/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.13406245]

I am free, I am bodiless, I am without sex and indestructible. I am at peace, I am infinite, without blemish and eternal. I am not the doer and I am not the reaper of the consequences. I am unchanging and without activity. I am pure awareness by nature, I am perfect and forever blessed. I am distinct from the seer, hearer, speaker, doer and experiencer. I am eternal, undivided, actionless, limitless, unattached - perfect awareness by nature. I am neither this nor that, but the pure supreme reality which illuminates them both. I am God, the indivisible, devoid of inside and outside, complete. I am uncomparable, beginningless Reality. I am far from such thoughts as "you", "me", and "this". I am eternal bliss, the Truth, the non-dual God himself. I am Narayana, I am the slayer of Naraka and of Pura. I am the supreme Person and the Lord. I am indivisible awareness, the witness of everything. I have no master and I am without any sense of "me" and "mine". I abide in all creatures, being the very knowledge which is their inner and outer support. I myself am the ejoyer and all enjoyment, in fact whatever I experienced before now.

In me who am the ocean of infinite joy the manifold waves of the universe arise and come to an end, impelled by the winds of Maya. Ideas like "material" are mistakenly imagined about me by people under the influence of their presuppositions, as are divisions of time like kalpas, years, half-years and seasons, dividing the indivisible and inconceivable. The presuppositions of the severely deluded can never affect the underlying reality, just as the great torrent of a mirage flood cannot wet a desert land. Like space, I am beyond contamination. Like the sun, I am distinct from the things illuminated. Like a mountain, I am always immovable. Like the ocean, I am boundless. I am no more bound to the body than the sky is to a cloud, so how can I be affected by its states of waking, dreaming and deep sleep? Imagined attributes added to one's true nature come and go. They create karma and experience its effects. They grow old and die, but I always remain immovable like mount Kudrali. There is no outward turning nor turning back for me, who am always the same and indivisible. How can that perform actions which is single, of one nature, without parts and complete, like space? How can there be good and bad deeds for me who am organless, mindless, changeless and formless, and experience only indivisible joy? The scriptures themselves declare "He is not affected" (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 4.3.22).

[Anonymous No.13406247]

Heat or cold, the pleasant or the unpleasant coming into contact with a man's shadow in no way affect the man himself who is quite distinct from his shadow. The qualities of things seen do not touch the seer, who is quite distinct from them, changeless and unaffected, just as household objects do not touch the lamp there. Like the sun's mere witnessing of actions, like fire's non-involvement with the things it is burning, and like the relationship of a rope to the idea superimposed on it, so is the unchanging consciousness within me. I neither do nor make things happen. I neither experience nor cause to experience. I neither see nor make others see. I am that supreme light without attributes. When intervening factors (the water) move, the ignorant ascribe the movement of the reflection to the object itself, like the sun which is actually immovable. They think "I am the doer", "I am the reaper of the consequences", and "Alas, I am being killed." Whether my physical body falls into water or onto dry land, I am not dirtied by their qualities, just as space is not affected by the qualities of a jar it is in. Such states as thinking oneself the doer or the reaper of the consequences, being wicked, drunk, stupid, bound or free are false assumptions of the understanding, and do not apply in reality to one's true self, the supreme, perfect and non-dual God. Let there be tens of changes on the natural level, hundreds of changes, thousands of changes. What is that to me, who am unattached consciousness? The clouds never touch the sky. I am that non-dual God, who like space is subtle and without beginning or end, and in whom all this from the unmanifest down to the material is displayed as no more than an appearance.

I am that non-dual God who is eternal, pure, unmoving and imageless, the support of everything, the illuminator of all objects, manifest in all forms and all-pervading, and yet empty of everything. I am that non-dual God who is infinite Truth, Knowledge and Bliss, who transcends the endless modifications of Maya, who is one's own reality and to be experienced within. I am actionless, changeless, partless, formless, imageless, endless and supportless - one without a second. I am the reality in everything. I am everything and I am the non-dual beyond everything. I am perfect indivisible awareness and I am infinite bliss. I have received this glory of the sovereignty over myself and over the world by the compassion of your grace, noble and great-souled guru. Salutation upon salutation to you, and again salutation. You, my teacher, have my supreme saviour, waking me up from sleep through your infinite compassion, lost in a vast dream as I was and afflicted every day by countless troubles in the Maya-created forest of birth, old age and death, and tormented by the tiger of this feeling myself the doer.

[GOD No.13406257]

>>13406245
Blue nigga knows da truth

[Anonymous No.13406258]

Salutation to you, King of gurus, who remain always the same in your greatness. Salutation to you who are manifest as all this that we see. Seeing his noble disciple, who had achieved the joy of his true nature in samadhi, who had awaken to the Truth, and experienced deep inner contentment, kneeling thus before him, the best of teachers and supreme great soul spoke again and said these words. The world is a sequence of experiences of God, so it is God that is everything, and one should see this in all circumstances with inner insight and a peaceful mind. What has ever been seen by sighted people but forms, and in the same way what other resort is there for a man of understanding but to know God? What man of wisdom would abandon the experience of supreme bliss to take pleasure in things with no substance? When the beautiful moon iself is shining, who would want to look at just a painted moon? There is no satisfaction or elimination of suffering through the experience of unreal things, so experience that non-dual bliss and remain happily content established in to your own true nature.

Pass your time, noble one, in being aware of your true nature everywhere, thinking of yourself as non-dual, and enjoying the bliss inherent in yourself. Imagining things about the unimaginable and indivisible nature of awareness is building castles in the sky, so transcending this, experience the supreme peace of silence through your true nature composed of that non-dual bliss. The ultimate tranquillity is the return to silence of the intellect, since the intellect is the cause of false assumptions, and in this peace the great souled man who knows God and who has become God experiences the infinite joy of non-dual bliss. For the man who has recognised his own nature and who is enjoying the experience of inner bliss, there is nothing that gives him greater satisfaction than the peace that comes from having no desires. A wise and silent ascetic lives as he pleases finding his joy in himself at all times whether walking, standing, sitting, lying down or whatever.

[Anonymous No.13406259]

>>13406245
>I am without sex
indeed

[Anonymous No.13406262]

>>13406245
have kama

[Anonymous No.13406271]

>>13406245
based. but what is the difference between “experiencer” and “witness”? he says he is not the former, but is the latter.

[Anonymous No.13406277]

Hinduism is probably the closest to the truth of all the world's religions

[Anonymous No.13406281]

>>13406271
I experience the sensation of cold, but I also witness it.

[Anonymous No.13406285]

I AM GAY

[Anonymous No.13406293]

>>13406281
what’s the difference between the two

[Anonymous No.13406313]

>>13406293
Awareness of it perhaps? You experience it but you are also aware that it happens when it does, so there is the awareness of the experience, looking at it, being conscious that you feel it, and there is the experience itself of feeling it.

[Anonymous No.13406328]

>>13406313
so i guess
experience = visceral, tied to the senses
witness = detached, consciousness

that sounds plausible

[Anonymous No.13406419]

>>13406271
By experiencer is meant the intellect/mind; by witness is meant the formless distinctionless awareness which is prior to the activity of the mind

[Anonymous No.13406426]

>>13406419
is this technical, sanskrit terminology? if so what are the terms?

[Anonymous No.13406454]

[Anonymous No.13406471]

>>13406454
Both are based.

[Anonymous No.13406499]

>>13406426
The mind is called the ‘internal organ’ (antahkarana) and is contained with the subtle body (sūkṣma śarīra). The different functions and aspects of the mind are further classified and given different names in Sanskrit including mental cogitation, thoughts, memory, egoism etc. The subtle body is held to be inert and non-conscious until illumined like an object by Atma, the inner self comprised of formless, distinctionless, self-luminous, blissful awareness.

[Anonymous No.13406578]

>>13406471
this

[Anonymous No.13406612]

based and jivanmukti-pilled

[Anonymous No.13406628]

Thank you anon! I’m really happy today and this thread made me more happy!
I hope you all have a wonderful day today

[Anonymous No.13406632]

which verse or book was it that finally gave you atma-jnana bros?

For me it was the part in the Bhagavad Gita where God talks about how the Atma cannot be affected by the four elements, and that "Atman cannot be perceived by the senses, because the senses abide in Atman". That's what made me get it.

[Anonymous No.13406639]

>>13406277
They have excellent traditions and (in some ways) more importantly have preserved their traditions well. I think greco-egypto-roman religion and philosophy, if it had been preserved as well, would easily compete for attention in the west. I think the easy accessibility of "hindu" philosophy and religion is why it is so popular. it is also excellent, but has a certain temporal advantage over other traditions. It's all indo-european at the end of the day anyway though.

[Anonymous No.13406685]

>>13406632
For me, it was Shankara's commentary on the Katha Upanishad

[Anonymous No.13406709]

>>13406258
How to experience non-dual bliss?

[Anonymous No.13406728]

>>13406632
Holy shit I think I just got it

[Anonymous No.13406845]

>>13406709
In Advaita Vedanta knowledge is held to be central to experiencing realization and non-dual bliss. Regular meditation is held to be only a secondary means that held prepare one by steadying the mind etc and isn't at all considered fundamental. The main steps are studying the Vedanta texts or hearing them from a teacher (Sravana), reflecting on these teachings (Manana), and finally meditating or concentrating on the central truths of the śrutis as expressed in the Mahāvākyas such as 'That art Thou' (Nididhyāsana). An important point though is that Sravana is considered to be needed for the other steps. For someone who is not being personally instructed by a teacher the best thing would be to read Shankara's commentaries on the Prasthānatrayī and then branch out from there into other texts. There is no shortcut past studying the writings of the school, you can try to meditate on the ideas of the school just from reading about them online, but until you actually read a bunch of their central writings and know exactly what they are talking about and what they are prescribing you'll just be guessing without really knowing what you're supposed to be doing.

[Anonymous No.13406853]

>>13406245
[citation needed]

[Anonymous No.13407031]

>>13406845
Thank you!

[Anonymous No.13407077]

>>13406639
Definitely, it's a deep ocean compared to the shallow sea of the abrahamic religions

[Anonymous No.13407093]

>>13406245
>I am without sex
Have sex.

[Anonymous No.13407095]

who came up with this translation? thanks for posting this

[Anonymous No.13407097]

>>13407077
True mysticism in Abraham religions is a very deep ocean to explore.

[Anonymous No.13407110]

>>13407097
Yeah of concepts hijacked from every philosopher around them. And yes, I know syncretism is common, but the syncretics don't deny credit where credit is due. Abrahamism shamelessly steals, accuses everyone else, and then embarks on political campaigns to persecute all competition.

[Anonymous No.13407113]

>>13406845
Good post friend, cleared up a lot of things I've been mulling over.

[Anonymous No.13407116]

>>13406245
>I am neither this nor that.
Try again faggot

[Anonymous No.13407118]

>>13407110
I hear you, but I wouldn't discount Christian mysticism so quickly. Yes exoteric Christianity is inferior without a doubt, but the Christian mystics (and Christ, of course) are part of the same spiritual brotherhood, without a doubt

[Anonymous No.13407128]

>>13407118
It's just not necessary. Christianity is flawed because of its exclusive truth claims. All interesting mystic ideas in christianity were aped from neoplatonism. Uniquely abrahamic ideas of exclusive and exhaustive ownership of the truth can only impede wisdom. The Jesus narrative does not contribute positively to understanding god and creation. It is unnecessary at best and extremely harmful at worst.

[Anonymous No.13407131]

>>13407118
Eh, there isn't much mystical about it without compromising it's core beliefs.

[Anonymous No.13407137]

>>13407128
Hmm, I think Christianity is the religious equivalent of a special education class, but I also think a transcendent being/Aeon did incarnate in Christ, so. What can I tell you? Can you accept a temporality, a movement, in the absolute itself? Or are we doomed to a static natural order, eternally vivified by the nigredo/Midnight Mystery? It's up to you. And yes, again, I do think Christianity is for metaphysical speds. But I also don't. Go figure.

[Anonymous No.13407216]

>>13407116
>can’t comprehend non-being

[Anonymous No.13407292]

>>13407095
It's from this translation of Vivekachudamani by Jay Mazo

https://gita-society.com/pdf2011/vivekachudamani.pdf

[Anonymous No.13407294]

>>13407128
The original teachings of Christianity were corrupted by people trying to paint Christ as the sole God. Well, He’s the sole God inasmuch as any other jivanmukti is the sole God. Read the Gnostics.

>Jesus said: I am not your master, for you have drunk, and have become drunk from the bubbling spring which I have caused to gush forth.

[Anonymous No.13407319]

>>13407294
Again, gnostics are just ripping off neoplatonic thought without fully understanding it and applying an irrational hatred of creation to it. It's a dead end.

[Anonymous No.13407356]

>>13407319
Are you saying the historical Jesus Christ was ripping off Neoplatonism? For reference, I’m also what you would call a perennialist.

[Anonymous No.13407378]

>>13407356
Don't know about Jesus, but the author of the Gospel of John was hardcore sucking Plato off

[Anonymous No.13407388]

>>13407378
Fun fact: Sufis regard Jesus as a Sufi master and saint. He is highly regarded in the Sufi traditions and, in fact, there are traditional Sufi stories passes around about Jesus which are not found in the accepted Christian New Testament and, in fact, are much closer to Gnosticism. Second, I think the question of who influenced who in really spiritual matters is really irrelevant. Things truly coming from the same source don’t really brook academic questions of “Which one is more primordial?”

[Anonymous No.13407534]

>>13407319
Not all of the Nag Hammadi texts have the gnostic demi-urge or the portrayal of creation as malevolent. The Gospel of Thomas in particular is one that in its themes aligns more with eastern thought and Neoplatonism than typical gnosticism.

[Anonymous No.13407744]

bump

[Anonymous No.13407915]

>>13406245
>I have no ego
>here's my ego post

[Anonymous No.13408224]

Reminder that Christianity is itself non-Dual, and in fact fully Hegelian, or rather Hegel is fully Christian.

>Then shall the righteous answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, and fed thee? or thirsty, and gave thee drink?
>When saw we thee a stranger, and took thee in? or naked, and clothed thee?
>Or when saw we thee sick, or in prison, and came unto thee?
>And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.

He foretells their question only to answer it, why would they ask it if they now know the answer? The foretelling is at odds with the answer. Hidden in plain sight, Dialectic so pure that it is impervious to vulgar /r/atheist obsession with "inconsistencies" or "contradictions".

[Anonymous No.13408655]

>>13406709
hilarious phrase
wonder what the actual term was

[Anonymous No.13408687]

you are GAY

[Anonymous No.13408726]

Why does this sound like infinitely stupid esoteric shit to me. I want to like this. I want to have my life changed by this like other people say they do.
I'm a reasonably well performing researcher in my field and I have always done well in intellectual related tasks, so why am I so inept to appreciate this.
To me this sounds no different than a random stoner talking about his DMT experience or some wicca priestess talking about making vagina yeast bread for the blessings of the mother goddess.
What is wrong with me. Why do I find this so stupid.

[Anonymous No.13408727]

>>13406454
Is this true? I am interested in Thomism.

[Anonymous No.13408731]

>>13406853

>t. brainlet

[Anonymous No.13408734]

>>13406245
Where do you poo?

[Anonymous No.13408737]

>>13408731
t. reddit

[Anonymous No.13408738]

>>13408726

Have you actually tried psychedelics?

[Anonymous No.13408748]

>>13408737

Seething

[Anonymous No.13408751]

>>13408748
cope

[Anonymous No.13408758]

>>13408751

Stop using buzzwords like a redditor

[Anonymous No.13408764]

>>13408758
stop being a redditor

[Anonymous No.13409041]

>>13408764

u a lil bitch ass nibba

[Anonymous No.13409058]

>>13408726

you probably are highly logical with zero intuition for anything metaphysical. eating mushrooms or smoking weed is unironically a good next step for you

[Anonymous No.13409088]

>>13409058
unironically this. the guy needs to do something radical and crack a window in his head

[Anonymous No.13409095]

>>13406454
this is now my favorite version of this meme

>>13406632
there's a part in the bhagavad gita that's variously translated but the i am come as time, strike, do your duty, these men are already wasted by me

that used to really affect me. now i can see how it's sort of deterministic (not saying that's good or bad) but i still get feels

[Anonymous No.13409101]

>>13408726
can you really comprehend infinitely yet?

[Anonymous No.13409123]

>>13407118
>Christian mystics (and Christ, of course) are part of the same spiritual brotherhood, without a doubt
Definitely not. Abrahamics are nothing like basically any other religion on the planet. And trying to merge them with any other only benefits the Abrahamics in the end because those religions were meant to absorb other spiritual systems and then over time they will slowly chip away at the previously absorbed systems. Basically all the pagans of Europe tried syncretism with Christianity and it never worked. In the end the Judaism 2.0 was all that remained.

Anyone who says "Jesus and the Buddha/Shankara were like the same dudeee" is just either a crypto-Christian or a proto-Christian that intends to subvert any non-Christian elements in order to destroy it over time.

[Anonymous No.13409135]

>>13409123
That's why I said Christian mystics

[Anonymous No.13409141]

>>13408224
>Reminder that Christianity is itself non-Dual
Fuck you. There is nothing non-dual about ex nihilo, human soul and God dichotomy, a personal former tribal and vengeful God, identifying with your body/ego to the point that even your piss/shit/skin will be with you for eternity and heaven/hell.

[Anonymous No.13409510]

>>13409135
Polishing a turd won't ever stop it from being a turd.

[Anonymous No.13409515]

>>13409510
The mountain can be climbed with any set of truths

[Anonymous No.13409624]

>>13407077
I find a great deal of value in syncretism between east and west. Reading this just reminded me of Christ, and his promise to dwell within us. The unity of humanity and divinity. I think a lot of Christians forget that part.

[Anonymous No.13409785]

>>13409515
>The mountain can be climbed with any set of truths
Totally false.

[Anonymous No.13409790]

>>13409515
Definitely not.

[Anonymous No.13410097]

>>13406245

I believe this, because I’ve experienced aspects of this. But every time I try to talk about my experience the Christian LARPers are making me paranoid with their hell, eternal damnation and „only through our specific denomination will you be saved“-talk. I worry about this a lot, because I dont know if I should trust my experience, which felt more real than anything I’ve ever experienced or the Christians who are trying to scare me, that I’m only being deceived by the devil or some shit.
Man sometimes I wish I was a materialist atheist again, I never used to worry this much.

[Anonymous No.13410126]

>>13410097
Christianity is obviously false though. Next time you're accosted by the worshipers of the dead jew, ask them why there are no other historical records of the dead rising from their graves and appearing to people in Jerusalem as described in Matthew.

[Anonymous No.13410152]

>>13410097
You have experience, the thing they use to justify their belief in Christianity. Remember God does not care which form you perceive it in, and these Christians perceive God in a biblical manner which is not incorrect but is simply their intellect trying to wrap itself around the unknowable.
If you have perceived God in a different way than that is the way your intellect has wrapped around it, always remember that there is no absolute truth our senses and mind can fully understand.
Worship God in the way it has been given to you.

[Anonymous No.13410170]

>>13410097
>the virgin combined knowledge of all esoteric and mystic traditions
vs
>the chad singlular Christian larper who read the Bible once

[Anonymous No.13410198]

>>13410170

Thanks for the laugh

[Anonymous No.13410202]

>>13406257
lmao this caught me off guard

[Anonymous No.13410547]

>>13410126
then we shall ask the worshipers of elephant headed gods why there is no historical evedence of super kamehamehaa destructo disc super weapons or flying charriots, or super monkeys that could talk and grow to the size of mountains at will, or the millions of powers that all these monks, guru and sadhus are supposed to have

[Anonymous No.13410610]

>>13410547
>what are bombs
>what are airships
>still believing in the lies you've been told about history

also
>myth is myth at least the modern hindu isn't trying to tell you the super monkey existed
>same thing reported in every religion it requires a more broader examination

[Anonymous No.13410669]

>>13406259
I laughed.

[Anonymous No.13410947]

>>13410610
>myth is myth at least the modern hindu isn't trying to tell you the super monkey existed

yes they do, they try to fine evidence every day for this army of monkeys that built a bridge to sri lanka

>what are bombs
>what are airships
>still believing in the lies you've been told about history

what has this got to do with anything did they have bombs and airships 4 thousands years ago in india aswell as flying charietsand super duper bows soldiers that can shoot bows and arrows with the force of 1000 suns that can shatter mountains? didnt know that, very interesting

[Anonymous No.13411093]

What's the best english translation of the Upanishads? Might get the Oxford edition.

[Anonymous No.13411106]

>>13409141
they don't think it be like it is but it do

[Anonymous No.13411142]

>>13406245
lol poop skin

[Anonymous No.13411166]

>>13411093
yeah the oxford edition is ok, its very dense though, an easier read is the eknath easwaren version if your just getting into hinduism or eastern philosophy

[Anonymous No.13411311]

>>13411166
Dense in what sense? I'm reading Guenon's Man and His Becoming According to Vedanta and I've got the Deutsch book on Vedanta.

[Anonymous No.13411343]

>>13411311
Not that poster, but if you are going to read those books first then you'll know enough information already that you may just want to read Shankara's commentaries on them, which are a much better read than any regular English translation with notes.

[Anonymous No.13411372]

>>13411106
Just typical Christian subversion. They've been doing it for 2000 years and they're still doing it. They do it to get a foot in the door and then slowly over the decades/centuries purify it of non-Christian customs through the ebbs and flows of Christian traditionalism. It was done in Europe, and now it is being done in Asia. If you're not Christian, don't fall for it. And if you're Christian, good job.

Doesn't make Christianity non-dual though.

[Anonymous No.13411386]

>>13407093
chuckled, good one anon

[Anonymous No.13411397]

>>13410547
The only people who think that literally happened are Christian's who have no experience discerning metaphor from fact. The only Hindus who believe that stuff are two digit IQ peasants, the exact people who need to be controlled through fantasy

[Anonymous No.13411480]

>>13411397
so you suggest we shouldnt believe what is said in these religious texts as literal facts and shouldnt assume all people of said religions believe each word to be fact?
unlike what >>13410126 is saying

[Anonymous No.13411501]

>>13411311
it was difficult to read and i felt it could of been trimmed down alot to be more concise i felt it repeated itself far too much which made for a very tedious read. >>13411343 suggested shankaras comentaries i havnt read them myself but i have heard good things about them dont forget the brahama sutras as well

[Anonymous No.13411507]

>>13411480
Exactly, christianity without the resurrection is just platonism, which is a much superior tradition that they should all convert to

[Anonymous No.13411520]

>>13411397
>The only people who think that literally happened are Christian's who have no experience discerning metaphor from fact.
The thing is, any time an assertion in the bible is shown to be inconsistent with history, the christian will always say that it was merely metaphor. However, any time an assertion in the bible is shown to be consistent, he'll take this as proof of the veracity of the bible. The christian is able to use circular reason to say that any time the bible is wrong about something, it's merely metaphor, but otherwise it's 100% true, and as time goes on and the bible is revealed to be more fraudulent - wouldn't you know it? - it turns out the bible is more and more just a metaphor!

Decoupling my metaphysical and religious thinking from a pack of jewish fairy tales was the best decision I've ever made, and you can do it too.

[Anonymous No.13411532]

>>13410547
Why didn't Mark, Luke, or John feel it was necessary to mention the dead rising? What is the temporary zombie apocalypse supposed to represent or teach?

[Anonymous No.13411592]

>>13406245
>NO NO NO NOOOO YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO DO THAT!!, THERE IS NO SELF IT'S ONLY AN ILLUSION NOOO!!! STOP IT!!!

[Anonymous No.13411742]

>>13411343
is there a good edition of Shankara's commentaries?

[Anonymous No.13411759]

>>13411532
you would have to quote me the specific lines that you are refering to and please quote the version of the bible you quoted from

[Anonymous No.13411775]

>>13406245
>i am unchanging and without activity
>but here i am communicating with you lol

[Anonymous No.13411937]

>>13411759
ladies first

[Anonymous No.13411943]

>>13406245
Lol have sex

[Anonymous No.13412010]

>>13411937
oh, you're full of shit, i should of known......

[Anonymous No.13412117]

>>13411759
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew+27:51-53&version=KJV

[Anonymous No.13412234]

>>13411742
These are all good unabridged translations of his commentaries. Recommended reading order is to start from the top of this list and head down. You don't need to read all his Upanishad commentaries before his Brahma Sutra and Gita ones but the more of his Upanishad commentaries you read first the more you'll be prepared for and the deeper you'll understand his commentaries on the later two texts.

http://estudantedavedanta.net/Eight-Upanisads-Vol-1.pdf
http://estudantedavedanta.net/Eight-Upanisads-vol2.pdf
https://archive.org/details/Brihadaranyaka.Upanishad.Shankara.Bhashya.by.Swami.Madhavananda
https://archive.org/details/Shankara.Bhashya-Chandogya.Upanishad-Ganganath.Jha.1942.English
https://archive.org/details/BrahmaSutraSankaraBhashyaEnglishTranslationVasudeoMahadeoApte1960
http://estudantedavedanta.net/Bhagavad-Gita.with.the.Commentary.of.Sri.ShankaracharyaN.pdf

[Anonymous No.13412235]

>>13412010

>should of

You should of fucked off a long time ago

[Anonymous No.13412541]

>>13412235
nigga please

[Anonymous No.13413059]

>>13412234
So is it really helpful to start reading his commentaries on the Upanishads before moving to his BG bhashya? I was tempted to start with his BG. Could you explain why?

[Anonymous No.13413173]

>>13413059
Because the Brahma Sutras is a smriti text derived from the teachings of the sruti texts and as such mention the teachings of the Upanishads constantly. It's helps to have some level of familiarity with the material that the Brahma Sutras is a synthesis of in order to understand it. When you read through some of Shankara's Upanishad commentaries he explains exactly how we can deduce a certain meaning and teaching from the text, that way when you read through his Brahma Sutra commentary, you will be able to understand what he is talking about when he cites Upanishad passages because you'll have read his explanation of others before.

Even if you haven't read the exact Upanishad passage he is referencing in the Brahma Sutras once you read enough of them you'll be able to understand almost all of his citations and references just drawing from your knowledge of his commentaries on the other ones. The more of his Upanishad commentaries that you read first the more of his commentary you'll understand in depth because it's replete with citations from them, although you don't have to read all his Upanishad commentaries to understand his Brahma Sutra commentary. There will likely be an initial adjustment period where you will have to pay close attention to what he writes to get what he is saying, but once the meaning of what he is saying hits you it becomes clear that he is a very lucid thinker. This is another reason why it can be good to start with the Vol.1 of the 8 Upanishad commentaries, because when you read his commentaries on some of the shorter ones only a few dozen pages long you get to read an example of him fully explaining an idea and then drawing it to a conclusion, but with the Brahma Sutras you have different trains of thought stretching on for hundreds of pages.

[Anonymous No.13413495]

>>13413173
Thank you for the thorough explanation. I'll be starting with the Isha Up. from Gambhirananda's translation.

[Anonymous No.13413585]

>>13411372

Both Incarnation and Docetism are non-Dual and, moreover, the non-Duality between them is fully realized in Jesus. I think you're conflating non-Duality, One exploding into many, with mutual passivity, many rotting away as "one", i.e. Materialism.

[Anonymous No.13413606]

>>13406245
How did you type this out without a body?

[Anonymous No.13414354]

>>13408726
maybe your field is complete dogshit and you're nothing but another yesman?

[Anonymous No.13414437]

>>13408726
Because you like ben shapiro

[Anonymous No.13414620]

>>13413585
Saying Christianity is compatible with non-dualism because there are 12 people in rural Arkansas that believes in some retarded heretical theory makes you the biggest chump of all. Yes, Christianity is can be non-dual if it's no longer Christian but so are my shoes if I deny their shoeness.

Like I said, Christians can't help themselves but to subvert.

[Anonymous No.13414824]

>>13414620

Worse still, conflating non-Duality as Philosophy with non-Duality as exotic dogma or genealogical construct, i.e. non-Duality as spooky darkies speaking in tongues.

[Anonymous No.13414931]

>>13414620
>some retarded heretical theory
What does heretical even mean? The nigger foot sucking pope didn't affirm it (yet)?

[Anonymous No.13415029]

>>13406245
>I am free, I am bodiless, I am without sex and indestructible.
Yikes, count me out.