as a mere support from which to rise to the knowledge of transcendence”. Now, we ask : who is the one who rises to this knowledge? Either it is Brahman itself, and then it must mean, with Eckhart, Duns Scotus Erigenus, Hegel, Schelling and many others, that the world is the very self-cognitive process of the absolute – but then it has a value and a reality, rather than being a ghost outside the pre-existing eternal synthesis, it is the act itself through which this synthesis gives itself to itself. Or there is something ‘else’ over against Brahman, which means to make of Brahman something relative, ‘one of the two’, a view which is against the original hypothesis.
The one who rises to this knowledge is the Jiva, although really the Jiva is awakening from the illusory slumber of Jivahood to its true nature as Paramatma, Brahman. This does mean there is a something "else" over against Brahman as Evola writes, because at the summit of realization and liberation it's revealed that the inner Self of the Jiva was Brahman all along. This does not have value for Brahman Himself since He is always eternally contented and without desires or needs, but for the Jiva such an attainment is the very acme of its existence and the highest aim to which it can attain.

I sure hope you have finished your daily viewing of the Adi Shankaracharya (pbuh) film, anon.
https://youtu.be/Epo6ayGKsjg

>>14697266
>>14698225
>>14698724
>>14698862
Supra-based & supra-intellectual.
Time and time again, Buddhist doctrine is being shown to be deluded and retroactively refuted.

>>14697590
Yes, Perennial Philosophy.

>>14688323
You are already tainted by Agatha. Try again next life cycle.

>cancels every profane western 'philosopher'

>>14675672
Please try to be more intelligent when using /lit/.

>>14667239
>Theravada, Yogachara and Madhyamaka have all been retroactively refuted and debunked
Based...

>>14663476
*retroactively refutes you*

>>14662251
>As far as Mahâyâna is concerned, it is a transformation of Buddhism through a reincorporation of elements borrowed from orthodox doctrines ; and this is what we have written about it, as against Buddhism per se, which is eminently heterodox and antimetaphysical.

- Rene Guenon (pbuh), from the journal article 'REGARDING HINDU METAPHYSICS: A NECESSARY RECTIFICATION'

>>14653259
based thread... (pbuh)