[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature


View post   

File: 123 KB, 633x758, 1566018482145.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13731499 No.13731499 [Reply] [Original]

>b-b-but I didn't plagiarize buddhism
>i-its in the pre-buddhist upanishads!

>> No.13731528

>>13731499
Hinduism predates Bhuddism by a thousand years you faggot

>> No.13731558

>>13731499
>bait this shitty

>> No.13731561

>>13731528
The Bhudda was a fat ascetic who got called out for his belly

>> No.13731563

>>13731528
It makes it all the more embarrassing that he chose to extract Nagarjunian thought above the sacred Vedas

>> No.13731579

>>13731499
It is though. Shankara was such a vociferous critic of Buddhism and so scrupulously adheres to the Upanishads in his writing that the idea that he stole from Buddhism becomes self-evidently absurd to anyone who has read a good deal of him. I've had this conversation many times with Buddhist-posters and they never have a real argument. I quote them the exact passages showing the Upanishads talking about the same idea earlier and quote scholars who say that the idea he took things from Buddhism is incorrect and then you guys just stop replying or post some meme response like cope, rent-free etc. Please anon, post anything that you think he took from Buddhism, all of the claims are easily debunked.

>> No.13731598

>>13731579
>According to Hajime Nakamura, the Mandukya Upanishad was influenced by Mahayana Buddhism and its concept of śūnyatā.[5] Nakamura states, "many particular Buddhist terms or uniquely Buddhist modes of expression may be found in it"
>The text is also notable for inspiring Gaudapada's Karika, a classic for the Vedanta school of Hinduism
>Gaudapada "wove [both doctrines] into the philosophy of Mandukaya Upanisad, which was further developed by Shankara"

>> No.13731603

>>13731579
>advaitafag rears his ugly head again
lmao

>> No.13731611

>>13731579
>then you guys just stop replying or post some meme response like cope, rent-free etc
you do this too idiot

>haha BTFO
>COPE
>reply to own post with 'this'
don't pretend those weren't you

>> No.13731625

>>13731598
>(((Hajime Nakamura)))

>> No.13731629

>>13731561
>bhuddah was fat. Holy shit want to know how I know you're american?

>> No.13731632

>>13731625
>Nakamura was an expert on Sanskrit and Pali, and among his many writings are commentaries on Buddhist scriptures. He is most known in Japan as the first to translate the entire Pali Tripitaka into Japanese. This work is still considered the definitive translation to date against which later translations are measured. Because of his meticulous approach to translation he had a dominating and lasting influence in the study of Indic philosophy in Japan at a time when it was establishing itself throughout the major Japanese universities.

>> No.13731639

>>13731629
>I'm not American dumbass I'm from Canada, KYS

>> No.13731677

>>13731598
>According to Hajime Nakamura, the Mandukya Upanishad was influenced by Mahayana Buddhism and its concept of śūnyatā.[
X person saying Z doesn't mean shit, for every person saying an Upanishad was influnced by Buddhist thought you can find another person saying that Buddhists got X idea from the Upanishads. I have read the Mandukya and its not Buddhist at all, it talks about the 4 states of awake, dream, deep-sleep and the Absolute, all 4 of these states are already named in the much earlier pre-Buddhist Brihadaranyaka Upanishad which in the same text refers to the 4th state Turiya as being transcendental/beyond which is the whole point of the Mandukya. It doesn't talk about Sunyata at all in the Mandukya, the text bares little resemblance to Buddhism. Show me exactly what in it is Buddhist-influenced.
>Nakamura states, "many particular Buddhist terms or uniquely Buddhist modes of expression may be found in it"
Such as? If you are not familiar with his argument and are unable to repeat it then you shouldnt even bother quoting it, truly the mark of a pseud to just copy and paste some random quote from wikipedia without even knowing the details of it. Then, once you did that you'd have to explain how that affected Shankara's thought whatsoever but I'm not holding my breath.

>> No.13731688

>>13731499
wtf is this about?? fucking schizos

>> No.13731773

>>13731677
>X person saying Z doesn't mean shit, for every person saying an Upanishad was influnced by Buddhist thought you can find another person saying that Buddhists got X idea from the Upanishads.
You're inconsistent as shit when it comes to this stuff. You say this when someone else cites any scholar, but you happily and proudly cite Advaitin scholars who share your views as undeniable proof that your/their view on x topic is the only correct one. Everyone on this board even remotely familiar with your antics has seen you appeal to authority like a raving madman time and time again, saying shit like "the consensus among widely reputed scholars is that...." and then when you're pushed to name the scholars you're referring to, you always name some obscure Advaitins or fringe Traditionalist.

>> No.13731835

>>13731773
The difference is that when push comes to shove I actually quote the exact lines from the text that prove my argument whereas the people who allege this stuff typically never do so but just cite the claim of some partisan Buddhist scholar on wikipedia, ignoring that one can find just as many scholars of a different persuasion who disagree. An example is right here in this thread when someone posted that the Mandukya is allegedly Buddhist influnced, I explained exactly why I thought that was wrong and then asked the poster for specific examples of what is buddhist-related in it (which shouldnt be difficult if it was true, the Mandukya is only like 5 or 6 verses long), which the other poster still hasn't provided

>> No.13731848

>>13731835
why are you posting from a new IP?

>> No.13731859

>>13731848
he does this all the time too, when his argument fails him he posts from his phone or resets router in order to dogpile others and bump his own posts with 'haha this lmao xD'

reminder that he is the same guy who was caught samefagging in the trad thread long ago

>> No.13731893

>>13731859
I'd like to think that a truly enlightened individual would refrain from such actions.

>> No.13731904

>>13731773
Yep he does this alot. I remember when he made a fool of himself when he recommended an author (Dasgupta or Sharma?) to support his argument that advaita wasn't even influenced by madhyamika (let alone plagiarized) then I gave a full quote from the SAME author who said madhyamika had a striking influence to advaita. Its hilarious the amount of cognitive dissonance he possesses.

>> No.13731905

>>13731848
Im phone-posting
>>13731859
>>13731893
not an argument

>> No.13731916

>>13731905
>"Im phone-posting"
>new IP again
lmao this nigga has 2 phone lines just so he could shitpost

>> No.13731957

>>13731905
>not an argument
So do you think that's the kind of thing an enlightened individual would do?

>> No.13731959

>>13731904
You are lying about that thread, I have it right here, as I already explained, in the list of scholars who rejected the significant Buddhist influence I made the mistake of including Dasgupta because I saw this quote:

"Dasgupta and Mohanta suggest that Buddhism and Shankara's Advaita Vedanta represent "different phases of development of the same non-dualistic metaphysics from the Upanishadic period to the time of Sankara."[39][note 8]"

I didn't omit anything, the quote you posted was a totally different one and after you pointed it about I admitted I had been mistaken about that one scholar. That one scholar didnt matter anyway since I listed 5 or 6 others who agreed with me. We wouldnt have to play the citation game if you actually threw down your cards and pointed to something in Advaita you think irrefutably comes from Buddhism instead of being a wikipedia warrior

>>/lit/thread/S13274388#p13276475

That was the same exchange where you lost your temper like a child at the end of it and called me a satanic bastard btw

>> No.13731974

>>13731957
I'm solely in this thread to debunk nonsense allegations of plagiarism by Shankara which people have still failed to provide good evidence for, and also failed to come up with a response when I quote an Upanishad saying it before Buddha/Nagarjuna did. Im not here to be baited by schizos and answer their dumb questions.

>> No.13732000

>>13731974
A simple yes or no answer would suffice, there's no need to attack the mentally ill and those less fortunate.

>> No.13732012

>>13732000
A yes or no to what question? No, I dont reset my router if that is what you are asking, Im phone posting while in the midst of running errands and sometimes it automatically connects to somewhere I've gone before and have the wifi password to, when im there it posts under that IP until I leave. A fully enlightened person would not be posting on 4chan to begin with.

>> No.13732047

>>13732012
>A yes or no to what question?
Whether an enlightened individual would do that (not you personally, I didn't mean it as an attack on you).

>A fully enlightened person would not be posting on 4chan to begin with.
Yeah that's most likely correct.

>> No.13732096

>>13731677
>>13731598

In case you needed anymore evidence that Nakamura's claim of Buddhist influence on the Mandukya Upanishad is bullshit, here it is. Nakamura despite his accolades is undoubtedly a Buddhist partisan, I've read large portions of his 'A History of Vedanta Philosophy' and he makes sweeping claims about influence in it without citations or evidence.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandukya_Upanishad

>According to Michael Comans, Vidushekhara also notes that the term prapañcopaśama does not appear in pre-Buddhist Brahmanic works, but in contrast to Nakamura he does not conclude that the term was taken over from Mahayana Buddhism.[6] According to Comans, eventual Mahayana origins of this term are no more than a possibility, and not a certainty.[6]

>Comans also disagrees with Nakamura's thesis that "the fourth realm (caturtha) was perhaps influenced by the Sunyata of Mahayana Buddhism."[note 2] According to Comans, It is impossible to see how the unequivocal teaching of a permanent, underlying reality, which is explicitly called the "Self", could show early Mahayana influence.[40]

>Comans further refers to Nakamura himself, who notes that later Mahayana sutras such as the Laṅkāvatāra Sūtra and the concept of Buddha-nature, were influenced by Vedantic thought.[40] Comans concludes that: [T]here can be no suggestion that the teaching about the underlying Self as contained in the Mandukya contains shows any trace of Buddhist thought, as this teaching can be traced to the pre-Buddhist Brhadaranyaka Upanishad.[40]

>Jacobs lists adrsta and other terms in more ancient, pre-Buddhist literature such as the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad.[41]

>> No.13732104

>>13731561
>Buddha
>fat
Your confusing him with Budai.

>> No.13732115
File: 78 KB, 736x1024, windows.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13732115

tfw I'm probably the only real religious prophet alive but god isn't compelling me to educate the masses in the truth, nor is it even possible because everyone has to undertake the quest for truth themselves

>> No.13732196

>>13732115
please tell me where to begin. Perhaps it is true that everyone needs to undertake the quest for the truth themselves, but a ship is lost if it has no destination, it simply floats the waters and it will never reach the truth. So tell me, Quo vadis?

>> No.13732569

Reminder that Buddhist Phenomenology is demonstrably absurd on both Idealist and Materialist grounds, and that its Ontological inferences therefrom are not even formally Logical.

>> No.13732587

>>13731579
Have sex

>> No.13732661

>>13731959
>You are lying about that thread
nope, you got utterly BTFO and had to backpedal.

>That was the same exchange where you lost your temper like a child at the end of it and called me a satanic bastard btw
wasn't me btw, I was the anon who made you seethe in an earlier thread which compelled you to crop your autistic response in mspaint.

>> No.13732673

>>13732196
Where do you think you should look?

>> No.13732685
File: 12 KB, 251x242, 1564433816091.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13732685

>>13732012
>i-it's the phones man, they keep reconnecting and shit

>> No.13732732

>>13731579
Funny, moms karen shelf has a book about how Jesus survived crucifixion, ran away to india and became buddhist.

Precepts about stealing evidently doesnt apply to figureheads and ideas.

>> No.13732738

>>13731528
The OP most likely refers to the Advaita Vedanta being heavily influenced by Mahayana Buddhism.

>> No.13733123

Now that the allegation with regard to the Mandukya Upanishad was debunked and shown as nonsense, if any other posters have anything else they think Advaita took from Buddhist they should say so, otherwise we'll just have to put this matter to rest and agree that Shankara was not influenced by Buddhism and didnt take anything from it

>> No.13733169

>>13731528
>Babylonical Talmudism predates Christianity by a thousand years
The Babylonian Talmud (the more complete and authoritative) was written down c. 500, but was further edited for another two centuries.
And so was Hinduism, a reaction to Buddhism, which is a reaction to Vedic religion.

Anyway, is dickmeasuring in imaginary lineages that important for your personal Enlightenment?

>> No.13733253

>>13733123
yes you have successfully swayed all of /lit/ and convinced them that 95% of scholars are wrong and that you, an autistic e-trad with a short temper, are undoubtedly correct.

>*tips lingam*

>> No.13733293

>>13733253
>95% of scholars
stop lying

>> No.13733302

>>13733293
why does the fact that academic scholarship disagrees with your view disturb you?

>> No.13733331

>>13731499
This is a juicy thread

>> No.13733340
File: 1.36 MB, 238x300, popcorn.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13733340

>tfw don't believe in any of these poopoo peepee religions and only come here to watch the spastics fight

>> No.13733364
File: 170 KB, 506x1066, 1560231184073.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13733364

>>13733302
It doesn't disturb me at all, I only object to Buddhist-posters misrepresenting it as some sort of consensus, when in actuality the scholars are fairly divided on what if any is the relationship between the two, I have pointed this out many times only for people to still pretend and lie that there is widespread agreement on the issue.

>Advaita Vedanta and Mahayana Buddhism share similarities and have differences,[458][459] their relationship a subject of dispute among scholars.[460] T
>Advaitins have traditionally challenged the Buddhist influence thesis.[486] Modern scholarship generally accepts that Gaudapada was influenced by Buddhism, at least in terms of using Buddhist terminology to explain his ideas, but adds that Gaudapada was a Vedantin and not a Buddhist.[486] Gaudapada adopted some Buddhist terminology and borrowed its doctrines to his Vedantic goals, much like early Buddhism adopted Upanishadic terminology and borrowed its doctrines to Buddhist goals; both used pre-existing concepts and ideas to convey new meanings.[485][458] While there is shared terminology, the Advaita doctrines of Gaudapada and Buddhism are fundamentally different.[298][494]
>According to Sarma, "to mistake him [Gaudapada] to be a hidden or open Buddhist is absurd".[492] The doctrines of Gaudapada and Buddhism are totally opposed, states Murti:[298]
>Nikhilananda (2008, pp. 203–206) refutes the argument for Buddhist influence on Gaudapada's philosophy by arguing that the whole purpose of Gaudapada was to demonstrate the ultimate reality of the birth-less and non-dual Atman, a concept foreign to Buddhism. Scholars such as Murti state that, while there is shared terminology, the doctrines of Gaudapada and Buddhism are fundamentally different.[34][35]
>>Mahadevan states, "At the outset it must be pointed out that, when the critics hurl the charge of pseudo-Buddhism against Advaita, they use the word Buddhism rather in a vague and general sense. The doctrine of unreality of the world, and the theory of non-recognition are found to be common as between the idealistic schools of Buddhism and Advaita. Most critics believe that these are not Upanishadic doctrines, and so, their conclusion is that Advaita must have borrowed them from the Mahayana schools. And the earliest teacher who effected this borrowing, in their view, is Gaudapada."[14]

Most of the examples of quotes on wikipedia are just scholars saying "Advaita resembles X school of Buddhism" without any concrete examples, when they actually do give specifics it's often stuff like Maya or monasticism which already appears in the pre-Buddhist Upanishads.

>> No.13733468

>>13733364
>N-NO THERE IS NO CONSENSUS LALALAL CANT HEAR YOU
imagine suffering delusions of grandeur all because your traditionalist side character is 'being attacked' on a Soto-zen image board.

>> No.13733561
File: 7 KB, 280x180, images.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13733561

>>13733331

>> No.13733568

>>13733468
I just demonstrated that it is not a consensus by quoting some 4 or 5 scholars who disagreed that Shankara/Gaudapada stole ideas from Buddhism. I'm not suffering delusions of grandeur, I haven't been talking about myself at all but have only been talking about Advaita and Buddhism. I don't know why you insist on making personal attacks against me. /Lit/ is not a Buddhist board, there are more Christians here than Buddhists. I have already btfo and exposed as nonsense the single claim about Advaita stealing that was posted in this thread (Nakamura's retarded claims about Mandukya), if you have anything else that you think Shankara took than feel free to post it but when you just throw insults you make your fellow Buddhists look bad and don't convince anyone.

>> No.13733651

>>13731499
>unironically reading scripture
kill yourself

>> No.13733657

>>13732104
>Then I thought, ‘I can’t achieve that pleasure [derived through meditation] with a body so excessively emaciated. Why don’t I eat some solid food, some rice and porridge?’ So I ate some solid food.

Now at that time the five mendicants were attending on me, thinking, ‘The ascetic Gotama will tell us of any truth that he realizes.’ But when I ate some solid food, they left disappointed in me, saying, ‘The ascetic Gotama has become indulgent; he has strayed from the struggle and returned to indulgence.’

https://suttacentral.net/mn36/en/sujato

>> No.13733664

>>13731499
dude you can't plagiarize buddhism merely understand it

>> No.13733742 [DELETED] 

>>13733657
he was pretending to not know the difference between budai and buddha as a meme

>> No.13733770
File: 175 KB, 1326x1182, Hinduism_and_Buddhism.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13733770

daily reminder

>> No.13734203

>>13733568
>I just demonstrated that it is not a consensus by quoting some 4 or 5 scholars who disagreed
LMAO

isn't it pathetic how hard you're trying to shift public scholarly opinion, yet everyone knows in their heart of hearts that advaita will always be known as madhyamika in disguise? All you come up with is slurping autismo tier arguments, declare yourself the winner and lash out when you're called out for having holes in your logic.

>> No.13734225
File: 11 KB, 1199x141, 1559913371387.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13734225

>>13733770
RENT FREE

>> No.13734347
File: 134 KB, 624x434, 5059e67423ec68d215f30c46a98ce3faff46bb5feb3b2049758c94ba59165cb9.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13734347

>>13734203
Your post just consists of a bunch of irrelevant ad-hominem attacks, meanwhile, nobody has yet posted anything else that they claim Advaita took from Buddhism except for the 1 claim that was already debunked.

This is a classic case of projection where you are trying to distract from the obvious fact that Buddha got his teachings from the early Upanishads and just put a new spin on them.

>> No.13734360

>>13734347
As a Catholic completely neutral to the subject, by reading This thread, I Think You're right.

>> No.13734475

>>13734360
>As a completely neutral to the subject
My god. That is not a good sign.

>> No.13734487

>>13734475
It is it means I'm objective. No stakes in the matter either way.
The buddhistbros have been seething This whole thread, and the advaitafag has simply shown datas.

>> No.13734528

>>13731499
>someone genuinely spent time to actually make an decent quality adi sankara wojak
i'm a little impressed desu

>> No.13734555

You should all be ashamed of yourselves for replying to this shitty bait. I know i am
https://youtu.be/omM3vnHsVik

>> No.13734642

>>13734555
Interesting video. How did you find that? What does this channal do?

>> No.13734801

>>13734642
Uploads vids from the current Shankaracarya of Puri?

>> No.13735893

>>13733657
>did this nigga just eat rice
>fucking fat retard

>> No.13736030

>>13731639
So you're from the shittier version of america.

>> No.13736118

>>13734555
I like how the senior monks are always fat and corpulent.

>> No.13737096

>>13736118
Wonderful, isn't it? That you don't need meat to get protein
Also what is having a slower metabolism as you age?

>> No.13737272

>>13733340
>believes in a sandnigger religion

>> No.13737345
File: 101 KB, 490x627, 1563734671538.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13737345

>>13731579
The Vedas are wellknown for people being able to read almost anything into them. Which is why you have atomists, theists, monists and hard polytheists that all subscribe to the Vedas. So saying that it can be found in the Vedas doesn't really disprove that he got a lot of his intellectual thought from Buddhism.

I mean you have Christians walking around pretending the Bible preaches Monism and/or that divine simplicity fits with the biblical view of God by just quoting literally one fucking line from the entire book. Even though the 100% of the rest showcases a very very very low metaphysical and philosophical understanding.
>muh I am that I am

>> No.13737685

>>13737345
You are using specious reasoning. It's wrong to imply that because there are many different interpretations of the Upanishads that any one interpretation is subjective and isn't closer to the truth of the text than others. The reason why Vedanta largely superceded (while incorporating from) the other schools of Hindu philosophy from the first millenium onwards is that they were the most authoritative commentators on the Upanishads and showed where the other schools deviated from them. Before Vedanta arose nobody that we know of wrote commentaries on the Upanishads/Gita explaining their meaning. From the 8th century onwards the other schools were permanently eclipsed in influence/popularity by the Vedanta schools. Similarly, the reason why the most popular and oldest Vedanta posits either a partial (Bhedabheda) or full (Advaita, Vishishtadvaita) identity between the individal soul and Brahman is because so many Upanishad verses clearly state there is an absence of difference or a shared identity between them. This is why it took until the 13th century for Madhva to establish Dvaita as a serious Vedanta school, some 500 years after Shankara and a millenium after the Brahma Sutras were written; that so many verses are so clearly non-dualistic/monistic is why Dvaita took so long to arrive and why it was never very popular. The first few generations of Indologists often candidly write that the Upanishads are clearly monistic and this is mostly only disputed by a few 21st century scholars who adhere to some critical theory-influenced idea that academics have to deny the elephant in the room to adhere to some incoherent abstract ideal of 'academic neutrality'.

Secondly, you are implying it's a mystery where Shankara's ideas come from that we have to make inferences about, it's not. In his commentaries he exhaustively analyzes every sentence of every text he comments on, constantly going out of his way to answer hypothetical objections that a different interpretation is right, in every case pointing out how that alternative interpretation either conflicts with the grammer of the sentence, or is logically inconsistent, or contradicts something the same text says earlier etc. His writings subject all of his own thought to a self-critical dialectic which lay out his reasoning for everyone to see. With every single little doctrine and position of Advaita he spends dozens of pages arguing with devils advocate opponents to show how it is indeed supported by and is the meaning of the Upanishads. Lastly, you or anyone else still haven't pointed to any specific evidence that he was influenced by Buddhism to begin with which kinda begs the question. The only thing posted in this thread was Nakamura's retarded claims about the Mandukya which another scholar BTFO and which I already explained was wrong and which nobody offered any evidence in support of in response to my post. Nobody has posted anything else supporting the idea he took from Buddhism.

>> No.13738001

>>13737685
>shankara or the brahma sutras being post christ
British propaganda. Listen to the members of the tradition instead.
https://youtu.be/aiR2P_KCTz4

>> No.13739353
File: 127 KB, 782x758, 1562618927657.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13739353

>>13737685
>it doesn't explicitly say he plagiarized Buddhism anywhere despite the evidence being right on my face so he didn't do it

>> No.13739389

>>13739353
what evidence? what specifically are you alleging that he plagiarized and where is the evidence for that?

>> No.13740327

>tfw I made advaitafag (aka guenonfag) go on a shitposting spree rn
he's just too easy

>> No.13740373
File: 29 KB, 233x400, 10-wheel-of-fortune-meaning-rider-waite-tarot-major-arcana_large.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
13740373

Do the details matter? Is fighting necessary when we are all still bound to Samsara, when the wheels of Karma have been grinding us into the dust? Please practice what you preach and find yourself again in Dharma.

>> No.13740401

>>13740373
I have a hard time believing a lot of the people arguing in this thread sincerely believe in the Dharmic religions.
Everyone is just shitposting and baiting to get a rise out of the opposing side

>> No.13740411

>>13740401
The old western game of Judo vs. Karate