/lit/ - Literature

How can Advaita Vendatist be certain that brahman being the atman and the ultimate reality is not another form of maya?

>>16902578
>*vanquishes Advaita from India for all time with his irrefutable criticisms that not a single Advaitin ever had the brains to refute*
>*coins the word crypto-buddhism*

Ramanuja > Madhva >>> Shankara

Thomistic metaphysics is also more than adequate and does not need supplementation from vedanta.

inb4 muh guenon mothafucka

>The entire theory of mayavada rests on a fictitious foundation of altogether hollow and vicious arguments, incapable of being stated in definite logical alternatives, and devised by men who are destitute of those particular qualities which cause individuals to be chosen by the Supreme Person revealed in the Upanishads; whose intellects are darkened by the impression of beginningless evil; and who thus have no insight into the nature of words and sentences, into the real purport conveyed by them, and into the procedure of sound argumentation, with all its methods depending on perception and the other instruments of right knowledge. The theory therefore must needs be rejected by all those who, through texts, perception and the other means of knowledge — assisted by sound reasoning — have an insight into the true nature of things.

>Ramauja agreed with Shankara they just emphasise different aspects it's all orthodox bro
t. Rene Gaynon

Here is what Ramanuja actually says about the avdaita vedanta doctrine (Brahma Sutra Bhashya 1.1.1):
>This entire theory rests on a fictitious foundation of altogether hollow and vicious arguments, incapable of being stated in definite logical alternatives, and devised by men who are destitute of those particular qualities which cause individuals to be chosen by the Supreme Person revealed in the Upanishads; whose intellects are darkened by the impression of beginningless evil; and who thus have no insight into the nature of words and sentences, into the real purport conveyed by them, and into the procedure of sound argumentation, with all its methods depending on perception and the other instruments of right knowledge. The theory therefore must needs be rejected by all those who, through texts, perception and the other means of knowledge — assisted by sound reasoning — have an insight into the true nature of things.

>>14697165
>whereas nobody has even been able to do the same for Shankara
*ahem*