/lit/ - Literature

>>14665017
true

>>14665017
And Guénon built upon this further BTFOing all of philosophy.

>>14665017

>>14665017
Actually, Plato proactively debunked all philosophy after him, which includes the Upaniśads, which, of course, didn't appear until AD, despite the bizarre pseudohistorical claims.

>>14665025
Plato preemptively dismantled this Freemason slob.

>>14665041
>>14665025
>>14665020
https://detechter.com/these-8-western-philosophers-were-influenced-by-hinduism/

>>14665052
Schopenhauer

"The Upanishads are the highest production of human wisdom"

"Upanishads are the most satisfying and elevating read"

guenonfag is spamming his asspained side-threads again. remember to post the parmenides one too you sad schizo.

>>14665078
Not an argument. Take your pills schizo

Your threads are becoming more and more successful, Guenonfag. Soon you will really win them over!

>>14665093
They quite literally literally solved consciousness. The Greeks are like retarded children in comparison

>>14665103
inb4 he replies to his own post saying "based" 40 times

>>14665078
>this image
Holy fuck the autism is getting out of control

>>14665103
Buddha did. Vedantists just say Buddhism + "universal atman bruh"

>>14665103
this, except for Neoplatonism

>>14665164
The Upanishads were first and Buddhism is an inferior copy of them

>>14665179
>The Upanishads were first
Wrong.
>Buddhism is an inferior copy of them
False.

>>14665179
Only a few Upanishads are pre-Buddhist and even those aren't certain. The Upanishads are all massively influenced by sramanas which are non-Vedic in origin and have more in common with Jains and Buddhas. The early non-Vedic sramana communities probably greatly influenced even the earliest two Upanishads that are arguably pre-Buddhist. And Buddhism itself, a developed form of sramana, very much influenced the subsequent Upanishads.

It's even worse if you are an Advaitin. At least non-Advaita Hindus can claim that their Hinduism is Vedic. Advaita Vedanta is not only an inaccurate account of the Vedas (and seen as such by 95% of Hindus), it is a wholesale copy-and-paste of Mahayana Buddhism from 1000+ years after the principal Upanishads. Advaita is like the Mormonism of Hinduism, it's a tiny fringe sect that most people regard as a curiosity.

Only a few neovedantists on the internet dispute any of this.

>>14665205
The sramana movement started with the Buddha. The early Ashoka stones refer to Buddhists only when they speak of sramanas. Jainism probably wasn't even contemporary with the Buddha but was pulled back in time by the Jains in order to argue against the Buddha directly. The Buddhists obviously had no problem with this because then they could do the same thing. Essentially Indian history as most people hink of it most likely started with the Buddha.

You're right that sramana isn't Vedic, it is nomadic. It is Scythian, by the sage of the Scythians.

>>14665017
A decadent system beautifully devised by a people who, above and beyond, hate life.

>>14665205
>>14665288
Both of you are wrong, sramanas came from the Vedics and arose out of Vedic spiritual teachings. The Upanishads are the flowering of this, Buddhism/Jainism are spinoffs of the older Sramanic-Upanishadic tradition

>Patrick Olivelle, a professor of Indology and known for his translations of major ancient Sanskrit works, states in his 1993 study that contrary to some representations, the original Śramaṇa tradition was a part of the Vedic one.[35] He writes,

>Sramana in that context obviously means a person who is in the habit of performing srama. Far from separating these seers from the vedic ritual tradition, therefore, śramaṇa places them right at the center of that tradition. Those who see them [Sramana seers] as non-Brahmanical, anti-Brahmanical, or even non-Aryan precursors of later sectarian ascetics are drawing conclusions that far outstrip the available evidence.

>—Patrick Olivelle, The Ashrama System[36]
>According to Olivelle, and other scholars such as Edward Crangle, the concept of Śramaṇa exists in the early Brahmanical literature.[24][25] The term is used in an adjectival sense for sages who lived a special way of life that the Vedic culture considered extraordinary. However, Vedic literature does not provide details of that life.[37] The term did not imply any opposition to either Brahmins or householders. In all likelihood states Olivelle, during the Vedic era, neither did the Śramaṇa concept refer to an identifiable class, nor to ascetic groups as it does in later Indian literature.[38] Additionally, in the early texts, some pre-dating 3rd-century BCE ruler Ashoka, the Brahmana and Śramaṇa are neither distinct nor opposed. The distinction, according to Olivelle, in later Indian literature "may have been a later semantic development possibly influenced by the appropriation of the latter term [Sramana] by Buddhism and Jainism".[22]

inb4 you post a bunch of quotes from books from the early to mid 20th century or older, Olivelle's study in 1993 debunks their assumptions and conclusively showed the sramanas were originally a part of the Vedic tradition, nobody has proven Olivelle's wrong yet, his research is the most up to date and comprehensive account of the origin of the sramanas

>>14665017
Just bought this. How should I read it without reading the smell?

>>14665326
>inb4 you post a bunch of quotes from books from the early to mid 20th century or older, Olivelle's study in 1993 debunks their assumptions and conclusively showed the sramanas were originally a part of the Vedic tradition, nobody has proven Olivelle's wrong yet, his research is the most up to date and comprehensive account of the origin of the sramanas
seek help
>According to Bronkhorst, the sramana culture arose in "greater Magadha," which was Indo-European, but not Vedic. In this culture, Kshatriyas were placed higher than Brahmins, and it rejected Vedic authority and rituals.
Both Jeffrey Long and Bronkhorst agrees with this. It was a nomadic Scythian phenomena.
>inb4 you try to dispute this by using late 20th century or older quotes
Remember that Long and Bronkhorst released their papers proving this in 2012 and 2007 respectively and no one have been able to refute them since. Their research used the absolutely newest research available and all the findings since then have only further substantiated their claims which makes it the most comprehensive account to-date.

>>14665326
Wow, we finally got Guenonfag reading scholarship! Only when it suits him, but still an improvement from before. At least you're not citing neovedantist religious propaganda anymore. Although dude, you can't just say "no one has refuted olivelle he is UNREFUTED." That you always conceive of debates in terms of "debunking," "refuting," "BTFOing," etc., is weakening your ability to critically engage with texts and traditions.

From the same Wikipedia article where you found Olivelle:

Olivelle 1993, p. 68, Quote: "It is obvious that vedic society contained large numbers of people whose roots were non-Aryan and that their customs and beliefs must have influenced the dominant Aryan classes. It is quite a different matter, however, to attempt to isolate non-Aryan customs, beliefs, or traits at a period a millennium or more removed from the initial Aryan migration."

Olivelle 1993, p. 68, Quote: "The Brahmanical religion. furthermore, like any other historical phenomenon, developed and changed over time not only through external influences but also by its own inner dynamism and because of socio-economic changes, the radical nature of which we have already discussed. New elements in a culture, therefore, need not always be of foreign origin."

So there are non-Vedic influences and complex developments. The author of the OP picture (are you the OP?), Max Muller, also believes that the societies of the late Brahmanic period were in extreme flux and that the Upanishads constitute a break away from the Brahman castes (he also includes the Aranyakas in this). Partially this was a rebellion of the kshatriyas, but of course we know next to nothing about what this society actually looked like. One of the few things we can say for certain is that the Brahmanas proper seem to show considerable drift both linguistically and in terms of content, and they are organized by communities (as associated with certain families or perhaps even rulers).

So it's likely that the sramana revolution was many-faceted and drew from lots of different channels, including a non-priestly upper caste "social" revolt against the priestly caste (? hard to know what this really was), various ethnic/linguistic/religious outsiders, and so forth.

Pic related is from Bronkhorst in 1998, and he seems to qualify or disagree with Olivelle. I haven't read it though, just cherry-picking here.

>>14665371
Can you link the papers? Sounds interesting. I thought the Scythian hypothesis was a meme.

>>14665288
>The sramana movement started with the Buddha

>Duuudeee... eastern mystics had it all figured out

>>14665399
>the West bro! Start with the Greeks! It's much superior

>>14665326
>sramanas came from the Vedics and arose out of Vedic spiritual teachings
yes the very same tradition that explicitly rejected the Vedas...arose out of Vedic spiritual teachings, I can see why nobody bothered to disprove this brilliant assessment

>>14665410
>can't figure out poo in loo
>"bro, they say if you die you might be a cow when you wake up"
Cringe. If you can't figure out toilets you have no place commenting on philosophy.

>>14665378
>https://www.academia.edu/25950011/Possible_Iranian_Origins_for_the_%C5%9A%C4%81kyas_and_Aspects_of_Buddhism
And the book "Greek Buddha: Pyrrho's Encounter with Early Buddhism in Central Asia"
>>14665379
Yes. And also Buddhism wasn't as much of an attack on Brahmanism but an attack on Zoroastrian influence on Brahmanism which had started to seriously take hold. The idea of a metaphysical good/evil duality, ritual and sacrifice being necessary for salvation as opposed to them having impact on things in this very life which is how Vedic sacrifices and rituals were originally conceived of and a personal God.

>>14665424
damn, minoans pooped like THAT? genuinely impressed

>>14665424
Crete was the peak of post-Atlantean civilization

>>14665424
You're forgetting the best part of the public toilet experience. You all got to share the same wiper.

>>14665017
>This book has more wisdom in it than anything ever written.
Yes.

>>14665428
kek, are you the same anon who recommended Beckwith's book on Pyrrho in a thread a few days ago? If so I already ordered it through the library because of you

>>14665428
>Several śramaṇa movements are known to have existed in India before the 6th century BCE (pre-Buddha, pre-Mahavira), and these influenced both the āstika and nāstika traditions of Indian philosophy.[28][29]
Additionally the Rig Veda talks about long haired, saffron robed men who engaged in austerity instead of fire rituals and even mentions the first tirthankara of Jainism (Rishabhanatha). It is clear that the Sramana movement started around the time that the Vedic period was coming to an end (since these referenced occurred in the youngest section of the Rig Veda [book 10]).

>>14665465
lel yeah I think so. But then again someone else from here once recommended it to me so i can't take the credit.

>>14665326
I like how you just copy-paste selected sections of wikipedia and leave out things which disagree with your presumptions

>Govind Chandra Pande, a professor of Indian history, states in his 1957 study on the origins of Buddhism, that Śramaṇa was a "distinct and separate cultural and religious" tradition than the Vedic.[34]
>source date: 1995

>>14665542
>1957

>>14665542
he does this a lot. Quotes authors that aligns with him and discounts ones that don't. I actually gave him a Max Mueller citation once and he dismissed it as 'hurrrr (((western scholars)))) even though Olivelle is a western scholar himself

>>14665549
The same year as Robinson, Guenonfag's favourite author?!? Did he just checkmate himself?

>>14665556
He rails against Muller all the time but then cites him. He recommended Radhakrishnan the other day and today he said Radhakrishnan is a neovedantist and not to be trusted. He approvingly cites Schuon unless Schuon is being called out for his pedo shit, then he says Schuon is an outlier. He likes when Sharma says Advaita is in the ancient Upanishads, but he dislikes Sharma when he says that Mahayana developed the full implications of these Upanishads and actually created the full Advaita position that Shankara then adopts.

I've never seen him become more open, never seen him agree to disagree with anyone, never seen him do anything other than be a manipulative prick.

>>14665069
Have you read them? They instruct you to rub your ejeculate into your forehead after each coom session

>>14665599
wow, they solved the central problems of nofap millennia in advance
truly these were men of boundless wisdom

>>14665599
Based. This encourages you not to coom so often.

>>14665599
Based...

>>14666105
>guenon advocates eating cum

>>14666114
Well, technically it would not be seen as coom; just as Christians do not see bread as bread after the transubstantiation has taken place.
>Extreme precautions must be taken to not consume even a single dropling of an Amrita that has not yet fully transubstantiated, as it can contribute to great spiritual anguish. It is for this reason that the drinking of Amrita should be in its essence an initatic Sacrament.

>>14666120
youre fucking with us right

>>14666138
He did believe in the traditional healing power of the Amrita-Sacrament (that is a pretty normal Upanishadic belief).
>It is precisely because Amrita has a quality so divine that it is proper to subject oneself to all that it entails and therefore also to its arduous preparation, and to put it on the table before food, so that it may be not found lacking in quality. This, of course, is perfectly in harmony with the doctrines of almost all traditional schools. Thus it is urged that the divine nectar be milked and consumed as a Sacrament by the initiated. Without dwelling on the matter any longer, we will only note that while mating, a European male can (at best) be expected to produce far less of the nectar than a Negroid male of comparable stature, and that this difference in aptitude will certainly be passed on through the generations.

https://discord.gg/FFwRXKq

.

>>14666863
>*wakes up 4 AM to take a pee*
>oh shit my thread is gonna die
>bumps thread
>*goes back to sleep to continue discussion in the morning*