/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.16116977]

Should I get the four volumes of this, or the single-volume "The Principle Upanishads"?

[Anonymous No.16116999]

I would be careful about reading Advaita Vedanta interpretations such as Shankara's as a commentary to the Upanishads, they are extremely reliant on Buddhist philosophy (Shankara is called a "cryptobuddhist" by most Hindus, and most scholars agree). If you want to read the Upanishads, work through them with editions and commentaries that aren't sectarian, or at least read an interpretation that is closer to the original meaning of the Upanishads, rather than Shankara's 9th century AD quasi-buddhism.

[Anonymous No.16117030]

>>16116999
Which of the editions I listed is a Shankara one?

[Anonymous No.16117042]

Why Nikhilananda in particular?

[Anonymous No.16117043]

>>16116977
I actually own all 4 of those. I recommend the first 2, but the ones in 3 and 4 kind of suck (far more shallow repetition in the upanishads themselves, or lengthy descriptions of rituals of dubious relevance to you). I am by no means an expert btw, I've read these 4 and the Bhagavad Gita, that's it

>>16117030
He posts that copypasta bs in every hindu thread to start arguments lol. This set has his commentaries, but they're parallel to the text, you don't have to read them, I found some illuminating, again as a nonexpert who bumbled here by way of the schope.

[Anonymous No.16117045]

>>16116999
OOOGAAA BOOOOGAAA

[Anonymous No.16117472]

>>16117042
I just saw that it was four volumes and assumed that it's the most complete, as opposed to single-volume editions with only ~500 pages.
>>16117043
I'm also interested because of Schopenhauer. Do the first two volumes have the main Upanishads that everyone refers to? I know there are over 100 of them

[Anonymous No.16117573]

>>16116977
To me, the best explanation of or commentary on the Upanishads is clearly that of Shankara. Even the Upanishad commentaries by Radhakrishnan and Nikhilananda which have already been posted here are largely based or significantly influenced by Shankara. Nikhilananda’s basically follows Shankara’s commentaries closely while excising much of the interesting debates and deeper metaphysical discussions to keep it accessible and brief for newcomers. Radhakrishnan’s follows Shankara’s commentaries less closely than Nikhilananda and he mentions the other commentators at times but Radhakrishnan generally still follows a somewhat non-dualist take in his explanations anyways. You might as well read the primary sources they are both based on, as the qualitative difference between reading the actual writings of Shankara and academics is similar to the difference between reading Plato versus reading some book about Plato written by a scholar in the 20th century. You can check out some of his Upanishad commentaries here, multiple websites sell hard copies of them, in addition to the ones in these links he wrote commentaries on the Brihadaranyaka and Chandogya Upanishads which have been translated.

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

[Anonymous No.16117607]

>>16116977
buddhism is better

[Anonymous No.16117611]

>>16117607
shankara is a crypto-buddhist so it's the same thing pretty much

[Anonymous No.16117619]

>>16117607
give me some books on buddhism

[Anonymous No.16117629]

>>16117607
Buddhism is just excessive moralfagging + nihilism(although it's not nihilism because they don't deny reality which has never been the definition of nihilism but since the Buddha said this is the reason why he is not a nihilist then that means they're not nihilists)

[Anonymous No.16117686]

>>16117043
>>16117472
Another Schopenhauer reader here. I'm almost finished with the Gita and I'm really liking it. Hoping to read Upanishads next.

[Anonymous No.16117699]

>>16116999
Stfu hare Krishna
Every time Hinduism comes up you come in here talking hare Krishna dogmatic bs

[Anonymous No.16117706]

>>16116977
Just get the penguin one, there isn't much difference

[Anonymous No.16117728]

This animosity between Hindus and Buddhists and between their own sects is really ironic given they all preach universal compassion and kindness. Can't you guys just be friends ffs?

[Anonymous No.16117816]

>>16116977
'The Principle Upanishads' has complete and unabridged editions of all the primary Upanishads

[Anonymous No.16117848]

>>16116999
Checked. So the Advaita Vedanta is the Upanishad commentaries made by Shankara?

[Anonymous No.16117933]

>>16116977
I would heavily recommend Nikhilananda's translation of the Upanishads. It is by far the most comprehensive set, not just in terms of the text itself, but also in terms of supplemental material from Advaita thinkers from the time. I have the four volume set, and even though I would recommend all four, volumes one, two, and maybe three really stand out as being essential.
>>16117472
Assuming this is OP, volumes one and two have the kena, katha, isha, mundaka, shvetashatara, prashna, and mandukya Upanishads. In my opinion, the only major Upanishad you would be missing out on would be the Brihadaranyaka in Volume three. If you're coming into the Upanishads from Schopenhauer, I think the supplemental material from Shankara, Gaudapada, and Nikhilananda would be very helpful, as Advaita closely resembles most of Schopenhauer's ideas and would likely be akin to your interpretation of the text.

Just to address
>>16116999
>>16117611
First of all, who cares if Advaita is similar to Buddhism, what your saying is nowhere close to an argument. Unless if you're all braindead religious dogmatists.
Secondly, you should all read Gaudapada's Karika on the Mandukya Upanishad (The Karika is actually in volume two of Nikhilananda's translation). Towards the end he outlines a really good argument against dvaita and explains why Advaita is fundamentally different from the Buddhist notion of Shunyata. People have been accusing Advaita philosophers of being "crypto-buddhist" since the 500's and you people still refuse to engage with Gadapada's arguments from the Karika to this day.

[Anonymous No.16117936]

>>16117848
technically you could say Advaita started with Gadapada, who was the mentor of Shankara's mentor.