/lit/ - Literature

I would start with the upanishads, because they present the most straightforward explanation of the non-dual metaphysics central to the whole thing. They also were the last thing you were properly instructed in if you were learning this stuff in ancient times so you might as well skip straight to that good shit.

>>14622320
>because they present the most straightforward explanation of the non-dual metaphysics central to the whole thing
Based.

>>14622263
Upanishads
Bhagavad Gita
Brahma Sutras

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prasthanatrayi

>>14622263
I got bored of the Rig Veda
Reading the entire Mahābharata is based but it's not really realistic so I'd look for a good abridgement by a reputable university publisher or you can do what I did and read the important bits from the whole translation by Debroy
If you aren't a slack you should be able to read the Ramayana, the Purana and Vasistha's Yoga
After all that you should finish your ancient Hindu study with the Upanishads and please don't read some garbage commentary posted by guenonfag and his I'll, just find a clean translation from a reputable publisher and you should be good
Good luck anon!

>>14622263
>What texts are the most essential and core, as there are so many (4 vedas, upanishads etc. etc.)
The primary Upanishads and the Bhagavad-Gita, the Vedas are mostly of interest to academics only, with the possible exception of the Rig-Veda which has some nice poetry. If you want a translation of those texts by academics then Olivelle's edition of the Upanishads are good as is Flood's edition of the Bhagavad-Gita. If you want to read the classical commentaries of Hindu philosophers on those texts, Adi Shankara wrote some great commentaries on the Upanishads which have been translated, and the Bhagavad-Gita has had numerous wonderful commentaries written on it by Hindu philosophers such as those by Shankara, Ramanuja, Abhinavagupta and Jnanadeva.

>I was planning on picking up the mahabharata and ramayana. Abridged or unabridged?
Reading the entirety of both unabridged could take you possibly a whole year or so, the former especially is quite long. Doing that would allow you to fully appreciate the glory and significance of those texts but people also find the abridged verisons to be enjoyable. It comes down to how much time you want to spend reading them. There is some philosophical content in the Mahabharata but those two text are literary epics and not primarily philosophical or metaphysical works like the Upanishads.

>Any other texts, like the yoga sutras of patanjali?
The Yoga Sutras of Patanjali is a classic worth checking out, I'd also recommend 'The Yoga Vasistha', in particular the longer ~700 page translation of it by Venkatesananada which was published by SUNY

>What about the rig veda? They dont seem to publish the other three.
The Jamison and Brereton translation is the latest critical edition of it published by academics specializing in that area, i'd recommend getting that one if you desire to read it

>Also, is english fine, or preferably english and sanskrit?
Unless you are planning to learn Sanskrit, it's unnecessary to get editions that contain the Sanskrit characters, but most English translations of Hindu writings do so anyway.

Any good YouTube lectures on Advaita?

>>14622402
Here is a playlist of 81 videos of various lectures on Advaita by Swami Sarvapriyananda. He is a nice speaker

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S6YyCXtdbWo&list=PLgH-RjAR8IdHTdWAr64c7kYt4bmUB60n6

>>14622434
Thank you, anon. Is he an orthodox anti-buddhist Advaitin?

>>14622434
in particular his 12-part 'Introduction to Vedanta' series is very informative

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4gqTD_EPQY&list=PLgH-RjAR8IdHTdWAr64c7kYt4bmUB60n6&index=8

>>14622451
he has the Shankara (pbuh) phenotype, so i assume yes.

>>14622451
I don't know, you can watch a video of him here talking about and contrasting anatta/atman and shunya/purna. Presumably as he would have studied all of Shankara's works he would be well acquainted with where Buddhism differs from Advaita and why Shankara criticizes it, I'm not aware of whether he sees any or much value in Buddhism despite those disagreements.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tJfM0tyOwjc

Listen, if any of you really care about this shit beyond memeing on a homosexual illustration forum you can learn to read and pronounce Sanskrit in about 6 months of consistent study. If you have considered reading the Mahabharata unabridged in english then the prospect of spending several months studying this shouldn't seem so daunting, and you get the benefit of not having to rely on biased translations or commentaries.

>>14622508
What kind of study program would allow you to read Sanskrit in only six months? Isn't it a very difficult language?

fucking guenonposter has made me paranoid that all of these people are guenonposter sockpuppets and now i don't want to read any of them

>>14622508
>implying that having a partial understanding of a language is less detrimental to the interpretation of a sophisticated text than a professional well-respected translator's biases.
>as if you couldn't take those biases into account when reading and work around them.
learning languages to read a couple of books is a meme.

>>14622320
>>14622327
>>14622341
>>14622364

Thank you so much!!!!!!!!!

Does anyone know wether the abridged Mahabharata contains the complete Bhagavad Gita, or is it better to just get it by itself?

>>14622672
>Does anyone know wether the abridged Mahabharata contains the complete Bhagavad Gita, or is it better to just get it by itself?
It depends on the individual translation. It's worth it to get an individual copy of the Gita though IMO because these tend to come with various introductions and notes explaining some of the terminology and concepts used in it which would be helpful for a newcomer to Hindu philosophy to read

>>14622558
This means that you have not acquired sufficient virtue in this life and previous lives to be ready for gnosis, so the all-pervasive Being who runs through everything like a thread controlling it from within has ordained that you should have to continue trudging in darkness until the acquisition of virtue and the eradication of sin by you leads to the appointed hour of illumination

>>14622508
>learn to read and pronounce Sanskrit
It would take an average mind about a week, not 6 months. Learning the language will take much longer than 6 months though.

>>14622725
Incorrect.

>>14622558
>all of these people are guenonposter sockpuppets
In a way, that is the non-dualistic truth.

>>14622733
How and why?

>>14622733
We asked you in the other post how the fuck you're supposed to learn the hardest classical PIE language in six months but you've given us nothing

Link to some Hinduism resources

http://www.mediafire.com/folder/ziouaua5sgmol/Hinduism

Is the Brahma Sutra Bhasya considered a classic ?
Which version, Radhakrishnan or Gambhirananda? They also differ in length by a lot.

Here is a useful resource on modern scholarly consensus about Shankara.

>>14623217
>modern scholarly consensus
Worthless piece of garbage by it's very nature.

>>14623202
>Is the Brahma Sutra Bhasya considered a classic ?
Yes, the Brahma Sutra is considered very important to the Vedanta schools. The Brahma Sutra Bhasya of Shankara is one of the more influential ones and the first by a founder of a major Vedanta school. The Brahma-Sutra commentary by Ramanuja, the founder of the Vishishtadvaita school is sometimes referred to as the Vedanta-Sutras.
>Which version, Radhakrishnan or Gambhirananda? They also differ in length by a lot.
Radhakrishnan didn't do a translation of the founders of the schools but did his own that discusses that of Shankara's and Ramanuja's. Radhakrishnan's book would certainly be simpler than Gambhirananda's and the scholarly value of his books is generally high, but at the same time he also wrote about his own interpretation of Hinduism and Vedanta which differed from traditional Vedanta and which some people have written is 'neovedanta' or which is influenced by western philosophy, so his book may present a somewhat idiosyncratic take.

Gambhirananda's did an unabridged word for word translation of Shankara's 8th-century commentary on the Brahma Sutras, it's the lengthiest and most densest of Shankara's works and to a large degree presupposes familiarity with the Upanishads already by the reader, although it is often considered to be his greatest and most sublime work. I would only recommend reading it after having both read all of the primary Upanishads (with or without commentary) and preferably some of Shankara's writing too so you have some understanding of his style of writing and ideas already. If you want to you can do these both at once by reading Shankara's commentaries that he wrote on the Upanishads, which contain the complete text of the Upanishad itself, the links below have 8 out of the 10 or 11 commentaries that he wrote on the Upanishads.

https://estudantedavedanta.net/Eight-Upanisads-Vol-1.pdf
https://estudantedavedanta.net/Eight-Upanisads-vol2.pdf

>>14623397
based, thank you very much!

Which version of the Upanishads is recommended?
Eight Upanishads?
The Principle/primary Upanishads?
Easwaran's?
etc. etc.

Do they all contain largely the same texts or contain different ones and are they the same length?