/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15079007]

How can Buddhists still believe in the foolish and nonsensical doctrine of "no-self" after it was completely destroyed by Śaṅkarācārya?

[Anonymous No.15079073]

>>15079007
Why do enjoy reading about debates from a foreign religion so much?
I really like hindu-buddhist polemics

[Anonymous No.15079390]

>>15079073
I find the actual philosophy more interesting than the polemics, but the polemics are still very interesting too. It's especially interesting in this case because Buddhism is more accessible and has a lower bar to entry and so there are so many new-age buddhists, and commercialized buddhist rackets and buddhist products and feel-good Jewish Buddhist talking heads etc that you see a lot of people and redditor-types who end up accepting it uncritically because Buddhism is the main eastern philosophy they are exposed to, and of course when indoctrinating people into Buddhism and in 'intro to Buddhism' books they don't mention all these critiques of it that various Hindus and Daoists etc have made throughout history, so it's interesting sometimes to watch people come to terms with these criticisms that they've never realized before were major holes in Buddhist doctrine.

[Anonymous No.15079474]

>>15079007
Protestants believe the first 1500 years of christian history didn't happen so...

[Anonymous No.15080047]

>>15079007
tldr how he "destroyed" them you flaming faggot

[Anonymous No.15080067]

>>15080047
in that picture he has Buddhists arguing for "no-self" and then he takes apart their arguments one after another and shows how they dont make sense and dont align with our actual experience, just read it

[Anonymous No.15080211]

Based. Anyone notice how since the Guenon posters have been posting on lit, the Buddhists all either left or admitted they're BTFO?

[Anonymous No.15080293]

>>15079007
Sakayumi never claimed no-self

[Anonymous No.15080442]

>>15080293
So why don’t “orthodox” buddhists reject the ones who claim no-self?

[Anonymous No.15080655]

>>15080293
But all the important Buddhist thinkers like Nagarjuna, Aryadeva, Chandrakirti, Vasubandhu, Dinnaga, Dharmakirti, Santariksita etc all did interpret Buddha as teaching a "no-self" doctrine and they all argue for such a "no-self" interpretation in their writings. So did almost all of later Buddhism and the major Buddhist philosophers all fundamentally misunderstand Buddha on that topic? How can you then take seriously their claims to be the correct interpretation of his teachings? It has major implications for understanding his teachings.

[Anonymous No.15081528]

>>15079007
What edition is that? I have the two volumes of the 8 Up. of Gambhirananda's translation, does Shankara btfo buddhists in any of those upanishads?

[Anonymous No.15081537]

Hylics seething

[Anonymous No.15081544]

where do I start with Shankara?

[Anonymous No.15081548]

God daaaaaamn, this is sooooo baaaaased!

[Anonymous No.15081551]

>>15081548
KEK

[Anonymous No.15082058]

>>15081528
That picture is from Shankara's commentary on the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad, which Swami Madhavananda has a 650-page translation of which you can find on archive.org or order a hard copy of from amazon or vedanta.com, I recommend reading it only after you've read the entirety of Gambhirananda's 8-part set. He doesn't criticize Buddhism as much in the 8-part set and his main criticisms of it are in his Brihadaranyaka and Brahma Sutra commentaries although it comes up a few times, especially in his commentary on the Mandukya Karika which is in the 2nd half of the 8-part set.

>>15081544
I recommend starting with Gambhirananda's translation of 8 of his Upanishad commentaries in 2 parts

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

[Anonymous No.15082772]

>>15081548
this but unironically

[Anonymous No.15083050]

>>15080655
You're right, they argued for no-self. You know the doctrine that Shankara later adopted.

[Anonymous No.15083143]

No self philosophy is just another way of saying shankaras advaita teachings and he was called a crypto Buddhist by other hindus

[Anonymous No.15083363]

>>15083050
Shankara never adopted no-self you dumb hylic, in OP's pic Shankara is completely btfoing Buddhist clowns who argue for no-self

[Anonymous No.15083370]

>>15079007
They literally cannot, brother....
Guenon PBUH..... He BTFO'd them...

[Anonymous No.15083520]

>>15083363
Yeah he did. He adopted the Buddhist idea of no-self, which is no personal self found in the skandhas or emergent of them.
>be poo
>believe in personal self that reincarnates
>The Buddha shows how its a cringe doctrine
>1300 years later Shankara comes along and copypastes it
>700 years later poos on 4chan calls the Buddhist idea of no-self retarded

[Anonymous No.15083529]

>>15079007
hello guenonfag, still seething about your deleted thread yesterday?

[Anonymous No.15083567]

>>15083520
this, also this is why virtually everyone for a thousand years has called shankara a crypto-buddhist. pic related

>>15083529
what happened?

[Anonymous No.15083599]

>>15083567
>what happened?
jannies actually did something for once

[Anonymous No.15083617]

>>15083599
So based....

[Anonymous No.15083631]

Oh no Buddha bros we got too cocky!
How will we escape the (righteous) wrath of the Advaitin Chads, with their lingas as big (and as thick) as mount Meru??

[Anonymous No.15083639]

>>15083631
>lingas

guenonfaggots prefer "feminine" lingas, you know this

[Anonymous No.15083653]

>>15083631
their lingam is just compensating for their shameful plagiarism

meanwhile in the real world, the Buddha absolutely dominates the skys of asia wherever you tread. Advaitins simply can't compete.

[Anonymous No.15083667]

>>15083653
WAIT WHAT? why doesn't Shankara have a gigantic statue? I thought he was based and btfo Buddhism???

[Anonymous No.15083689]

>>15083653
Kitsch and overcompensatory

[Anonymous No.15083695]

>>15083667
He wishes lol, unfortunately for Advaita, due to its lack of support even in the homeland, he is mostly confined to paper.

pic related is probably the biggest shankara statue in existence, but doesn't even reach the feet to the golden Buddhas.

[Anonymous No.15083715]

>>15083695
>even the file is small

[Anonymous No.15083726]

>>15083695
even Ramanuja (nirvana be upon him), the man who coined the term 'crypto-buddhist' (Pracchannabauddha) swamps Shankara's feeble status.

>The Statue of Equality is a monument dedicated to the 11th-century Vaishnavaite Saint Bhagavad Ramanuja, commemorating 1000 years since his birth.[2] It is scheduled to be inaugurated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

[Anonymous No.15083739]

>>15083726
Modi is an Advaitin though so Advaita rules the biggest democracy in the world.

[Anonymous No.15083769]

>>15083739
Advaitins publicly denounced him lol

[Anonymous No.15083773]

>>15083739
If he's an Advaitin, why isn't he getting his own monument like Ramanuja? Surely Modi wouldn't inaugurate the person who called Shankara a cryptobuddhist if he's a strict Advaitin.

[Anonymous No.15083814]

>>15083769
That is just one guy, there are plenty of Shankaracharyas. Far from all Advaitins denounce him. Uttar Pradesh is also ruled by an Advaitin monk and that guy is a lot more far-right than even Modi.

[Anonymous No.15083860]

>>15083814
>i-its just one shankaracharya bro
holy cope....

[Anonymous No.15083879]

>>15083860
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lD_ag67tH3I

[Anonymous No.15083889]

>>15083653
>>15083695
>>15083726
comparing statues...the actual state of idol worshipers

[Anonymous No.15083910]

>>15083769
>>15083860
>fake leftist shankacharyas virtue signalling
Cringe
>https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/adhokshjanand-devtirath-is-not-recognised-puri-shankaracharya-swami-nischalananda-saraswati/articleshow/34546159.cms?from=mdr

[Anonymous No.15083914]

>>15083889
goat simps are one to talk, you worship a black cube

[Anonymous No.15083917]

So what finally drove guenonfag insane?

[Anonymous No.15083932]

>>15083520
The pre-Buddhist Upanishads from hundreds of years before Buddha state that the Self is the witnessing consciousness and not the mind and thoughts, nice try you dumb hylic, it's so typical of you to lie like that. It might even be a little annoying if it weren't for the fact that it's highly amusing to prove you wrong and BTFO you over and over repeatedly. Brihadaranayka verse 3.8.11. specifies that Brahman is "the witness" and in 4.3.7. states that the Self is not the intellect but is only identified by people with it and then in verse 3.4.2. the Brihadaranyaka explains how the self is the witnessing conciousness to which all sensory data and thoughts are presented as objects:

>This is your self that is within all.’ ‘Which is within all, Yājñavalkya?’ ‘You cannot see that which is the withess of vision; you cannot hear that which is the hearer of hearing; you cannot think that which is the thinker of thought; you cannot know that which is the knower of knowledge. This is your self that is within all
>>15083529
Coping with the fact that Śaṅkarācārya showed that the "no-self" doctrine believed in by so many Buddhist "philosophers" is laughable garbage?
>>15083653
Your post exemplifies how Buddhism is a fake and corrupted form of spirituality, the Buddha instructed people to abandon their possessions and take up the beggars bowl as a monastic and here you are bragging about gaudy statues, I suppose that when all of the spiritual teachings that you follow are devoid of any logic or value then attachment to objects is all you have left

[Anonymous No.15083950]

>>15083932
Nobody cares what you think, we care what experts and scholars think. Experts and scholars call Shankara a crypto-buddhist. You can believe whatever you want, within your little crypto-buddhist cult that only a few people in India even care about.

[Anonymous No.15083959]

>>15083932
>The pre-Buddhist Upanishads from hundreds of years before Buddha state that the Self is the witnessing consciousness
There is like 2 Upanishads that possibly predates the Buddha.

It's unfortunate that no one could derive non-duality from them before the Buddha though. Really Nagarjuna had to do his thing until the Hindus supposedly could understand their own scriptures. Weird that...

[Anonymous No.15083972]

>>15083917
The one who originally drove him mad were 2 anons, one who would accuse Guenon of being a crypto-theosophist and the 'Kantbro' who also advanced that argument but added another, that traditionalism has its roots in Kantian 'bootleg neo-Platonism'. This was back in early 2018 right before /trad discussion/ started. It was a short lived general since the 'theosophy/kant shill' (who he equated as the same person) would regurlaly post and BTFO him every thread and he would absolutely lose his shit and post his ramblings outside of trad discussion generals. This prompted mods to delete any new trad discussion threads and effectively end it (this was known as the trad exodus, regular posters that actually discussed the topic left the scene). From there you can read pic related and see how he further devolved into chaos.

[Anonymous No.15083986]

>>15083932
>Your post exemplifies how Buddhism is a fake and corrupted form of spirituality, the Buddha instructed people to abandon their possessions and take up the beggars bowl as a monastic and here you are bragging about gaudy statues, I suppose that when all of the spiritual teachings that you follow are devoid of any logic or value then attachment to objects is all you have left
just face it you're upset that Shankara's statue dick is tiny

[Anonymous No.15084052]

>>15083972
>tfw you realize the whole history of guenonfag is one long series of him getting BTFO by other anons and failing at everything he tries

[Anonymous No.15084120]

literally comparing statue sizes lmao. the absolute state of orientalist larpers