/lit/ - Literature

>>14767644
Start with the primates.

>>14767653
Didn't laugh. Going to have to do better anon.

>>14767644
Obviously Plotinus, I prefer Platonism, but ultimately Hinduism probably has the better potential. But Platonism is better for society.

>>14767644
retarded hindu or retarded christian

>>14767709
retarded post

Don't think.
Do what the TV says.

>>14767644
Scholasticism.

>>14767644
Original Advaita

Neither. Go for Iamblichus and the Shaktists instead.

>>14767644
>pagan idolatry or blind impersonalism

neither.
st maximus, i choose you

>>14768037
ah, so blind personalism instead

>>14768042
no u

>>14767918
Christians trying to subvert non-dualism now too? There is nothing christcucks won't try to stay relevant.

>>14768037
>impersonalism
>everything is full of gods
Every form is a god, the impersonal doesn't exist as a concept in hellenic thought

>>14768517
Non dualism has always existed in Christianity, keep coping.

>>14768637
Completely false. No Christian doctrine fits in with non-dualism. Christianity is a wholly dualistic religion.

>>14768694
True, but only in our relation with the Father. For identity with Christ has always existed in Christianity, and, if one may be bold, we could say that it's the meaning of Christianity.
The dualism in relation to the Father exists in most doctrines in the relation with the Essence of God.

>>14767644
Neither. Buddha
>>14767687
Based

>>14768694
You're confusing monism with nondualism.

>>14768637
>>14768694
>>14768697
>>14768782
I find myself divided, is there simply a dissolution into God, a utter cessation of individuality and therefore indistinction with Him or there will be still a unity within a unity? The former seems to be the heresy of Free Spirit in Christianity, but I also understand that may we have our proper place in an eternal relation with God through a perfect harmony of Love.

>>14768782
No I'm not. Christianity is not compatible with monism/non-dualism though, so it doesn't matter.

>>14767644
At age 8 Plotinus was unusually still being breastfed by his wet nurse, by the same age Shankara had already renounced life as a student and householder to become a monastic sannyasin after a crocodile had seized Shankara while he was in the river and he used it as an opportunity to extract from his nearby mother a promise to give him permission to become a sannyasin if the crocodile released him. This same difference of attainment in spiritual progress by Shankara and Plotinus set the direction for the rest of their lives and continued to be a pattern, the imbalance was never equalized

They both say the same things but Shankara is more complete

>>14768916
How

>>14768826
There is a unity with His energies, which are distinct but not separated from his essence.

>>14767644
Neither. Proclus and Dionysius the Areopagite.

>>14767644
Meister Eckhart

>>14767644
both

>>14769137

Shankara is more precise in the definition of the 5 bodies, and in explaining the 4 ways of liberation. Plotinus talks only about Bhakti (love) and Jnana (knowledge) , Shankara adds Karma (work) and Raja (meditation)

>>14768694
>Christianity is a wholly dualistic religion.

So is Hinduism according to most Hindus.

>>14769755
true. tradposters don't seem to realize shankara is a fringe in hinduism

>>14768916
Shankara is a crypto-Buddhist.

>>14769755
That's not true, Advaita and Vishishtadvaita have been the two most influential schools of Hindu theology historically. Dvaita wasn't even formalized into a school until the 13th century. The Bhedabheda (difference and non-difference) was also more popular and influential than Dvaita with there being multiple important Bhedabheda thinkers before and after Madhva. The pure dualism of Dvaita is a minority compared to the various schools which say that the soul is either non-different from Brahman (Advaita, Vishishtadvaita and Shuddadvaita) and the schools that say it is both different and non-different from Brahman (Bhedabehda and Achintya Bheda Abheda)

>>14769930
Saying it doesn't make it so.

>>14769930
>>14769930
>Advaita and Vishishtadvaita have been the two most influential schools of Hindu theology historically.

It's funny that I've seen you have this discussion with people at least three or four times now, over the course of years. I've been on this damn board too long. You were always a complete dick about it too, typical neovedanta evangelist. "Everything is really advaita, advaita is orthodoxy, real Hinduism is advaita!!" It's just not true. Advaita is a small minority among Hindus, most are effectively dualist in belief if not outright explicitly dualist in metaphysics.

Bonus round: Advaita is just dualism anyway since it reifies maya. It's a pantheistic emanationism. The Buddhist epistemological forms of nondualism, from which Shankara stole his framework, are more logically consistent because they don't try to paradoxically naturalize their nondual epistemology to a vedic pantheism like Shankara does.

>>14770282
>Everything is really advaita, advaita is orthodoxy, real Hinduism is advaita
Holy based....

>>14770598
cringe

>>14770627
cringe
>>14770598
based

>>14767644
Slight preference for Neoplatonist metaphysics.
Dislike Plotinus's ethics. Limp-wristed "Christian morality" began not with Christ but with Plato.

>>14771893
Can you elaborate with sources out of Plato? (You can't lol)

>>14768866
>At age 8 Plotinus was unusually still being breastfed by his wet nurse
what a chad, you know he was hitting that

>>14772778
based

>>14769829

>Anti-Shankara poster is at it again

Both. They're in perfect agreement.

>>14768782
Monism is nondualism, retard.

>>14768694
ΤΑ ΠΑΝΤΑ ΚΑΙ ΕΝ ΠΑΣΙ ΧΡΙΣΤΟΣ

Plotinus doesn't say anything not already found in Plato.

>>14774811
i don't think so, tim

>>14768694
For in Him all things were created, things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities. All things were created through Him and for Him.

one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

that they should seek God, and perhaps feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us, 28 for
In him we live and move and have our being

in Advaita, who is ignorant of not being Brahman?

>>14776365
>in Advaita, who is ignorant of not being Brahman?
The Jiva, or the individual soul is; this soul being only an appearance of the one Atman-Brahman. The Atman is unchanging and without thought and volition, however because of the Atman/Brahman's power of maya it causes limiting adjuncts such as the subtle body (which includes the intellect) to be conjured up by ignorance. In association with these limiting adjuncts the Atman becomes identified by the Jiva with them, the intellect is wrongfully taken to be the Self and the notion of being a thinker and doer is mistakenly superimposed onto the Atman just like one might see the reflection of the moon in a puddle and mistakenly think that the movement of ripples on the surface of the puddle means that the moon itself is moving in such a manner.

The one whose system of thought can produce men like pic related

>>14777371
based

>>14777371
>some poo in loo that sat around all day doing nothing

The one Guenon followed.

>>14778071
Made me laugh pretty hard.
This is exactly what it is.

>>14778071
>>14779587
this.

>bro I am like God Lmao. I need nothing. I will sit here all day meditating in girls clothes while my poor family cannot even afford a loo to poo in without my support.

>>14779600
We have thousands of these in LA where I live. They're called homeless schizos. In India they worship them.

>>14777371
>man
>gyno

>>14777371
>>14779600
Why does he have tits? Is he unironically transitioning?

>>14780318
He was just an old man, sometimes old men who are not even obese just have saggy skin in their breast area just like how their necks and skin on their arms can get saggy too. You laugh now but it may happen to you too one day

>>14767644
shankara

>>14769137
The Enneads span a long period of Plotinus' life and contain contradictory perspectives, evidently from his views changing as he grew older. In just one example, Plotinus in some passages writes about how the highest element in the soul is the Mind (I.1.8) and he warns against trying to ascend above this but then in other Ennead passages he says that the soul is beyond Mind and writes about ascendance to the One and a complete union with the One such that there is no duality or distinctions left, such as in (IV.8.1) (VI.7.34) (VI.9.11) (VI.7.34). In Shankara's writings there are no such major discrepancies or contradictions that need to be reconciled, they read as though someone sat down and wrote out a consistent doctrine without his views changing from the beginning to end. One would expect any complete system to moreso resemble the latter than the former, or at the very least one would expect a final definitive statement from Plotinus explaining which of the two views he elaborated on were correct and an explanation of why he wrote seemingly in support of both. Shankara also more often engages in an analytical discussion of the ideas he is talking about insofar as he often will present in depth the arguments of people disagreeing with his ideas which he then responds to by explaining how and why the opponent and their arguments are still wrong.

>>14781336
>Shankara also more often engages in an analytical discussion of the ideas he is talking about insofar as he often will present in depth the arguments of people disagreeing with his ideas which he then responds to by explaining how and why the opponent and their arguments are still wrong.
Holy based... Where do I start with him?

>>14781860
>Where do I start with him?

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

>>14767709
>retarded christian
You are subhumanly retarded.