/lit/ - Literature

>Shankara BTFO
10/10

First time writing fiction, how am I doing?
>Her antiquity in preceding and surviving succeeding tellurian generations: her nocturnal predominance: her satellitic dependence: her luminary reflection: her constancy under all her phases, rising and setting by her appointed times, waxing and waning: the forced invariability of her aspect: her indeterminate response to inaffirmative interrogation: her potency over effluent and refluent waters: her power to enamour, to mortify, to invest with beauty, to render insane, to incite to and aid delinquency: the tranquil inscrutability of her visage: the terribility of her isolated dominant resplendent propinquity: her omens of tempest and of calm: the stimulation of her light, her motion and her presence: the admonition of her craters, her arid seas, her silence: her splendour, when visible: her attraction, when invisible

>>15090912
Reminds of that movie with Sean Connery and that nigger kid on the debate team. The whole movie leads up to this speech that he’s supposed to make, and instead of going through the argument they just do a montage of this nigger reading in front of a bunch of impressed white kids and teachers totally blown away lmao

>>15090912
I think it is interesting

Have you read borges?

>>15090912
Based.

Fuck guenonfag and fuck any one who considers Buddhism heterodox Hinduism

>>15092573
Yes! Can someone finally provide an argument against guenonfag because he remains to be undefeated. I would write out a rebuttal if I could but I am literally a fucking retard. Can someone please explain why Buddhism isn’t a religion for fucking retards?!?!?

>>15090912
>Actor is literally named ‘Nagarjuna’
Supremely Based

>>15092595
>wow this guenonbro sounds like a handsome devil, I bet he’s an undefeated champion in epic debates, go ahead and refute ‘him’ I bet you can’t lol
>who me? I’m just a random retarded anon don’t mind me, he’s the real genius god I wanna suck his 2 inch so bad

>>15093051
>I’m so fucking smart and stupid at the same time

>""""""""""I’m so fucking smart and stupid at the same time""""""""""""""""

>>15093103
Nice

>>15090912
Based Nagarjuna (omph) retroactively humiliating Dikshitars since 250 CE

>>15090912
You switch tenses between the two sentences.

>>15090912
>Shankara refuted by Nagarjuna
Nice fiction

>>15094231
you're right, he was refuted by Ramanuja, Madhva, Bhaskara, Desika, etc

>>15094231
If it's fiction, why is there a picture of it?

checkmate neo-vedantists

angara bangara I want all you indian humbabas to exit life.

>>15094374
cringe...

I reverse image searched op's picture and the only result was "Good Friday"

>>15092595

>>15090963
You’re quite at an immature stage. The almost arbitrary usage of fancy words and the excessive and totally unnecessary use of colons is unbearable. Read more, learn from different styles and authors.

>>15090963
the properties of the moon listed, but you mingle low aspects ("to incite to and aid delinquency", "satellic dependence") with high ones ("her power to enamour", "her antiquity")
Just like a mountain terminating in its summit, your devices should start at the lowest and finish at their highest point, but here you mingle the great and the vulgar together
In some parts the devices are obfuscated by the chosen terms - "her antiquity in preceding and surviving succeeding tellurian generations" hides the inherent gravity of "a thing older than the race of man", or "effluent and refluent waters" which is very meek beside the "the tides" - while "indeterminate response to inaffirmative interrogation" is just waggery

>>15090912
what movie is this?

>>15095476
It's from the movie Adi Shankaracharya when the eponymous character of the movie meets an outcaste and has a humbling interaction with him

>>15090912
Śaṅkarācārya settled down onto his tigerskin run and faced Nagarjuna

"It's time to settle whose teachings are correct for once and for all" Śaṅkarācārya stated

"I agree, let us enter into a debate" Nagarjuna said. "But Śaṅkarācārya, we both accept that the phenomenal world is only conditionally real and lacks ultimate reality, you on the authority on the Upanishads and me on the words of the Tathagata, where is the disagreement?"

"Ah, but you see" Śaṅkarācārya interjected, "You reject that there is any existent higher reality and state that even Nirvana is sunyata or empty of essence and self-nature, whereas the Upanishads describe the ultimate reality Brahman as an infinite undecaying intelligence which is purnam (fullness), you also hold to the foolish anatta (no-self) doctrine which I have debunked in my popular writings repeatedly"

"But Śaṅkarācārya! The Tathagata refuted all doctrines of Self!" Nagarjuna shouted out

"That is incorrect my friend, he actually stated in one Sutta that the denial of the Self was an extreme of nihilism, but he didn't affirm the existence of the Self because he was trying to point to the apophatic Upanishadic Self by negation, you and all the other Buddhists sadly misunderstood him as teaching "no-self" despite that he condemned this in the Pali Canon as nihilism, anyways back to the subject at hand, your denial of the Self is foolish, like a man who says he is not wet while he is swimming in the ocean."

Śaṅkarācārya continued "If there is no Self then there is nobody to realize the truth of emptiness or Nirvana, there is no examples of illusions or emptiness being self-aware and conscious like we are, the Self as the luminous awareness which observes all of our thoughts and sensations stands self-proven and can only be denied by the dim-witted"

Nagarjuna protested "But Śaṅkarācārya, I don't mean emptiness as in nothingness, I mean emptiness as devoid of uncaused permanent existence, that is to say everything is a web of mutually-dependent relations such that nothing in the world has ultimate, independent or uncaused existence, you are misunderstanding what I mean"

>>15096195

Śaṅkarācārya calmed rebutted "Well, if that's true then you should have picked a better word to express that then emptiness, but in any case your theory is still wrong because you still deny the ultimate reality of the Self and the aggregates which you believe produce the false sensation of it, if the Self and aggregates do not exist in ultimate reality then there wouldn't be any conscious experience at all; something that lacks existence at the level of ultimate reality cannot suddenly turn into seemingly real conscious experience at the basis of conditional reality, if there is no underlying existent basis for the illusion of Self to arise then it would not arise and we would not even be conscious. Illusions never appear where there is no existent basis but only where there is a real existing substratum in which they can inhere such as seeing a snake in a rope or a man in a post. Hence the either the Self is real or the real ultimate existence of something which causes the existence of the Self is proven, either way your theory is falsified."

"b-but Śaṅkarācārya, you yourself maintain that the phenomenal world doesn't exist in ultimate reality, how are you not also attacking your own doctrine?" Nagarjuna stuttered

Śaṅkarācārya replied "Ah but you see I maintain that there is an absolutely real Entity that is intelligence and bliss, the Brahman of the Upanishads, who while existing as the substratum in which this illusion inheres creates it with His magical power of maya, so my doctrine doesn't face the same contradictions since there is an absolute Reality causing those illusions

Nagarjuna sat back in disbelief and after a pause stated "I see how you are right, truly illusions cannot arise where there is no ultimately existent basis, but is not the moksha (liberation) you describe still a form of bondage, how can you assert that it is complete liberation and the highest aim when you still say that one exists as Bliss-Awareness? Is this not the extreme of eternalism? This very eternal Awareness being a form of bondage?

>>15096205

Śaṅkarācārya laughed and replied "What a silly proposition, In Moksha one enters into one's previously obscured true nature as Brahman Himself and becomes eternal Bliss, it is complete freedom untouched and unaffected by anything, existing as the "One alone, without a second" as the Chandogya Upanishad states, there being nothing else existing, there is no second entity or effect at this stage which can make Brahman unhappy or unsatisfied "

Śaṅkarācārya continued "In fact it is your idea of liberation itself which is nonsensical, you state that Nirvana is bliss, yet at the same time you deny that anything continues which can experience that bliss, if the individual entity does not continue into Nirvana, and if you don't admit any supra-individual entity which does like the Atman, then Nirvana can not be experienced and it is merely a dissolution into nothingness, an extinction. Bliss in such a scenario becomes only a figurative way of describing how annihilating oneself prevents one from experiencing the suffering of life, but it is not Bliss in a literal sense and so it is not true Bliss as the Upanishadic moksha is. You are a Charvaka (materialist) in disguise.

Nagarjuna gasped and replied "b-but Śaṅkarācārya, Nirvana is beyond the extremes of existence and non-existence! It's not nothingness or a complete annihilation!"

Śaṅkarācārya smiled, "Nagarjuna my foolish friend, you yourself have turned Nirvana into complete annihilation an nothingness by your denial of anything that continues into Nirvana which experiences it, if the person, Atma, Jiva, aggregates or any other way of describing a person do not experience Nirvana after death, then it has no connection with the person who is supposed to be attaining it and the only result is the annihilation of their cycle of rebirth and their extinction into nothingness. Also, it does not make any sense to say that Nirvana is beyond existence and non-existent. Something can either exist or it cannot exist, or it can have a transcendental existence beyond all thought and language such as the Upanishadic Brahman, but this later category is still a special category of existence.

>>15096217

Śaṅkarācārya continued "In trying to posit this special category of 'beyond existence and non-existence' you are unsuccessfully trying to worm your way in-between the one side of eternally existing liberation *as bliss* which would falsify the thesis that Nirvana is empty, and on the other hand the other side of complete extinction into nothingness, which you want to avoid. You have given no reasons why anyone should accept such a fanciful category of "beyond existence and non-existence" because there are no reasons for it, there are no supporting examples to be drawn from whatsoever that would suggest that it is a real category, there is no proof that it is not just a fanciful hypothesis and indeed any attempt to prove it results in inevitable contradiction; something can either exist at the level of ultimate/absolute truth or it cannot exist at that level, there is no 3rd option, you have attempted to make it up to escape the contradictory predicament you are in, just as though when a man is caught stealing from the king's treasury and is brought before the king he tries to say "your highness the guard indeed saw me escaping out the window with a bag of jewels but I am at the same time not guilty of stealing from your treasury".

Nagarjuna whined "Śaṅkarācārya, I know that it defies logic and common sense but think, if we assent to the claim that Nirvana exists then we are conceptualizing about it and falsifying the Real as a result!"

Śaṅkarācārya replied "Nagarjuna, the only thing that has been falsified is your reputation as a great philosopher"

Nagarjuna sat back in stunned silence for many minutes before silently walking away from the debate stage in humiliation and confusion.
श्रुति स्मृति पुराणानामालयं करुणालयं|
नमामि भगवत्पादशंकरं लॊकशंकरं ||

>>15096218
>Śaṅkarācārya replied "Nagarjuna, the only thing that has been falsified is your reputation as a great philosopher"
damn... Nagarjunafags on suicide watch