/lit/ - Literature

More accurate would be Buddha on top of Shankara and Guenon. Shankara has been called a "crypto Buddhist" in India for over a thousand years.

>>14383055
>>14383058
okay guenonposter

>>14383055
Left are respected men who have greatly influenced humanity and made their mark in history.

Right are a bunch of talentless hacks and literal nobodies outside of incel circles.

>>14383060
Okay Guenonfag

>>14383055
Good Lord. You got most of your shill threads deleted. Just stop.

Buddha should be on both sides.

>>14383079
okay seguro :^)

>>14383055
>Thinking the Buddha is on the left hand path and not the MIDDLE path

What is it with 60iq Whiteheadians/Guenonfags appropriating whoever they want to be on their side

>>14383090
ok ken

>>14383104
Good post.
>>14383055
Both hands are on the One being.

>>14383104
Left represents change/becoming, right represents absolute/being.

The inbetween.
Plato's Sophist 247b to 249b.
This is why it is Plato whose work remains complete, while the two extremes cannot exist without harmony, for it is Harmony, Unity, the One that causes the two antitheses.

>>14383303
Wrong.

>>14383364
Correct.

>>14383364
>implying that wasn't Heraclitus

>>14383364
249d*
>Then the philosopher, who pays the highest honor to these things, must necessarily, as it seems, because of them refuse to accept the theory of those who say the universe is at rest, whether as a unity or in many forms, and must also refuse utterly to listen to those who say that being is universal motion; he must quote the children's prayer, “all things immovable and in motion,” and must say that being and the universe consist of both.

Next it is right to consider the question of how our conception that attempts to reveal [the nature of] the determinate One differs from [our effort to grasp] that One which we were just discussing, which is incommensurate with our own conceptions. The common conception conforms to the One that is available to us, a conception that is differentiated from the underlying realities that are [other than the conception] and so obviously is not adequate to the indeterminate One. But if this conception of the One is removed, then we have no other means of grasping it, so that it is even meaningless for us to call it One.
Further, we are unable to conceive of any principle simpler than this One that suggests itself to us, so that this will turn out to be the fi rst principle. Now the Good is also a candidate for the first principle of all because it is impossible for anything to be superior to it; thus the Good well might be the principle of all things. And therefore our conceptions result in equating the Good and the One.
And yet how can the first be bounded by determination and contradistinction? And how can the first be a form? A particular one of the many forms constitutes the one [form] or the [form of the] Good.
Moreover, just as motion and stillness constitute a single antithesis, and again otherness and sameness, and [so with] many other such antitheses, yet there is in each of these a superior and inferior element, whereas it is only in a ratio of two similarly ranked things that there is the better and the worse, and again, the opposites participate reciprocally in each other, as is shown in Parmenides, in such a way that the one and the many participate in each other as well.
Therefore the One is not a principle because this One unifies the many, whereas on the contrary it is One as that in which the many are
unified. The one that is in the many is participated, whereas the One that
subsists as independent is before the many, and therefore [this One] is before all things; therefore this One is the principle of all things. And even if the many are opposed to the One, nevertheless it is not that the many enjoy the same rank as the One, but they [are opposite in] the way that effects are related to cause.

>>14383068
>Right are a bunch of talentless hacks and literal nobodies outside of incel circles.
parmenides is good

>>14383407
>>14383430
English please?

>>14383430
Apart from these considerations, if the One is that which brings together all things (for to the One belongs the property of making one, and of being the cause of the mixture),10 but that which makes one and that which brings together all things is prior to and also superior to that which is collected
or made one, clearly the One is the principle of all things, just because it is contradistinguished with respect to all things in the way that cause is contradistinguished with respect to effect, and this is what we are familiar with as One.
But is nothing else one, as for example the so-called generic one?
We must say that the one as genus is a one with which we are familiar in the sense of a one among all things, in the way that the many are one, by which I mean one form, the form of Good or of Beautiful. In any case, the determinate concept corresponds to a determinate reality. We must understand that One not as bringing about unity, but as bringing about the many. For it is
actually the cause of multiplicity, cause of the good, cause of beauty, cause of the whole, and there is nothing for which it does not function as a cause by virtue of its unique simplicity. If it brings about unity, then it cannot be called One in the strict sense. If the epithet “One” does not belong to it properly, then
we are entitled to call each one [by a different name], that is, not only cause of unity, but also cause of multiplicity, and if you wish One and many, or rather all things before the many and before the all.
What then?...

>>14383055

not only does this have zero to do with the occult meaning of left/right, basically everyone on here is already a monist

>>14383055
right

>>14383485
Read Plato's Theaetetus-Sophist-Statesman, Philebus, and Parmenides.
Why not add Lysis, Phaedrus, and Republic.
Then Plotinus, the Proclus' Commentaries on Timaeus, Parmenides, and the essays on Republic.
Now you can read and understand
>>14383489

>>14383485
Why is it that brainlets have such a hard time understanding Plotinus?

>>14383364
>>14383407
>>14383430
Neoplatonism gets a lot right but is unfortunately incomplete, as evinced by the failure of Plotinus to attain a permanent union with the One, he only had a few momentary glances. Guenon was right on the money in this letter. Advaita Vedanta and certain Sufi doctrines reach the final stage that danced just out of the grasp of Plotinus

>"I never wrote anything on Plotinus, and admit that I never had the time to study him closely; but I know that there are many similarities to be made with oriental doctrines...Only there is one thing that has always shocked me: this history of states that Plotinus would have attained a certain number of times in his life, and, from which, seem to have left nothing permanent, which is poorly understood from the point of view of initiation; there would have been, in any case, something very incomplete in relation to his realization." - Rene Guenon, letter to Dr.Duby, 14 December 1936, Cairo

>>14383596
Well that's Damascius which is Plotinus on amphetamines and cocaine.

>>14383632
Because we aren't Gnostics damning the world or even matter.
By being our best and ultimate self we in turn are the One in full, completely. As Anaxagoras revealed, something of all in all, each a supreme Echo of the Ineffable One.

yeah bro I'm a buddhist, how could you tell

The only real takeaway from these threads is that reading Guenon won't cure your internet addiction.

>>14383666

trips of excellence

>>14383632
>I didn't read him
>he didn't win
>he didn't follow my concepts
Wow btfo

>>14383055
Whitehead has nothing to do with the people on the left.
Whiteheadian becoming =/= Heraticlian flux
>>14383502
Whitehead is a pluralist.

>>14383652
>because we aren't Gnostics damning the world or even matter.
Neither is Advaita you dummy, Plotinus is more gnostic-like than Advaita is, Plotinus identified matter with evil while Shankara never did

>According to Plotinus, matter is to be identified with evil and privation of all form or intelligibility (see II 4).
>Matter is only evil in other than a purely metaphysical sense when it becomes an impediment to return to the One.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plotinus/

>By being our best and ultimate self we in turn are the One in full, completely.
If you don't attain complete and permanent union with the One, you aren't the One completely

>>14383068
>Whitehead

>>14384190
Whitehead is more prominent than Guenon, get over it.

>>14383104
Well, you seem to have said it yourself. They are mentally ill, but also retarded, just like everyone else on this board except me (I'm only mentally ill, and that rather mildly).

>>14384175
To add on, for Whitehead, becoming is for the purpose of being (signification in the universe), and being is for the purpose of novel becoming (the emergent individual self).
He basically tries to reconcile both without prioritizing one over the other.
>>14384190
Whitehead is based. Deal with it.

>>14383430
>Therefore the One is not a principle because this One unifies the many, whereas on the contrary it is One as that in which the many are
unified.
>mfw i realized that the one is so not in the numerical sense of singularity but in the subsuming sense of fullness without reading anything
>mfw that man is i and i am that man

>>14383372
Wrong

>>14383303
Correct

>>14383688
this

thesis.......anti thesis...... SYNTHESIS

FUSION HA!!!!

>>14383666
>believe in yourself
kek can't make this shit up

>>14383489

Tremendous ground covered in just a few words. It makes the philistines masquerading as Christians and Philosophers, Aquinas et al., all the more pathetic.

>>14384195
Only one person on this board likes and spams Whitehead whereas about one half to one third of /lit/ has read and appreciates Guenon

>>14383055
Option 1 is Heraclitus and Whitehead.
Option 2 is Parmenides and Bradley (fuck off with your Guenon).
Option 3 is Buddhist sunyata understood as non-existence, and Kitaro Nishida/Kyoto School.
Take your picks everyone. Remember to ignore the Guenonist shills. Honestly I do prefer 2 to 1 myself.

>Whitehead understood perhaps more sharply than anyone else that the creative evolution of nature could never be conceived if the elements composing it were defined as permanent, individual entities that maintained their identity throughout all changes and interactions. But he also understood that to make all permanence illusory, to deny being in the name of becoming, to reject entities in favor of a continuous and ever-changing flux meant falling once again into the trap always lying in wait for philosophy - to "indulge in brilliant feats of explaining away." - Order Out of Chaos, Ilya Prigogine

Which side was more progressive?

>>14383666
whom is this enlightened individual? also, checked.

>>14385555
So we're back at a middle territory between being and becoming.
>I am the being that will become what is and the becoming that will be eternally.
Back off, take off your shoes.

>>14385627
progress is cringe

>>14386167
But hasn't it helped make our lives better? We have smartphones so we can easily contact people, etc, etc.

>>14386263
No. Its made people into superficial, vacuums. Ungrateful, nihilistic narcissists. We were better of as serfs. Unironically. At least back then i would have had land and maybe of even been lucky enough to be born into a trade. A solid metaphysical place with abundant meaning in the cosmos.

>>14386301
>guenonfag defending caste system again
clockwork

>>14386307
>implying we dont have castes now

>>14386335
you also have street shitting now, but you've already written that is dharmic too lol

>>14383303
>LHP people believing anything inherently deceptive LHP people tell them

LHP is the inverted pentagram, which represents everything Buddha was against. RHP is the upright one, which is exactly what Buddha was all about.

>>14386361
https://gnosticwarrior.com/pentagram.html

>>14386361
This, Shankara is more like a renegade buddhist than anything

What is movement? Isn't all movement in relation to something? As in the phenomenal world there is no absolute rest, but only relative; so, movement is always relative to something at rest. Therefore universal movement is movement in relation to universal rest?

>>14386485
>>14383407

>>14386307
I haven't even read him!
Whiteheadites be trippin.

>>14386485
Yes. Relative movement could be thought as divine emination.

>>14386782
this, whiteheadposters confirmed schizoid

>>14386301
>nihilistic narcissists
How is the average hood rat a nihilist

>>14383055
My path

>>14387071
>nihilist atheism
Such a surprise from you, tranny

>>14383055
comparing soneone of whitehead's stature to that nobody hack should land you in some kind of philosophy prison

I didn't want to make a thread for this, so I'll just post here.

Can somebody list of all the philosophers represented in this image?

>>14387086
>Nihilism

>>14387256
thales heraclitus democritus don't know socrates plato aristotle diogenes
jesus don't know aquinas don't know don't know
luther shakespeare descartes hobbes spinoza leibniz newton
don't know don't know
kant hegel schelling schopenhauer don't know kierkegaard
marx stirner thoureau nietzsche don't know don't know
russell wittgenstein don't know moore don't know don't know
heidegger sartre camus don't know don't know schrodinger turing don't know don't know don't know
kazcyinsky don't know rorty don't know moldbug land zizek don't know brassier
overall a terrible list desu

>>14387071
In theory. In practice you're a middle-age neoliberal wageslave.

>>14383104
>MIDDLE path

This is correct, as can be seen from the Kaccayanagotta sutta and the works of Nagarjuna. The Buddha's metaphysics teaches a middle path between existence and non-existence.

https://suttacentral.net/sn12.15/en/sujato

>“Kaccāna, this world mostly relies on the dual notions of existence and non-existence.

>But when you truly see the origin of the world with right understanding, you won’t have the notion of non-existence regarding the world. And when you truly see the cessation of the world with right understanding, you won’t have the notion of existence regarding the world.

So, here it is straight from the horse's mouth. Anyone who thinks Buddha taught nothingness has not read the texts.

>>14387323
I’m not a liberal.

>>14387497

Also, if you want to play this Hegelian dialectic game (gayyy) then you would have to choose the only religious philosophy that actual posits non-being as the ultimate reality, and that is the Xuanxue Neo Daoism of Wang Bi, which held that everything was rooted in non-being (Wu).

>>14384180
>permanent
It's literally timeless. Plotinus day on earth in henosis could be said to have been an eternity and no time at all for him. A simultaneous infinity.

>>14384180
>>14387544
Also
>nice copy pasting top Google result
Again you like Gnostics obsess about me myself and I. "I must be saved" "what can I do for myself to ensure my own salvation" "screw other souls not my problem, time to sit under a tree a rot because I think this mindlessness is a mystical experience" when it is nothing but the silence of a dead mind.

>>14386263
>>14386263
>But hasn't it helped make our lives better?
nah it just made it comfy

>>14383068
>parmenides is a talentless hack
lmao no

>>14386359
?
what is your point?
yes they shit their street and its disgusting
but castes exist in the west too

>>14387497
>middle path between existence and non-existence
No such thing exists.

Every Guenon thread is just shitty memes, spam, and low-effort baiting. There's no actual discussion even between Guenon fans, which is interesting seeing as you'd think that they would want to discuss the ideas of their philosopher. It's almost as if it's a single obsessed idiot trying to meme guenon into popularity without knowing the first thing about philosophy...

>>14387505
lmao liberalhurt

>>14387561
We exist in the world because the essence of existence is inspiration and generation. We plunged down by our own intrinsic desire to mimic the above, and like him create.
The desire for the Good can only be matched by the Soul's will to emanate something of our own. To want nothing but "permanent" dissipation into unity is to insult God who Being the One has distinguished himself from himself, if the One is all one should be why isn't he?
It's because he is One and all things, many undifferentiated, Ineffable; not a mere generic One nor the set of all sets, Empty.

>>14385534
>Being (British Israelism)

The fuck?

>>14387628
based

>>14383632
>>14384180
advaita has also it's anti-hyle inclination, it is not surprising how close to buddhism it could be; but the golden chain reflects as much an harmony as advaita vedanta.

>>14387544
That's a cope answer, Plotinus himself described it as a temporary state that eventually wore off
>screw other souls not my problem,
Yes, that's why Shankara wrote thousands of pages of writing lucidly instructing others how to reach it as well and pointing out for the benefits of aspirants exactly why other systems are contradictory and hence not useful. All of you arguments against Advaita turn out to be strawmen.

>>14387059
Cultural saturation. The whole culture is nihilisitc.
>>14387071
>my path
>Lists books by other people
What did (s)he(?) mean by this?

bump

>>14383577
He was indicating that your prose is overly verbose and meandering, brainlet.

>>14387624
he never claimed it exists you fucking idiot, it's just what Buddha believed and taught

>>14387639
You are not a Neoplatonist.

>>14388802

Left! Please, god, left!

>>14383666
>believe in yourself
Based bugman recognizing that anatta is a false doctrine mentioned nowhere in the Pali canon.

>>14388802
>>14389111

>>14389111
>>14389149
All cherrypicked from a book that misinterprets the whole Neoplatonic tradition from a Christian standpoint, yeah, no, you are not a Neoplatonist.

>>14386263
>But hasn't it helped make our lives better? We have smartphones so we can easily contact people, etc, etc.
LMFAO

>>14389185
>All cherrypicked from a book that misinterprets the whole Neoplatonic tradition from a Christian standpoint, yeah, no, you are not a Neoplatonist
You prefer Thomas Taylor?
I have that as well.
>the One of man [or the summit and flower of his nature,] is he more true man, that of soul is the more true soul, and that of body the true body. Thus also The One of the sun, and The One of the moon, are the more true sun and moon.
>Neither The One, nor 'All Things' acords with the nature of The One. For these are opposed to each other, and distribute our conceptions. For if we look at the simple and The One, we destroy its immensely great perfection; and if we conceive all things subsisting together, we abolish The One and the Simple.
{continuation in pic related} . . .
. . . is also at the same time all things. But the first is above the One and All Things, being more simple than either of these.

>>14389224
Or why not from the Prophet himself?

Where should I start with Guenon?

>>14389397
his first book 'intro to hindu doctrines'

>>14388560
If you’d read the books you’d know.
There’s even this anon telling me I’m some kind of hypocrite for not following Stirner the way he thinks I should. Laughable.

>>14383055
left is cringe, right is based

>>14383055
right is cringe, left is based

>>14389224
>>14389247
None of those pages implies that there is no true Self knowing possible, rather the dissolution of relation in unity, so knower, known, knowing states are all united in the One but such ideas in words cannot be directly known due to the nature of language itself doesn't have meaning to those who are inept in describing purer and purer essences beyond those means of expressing distinctions itself, but that isn't therefore the equivocation of unknowing as ignorance as means of the return nor does everything you had said is a prerequisite to go through the mystical synthesis to the One. Unknowing cannot be taken to the point where there is literally nothing to be known at all, for at that point you have negated the very ultimate essence itself. To know nothing of the One isn't to know thyself which is the very goal to real philosophy. What you identify selfhood in is what determines your fate after death. If you know that you know nothing of who you really are before you die, you just don't know and so you are ignorant, unqualified to speak on matters that you don't know of at all. You cannot bring your money, body, works, empirical knowledge, beliefs, rituals, none of such matters passes on when Theosis is fully completed in death(and partially while alive, dead to the world). Nothing besides wisdom merit directly to anything after, you will return back to this world seeking Self in what's not the Self for what is not the Self will lead you towards becoming of being. Yes you should work to pay the bills but such is a duty and is not a spiritual merit or debt for afterlife insurance. The super ignorance is not ignorance at all, it is just descriptively ineffable like trying to explain what the sun looks like to someone who were born without eyes, one can know that they cannot know by descriptive means yet also know that it could be known, just impossible to describe the divine bliss of true ultimate reality without using inferior words that never properly explain direct knowing. There's nothing wrong with devoting one's life to the truth as well as disassociating from wider society and its many distractions which the main point of why people should work is to no longer need to work when they one day cannot work, a sort of cultural retirement program which is what sannyasins and some of the initiates into the Pythagorean mysteries mostly are those who can in one way afford the time, effort, money to focus their lives on the pursuit of the truth and liberation from false understanding from metaphysical ignorance though money is of no real eternal value to the wise. Enlightenment isn't limited to the elderly nor their place in society, anyone has the potential to know thyself, but it isn't the case for modern schools which had failed to promote metaphysical endeavors. The West has failed the Greeks while modern Greeks and Indians have mostly degenerated in this global age of materialism.

>>14387682
kek

>>14390057
> If you know that you know nothing of who you really are before you die, you just don't know and so you are ignorant...
Knowing nothing of the One is to know the One. Shankara points it in his Vivekachudamani if I recall correctly, ''those who don't know It, verily, they do know It, and those who think they know It, don't know It''. It is a very subtle line, Dnyaneshwar also says something similar to this.

>>14390285
That doesn't explain who knows and what kind of knowing is done, since if there is nothing to know that is to know thyself for Self is not an object to be known, but that of course again doesn't mean there is no Self-Knowledge here, I don't fall for petty word games. If All is One One cannot find itself outside itself without becoming the One outside the One, the eikonic One that is the psyche manifold existence that goes through subject-object superimposition.

>>14383068
Prince Charles is Guenonian.

>>14387071
why are you "muh individual" type people always the biggest fucking losers and failures?

>>14390425
Why don't you just let them be themselves, it is what they struggle with and so they seek refuge in such self help books since the world is a cruel mistress.

>>14390327
yeah unity of knower known and knowledge and undermining of subject-object distinction; ''the One is all things and no one of them'', It comprehends everything but is not comprehended.
>the eikonic One that is the psyche manifold existence that goes through subject-object superimposition.
do you mean the reflection of the One (neither being nor non-being) and on It by Logos generates dyad and therefrom multiplicity?

>>14390631
Saguna Brahman as the expression of Citta in avidya gains vijnana at birth, that empirical impure (by avidya) consciousness in contrast to the pure consciousness that is Nirguna Brahman, hope that makes some sense to you though vijnana is more used by Buddhists to imply the Citta is itself vijnana but those Buddhists don't get that the Citta is not destroyed by the psycho-physical death of the namarupa. When consciousness ceases, so does that body ceases as the body breaks down and is no longer a living body since it needs a living soul to be a living body, while a living soul is the superimposition of spirit and body, that soul coordinate to the body is bound to the body, dies with the body, yet the soul of the soul, the atman is unharmed, just disembodied. That being said, if it is a very ignorant soul, it can become a manomayakaya, mind made body as a rough translation, an astral body, a spectre is formed, never fully alive and is suffering when around the presence of others, never too far away from the location of death or the place of burial.

>>14383055
Ambidextrous

>>14390734
>manomayakaya
so would that be a ghost, meaning that ghosts are temporary states of existence one can transmigrate to?

>>14390734
It is rather confusing whether the citta is one of the buddhi-ahamkara-manas composite or if it is closer to the Atman, being the foundation of all knowledge and experience, hence self-proved.
>if it is a very ignorant soul, it can become a manomayakaya, mind made body as a rough translation, an astral body, a spectre is formed, never fully alive and is suffering when around the presence of others, never too far away from the location of death or the place of burial.
So was Guenon right when he wrote that in some cases, after bodily death, there is still a prolongation of an individual's individuality, certain psychic and subtle elements subsisting; and I deem it to be the case with very ignorant soul. Is this manomayakaya (I'm not familiar with this term)?

>>14390734
Also, what do you think of the christian attached to the exoteric, superficial, side of Christianity? Does Faith stand together with Knowledge? The Love of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, just as bhakti, expresses that kind of Plotinian Love in which one's essence is incited to move towards God, to attain henosis, to liquify itself into the Absolute (or itself into ''ItSelf'', sorry for my lack of eloquence here). And although advaita vedanta clearly sustains a kind of morality, virtue as purification, I still find the moral, virtuous aspects of them to be quite different or less emphasized than the platonic, christian ones.

bump

>>14389211
But is he wrong? :)

>>14383055
both

>>14385492
>Only one person on this board likes and spams Whitehead
all I see are 20+ guenon threads everyday. Where are these 'whiteheadfags' spamming the board??

>>14392020
yes he's wrong, the spiritual degradation is not at all worth the benefits of tech

>>14392898
How do? Does Guénon talk about the smartphones of his time in this way? I'm open to changing my mind.

>>14393083
no but everything he says applies to now even more than the time he wrote it, read East and West, Crisis of the Modern World, and Reign of Quantity for his main criticisms of modernity

>>14385534
Who will be the next Hegel?

>>14394131
Who cares? Hegel himself wasn't very impressive.

>>14391148
>>14391186
Ah, I had a good nap.
Here's what Ken thinks about ghosts, he quotes Socrates in Phaedo mostly as well as a quote from his translation of the Dhammapada as well as a simple quote from the Bhavagad Gita. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1efL7wW2WxLwYyto3oPmVJ0kiYv-xshEL/view
Here's Ken's Dhammapadanapali translation (that certain Buddhists here deny it even exists): https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NuU4emvXrgGevFKVCqyBVVTsB-HcaN1U/view This gets into what is the true-Self and various other things, even has a mention of Indra.
Here's Ken's translation and explanation of the Four Noble Truths: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NNmfC4h5SP_aihXXUa2FjfOj97MszGgn/view

Ghosts are temporary states of ignoble people due to agnosis/avijja/avidya grasping onto the khandhas/maya. Ignoble people are usually the ones who linger on about but some people while alive can train themselves to do some of those out of body experiences at will rather than by some event i.e. car crash, near death though medical doctors pass it off as a state of hyperconsciousness with neurons firing and all that but the body doesn't work on electricity, it works off of dielectricity or conventionally electrostatic charge and discharge while electricity proper is a hybrid of the magnetic field moving against a dielectric reflector, causing aether/akasha torsion but that's a whole other topic. Isidore might had done some of this in his sleep according to Damascius.
>>14391406
Devotion for Knowledge is not what saves anyone. One can be devoted for all of their lives yet have no means for themselves nor received any guidance from others. I know you don't agree with western dates on when certain scriptures came about and such but I do think this book by Karl H. Popper is underrated in how it gets into various topics from the standpoint of the main Advaita tradition: http://en.bookfi.net/md5/5F6A1C1109FF8F26478546D90FAEE7E9 Just don't read the later parts of the encyclopedia where it's mostly the translations of the various scriptures used in Advaita. He makes a strong defense for Advaita Vedanta and talks about the arguments they had in a systematic format and although he mentions some criticism against Advaita from the Buddhists he's usually defending as to why it is not probable that any of the Advaitin are crypto-Buddhists but please just look pass that, much of your answers and my answers on most of the basic Advaita stances as to why people should even uphold karman and what is karma to those who have Self-Knowledge since Knowledge isn't a work and no real karmic activity is done, it merely becomes a duty without karmic residue.

>>14387624
Brainlet alert, read the texts and understand what existence and non-existence mean in this case.

>>14391907

>>14394950
>Just don't read the later parts of the encyclopedia where it's mostly the translations of the various scriptures used in Advaita.
Why would I not want to read them?

>>14395976
You can, but you can also read the translations by Swamis instead though I didn't really share it for those translations even though for a beginner that book alone has most everything they're looking for in one place.

>>14395976
>>14396014
Scratch that, they're "summaries", it don't even have the translations, I'm still in part one of the book.

>>14383055
The Ganon path

>>14387561
what would you counter this position and perspective with?

Do you have a counter-proposition?

>>14387561
hold on autism, we are in the manifested world, where everything is conditioned and individual; you need to understand some things before you can dissolve the faux-I, the consequences will naturally lead to an open selfless ''action''.

>>14383055
right hand is best

>>14397349
Escaping the cave is not another world or spatial location, it is right here.

>>14397921
indeed, but as the illusion is superimposed on the object what is not the Self is sumperimposed on the Self, ''the One is all things and no one of them, the source of all things is not all things; and yet it is all things in a transcendental sense''.

>>14398006
He's semi conflating parinibbana with nibbana as well as failing to know that the principle behind vinnana is the citta which the citta is never said to be the aggregate, while the citta is what brahman does, brahman is not citta, the One is not Intellect/Mind, primordial agnosis of the Monad is the means for emanation. Mind isn't directly the corporeal manifold consciousness, it is indirectly the cause, the principle behind the lesser state of Mind as consciousness but not equal to consciousness, a weaker emanation, less platonically ontologically real but nevertheless apparently real. The One in agnosis just cannot know itself the way it knows the aggregate forms, yet it can unknow what it is not in quality/attribute to know what it is without qualities or in principle.

>>14398158
I should clarify a bit, Citta is Brahman in the sense of saying Saguna Brahman is Nirguna Brahman, both are "Brahman" and are one not merely as a union, but illusory distinctions do arise from the lack of Self-Knowledge. Why is there any extrinsic attribute/quality/expression of the One to begin with is known through apophatic unknowing.

>>14383055
https://discord.gg/evBdcNG

is there anything good in this thread

>>14399141
Nope.