I want to get some serious scholarly study of buddhism done,with emphasis on cosmology, the hell and heaven realms,and the mythology,rather than philosophical writings or daily practices. studies of ancient buddhas,wrathful deities,etc I read "burning for the buddha" and really enjoyed it

File: 153 KB, 750x767, Monksitting.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Fri Apr 17 16:56:04 2020 No.15125182 [Reply] [Original]

I want to get some serious scholarly study of buddhism done,with emphasis on cosmology, the hell and heaven realms,and the mythology,rather than philosophical writings or daily practices.
studies of ancient buddhas,wrathful deities,etc
I read "burning for the buddha" and really enjoyed it

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 17 17:07:10 2020 No.15125311 >>15125182 Try "A Handbook of Tibetan Culture." "Shambhala" is also a good look into Tibet and its religion but some of the info may be a bit dated.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 17 18:37:40 2020 No.15126065 bump, i'm also interested.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 17 20:20:57 2020 No.15126807 >>15125182 Just read up on hinduism, as far as cosmology are concerned they are inseperable.

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 17 23:04:01 2020 No.15127791 >>15126807 What texts? the Mahabharata?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 17 23:28:21 2020 No.15127938 >>15125311 Didn't the Tibetans mix Buddhism with their shamanistic religion?

>>	Anonymous Fri Apr 17 23:37:56 2020 No.15127993 File: 1.67 MB, 720x404, 1580039577594.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15126807 >Just read up on hinduism cringe....

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 03:12:20 2020 No.15128966 >>15125182 Sounds like your looking for Mahayana Buddhist texts. I'm also looking for the same. It seems like all of the entry level Buddhists books are always cringe Theravada shit.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 04:01:18 2020 No.15129140 >>15125182 What you're looking for is Akira Sadakata, Hajime Nakamura - Buddhist Cosmology_ Philosophy and Origins-Kosei Publishing Company (1997) >>15125311 >Tibetan >Buddhism

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 04:05:08 2020 No.15129155 Start reading the Pali Canon, preferably from a good introductory selection of Sutras. Then 'Paul Williams - Mahayana Buddhism: The Doctrinal Foundations'

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 04:05:26 2020 No.15129157

>>15125182
Some suggestions:
Rene De Nebesky - Wojkowitz. Oracles and Demons of Tibet.
Judith Simmer - Brown. Dakini's Warm Breath. (Analysis of the Dakini in Tibetan Buddhism).
Elizabeth English. Vajrayogini. Her Visualizations, Rituals, and Forms.
Keith Dowman. Masters of The Mahamudra. (Collection of tales about the mahasiddhas).
Miranda Shaw. Buddhist Goddesses of India.
Rob Linrothe. Ruthless Compassion: Wrathful Deities In Early Indo-Tibetan Esoteric Buddhist Art
Robert Beer. The Encyclopedia of Tibetan Symbols and Motifs.
You could also find Buswell's Princeton Dictionary of Buddhism and Encyclopedia of Buddhism and read about the stuff you find interesting.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 04:11:40 2020 No.15129187 >>15128966 >It seems like all of the entry level Buddhists books are always cringe Theravada shit. that's because the Mahayana corpus consist of the Pali Canon + Mahayana Sutras, whereas Theravada is mainly Pali Canon

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 04:28:59 2020 No.15129239 >>15129187 >Mahayana corpus consist of the Pali Canon that's just false

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 04:30:36 2020 No.15129243 Mahayanists and vajrayanists do not read the pali canon. They never heard of this.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 04:48:46 2020 No.15129291 >>15129239 correct, that's why I said Pali Canon + Mahayana Sutras >b-b-but the PC is part of all major sects

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 04:49:17 2020 No.15129294 File: 48 KB, 800x729, 1557415248081.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15129243 >Mahayanists and vajrayanists do not read the pali canon. They never heard of this.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 04:51:32 2020 No.15129303 >>15125182 read MahaPrajnaParamita-Sastra by Nagarjuna, and study the Mahayana

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 04:53:25 2020 No.15129308 >>15129303 >and the mythology,rather than philosophical writings

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 04:53:47 2020 No.15129310 >>15125182 >>15129157 no, don't. read the Sutras from Buddha and Sastras from his disciples only

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 04:54:11 2020 No.15129311 >>15129243 Found the internet Buddhist "convert"

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 04:55:15 2020 No.15129314 >>15129303 >>15129308 yes, the mythology is included in the books of Saint Nagarjuna

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 05:03:02 2020 No.15129333 File: 45 KB, 359x388, 1579903474395.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15129303 >MahaPrajnaParamita-Sastra by Nagarjuna Based

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 05:14:26 2020 No.15129364 File: 61 KB, 324x385, 1577431682811.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15129333

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 05:16:28 2020 No.15129368 >>15129364 Maha-Marjna-Paramita Sastra

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 06:42:35 2020 No.15129766 >>15125182 Start with the Maurya you pleb

Nirvana is non-existence. Exis(...) Sat Apr 18 06:46:41 2020 No.15129777

Nirvana is non-existence. Existence is a sin.

Like Gautama Buddha, deep in my meditation, i am about to explain the trap set by Mara, who is Demiurge, who is satan, the god of this world, to lure mankind into the underworld that is presented as heaven to people.

Nirvana is non-existence. It isn't a state of being, like paradise, with endless pleasures.

Since you start existing, you are set in a trap.

You go down from higher spiritual worlds to lower worlds, until you come down to this material, then most of us go lower still, hell levels.

Existence is a trap. Highest chakra is considered holy, divine, pure by most. It is itself a mechanism to trap you to indulge, first indulge in the highest chakra, then slowly slide down, until you reach your lowest desires, desires of sin, in the lowest chakras, situated in genitals.

The more you indulge, the lower you go. Worship itself is a sin. The more you worship, the more you enable the demon who is keeping you entrapped.

The rulers took Adam and put Adam in paradise. They said, Eat, meaning, do so in a leisurely manner. But in fact their pleasure is bitter and their beauty is perverse. Their pleasure is a trap, their trees are a sacrilege, their fruit is deadly poison, their promise is death.

They put their tree of life in the middle of paradise.

I shall teach you the secret of their life, the plan they devised together, the nature of their spirit: The root of their tree is bitter, its branches are death, its shadow is hatred, a trap is in its leaves, its blossom is bad ointment, its fruit is death, desire is its seed, it blossoms in darkness. The dwelling place of those who taste of it is the underworld, and darkness is their resting place.

Because you attached yourself to physical pleasures, the pain of suffering is doubled. If you nonindulge, pain sensations can be dampened or rendered unpainful.

ego itself is a trap to keep you interested in this trap that is existence.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 06:50:38 2020 No.15129792 >>15129777 >Adam Stopped reading here

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 06:53:40 2020 No.15129807

>>15125182
The Buddha was not a scholar, he was a renunciate. To learn it properly you have to learn it from those who are also renunciates. Scholars learn the words, but they never spend the time discerning what those words refer to in their experience.

Listen to this guy, he's probably an arahant:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKejmWAt_kNpRMq5gQEGAqw

>>	Nibbanic Uberlord Sat Apr 18 06:58:59 2020 No.15129837 File: 79 KB, 612x463, The trap of existence 1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15129792 forgot to add this. Replace adam with buddha or siddharta that text is a template.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 07:16:00 2020 No.15129911 >>15129777 >Nirvana is non-existence cringe

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 07:31:23 2020 No.15130021 >>15125182 I coomed and lost some of my virya when will it come back?

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 07:41:14 2020 No.15130065 >>15129911 its called nihilist buddhism

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 07:44:48 2020 No.15130091 >>15130065 cringe....

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 07:58:33 2020 No.15130152

>>15130091

We are trying to create new versions of buddhism. Just as the west has developed a new theory of reincarnation, which, simultaneous incarnation, plus reincarnation backwards in time. Like if you were born in 1980s then died in 2040s then you'll get reincarnated in 500 BC possibly.

New ideas. New religions.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 08:05:53 2020 No.15130182 >>15127993 he broke the conditioning

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 08:09:30 2020 No.15130197 >>15127993 dude is pretty yoked though, mirin' his form

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 08:16:07 2020 No.15130229 >>15129777 you have it figured out. this man is correct

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 11:22:03 2020 No.15131328 >>15129777 No "sins" in buddhism

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 11:23:46 2020 No.15131346 >>15125182 what's your take on hungry ghosts?

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 11:44:27 2020 No.15131529 >>15129911 Can you give an example of something that distinguishes Nirvana from nothingness?

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 11:52:16 2020 No.15131589 >>15125182 Buddhism by Richard Gard

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 11:54:26 2020 No.15131614 >>15126807 >>15127791 Markandeya Purana Srimad Devi-Bhagavatam Bhagavata Purana Brahma Samhita Ramayana First few chapters of Puranas are always Cosmology. Brahma Samhita is pure Cosmology too

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 12:00:16 2020 No.15131654 File: 2.58 MB, 3619x5467, Krishna-loka-large.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >Brahma Samhita no commentary https://drive.google.com/file/d/199TCZPtMtt_kdhYOYtmRhaK3WghnuC6-/view?usp=drivesdk

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 12:12:10 2020 No.15131751 >>15131654 >that image Why is the worldbuilding so autistic?

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 12:15:33 2020 No.15131782

>>15131751
Because they're P A J E E T S

You may enjoy this selection from Srimad Devi-Bhagavatam:
(1 of 2)
>In days gone by there reigned a king, named Uparichara; he ruled over the Chedi country and respected the Brâhmins; he was truthful and very religious. Indra, the lord of the Devas, became very pleased by his asceticism and presented him an auspicious celestial car (going in the air) made of pearls, and crystals, helping him in doing what he liked best. Mounting on that divine chariot, that religious king used to go everywhere; he never remained on earth; he used to remain always in the atmosphere and therefore be had his name as “Uparichara Vasu” (moving in the upper regions). He had a very beautiful wife, named Girikâ; and five powerful sons, of indomitable vigour, were born to him.

>The king give separate kingdoms to each of his sons and made them kings. Once on an occasion, Girikâ, the wife of the Uparichara Vasu, after her bath after the menstruation and becoming pure came to the king and informed him of her desire to get a son; but that very day his Pitris (ancestors) requested him also to kill deer, etc., for their Srâddha (solemn obsequies performed in honour of the manes of deceased ancestors). Hearing the Pitris, the king of Chedi became somewhat anxious for his menstruous wife; but thinking his Pitris words more powerful and more worthy to be obeyed, went out on an hunting expedition to kill deer and other animals, with the thought of his wife Girikâ in his breast. Then while he was in the forest, he remembered his Girikâ, who was equal in her beauty and loveliness to Kamalâ, and the emission of semen virile took place. He kept this semen on the leaf of a banyan tree and thought “How the above semen be not futile; my semen cannot remain unfruitful; my wife has just now passed her menstruous condition; I will send this semen to my dear wife.” Thus thinking the time ripe, he closed the semen under the leaves of the banyan tree and charging it with the mantra power (some power) addressed a falcon close by thus :-- “O highly fortunate one! Take this my semen virile and go to my palace. O Beautiful one! Do this my work: take this semen virile and go quick to my palace and hand it over to my wife Girikâ for to-day is her menstruation period.”

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 12:16:45 2020 No.15131793
File: 57 KB, 300x300, sad-falcon_fb_294527.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15131782
(2 of 2)
>24. Sûta said :-- “O Risis! Thus saying, the king gave that leaf with the virile therein to the falcon, who is capable of going quick in the air, took it and immediately rose high up in the air.
>25-26. Another falcon, seeing this one flying in the air with leaf in his beak, considered it to be some piece of flesh and fell upon him. Immediately a gallant fighting ensued between the two birds with their beaks.
>27. While the fighting was going on, that leaf with semen virile fell down from their beaks on the waters of the Jumnâ river. Then the two faIcons flew away as they liked.
>28-39. O Risis! While the two falcons were fighting with each other, one Apsarâ (celestial nymph) named Adrikâ came to a Brâhmin, who was performing his Sandhyâ Bandanam on the banks of the Jumnâ. That beautiful woman began to bathe in the waters and took a plunge for playing sports and caught hold of the feet of the Brâhmana. The Dvija, engaged in Prânâyâma (deep breathing exercise), saw that the woman had amorous intentions, and cursed her, saying :-- “As you have interrupted me in my meditation, so be a fish.”

>Adrikâ, one of the best Apsarâs, thus cursed, assumed the form of a fish Safari and spent her days in the Jumnâ waters. When the semen virile of Uparichara Vasu fell from the beak of the falcon, that fish Adrikâ came quickly and ate that and became pregnant. When ten months passed, a fisherman came there and caught in a net that fish Adrikâ. When the fish's belly was torn asunder, two human beings instantly came out the the womb. One was a lovely boy and the other a beautiful girl. The fisherman was greatly astonished to see this. He went and informed the king of that place who was Uparichara Vasu that the boy and the girl were born of the womb of a fish. The king also was greatly surprised and accepted the boy who seemed auspicious. This Vasu's son was highly energetic and powerful, truthful and religious like his father and became famous by the name of the king Matsyarâj. Uparichara Vasu gave away the girl to the fisherman. This girl was named Kâli and she became famous by the name of Matsyodarî. The smell of the fish came out of her body and she was named also Matsyagandhâ. Thus the auspicious Vasu's daughter remained and grew in that fisherman's house.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 12:17:22 2020 No.15131799 File: 487 KB, 2481x3570, IMG_5425.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15131751 It's not that more autistic than the Buddhist cosmology in pic related, just more colorful

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 12:18:49 2020 No.15131814 >>15131782 >>15131793 Buddha does weird sexual stuff too like in one Pali Canon Sutta he psychically projects a mental image of his shriveled up retracted penis into another guys mind

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 12:22:40 2020 No.15131853 File: 129 KB, 1045x1125, 9656a492d8a964fef42596a3702632c4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15131799

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 12:23:45 2020 No.15131860 >>15131814 I actually laughed until it hurt reading about that fucking falcon the other day

>>	Sully Erna Sat Apr 18 12:50:11 2020 No.15132079 >>15131328 As Buddhism does not believe in any personal God or any Supreme Being, the word “pāpa, apuñña” or sin stands for the evil elements that defile the mind and have a deadening effect on the psyche making it difficult for its upliftment.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 12:52:15 2020 No.15132103 >>15131529 this guy gets it. Nirvana = non-existence, not some heavenly abode where former buddhas meditate eternally.

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 12:56:03 2020 No.15132134

>>15132103
Buddhists do not believe that Nirvana is non-existence. This is not what the Buddha taught. At all. Neither is the second one. Buddhists do not believe this, and the Buddha never taught this. At all. Emptiness of self doesn't mean you don't exist. A chariot lacking a non-conditioned reality does not mean that the chariot doesn't exist, it just means that you are misunderstanding HOW it exists.

>>15131529
Existing, for starters.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 12:56:46 2020 No.15132145 >>15132103 The Veils Of Negative Existence Kenneth Grant was a fucking genius with his interpretation of Negative Anti-Existence

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 12:58:28 2020 No.15132161

>>15132134

Moksha, also called vimoksha, vimukti and mukti, is a term in Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism for various forms of emancipation, enlightenment, liberation, and release.

Liberation and/or release from constant rebirths. In other words: dreamless sleep, non-existence.

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 12:58:38 2020 No.15132163

>>15132134
Nirvana is cessation.
That's indisputable.
Gotama had more in common with Whitehead. You are an assemblage. The idea is to cease momentum.
Nirvana is that cessation.
By definition it is blowing out. That's what the term Nirvana actually translates to.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 12:59:32 2020 No.15132172 >>15132145 Can you explain this concept for other guys here who think non-existence is non-buddhist concept.

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:00:53 2020 No.15132181

>>15132161
Moksha in hinduism is highly variable.
For an advaita it means existence as brahman, so the individual self is what stops.
For a Gaudiya Vaishnava, it means to leave the material world to enter the Spiritual Universe and Krishnaloka, a kind of heaven centered on cowherding life weirdly enough

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:02:20 2020 No.15132195

>>15132161
>>15132163
Nirvana is not non-existence, by definition. The Buddha goes over this, and Nagarjuna does to an even more autistic degree. Nihilism, the belief that nothing exists OR that non-existence is desirable, is something the Buddha explicitly argues against.

Nirvana does not refer to "blowing out" in the sense of a fire as YOU understand it. The Ancient India view of fire was that an actual literal fire is rather something that is summoned from a a cosmic "ether" of sorts, and that when it extinguishes it fades back into this ether. Nirvana is not just poofing out of existence, or turning off or whatever, it's being freed from delusions and thus from rebirth.

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:03:04 2020 No.15132203 [DELETED]

>>15125182
>Ron shuffled his feet uncomfortably as he stared at them, hands tangled in a worried knot
>"What the fuck you doin' Weasley?! You better not be looking away from them!",yelled Malfoy as he stroked his rock hard member as it protruded proudly from his wizarding robes.
>Ron glanced up sheepishly to see Harry vigorously pounding Hermione from behind on the Gryffindor commons table.
>Harry looked over his shoulder at his friend with a slight grin on his face.
>"C'mon Ron", Harry grunted in between his rapid thrusts, "no need to be coy. Take it all in."
>As he plowed deeper and deeper into Hermione's beet red pussy he looked over at Dumbledore, himself deeply entranced in the act taking place before him.
>"I much prefer this Chamber of Secrets to the other, professor!" Harry exclaimed.
>"FOCUS BOY!" Hissed Professor Snape, rubbing the tip of his precum glazed penis with his thumb.
>"You're just like your father. He could never take a proper inter-house fuck train seriously either."
>The look on Dumbledore's face lightened somewhat as Harry's thrusts became quicker.
>"You getting your vinegars, young mister Potter?" Dumbledore asked in his usual, calm tone
>Harry didn't have time to respond before he began to ejaculate wildly deep inside of Hermione's slick cunt.
>Falling over her back, he licked the sweat from her skin and gazed up at the clock.
>"Twenty-one minutes... looks like a new house record." Harry muttered out in gasping breaths.
>Snape's dick began to go limp.
>Dumbledore, slapping Harry on the back, exclaimed, "50 points for Gryffindor."
>Ronald looked back down at his feet, tears welling in his eyes.
>Malfoy looked over at Dumbledore and yelled, "He cheated! There must have been a spell or some such!"
>Tucking his willy back into his robe he stormed passed Snape and over to the common room door.
>"My father will hear of this", Malfoy whispered as he stormed out of the room.

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:03:49 2020 No.15132213

>>15129777
>>15131529
>>15132103
>nirvana = non-existence
I have heard that on one occasion the Blessed One was staying in Savatthi, at Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Then the wanderer Vacchagotta went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, exchanged courteous greetings with him. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there he asked the Blessed One: "How is it, Master Gotama, does Master Gotama hold the view: 'The cosmos is eternal: only this is true, anything otherwise is worthless'?"

"...no..."

"Then does Master Gotama hold the view: 'The cosmos is not eternal: only this is true, anything otherwise is worthless'?"

"...no..."

"Then does Master Gotama hold the view: 'The cosmos is finite: only this is true, anything otherwise is worthless'?"

"...no..."

"Then does Master Gotama hold the view: 'The cosmos is infinite: only this is true, anything otherwise is worthless'?"

"...no..."

"Then does Master Gotama hold the view: 'The soul & the body are the same: only this is true, anything otherwise is worthless'?"

"...no..."

"Then does Master Gotama hold the view: 'The soul is one thing and the body another: only this is true, anything otherwise is worthless'?"

"...no..."

"Then does Master Gotama hold the view: 'After death a Tathagata exists: only this is true, anything otherwise is worthless'?"

"...no..."

"Then does Master Gotama hold the view: 'After death a Tathagata does not exist: only this is true, anything otherwise is worthless'?"

"...no..."

"Then does Master Gotama hold the view: 'After death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist: only this is true, anything otherwise is worthless'?"

"...no..."

"Then does Master Gotama hold the view: 'After death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist: only this is true, anything otherwise is worthless'?"

"...no..."

"How is it, Master Gotama, when Master Gotama is asked if he holds the view 'the cosmos is eternal...'... 'after death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist: only this is true, anything otherwise is worthless,' he says '...no...' in each case. Seeing what drawback, then, is Master Gotama thus entirely dissociated from each of these ten positions?"

"Vaccha, the position that 'the cosmos is eternal' is a thicket of views, a wilderness of views, a contortion of views, a writhing of views, a fetter of views. It is accompanied by suffering, distress, despair, & fever, and it does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation; to calm, direct knowledge, full Awakening, Unbinding.

"The position that 'the cosmos is not eternal'...

"...'the cosmos is finite'...

"...'the cosmos is infinite'...

"...'the soul & the body are the same'...

"...'the soul is one thing and the body another'...

"...'after death a Tathagata exists'...

"...'after death a Tathagata does not exist'...

"...'after death a Tathagata both exists & does not exist'...

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:04:21 2020 No.15132219

>>15132213
"...'after death a Tathagata neither exists nor does not exist'... does not lead to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation; to calm, direct knowledge, full Awakening, Unbinding."

"Does Master Gotama have any position at all?"

"A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away with. What a Tathagata sees is this: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is perception...such are fabrications...such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.' Because of this, I say, a Tathagata — with the ending, fading away, cessation, renunciation, & relinquishment of all construings, all excogitations, all I-making & mine-making & obsessions with conceit — is, through lack of clinging/sustenance, released."

"But, Master Gotama, the monk whose mind is thus released: Where does he reappear?"

"'Reappear,' Vaccha, doesn't apply."

"In that case, Master Gotama, he does not reappear."

"'Does not reappear,' Vaccha, doesn't apply."

"...both does & does not reappear."

"...doesn't apply."

"...neither does nor does not reappear."

"...doesn't apply."

"How is it, Master Gotama, when Master Gotama is asked if the monk reappears... does not reappear... both does & does not reappear... neither does nor does not reappear, he says, '...doesn't apply' in each case. At this point, Master Gotama, I am befuddled; at this point, confused. The modicum of clarity coming to me from your earlier conversation is now obscured."

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:04:52 2020 No.15132224

>>15132219
"Of course you're befuddled, Vaccha. Of course you're confused. Deep, Vaccha, is this phenomenon, hard to see, hard to realize, tranquil, refined, beyond the scope of conjecture, subtle, to-be-experienced by the wise. For those with other views, other practices, other satisfactions, other aims, other teachers, it is difficult to know. That being the case, I will now put some questions to you. Answer as you see fit. What do you think, Vaccha: If a fire were burning in front of you, would you know that, 'This fire is burning in front of me'?"

"...yes..."

"And suppose someone were to ask you, Vaccha, 'This fire burning in front of you, dependent on what is it burning?' Thus asked, how would you reply?"

"...I would reply, 'This fire burning in front of me is burning dependent on grass & timber as its sustenance.'"

"If the fire burning in front of you were to go out, would you know that, 'This fire burning in front of me has gone out'?"

"...yes..."

"And suppose someone were to ask you, 'This fire that has gone out in front of you, in which direction from here has it gone? East? West? North? Or south?' Thus asked, how would you reply?"

"That doesn't apply, Master Gotama. Any fire burning dependent on a sustenance of grass and timber, being unnourished — from having consumed that sustenance and not being offered any other — is classified simply as 'out' (unbound)."

"Even so, Vaccha, any physical form by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of form, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea. 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply.

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:05:24 2020 No.15132230

>>15132224
"Any feeling... Any perception... Any fabrication...

"Any consciousness by which one describing the Tathagata would describe him: That the Tathagata has abandoned, its root destroyed, made like a palmyra stump, deprived of the conditions of development, not destined for future arising. Freed from the classification of consciousness, Vaccha, the Tathagata is deep, boundless, hard to fathom, like the sea. 'Reappears' doesn't apply. 'Does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Both does & does not reappear' doesn't apply. 'Neither reappears nor does not reappear' doesn't apply."

When this was said, the wanderer Vacchagotta said to the Blessed One: "Master Gotama, it is as if there were a great sala tree not far from a village or town: From inconstancy, its branches and leaves would wear away, its bark would wear away, its sapwood would wear away, so that on a later occasion — divested of branches, leaves, bark, & sapwood — it would stand as pure heartwood. In the same way, Master Gotama's words are divested of branches, leaves, bark, & sapwood and stand as pure heartwood.

"Magnificent, Master Gotama! Magnificent! Just as if he were to place upright what was overturned, to reveal what was hidden, to show the way to one who was lost, or were to carry a lamp into the dark so that those with eyes could see forms, in the same way has Master Gotama — through many lines of reasoning — made the Dhamma clear. I go to Master Gotama for refuge, to the Dhamma, and to the Sangha of monks. May Master Gotama remember me as a lay follower who has gone to him for refuge, from this day forward, for life."

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:09:37 2020 No.15132274

>>15132103
>Nirvana = non-existence
I have heard that on one occasion Ven. Sariputta was staying near Savatthi at Jeta's Grove, Anathapindika's monastery. Now, at that time this evil supposition had arisen to Ven. Yamaka: "As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more (mental) effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death." A large number of monks heard, "They say that this evil supposition has arisen to Ven. Yamaka: 'As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death.'" So they went to Ven. Yamaka and on arrival exchanged courteous greetings. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, they sat to one side. As they were sitting there, they said to Ven. Yamaka, "Is it true, friend Yamaka, that this evil supposition has arisen to you: 'As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death.'

"Yes, friends. As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death."

"Don't say that, friend Yamaka. Don't misrepresent the Blessed One. It's not good to misrepresent the Blessed One, for the Blessed One would not say, 'A monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death.'"

But even though Ven. Yamaka was thus rebuked by those monks, he — from stubbornness & attachment — maintained his adherence to that evil supposition: 'As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death.'

When those monks could not pry Ven. Yamaka loose from his evil supposition, they got up from their seats and went to Ven. Sariputta. On arrival they said to him: "Friend Sariputta, this evil supposition has arisen to Ven. Yamaka: 'As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death.' It would be good if you would go to Ven. Yamaka out of sympathy for his sake."

Ven. Sariputta consented by remaining silent.

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:10:10 2020 No.15132280

>>15132274
Then in the evening Ven. Sariputta left his seclusion, went to Ven. Yamaka, and on arrival exchanged courteous greetings. After an exchange of friendly greetings & courtesies, he sat to one side. As he was sitting there, he said to Ven. Yamaka, "Is it true, my friend Yamaka, that this evil supposition has arisen to you: 'As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death.'

"Yes, my friend Sariputta. As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death."

"What do you think, my friend Yamaka: Is form constant or inconstant?"

"Inconstant, my friend."

"And is that which is inconstant easeful or stressful?"

"Stressful, my friend."

"And is it proper to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'?"

"No, my friend."

"Is feeling constant or inconstant?"

"Inconstant, my friend."...

"Is perception constant or inconstant?"

"Inconstant, my friend."...

"Are fabrications constant or inconstant?"

"Inconstant, my friend."...

"Is consciousness constant or inconstant?

"Inconstant, my friend."

"And is that which is inconstant easeful or stressful?"

"Stressful, my friend."

"And is it proper to regard what is inconstant, stressful, subject to change as: 'This is mine. This is my self. This is what I am'?"

"No, my friend."

"Thus, friend Yamaka, any form whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: Every form is to be seen with right discernment as it has come to be: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.'

"Any feeling whatsoever...

"Any perception whatsoever...

"Any fabrications whatsoever...

"Any consciousness whatsoever that is past, future, or present; internal or external; blatant or subtle; common or sublime; far or near: Every consciousness is to be seen with right discernment as it has come to be: 'This is not mine. This is not my self. This is not what I am.'

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:10:53 2020 No.15132288

>>15132280
"Seeing thus, the instructed disciple of the noble ones grows disenchanted with form, disenchanted with feeling, disenchanted with perception, disenchanted with fabrications, disenchanted with consciousness. Disenchanted, he becomes dispassionate. Through dispassion, he is released. With release, there is the knowledge, 'Released.' He discerns that 'Birth is ended, the holy life fulfilled, the task done. There is nothing further for this world.'"

"How do you construe this, my friend Yamaka: Do you regard form as the Tathagata?"

"No, my friend."

"Do you regard feeling as the Tathagata?"

"No, my friend."

"Do you regard perception as the Tathagata?"

"No, my friend."

"Do you regard fabrications as the Tathagata?"

"No, my friend."

"Do you regard consciousness as the Tathagata?"

"No, my friend."

"What do you think: Do you regard the Tathagata as being in form?... Elsewhere than form?... In feeling?... Elsewhere than feeling?... In perception?... Elsewhere than perception?... In fabrications?... Elsewhere than fabrications?... In consciousness?... Elsewhere than consciousness?"

"No, my friend."

"What do you think: Do you regard the Tathagata as form-feeling-perception-fabrications-consciousness?"

"No, my friend."

"Do you regard the Tathagata as that which is without form, without feeling, without perception, without fabrications, without consciousness?"

"No, my friend."

"And so, my friend Yamaka — when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a truth or reality even in the present life — is it proper for you to declare, 'As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death'?"

"Previously, my friend Sariputta, I did foolishly hold that evil supposition. But now, having heard your explanation of the Dhamma, I have abandoned that evil supposition, and have broken through to the Dhamma."

"Then, friend Yamaka, how would you answer if you are thus asked: A monk, a worthy one, with no more mental effluents: what is he on the break-up of the body, after death?"

"Thus asked, I would answer, 'Form is inconstant... Feeling... Perception... Fabrications... Consciousness is inconstant. That which is inconstant is stressful. That which is stressful has ceased and gone to its end."

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:11:25 2020 No.15132300

>>15132288
"Very good, my friend Yamaka. Very good. In that case I will give you an analogy for the sake of taking your understanding of this point even further. Suppose there were a householder or householder's son — rich, wealthy, with many possessions — who was thoroughly well-guarded. Then suppose there came along a certain man, desiring what was not his benefit, desiring what was not his welfare, desiring his loss of security, desiring to kill him. The thought would occur to this man: 'It would not be easy to kill this person by force. What if I were to sneak in and then kill him?'

"So he would go to the householder or householder's son and say, 'May you take me on as a servant, lord.' With that, the householder or householder's son would take the man on as a servant.

"Having been taken on as a servant, the man would rise in the morning before his master, go to bed in the evening only after his master, doing whatever his master ordered, always acting to please him, speaking politely to him. Then the householder or householder's son would come to regard him as a friend & companion, and would fall into his trust. When the man realizes, 'This householder or householder's son trusts me,' then encountering him in a solitary place, he would kill him with a sharp knife.

"Now what do you think, my friend Yamaka? When that man went to the householder or householder's son and said, 'May you take me on as a servant, lord': wasn't he even then a murderer? And yet although he was a murderer, the householder or householder's son did not know him as 'my murderer.' And when, taken on as a servant, he would rise in the morning before his master, go to bed in the evening only after his master, doing whatever his master ordered, always acting to please him, speaking politely to him: wasn't he even then a murderer? And yet although he was a murderer, the householder or householder's son did not know him as 'my murderer.' And when he encountered him in a solitary place and killed him with a sharp knife: wasn't he even then a murderer? And yet although he was a murderer, the householder or householder's son did not know him as 'my murderer.'"

"Yes, my friend."

"In the same way, an uninstructed, run-of-the-mill person — who has no regard for noble ones, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma; who has no regard for men of integrity, is not well-versed or disciplined in their Dhamma — assumes form (the body) to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form.

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:11:56 2020 No.15132306

>>15132300
"He assumes feeling to be the self...

"He assumes perception to be the self...

"He assumes (mental) fabrications to be the self...

"He assumes consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness.

"He does not discern inconstant form, as it actually is present, as 'inconstant form.' He does not discern inconstant feeling, as it actually is present, as 'inconstant feeling.' He does not discern inconstant perception... He does not discern inconstant fabrications... He does not discern inconstant consciousness, as it actually is present, as 'inconstant consciousness.'

"He does not discern stressful form, as it actually is present, as 'stressful form.' He does not discern stressful feeling... He does not discern stressful perception... He does not discern stressful fabrications... He does not discern stressful consciousness, as it actually is present, as 'stressful consciousness.'

"He does not discern not-self form, as it actually is present, as 'not-self form.' He does not discern not-self feeling... He does not discern not-self perception... He does not discern not-self fabrications... He does not discern not-self consciousness, as it actually is present, as 'not-self consciousness.'

"He does not discern fabricated form, as it actually is present, as 'fabricated form.' He does not discern fabricated feeling... He does not discern fabricated perception... He does not discern fabricated fabrications... He does not discern fabricated consciousness, as it actually is present, as 'fabricated consciousness.'

"He does not discern murderous form, as it actually is present, as 'murderous form.' He does not discern murderous feeling... He does not discern murderous perception... He does not discern murderous fabrications... He does not discern murderous consciousness, as it actually is present, as 'murderous consciousness.'

"He gets attached to form, clings to form, & determines it to be 'my self.' He gets attached to feeling... He gets attached to perception... He gets attached to fabrications... He gets attached to consciousness, clings to consciousness, & determines it to be 'my self.' These five clinging-aggregates — attached to, clung to — lead to his long-term loss & suffering.

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:12:27 2020 No.15132309

>>15132306
"Now, the well-instructed, disciple of the noble ones — who has regard for noble ones, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma; who has regard for men of integrity, is well-versed & disciplined in their Dhamma — does not assume form to be the self, or the self as possessing form, or form as in the self, or the self as in form.

"He does not assume feeling to be the self...

"He does not assume perception to be the self...

"He does not assume fabrications to be the self...

"He does not assume consciousness to be the self, or the self as possessing consciousness, or consciousness as in the self, or the self as in consciousness.

"He discerns inconstant form, as it actually is present, as 'inconstant form.' He discerns inconstant feeling... He discerns inconstant perception... He discerns inconstant fabrications... He discerns inconstant consciousness, as it actually is present, as 'inconstant consciousness.'

"He discerns stressful form, as it actually is present, as 'stressful form.' He discerns stressful feeling... He discerns stressful perception... He discerns stressful fabrications... He discerns stressful consciousness, as it actually is present, as 'stressful consciousness.'

"He discerns not-self form, as it actually is present, as 'not-self form.' He discerns not-self feeling... He discerns not-self perception... He discerns not-self fabrications... He discerns not-self consciousness, as it actually is present, as 'not-self consciousness.'

"He discerns fabricated form, as it actually is present, as 'fabricated form.' He discerns fabricated feeling... He discerns fabricated perception... He discerns fabricated fabrications... He discerns fabricated consciousness, as it actually is present, as 'fabricated consciousness.'

"He discerns murderous form, as it actually is present, as 'murderous form.' He discerns murderous feeling... He discerns murderous perception... He discerns murderous fabrications... He discerns murderous consciousness, as it actually is present, as 'murderous consciousness.'

"He does not get attached to form, does not cling to form, does not determine it to be 'my self.' He does not get attached to feeling... He does not get attached to perception... He does not get attached to fabrications... He does not get attached to consciousness, does not cling to consciousness, does not determine it to be 'my self.' These five clinging-aggregates — not attached to, not clung to — lead to his long-term happiness & well-being."

"Even so, my friend Sariputta, are those who have people like you as their fellows in the holy life, teaching them, admonishing them out of sympathy, desiring their welfare. For now that I have heard this explanation of the Dhamma from you, my mind — through lack of clinging/sustenance — has been released from the effluents."

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:17:09 2020 No.15132361 Is Nibbana unmanifested presence?

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:21:17 2020 No.15132408 >>15131814 shitposting directly in the minds of others

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:22:19 2020 No.15132423 >>15131853 the lunar mansions sound comfy

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:24:10 2020 No.15132438 >>15132163 but for some autistic reason annihilationism is considered a heresy in actual buddhism, also if you don't believe in reincarnation there's literally no functional difference between widespread nirvana and nuking the earth

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:25:25 2020 No.15132454 >>15132213 >>15132219 one has to love buddhist autism

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:28:56 2020 No.15132491

>>15132288
>"And so, my friend Yamaka — when you can't pin down the Tathagata as a truth or reality even in the present life — is it proper for you to declare, 'As I understand the Teaching explained by the Blessed One, a monk with no more effluents, on the break-up of the body, is annihilated, perishes, & does not exist after death'?"
So... basically we should remain agnostic?

Not much better than nihilism to me.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:31:27 2020 No.15132514 This does not recognize all the pre-mahayana stuff like Five Skhandas and so on. Nirvana is cessation of becoming. I'll take some pics of this book bc there's no scans online I know of

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:32:24 2020 No.15132525 >>15132361 No. It cannot be categorized as something, nothing, both something and nothing, neither something nor nothing. It is beyond that which can be defined in a rigid sense but can only be described implicitly.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:33:25 2020 No.15132531 >>15132491 retard...

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:33:59 2020 No.15132541 >>15132438 >>15132491 because annihilism is the opposite of nihilism. an-nihilism.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:36:57 2020 No.15132568 >>15132541 t. esl speaker

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:39:44 2020 No.15132601

>>15132491
No. There's no you to be agnostic. That's the entire point. There's no you to go poof and not exist. There's no you to annihilate, no you to perish, and no you to not exist after death.

The goal isn't to stop existing, it's to step outside of the cycle of rebirth and death.

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:45:32 2020 No.15132643

>>15132531
Not an argument. Buddhists seems to mostly just say they're not nihilists because the Buddha happened to say he wasn't one although all signs point to nihilism.
>>15132601
>The goal isn't to stop existing,
But also there is no you existing to begin with.

Spiritual nihilism.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:48:28 2020 No.15132669 >>15132643 >But also there is no you existing to begin with. Correct. >Spiritual nihilism. Incorrect.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:53:31 2020 No.15132709 File: 2.11 MB, 3300x2550, IMG_20200418_125149.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] (1/4)

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:54:35 2020 No.15132718 File: 2.10 MB, 3300x2550, IMG_20200418_125135.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15132709 (2/4)

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:55:41 2020 No.15132731 File: 2.05 MB, 3300x2550, IMG_20200418_125114.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15132718 (3/4)

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:56:49 2020 No.15132740 File: 2.09 MB, 3300x2550, IMG_20200418_125101.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15132731 (4/4) You lying NIGGER

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 13:57:37 2020 No.15132746

>>15132669
>Correct
Nihilism is still nihilism even though one have to perform certain religious practices in order to truly realize this nihilism.

So basically Buddhists believe in ontological nihilism but that this truth is not understod and therefore causes suffering. This truth must be fully grasped through religious practice which is the religion of Buddhism. Nihilism but with robes.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 14:00:14 2020 No.15132761 >>15132669 >>15132746 Behold: >>15132709 >>15132718 >>15132731 >>15132740

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 14:02:10 2020 No.15132781

>>15132643
Well said. The funny thing is that the Buddha’s purpose was to trick atheists into believing in God (it worked). But once one sees value in Buddhism it would be wise to guide them towards Hinduism texts which I would say are far more life-affirming and beneficial.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 14:03:12 2020 No.15132791 >>15132781 Markandeya Purana, Bhagavata Purana &c my main sadhu

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 14:06:38 2020 No.15132821 >>15132746 >>15132781 By this definition all religion is just spiritual nihilism.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 14:08:37 2020 No.15132842 >it's a guenonfag thread Face it my dude, Whitehead and Nagarjuna BTFO'd Shankara. Get over it.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 14:16:58 2020 No.15132918 >>15132821 Animism isn't Based Tengri

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 14:33:46 2020 No.15133027

>>15132134
>This is not what the Buddha taught. At all.
Yes but he failed to offer any meaningful explanation of how it differs from non-existence and instead just asks people to trust him that it's not nothingness, sounds to me like he had a conceptual failure and tried to paper it up with "just trust me bro"
>A chariot lacking a non-conditioned reality does not mean that the chariot doesn't exist,
But if you maintained that the ultimate truth is that conditioned things dont have real existence or dont exist at the level of ultimate reality/truth then that still amounts to saying that the chariot doesn't *truly* exist
>Existing
If you can't say *what* about it that exists then it's really not different from asking someone to accept the existence of a hypothetical special catagory of nothingness
>>15132195
>Nirvana is not just poofing out of existence, or turning off or whatever, it's being freed from delusions and thus from rebirth.
if you say that the individual is just the aggregates though and that nothing continues into Nirvana than in practice it's non-different from dissolution into nothingness because Nirvana cannot be experienced and cannot be bliss if there is no entity remaining to experience that, if the entirety of concious experience is just the aggregates and these go poof then there is no difference between Nirvana and nothingness because in either case nothing is experienced any more and there is no continuation of awareness, the only thing that saves Nirvana from being dissolution into nothingness is if there is some Upanishadic- or Yogachara-style eternal and immutable consciousness which forever endures in liberation, otherwise it's indistinguishable from non-existence despite Buddhas protests to the contrary.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 14:35:38 2020 No.15133045 >>15132842 No they didn't lol, Nagarjuna was btfo by Burton in Emptiness Appraised and Whitehead by Guenon's deconstruction of """process philosophy""", nothing that Whitehead or Nagarjuna wrote is remotely applicable to Advaita

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 14:45:29 2020 No.15133120 >>15132821 Except no other religion is.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 15:02:02 2020 No.15133253 >>15133027 Dude, already btfo'd the whole argument: >>15132709 >>15132718 >>15132731 >>15132740

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 15:05:57 2020 No.15133282 >>15133253 What book is that?

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 15:19:08 2020 No.15133381

>>15133253
No it didn't, the fundamental point behind my argument was unanswered in those pages, I'll sum it up for you again

1) Buddhists deny that Parinirvana or Nirvana after the death of the body is "extinction" or dissolution into nothingness or non-existence
2) But Buddhists are also unable say anything about Parinirvana except that it exists (sometimes they says its bliss but back away from this claim when its pointed out this bliss cannot be experienced by any entity as there is none remaining and so this bliss is only figerative and is really not different from nothingness)
3) In light of the Buddhist refusal to admit any form of consciousness, awareness or anything else related to an entity which continues in Parinirvana after the body dies it becomes indistinguishable from complete extinction/nothingness, because in both nothingness and in the standard Buddhist concept of Parinirvana there is no experience of anything whatsoever
4) Buddhists try to grapple with #3 by denying that it's nothingness but are unable to give any reason why the two are different if in both cases nothing whatsoever is experienced and if in both cases there is no entity to experience anything

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 15:23:41 2020 No.15133419
File: 800 KB, 3000x2084, il_fullxfull.1204049598_dtvj.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15133282
Buddhism by Richard Gard, part of the Great Religions Of Modern Man series from the 60s. Academic specialists use excerpts from primary texts to illustrate the structure and nature of major living Religions

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 15:24:55 2020 No.15133427 >>15133381 I'm agreeing with you (so is the text) I meant it blew out the other guy (of probably guenonfag)

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 15:43:37 2020 No.15133553 >>15129140 I second this.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 15:46:03 2020 No.15133569 I think we can all agree that Tibetan "Buddhism" is just Vaishnavism in disguise. I mean, you even chant to go with Amitabha into what is honestly just Vaikuntha

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 15:55:31 2020 No.15133661

>>15133569
It actually is heavily influenced by Shaivism via Vajrayana, Pure Land Buddhism is more like Vaishnavism

>>15133427
I am Guenonfag, the person I am arguing with is the Buddhist(s) denying that Parinirvana is dissolution into nothingness, on the basis of the Buddha denying this. But as I point out in the absence of anything which can distinguish Parinirvana from nothingness (as both are without any sensation or entity whatsoever) it becomes functionally non-different from nothingness unless you are willing to accept that Buddha was trying to imply that a transcendental Supreme Self which is different from the aggregates continues forever in Parinirvana (as Coomaraswamy who could read Pali and several other scholars accept), but as most Buddhists are unwilling to accept this it becomes indistinguishable from nothingness and the Buddhist denial that Parinirvana is different from extinction into non-existence becomes a matter of pure faith without any logical reasons to accept it.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 16:07:40 2020 No.15133760 >>15133661 I can accept that with reservations

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 18:03:00 2020 No.15134672

>>15133381
In the Hinayana (which is often wrongly identified 'early Buddhism'), nirvana is characterized as the cessation of suffering. This is not an ontological non-existence or blankness, but peace. To call this 'nihilism' is to misunderstand nirvana merely as an ontological phenomenon, when in fact it is a soteriological goal.

In the Mahayana, ontological existence and non-existence are both explicitly rejected. But again the main point is soteriological. As explained in the Lotus Sutra, one of the most famous Mahayana sutras, one must awaken from the sleep of nirvana and carry out of the benefit of illusory sentient beings in order to complete the path.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 18:37:06 2020 No.15134934 >>15134672 This is such bullshit, and btfo'd by >>15132709 >>15132718 >>15132731 >>15132740

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 19:08:55 2020 No.15135180 >>15134934 Nothing I said is contradicted by that passage.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 22:21:01 2020 No.15136439 >>15133045 cringe....

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 22:27:27 2020 No.15136481 File: 34 KB, 500x228, cr.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15133045 >nothing that ... Nagarjuna wrote is remotely applicable to Advaita Then why do even advaitins say differently?

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 22:28:50 2020 No.15136489
File: 447 KB, 1630x1328, 1576282570701.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15136481
Why do Vivekananda, one of the most famous proponents of advaita in history, and Radhakrishnan, second president of India and another of the most famous advaitins in history, both say differently?

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 22:31:49 2020 No.15136501
File: 2.21 MB, 1450x5947, 1576172175532.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15136489
Why does every single mainstream scholar agree that Shankara's Advaita Vedanta was essentially a synthesis of 1st millennium CE Buddhism, both its philosophy and its monastic institutions, with older Vedanta texts?

Why did every Hindu in India outside of Advaita immediately call Advaita "crypto-Buddhism," even before modern scholarship agreed with this accusation?

Why was Advaita a minority compared to bhakti, dualist, and qualified non-dualist perspectives until the 1800s, when westernized, English-speaking, deist-influenced Indians like Ram Roy and Vivekananda re-popularized it as ecumenical Hinduism (and even themselves admitted it was essentially the same as Buddhism)?

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 22:34:54 2020 No.15136512 >>15136501 >>15136489 Commendable autism, both of you. Keep it up.

>>	None !XIxc6BpKnU Sat Apr 18 22:35:58 2020 No.15136517 >>15125182

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 22:36:02 2020 No.15136518
File: 91 KB, 996x357, gaudapada.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15136501
Why does Shankara's teacher, Gaudapada, by many to be the first true advaitin, endlessly praise Buddhism in his central text?

Why is Gaudapada considered to be a former Buddhist by most scholars, to the point that mainstream scholarly opinion is that he plagiarized much of his main work directly from Buddhist writings, especially the entire fourth book?

>>	None !n/czs3Nijs Sat Apr 18 22:37:25 2020 No.15136526 >>15136517 I suck cock

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 22:38:55 2020 No.15136532

>>15126807
This is pretty much true. Buddhism is Hinduism 2.0 (reincarnation until you become enlightened, karma, gods and demigods) except the Buddhists particularly stressed the “no-self” teaching. In some offshoots of Buddhism like Zen, the cosmological parts are pretty much “removed”, inasmuch as the Zen Buddhists would say all thoughts of cosmology, deities, reincarnation etc. are just glorious distractions from seeing your own self-nature.

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 22:47:51 2020 No.15136581

>>15136501
Shankara may have been influenced by Buddhism, but Advaita interpretation of the Vedas is not as outrageous as you’re making it to be. Read the Tejobindu Upanishad. Second, people who sincerely argue about the difference between Buddhism and Hinduism are clearly unenlightened peasants.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 22:52:19 2020 No.15136601 >>15136532 >Buddhism is Hinduism 2.0 cringe

Anonymous Sat Apr 18 22:58:38 2020 No.15136636
File: 201 KB, 931x638, olivelle.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15136581
The advaita interpretation of the Upanishads is late as fuck, the Upanishads have no single interpretation because they are collections of commentaries on the meanings of rituals. Brahman is variously described as monotheistic and dualistic, monistic, emanationist, and so on. Even the Brahmasutras may be as late as 500 CE, although they're probably closer to the turn of the millennium.

Pic related is Patrick Olivelle on how difficult it is to interpret the earliest Upanishads (here he's talking about Chandogya), which are semi-redundant compilations of oral recitations practiced by different people at different parts of northeast India. Note how most translators take "speak 'brahman'" to mean "discourse on Brahman," presuming the unity of the "brahman" concept that they're supposed to be proving.

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 23:13:29 2020 No.15136706 >>15129364 My fucking sides

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 23:23:32 2020 No.15136756 >>15135180 Says you, lying bitch

>>	Anonymous Sat Apr 18 23:24:35 2020 No.15136759 >>15136501 Based & truthpilled

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 00:00:45 2020 No.15136975

>>15136518
Gaudapada only praises Buddhism a few times in that text for getting a few things right that were already in the Upanishads but mostly criticizes Buddhism in the text and explains how Vedanta is still better and more logical than Yogachara and Madhyamaka
>>15136481
That picture omits the fact that Sriharsa also in his writings points out the important difference between Mahayana and Vedanta by explaining that Advaita holds that conciousness is eternal and unconditioned on the basis of the Upanishads which say so while Madhyamaka regards conciousness as temporary, empty, and subject to dependent-origination.
>>15136489
>another of the most famous advaitins in history, both say differently?
Both are unironic Neovedantins and dont represent traditional Advaita, that's why

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 00:21:19 2020 No.15137096

>>15136601
Historically and culturally speaking, yes. It came after and the Buddhists basically revised their teachings and put a different slant on them. This doesn’t have any bearing on the legitimacy of the Buddha’s enlightenment experience or on the experiences of Hindu yogis, which go entirely beyond historical and cultural influence.

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 00:26:38 2020 No.15137124

>>15136636
>the Upanishads have no single interpretation because they are collections of commentaries on the meanings of rituals. Brahman is variously described as monotheistic and dualistic, monistic, emanationist, and so on
This is a fair point, but like I said, advaita is clearly in the Tejobindu Upanishad. It’s even in the Chandogya Upanishad at points.

>He is known as a Jivan-mukta who stands alone in Atman, who realizes he is transcendent and beyond the concept of transcendence, who understands, "I am pure consciousness, I am Brahman". He knows and feels that there is one Brahman, who is full of exquisite bliss, and that he is He, he is Brahman, he is that bliss of Brahman. His mind is clear, he is devoid of worries, he is beyond egoism, beyond lust, beyond anger, beyond blemish, beyond symbols, beyond his changing body, beyond bondage, beyond reincarnation, beyond precept, beyond religious merit, beyond sin, beyond dualism, beyond the three worlds, beyond nearness, beyond distance. He is the one who realizes, "I am Brahman, I am pure Consciousness; Pure Consciousness is what I am".

—Tejobindu Upanishad, 4.1–4.30

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 00:29:46 2020 No.15137144

>>15137096
>It came after and the Buddhists basically revised their teachings and put a different slant on them
false

Buddhism was an iteration of a proto-sramanic tradition that likely descended from the Harappan civilization. The only major exposure he got from Hindu thought was his Samkhya teacher but later rejected his teachings. He certainly did not put a 'different' slant, he outright rejected the Vedas.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 00:36:16 2020 No.15137176 >>15137144 Wrong. Buddhism was an iteration of the proto-sramanic tradition that descended from the wider Scythian culture. The same cultural outlook that gave us Anacharsis.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 00:40:05 2020 No.15137199 >>15137176 Wrong Proto-sramanic tradition is at odds with known knowledge of Scythian culture (which the Buddha may have ethnically belonged to), while Indus Valley culture shows signs of proto-sramanism.

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 00:40:11 2020 No.15137200

>>15137144
>proto-sramanic tradition that likely descended from the Harappan civilization.
pure conjecture, there is no evidence of any surviving Harappan texts or teachings and in fact all the most central ideas of Buddhism already appear in the earliest Upanishads

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 00:42:38 2020 No.15137216

>>15137144
>The only major exposure he got from Hindu thought was his Samkhya teacher but later rejected his teachings. He certainly did not put a 'different' slant, he outright rejected the Vedas.
Samkhya is a school of Hindu philosophy. Second, see what I said about reincarnation until enlightenment (nirvana or moksha, variously) and karma. Buddhism and Samkhya are quite similar, by the way. In Samkhya, you learn to detach Purusha (conscious observer/witness/soul) from Prakriti (mechanism, material body and its processes). In Buddhism, this is put as “realizing that you have no self” I.e. that your self is not something localized or centralized anywhere in Prakriti.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 00:47:45 2020 No.15137248 >>15137199 False. The Scythians gave the west Cynicism and to the east they gave Buddhism.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 00:49:25 2020 No.15137255 File: 33 KB, 500x338, the-virgin-hellene-vs-the-chad-scythian-glorious-hat-taller-37953603.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15137248 WE

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 00:50:09 2020 No.15137258

>>1513720
>there is no evidence of any surviving Harappan texts
True but what is left to us can give hints as to the religious heritage of the Harappans. The seal of Pashupati (wrongly identified as Rudra) has been interpreted as the Tirthankara Rishabhanatha by Jains and Vilas Sangave or an early Buddha by Buddhists. Historians such as Heinrich Zimmer and Thomas McEvilley believe that there is a connection between first Jain Tirthankara Rishabhanatha and the Indus Valley civilisation. It is likely that sramanism was a unique strain of left from Harrapan culture that the Indo-Aryans encountered later on (as evidenced by the fact that reference to sramana only occurs in the latest layer of the Rig Veda).

>in fact all the most central ideas of Buddhism already appear in the earliest Upanishads
The upanishads were really a response to a proto-sramana movement that attacked the authority of the Brahmins and peeled away followers from the rigid Vedic system. This is why yajna and deva lauding that characterized the elder Vedic period were relegated and priority was given to metaphysical knowledge of an Absolutist principle that is centered on the self (atman-brahman). This is evidenced by the fact that these austere ideas are found in the latest book of the Vedas, the same time that references to sramanas (muni) appears. There is really no explanation on the part of the Hindus as to why the IE-centric framework of the Vedas was miraculously transformed into a neo-contemplativist framework without external forces, all there is about it amounts to apologetics.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 00:50:44 2020 No.15137262 File: 156 KB, 930x573, 1481374863144.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15137255 You've brought shame to this thread.

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 00:58:18 2020 No.15137303

>>15137258
That's weird, I did not intentionally delete my post, I don't know why it was deleted

> but what is left to us can give hints as to the religious heritage of the Harappans.
Again, the rest of what you cite is just pure speculation and people reading their own symbols and hopes into the obscure artifacts of a long lost culture
>The upanishads were really a response to a proto-sramana movement that attacked the authority of the Brahmins and peeled away followers from the rigid Vedic system. T
Again, this is conjecture and it's actually completely ludicrous as only the Brahmins were familiar with the Vedas, as they had not been written down and the only time someone could even hear them was if a Brahmin recited them, non-Brahmins would not bother to learn to memorize them. And the Upanishads are intimately bound up with the Vedas, the reference various Vedic meditations and rituals, they use Vedic gods in their parables, they refer to the Vedic Aranyakas and Brahmans, they repeat word for word mantras from the Rig-Veda, there is so much material in all the early Upanisahds that only someone who was extremely familiar with the Vedas would know that it's absurd to say that anyone other than Brahmins could come up with the Upanishads, this is probably you coping because the Upanishads are more interesting than Buddhism generally and so you want to peel them away from Hinduism.
>There is really no explanation on the part of the Hindus as to why the IE-centric framework of the Vedas was miraculously transformed into a neo-contemplativist framework without external forces,
By further developing ideas already in the Vedas, which already in the Rig-Veda mention that all Gods are one and that there is one Soul in all beings, the Brahmans and Aranyakas explain secret meditations and the esoteric meaning of Vedic rituals and are the mid-point in this transition from the Mantras to the Upanishads.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 00:59:45 2020 No.15137314 >>15137303 >*the Brahmanas and Aranyakas

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:01:35 2020 No.15137329 File: 2 KB, 42x26, 1587271844999.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15137255

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:05:08 2020 No.15137354

>>15137303
>Again, the rest of what you cite is just pure speculation and people reading their own symbols and hopes into the obscure artifacts of a long lost culture
non-argument

>the Upanishads are intimately bound up with the Vedas
nope. Upanishads relegated IE-polytheism of Vedas in favor of metaphysical Brahmanism. The rituals were thereafter secondary to knowledge of Brahman.

>By further developing ideas already in the Vedas, which already in the Rig-Veda mention that all Gods are one and that there is one Soul in all beings, the Brahmans and Aranyakas explain secret meditations and the esoteric meaning of Vedic rituals and are the mid-point in this transition from the Mantras to the Upanishads.
pure cope, very few verses in the Rig Veda mention this and are mostly found in book 10, the latest book, the one that tried to challenge the Sramanic thread imposed onto it.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:10:37 2020 No.15137392 >>15137200 Obviously Shramanas were a Dravidian thing. We should be looking at Tamil stuff tbqh

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:13:08 2020 No.15137411 >>15137200 >in fact all the most central ideas of Buddhism already appear in the earliest Upanishads very false

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:14:10 2020 No.15137416 >>15137248 >>The Scythians gave the west Cynicism and to the east they gave Buddhism. No there is no overlap between Scythians and buddhism

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:18:19 2020 No.15137442

>>15137392
Yes that's what many people speculate but there is not a single concrete piece of evidence that anyone has ever come up with to indicate that
>>15137354
>nope.
I just gave you a long list of reasons explaining exactly why that's true you dumbass, if all you have to say is "nope" to the facts I just pointed out, then by your lack of any response you are practically conceding that I'm right.
>Upanishads relegated IE-polytheism of Vedas in favor of metaphysical Brahmanism.
While extensively making reference to and quoting multiple layers of the Vedas, which only the Brahmins had memoried.
>The rituals were thereafter secondary to knowledge of Brahman.
There is no reason why this is not something that could have occurred as a change in Vedic/Brahmin thought, the earliest parts of the Vedas have been estimated by scholars to be as old as 1700 or 1500 BC, in any case even with a lesser estimate that's still 500-700 years before the first Upanishads around 800-700 BC which is more than enough for a significant change in worldview and religious thought among the same group or class of people such as Brahmins,

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:19:45 2020 No.15137449 File: 231 KB, 1306x1326, Buddhism.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>15137411 see pic related, it's a struggle to find anything in the Buddhism of the Pali Canon that doesn't have direct antecedents in the earliest Upanishads

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:20:37 2020 No.15137457 >>15137442 What's your opinion on The Arctic Home In The Vedas?

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:24:43 2020 No.15137477

>>15137354
>I just gave you a long list of reasons explaining exactly why that's true you dumbass, if all you have to say is "nope" to the facts I just pointed out, then by your lack of any response you are practically conceding that I'm right.
I'm saying they aren't bound up, Upanishads were coping with the Sramana monks challenging its authority and they had to relegate ritualism and come up with elaborate explanations to save face.

For example:
>While the hymns of the Vedas emphasize rituals and the Brahmanas serve as a liturgical manual for those Vedic rituals, the spirit of the Upanishads is inherently opposed to ritual.[104] The older Upanishads launch attacks of increasing intensity on the ritual. Anyone who worships a divinity other than the self is called a domestic animal of the gods in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad. The Chāndogya Upanishad parodies those who indulge in the acts of sacrifice by comparing them with a procession of dogs chanting Om! Let's eat. Om! Let's drink.[104]

>While extensively making reference to and quoting multiple layers of the Vedas, which only the Brahmins had memoried.
Here's an example of how the Brahmins tried to bullshit their way out of explaining away the waning sacrificial rites of the Vedas
>The performance of all the sacrifices, described in the Maitrayana-Brahmana, is to lead up in the end to a knowledge of Brahman, to prepare a man for meditation. Therefore, let such man, after he has laid those fires,[109] meditate on the Self, to become complete and perfect. -Maitri Upanishad[110][111]

This is obviously them trying to show how Sramanic their philosophy was when the Vedas were opposite to this.

>There is no reason why this is not something that could have occurred as a change in Vedic/Brahmin thought, the earliest parts of the Vedas have been estimated by scholars to be as old as 1700 or 1500 BC, in any case even with a lesser estimate that's still 500-700 years before the first Upanishads around 800-700 BC which is more than enough for a significant change in worldview and religious thought among the same group or class of people such as Brahmins,
Yes there were change, but not from within. It was a reaction to an external threat. Brahmins did not want to relinquish control and the wealth they had, so they had to adapt to the situation. How is this hard for you to understand?

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:27:56 2020 No.15137485

>>15137457
It seems very plausible, I haven't read it but I did read this article on the subject which discusses the book and goes over the evidence, reading this article convinced me that it could be real, there is just too much Arctic symbolism etc in the Vedas and Mahabharata (plus the Avestas some people say?) for it to all be a coincidence IMO

https://www.systematics.org/journal/vol1-3/SJ1-3c.htm

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:33:57 2020 No.15137524

>>15137477
>Upanishads were coping with the Sramana monks challenging its authority and they had to relegate ritualism and come up with elaborate explanations to save face
> This is obviously them trying to show how Sramanic their philosophy was when the Vedas were opposite to this.
this is all just speculation that you are pulling out of your ass without any evidence, just like everything else you have said

The discussion of sacrifice in the Maitri Upanishad doesn't mean that the Upanishads were not composed by Brahmins, since as I mentioned at least half a millenium had passed the initial composition of the Vedas which is more than enough time for the Brahmins to come to that conclusion on their own. Lastly, there is no evidence that there were even non-Vedic sramanics existing in the 800 BC range when the first Upanishads were written. The references to sramanics and munis that occur within the Vedas are talking about people within the Vedic fold, they are never presented in those texts as outsiders or as people who don't share the same beliefs. The only indication of any non-Vedic sramanics existing first appear with the rise of Samhkya and Buddhism which are post-Upanishads.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:34:21 2020 No.15137527 >>15137485 >It seems very plausible lmao aren't you the person who's so scholarly about the historicity of the Vedas/Upanishads yet you're here saying the Vedas came from of fictitious Nazi hyperborea? You clearly are insane...

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:34:35 2020 No.15137530
File: 127 KB, 646x1062, mainyu.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15137485
Avesta is so seriously under-read and underappreciated.
Weird considering how popular Gnosticism is.

Mazdayasna is a reaction to Vedism, just like Shramanas and Trika and Tantra.
It's like Vedism was pissing off everyone around them, lol.
Mazdayasna is like Aryan reaction as opposed to Dravidian reaction.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:36:19 2020 No.15137536 >>15137530 >It's like Vedism was pissing off everyone around them, lol. I mean if they were as unhinged as that poster, I would imagine them doing so. There's something about Hinduism that makes them schizophrenic.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:36:35 2020 No.15137537 >>15137527 wtf are you talking about, Tilak was an Indian intellectual. What is Nazi about it?

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:40:46 2020 No.15137561
File: 108 KB, 655x1080, asha.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>15137536
Well, in the intro to Hymns Of Zoroaster by West, there is mention of an event in Zarathustra's life where the Kshatriyas were abusing ritual, sacrificing hundreds of bulls for petty reasons, and overcomplicating ritualism to where it was impossible to perform without ten priests and so on.
In Flowers' Original Magic, he talks about how Mazdayasna is a stripped down hotrod re-implementation of Vedism, made more efficient and so on.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:41:20 2020 No.15137565 >>15137537 Hyperborean Vedas are clearly not supported by most Hindu scholars, hell just most scholars in general. It is a defunct theory that's only circulated by neo-nazis and (surprise surprise) traditionalists authors.

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:49:34 2020 No.15137601

>>15137565
Something doesn't need to be "supported by most scholars" in order for us to talk about it you twerp. Tilak was a respected Indian intellectual who wrote a book which examines the evidence for the theory and people have the right to discusses the merits of the book on the basis of the evidence discussed within it without deference to anyone and anything else

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:49:47 2020 No.15137605

>>15137524
>this is all just speculation that you are pulling out of your ass without any evidence, just like everything else you have said
non argument, try again

>The discussion of sacrifice in the Maitri Upanishad doesn't mean that the Upanishads were not composed by Brahmins, since as I mentioned at least half a millenium had passed the initial composition of the Vedas which is more than enough time for the Brahmins to come to that conclusion on their own.
This isn't how religions are suppose to progress. They don't simply change their entire framework if all is going well, why would they? The Vedas were revered as something from the Gods themselves, any tampering will be deemed smrti.

>Lastly, there is no evidence that there were even non-Vedic sramanics existing in the 800 BC range when the first Upanishads were written. The references to sramanics and munis that occur within the Vedas are talking about people within the Vedic fold, they are never presented in those texts as outsiders or as people who don't share the same beliefs. The only indication of any non-Vedic sramanics existing first appear with the rise of Samhkya and Buddhism which are post-Upanishads.
I don't think you quite understood what I was saying. It's not that the Brahmins were praising the Sramanas, they were adapting them. Of course they're going to say that the Munis were coincidentally part of their tradition all along. Look at the Vedas in its totality and understand that they were a group based on IE sacrifical rites and praising their Gods for wealth and glory, something at odds with the Upanishads.

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 01:56:00 2020 No.15137627

>>15137601
>something doesn't need to be "supported by most scholars" in order for us to talk about it you twerp
you could talk about it, but I find it baffling that on one hand you promote scholarship that comes to a consensus about the historicity of the Vedas, and on the other you simp to a single 'respected Indian intellectual' who proposed a now defunct theory unsupported by everyone else (even the ones you have previously brought up) except neo-nazis and traditionalists authors. You are clearly just regurgitating what Guenon et al are saying.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 02:02:52 2020 No.15137660 >>15137565 That's certainly an opinion.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 02:03:59 2020 No.15137665 >>15137660 Hyperborean Vedas is indeed an opinion.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 02:15:30 2020 No.15137722 >>15137665 You're confusing Tilak with Serrano, asshole. At least read the goddamn material before shitting on it. Tilak isn't into UFOs and Green Rays. Jesus.

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 02:17:42 2020 No.15137730 >>15137722 >reading debunked drivel no thanks incel

Anonymous Sun Apr 19 03:10:54 2020 No.15137950

>>15137524
>Lastly, there is no evidence that there were even non-Vedic sramanics existing in the 800 BC range when the first Upanishads were written.

800BC is pretty late by modern estimates. They were recorded closer to 600, but they likely predate their recording.

The thing is, there isn't much evidence of anything. We have NO sources for this period other than internal bramanic jainist and buddhist texts that were "open" texts (continually reedited) while in circulation for years. The best canon we have in terms of textual fidelity is the Buddhist canon solely because the Chinese translate it and freeze it in place ca. 400 AD. Everything else is fluid as hell.

In terms of reconstruction from archaeology and ethnolinguistic evidence and so on, the current best guess is that the cultural complex associated with brahmanic thought/society was in the upper/central gangetic plain but that the cultural complex associated with indigenous/folk and possibly sramanic culture was closer to Bengal, and definitely distinct.

The Vedic tradition isn't even conservative. The current consensus is that the period of the brahmanas and collation of the vedic samhitas is a deliberate taking stock and redacting of Indo-Aryan traditions, meaning obviously these were flayed into whatever shape was considered self-evident at the time. There is a noticeable drift toward speculation and monotheism, so where does this come from? It's just an internal development of the vedic ritualism and polytheism? This has been argued but even if you don't find it implausible, it's still impossible to prove. It's just as possible that the renunciate and ascetic traditions are indigenous Indian, but we don't even know whether this means "Dravidian."

tldr it's a stupid debate. We don't know shit. But in general in history, things tend toward complexity rather than simplicity. The old models of a singular Aryan invasion are no longer tenable; there were continuous and overlapping settlings/invasions of the Punjab by vedic tribes who extended into Iran. Calling it a single vedic invasion is like calling all Scandinavians "Vikings" in the year 1300.

Speaking purely from the vedic corpus, which we have a lot of, these Aryan people don't seem to have a renunciate culture. That only comes in after the settlement period in the first "reimagining" and collation of the vedic texts, centuries in. It's perfectly possible they drew upon "local" inspiration (cultural exchange spanning centuries).

>>	Anonymous Sun Apr 19 03:12:21 2020 No.15137956 >>15137950 >800BC is pretty late by modern estimates Pretty early*

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature