/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15268191]

Where do I start with pic related?

[Anonymous No.15268211]

Why not just include Adi Shankara's name in the post?

[Anonymous No.15268231]

>>15268211
That’s easy to answer, it’s because I’m autistic.

[Anonymous No.15268249]

>>15268191

You want to begin with his 8 Upanishad commentaries translated by Gambhirananda, you can find them to purchase on amazon or on Vedanta.com, or you can read them online as pdfs here

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

[Anonymous No.15268260]

>>15268191
>>15268249
like clockwork

[Anonymous No.15268262]

>>15268260
obsessed

[Anonymous No.15268278]

>>15268191
Unironically start with Nagarjuna, it is necessary to understand the root of Shankara’s system from him. Then just move on to Shankara himself and notice the similarities.

[Anonymous No.15268279]

>>15268262
>obsessed

[Anonymous No.15268289]

>>15268191
Start here.
Shaivism is a Nigger (((Dravidian))) Religion

[Anonymous No.15268292]

>>15268278
this

but I'd go even further and just disregard that cryptobuddhist entirely

[Anonymous No.15268298]

>>15268249
Alright thanks anon, I’ll check them out.

>>15268278
Is it absolutely necessary to do so?

>>15268260
Anything is probably better than Theravada.

[Anonymous No.15268299]

reminder that most hindus and all scholars agree that advaita is a ripoff of mahayana buddhism and its institutions, which is why real hindus have called advaita "crypto-buddhism" for a thousand years

[Anonymous No.15268301]

>>15268298
>Is it absolutely necessary to do so?
read MahaPrajnaParamita-Sastra by Nagarjuna

[Anonymous No.15268315]

>>15268292
>>15268278
Not OP, but I was going to read Nagarjuna until I found out that a Buddhist scholar wrote a book called "emptiness appraised", where he shows that Nagarjuna in his main work contradicts himself constantly, engages in common sophist tactics, and that the result of his writings is indeed nihilism despite his protests to the contrary. Its now clear to me that Nagarjuna is not worth studying, although some other Buddhist stuff is interesting

[Anonymous No.15268320]

>>15268298
>Is it absolutely necessary to do so?
No, Shankara and Nagarjuna disagree on a bunch of things and have totally different metaphysical conclusions, the people posting that you should read Nagarjuna are Buddhists who dislike Advaita and who are trolling

[Anonymous No.15268330]

>>15268298
why are you replying from a new IP mr op? did you forget that we can see them?

>guenonfag makes a thread
>tries to samefag it to boost it on the catalog
you've been caught again lol, this is I think the 7th time?

[Anonymous No.15268352]

>>15268330
What are you even saying I was just replying in my own thread

[Anonymous No.15268355]

>>15268315
>I was going to read Nagarjuna until I found out that a Buddhist scholar wrote a book called "emptiness appraised"
yea you 'just' found him out after repeatedly shilling it....

at least come up with a better lie

[Anonymous No.15268367]

>>15268352
replying from a new IP

let me guess you were 'phoneposting from work etc'

more excuses from resident schizo, same as always

[Anonymous No.15268379]

>Shankara didn't plagiarize buddh-

[Anonymous No.15268383]

>>15268367
He's just trying to slide my Dvaita campaign against him.
The bugmen FEAR Madhva
>>15268289

[Anonymous No.15268400]

>>15268367
This is precisely it anon, why are you projecting so hard rn?

[Anonymous No.15268416]

>>15268400
just admit that you fucked up in your own thread lol

[Anonymous No.15268424]

>>15268383

>Madhva's attempts to locate his controversial views in the canonical Vedanta texts often proved difficult. He is perhaps most famous for his idiosyncratic rendering of the Chandogya Upanisad's statement tat tvam asi or "you (the atman) are that (brahman)." By carrying over the 'a' from the preceding word, Madhva rendered the phrase atat tvam asi or "you are not that."

https://www.iep.utm.edu/madhva/

[Anonymous No.15268435]

>>15268383
based Madhva destroying Shankara and his ilk of cringey mayavadis

Indeed Ramanuja also made quick work of Shankara by being the first to label him a prachannabuddha (crypto-buddhist).

Om.

>>15268424
Madhva was right there

[Anonymous No.15268445]

>>15268191
MahaPrajnaParamita-Sastra by Nagarjuna

[Anonymous No.15268450]

>>15268400
Hello, I'm the poster known as 'Guenonfag', I post about Advaita sometimes and call Buddhism gay and so on, because of that, this one schizo poster who always shills Buddhism assumes that anyone who posts about Advaita on the board is me, and so any time you sees a thread with a picture about Hinduism or Adi Shankara, you can be sure that the schizo poster in question will be in there posting his pro-Buddhism and anti-Hinduism pastas and autism-oc. It's a little sad and pitiful that he is triggered enough by Hinduism-posting to the point of always trying to ruin the discussion *in every single thread about Hinduism ever*, but most people just ignore him now. It's best to just ignore him and only reply to real people who are interested in a genuine conversation.

[Anonymous No.15268468]

>guenonfag having a meltdown right now and talking to himself again
he had 1 job and he ruined it lol

[Anonymous No.15268519]

>>15268355
Haha holy fuck. Nice catch. How does he never get any less psycho? Why does every post he makes have to be some weird manipulative samefagging, shilling, or lying?

>>15268450
Meltdown right on schedule like the other anon said. Creepy shit dude.

[Anonymous No.15268521]

>The entire theory of mayavada rests on a fictitious foundation of altogether hollow and vicious arguments, incapable of being stated in definite logical alternatives, and devised by men who are destitute of those particular qualities which cause individuals to be chosen by the Supreme Person revealed in the Upanishads; whose intellects are darkened by the impression of beginningless evil; and who thus have no insight into the nature of words and sentences, into the real purport conveyed by them, and into the procedure of sound argumentation, with all its methods depending on perception and the other instruments of right knowledge. The theory therefore must needs be rejected by all those who, through texts, perception and the other means of knowledge — assisted by sound reasoning — have an insight into the true nature of things.

[Anonymous No.15268525]

>>15268468
I'm not OP and I wouldn't make this thread, I was just informing him why his thread quickly filled up with your autism posts. Posting "where to start with this person" threads are actually not an effective way at all to get people to read a philosopher they've never read before, you actually have to talk about their ideas and make them and their ideas look interesting if you want people to read them.

[Anonymous No.15268529]

>>15268521
based ramanuja

>The followers of Madhva argued that Shankara championed monism because he was so stupid that he could only count to one.

[Anonymous No.15268538]

>>15268525
>Posting "where to start with this person" threads are actually not an effective way at all to get people to read a philosopher

yeah your usual method was this >>15268260 where you pretend to have whole conversations with yourself, that's much better

[Anonymous No.15268544]

>>15268211
because he doesn't want us to find this thread for later use, just look at how we uncovered his shambolic attempt at shilling his own thread, he his trying to hide it from the archives

[Anonymous No.15268554]

>>15268525
then why do you make guenon and shankara look SO FUCKING RETARDED????? you’re giving everyone on /lit/ an allergic reaction to advaita vedanta with your constant half-baked autistic posting and unwillingness to engage!!!! fuck!!!!

[Anonymous No.15268558]

>>15268529
Indeed, and Madhva is top tier, the exposition and development from Samkhya and blowing out the stupid Snake And Rope analogy is perfect.

[Anonymous No.15268567]

>>15268521
>The entire theory of mayavada rests on a fictitious foundation of altogether hollow and vicious arguments, incapable of being stated in definite logical alternative
The Svetasvatara Upanishad, which is a primary Upanishad clearly teaches the doctrine of maya

"The sacred verses (chandas), the offerings (yajna), the sacrifices (kratu), the
penances (vrata), the past, the future and all that the Vedas declare, have been
produced from the imperishable Brahman. Brahman projects the universe through
the power of Its maya. Again, in that universe Brahman as the jiva is entangled
through maya.

- Svetasvatara Upanishad 4.9

"Know, then, that prakriti or nature is maya (illusion) and that Great Lord
(Mahesvara) is the mayin (the illusion-maker). The whole universe is filled with
objects which are parts of His being. "

- Svetasvatara Upanishad 4.10

"May the non-dual Lord, who, by the power of His maya, covered Himself, like a
spider, with threads drawn from primal matter, merge us in Brahman!

- Svetasvatara Upanishad 6.10

[Anonymous No.15268577]

>I post about Advaita sometimes

[Anonymous No.15268580]

>>15268525
>Posting "where to start with this person" threads are actually not an effective way

[Anonymous No.15268596]

>>15268567
>relying on late buddhist-influenced upanishads
Uh oh, you're stealing from Buddhism again. Why do advaita fags love to rip off Buddhists like this? Is it a sexual thing, like with the cows and feces?

[Anonymous No.15268602]

>>15268567
>'May I be many, may I grow forth' (Ch. Up. VI, 2, 3).
>'The being (purusa), of the size of a thumb, resides in the body (prakriti)' (Ka. Up. II, 1, 12).
are these famous passages non dualism as well?

[Anonymous No.15268607]

>>15268580
I have never once posted a "where to start with Shankara' thread, all of them have always been other people, if people have genuine questions about him then I enjoy coming into their threads and answering them but I have better things to do than post fake threads, there is no satisfaction to be found whatsoever in that, I'd much rather read books

[Anonymous No.15268615]

>>15268607
What do you gain from lying through your teeth to a thread full of people who have all personally witnessed you doing these things? Nobody cares, you've been embarrassed so many times it's not like you're some epic troll. Other anons just find it odd.

[Anonymous No.15268711]

>>15268596
The post-Buddhist primary Upanishads are not Buddhist-influenced, but in any case the pre-Buddhist Brihadaranyaka Upanishad also mentions maya when it says that Brahman appears to be manifold because of maya in verse 2.5.19., and there are multiple verses in the pre-Buddhist Chandogya Upanishad which use the analogies of clay, gold etc to explain how change is unreal and that the unchanging basis of Brahman alone is real.

>>15268567
>'May I be many, may I grow forth' (Ch. Up. VI, 2, 3).
Yes those famous passages are also non-dualism my friend. The doctrine of maya doesn't mean that there was never any creation or projection of the world whatsoever, it merely means that the creation/projection/etc only happened in an illusory manner, the world was created 'as it were'. That's why Svetasvatara Upanishad verse 4.9. says "Brahman projects the universe through Its power of maya", the universe is being projected by Brahman which is why it appears, but it is only through the power of maya, which is why Svetasvatara Upanishad verse 1.10. says "by the knowledge of identity with Him, one attains, in the end, cessation of the illusion of phenomena."

>'The being (purusa), of the size of a thumb, resides in the body (prakriti)' (Ka. Up. II, 1, 12)
This is also non-dualism, because that comes from the Katha Upanishad, and in the Katha Upanishad it says that the Purusha is both the Self and Brahman. As the Self and Brahman are both the Purusha they are really 3 names for the same entity. The Prakriti consisting of the body is part of the illusion created by Brahman's power of maya.

"The Purusha, not larger than a thumb, the inner Self, always dwells in the hearts of men."
Katha Upanishad 2.3.17.

"He, the Purusha, who remains awake while the sense−organs are asleep, shaping one
lovely form after another, that indeed is the Pure, that is Brahman and that alone is called
the Immortal."
Katha Upanishad 2.1.8.

[Anonymous No.15268723]

>>15268602
meant to cite you here >>15268711

[Anonymous No.15268734]

>>15268711
>oh that passage?
>yea non-dualism as well
>oh that one?
>its all maya bro
>you mean that verse?
>yea I'm thinking maya is based (pbuh)
so this is the power of 'advaita'...

[Anonymous No.15268738]

>>15268711
>pre-Buddhist Brihadaranyaka Upanishad

It's now argued by most scholars, following Bronkhorst, that Brihadaranyaka is post-Buddhist. You are defending an extremely doctrinaire advaita position that not even the vast majority of advaitins defend, because it's brittle and easily laughed at. Which is exactly why vishishtadvaitins, who have a reading much closer to the actual philosophy of the Upanishads, do laugh at it. The dualists are closer too because they are in accordance with much more of the openly devotional and creationist aspects of the vedas.

Advaita is a strange buddhism/deism hybrid, for westernized Hindus who don't feel comfortable with their own traditions. It's not even Buddhism, it turns Buddhism into nihilism.

[Anonymous No.15268769]

>>15268734
This

literally anything promoting duality or multiplicity, unique or otherwise, in the upanishads is (in the eyes of the advaitin) reduced to maya. In fact why aren't the scriptures itself maya? Isn't Vedas and Upanishads supposed to be clothed in maya? That pretty much defeats the whole purpose of AV.

[Anonymous No.15268875]

>>15268734

"It is contended by some that the doctrine of māyā or avidyā is not found in the Upaniṣads and it is borrowed by Shankara from Buddhism. This contention can be made only by those who are un-informed or ill-informed about the Upaniṣadic philosophy. The term māyā can be traced to the Rigveda (VI, 47, 18) where the one Supreme is said to appear in many forms through his power of māyā. The Shvetashvatara (IV, 9-10) describes God as ‘māyī, Lord of māyā, and his wonder-working power of creationas māyā. The term avidyā is often used in the Upaniṣads in the sense of ignorance and appearance. The Mundaka (II, 1, 10) compares ignorance to a knot which is to be untied by the realisation of the Self. The Katha (I, 2, 4-5) says that worldly people live in ignorance and thinking themselves wise move about like blind men led by the blind. The same Upanisad (11,1,2) warns us not to find reality and immortality in things of this unreal and changing world. The Chandogya (VI, 1, 4) makes it clear that Atma is the only reality and that everything else is a mere word, a mode and a name. The same Upanisad (VIII, 3,3) says that worldly people are covered with the veil of falsity. It also says (VII, 1, 3) that he who realises the Self goes beyond sorrow. The Isha (7) assures us that delusion and suffering are gone for him who realises the unity of the Self. It also says (15) that the face of the Truth is covered by a golden veil and that the aspirant prays to God for its removal. It also compares ignorance with blind darkness (9).

The Prashna (I, 16) tells us that Brahma can be realised by those who have neither crookedness nor falsehood nor illusion. The Katha (II, 1,10) makes it clear that he who sees as if there is plurality here goes on revolving in the cycle of birth and death. The Brhadaranyaka (II, 4, 14 and IV, 5, 15) says ‘as if there were duality’ implying that duality is a semblance, an appearance, an as it were. The same Upanisad (I, 3, 28) has the famous prayer which runs: Lead me from unreality to Reality, from darkness to Light, from death to Immortality. This implies the distinction between appearance and reality, between ignorance and knowledge and between change and eternity. Quotations from the Upaniṣads can be multiplied where the phenomenal world of plurality and change is declared to be mere appearance due to māyā or avidyā and Brahma is said to be the only Reality, the eternal, undeniable and non-dual Self. Prof. R.D. Ranade rightly points out the origin of the doctrine of māyā or avidyā in the Upanisads and concludes that “we do find in the Upaniṣads all the material that may have easily led Shankara to elaborate a theory of Māyā out of it.. . . let no man stand up and say that we do not find the traces of the doctrine of Māyā in the Upaniṣad!”

[Anonymous No.15268931]

>>15268875
>>15268875
>consensus of all scholars and most hindus that shankara borrowed all his core concepts from buddhism
>including literal presidents of india and india's most famous and influential advaitins
>vs
>some random guy on the internet

cryptobuddhist, you're doing what >>15268734 said and simply repeating "but it IS what i say it is" like you always do

[Anonymous No.15268994]

>>15268769
>In fact why aren't the scriptures itself maya? Isn't Vedas and Upanishads supposed to be clothed in maya? That pretty much defeats the whole purpose of AV.

An 11th century advaitin named Ānandabodha in his work Pramānamālā wrote the question "If the universe is unreal, the scriptures are also unreal, and so how can they be valid in regard to Brahmin?' to which Ānandabodha answered "Just as in a reflection, which is unreal, can indicate the prototype, which is real."

[Anonymous No.15269010]

>>15268994
Compare to Primordial Torah in Kabbalah.
(((Advaita)))

[Anonymous No.15269037]

>>15269010
The concept of a primordial scripture exists in many schools in Hinduism, most of the Vedanta schools accept that the Vedas and Upanishads are eternal and appear in every cycle of universal manifestation, and the mimansa school held this idea too. So also in Islam the majority of Sunni muslims consider the Quran to be uncreated and eternal like Allah. It's actually a fairly common religious idea worldwide and isn't an inherently Jewish one.

[Anonymous No.15269544]

>>15269037
Mimamsa is actually hilarious, imagine being so fundamentalist that you become atheist and start to worship the scripture itself