/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.17503269]

What is the best translation of the Upanishads? Also, can we get a buddhist hate thread?

[Anonymous No.17503274]

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.17503279]

>he can't read Sanskrit
>he's going to read the work of a human translater who speaks a false language
ngmi

[Anonymous No.17503351]

>>17503279
>he doesn’t poo in the loo
>thinks he can understand the ancient mysteries of the sages
Sad!

[Anonymous No.17503495]

>>17503274
Buddhism was a reaction to Hinduism. Buddhists were essentially ancient antifa members that were mad at the caste system (i.e. last men), so they took Hinduism and tried to negate the Self. This failed, obviously, but the arguments between Buddhists and Hindus definitely helped grow the philosophical tradition, culminating in Shankara (pbuh) who refuted every Buddhist he came across and restored basedness in India.

[Anonymous No.17503521]

>>17503495
>Buddhists were essentially ancient antifa members that were mad at the caste system
This is the best marketing you can come up with?

[Anonymous No.17503617]

>>17503269
What's there to hate about Buddhism? You can disagree with it, Indeed, I do. But they're the least annoying religion out there.

[Anonymous No.17503621]

>>17503495
Let me guess, you think the caste system and violence are "based" and that Arjuna did the right thing.

[Anonymous No.17503651]

>>17503621

[Anonymous No.17503701]

>>17503617
Buddhism is incoherent as long as it holds anatman

[Anonymous No.17503708]

>>17503269
Can't be a Hindu if you hate people.

[Anonymous No.17503711]

>>17503708
absolutely untrue westerner

[Anonymous No.17503713]

>>17503708
t. probably thinks Hindus can’t commit violence either

[Anonymous No.17503716]

>>17503279
This

[Anonymous No.17503725]

>>17503711
Bruh wtf. Pure bred pajeet here.

[Anonymous No.17503729]

>>17503713
Implying you have to hate people to commit violence.
>Go understand Dharma anon.

[Anonymous No.17503730]

>>17503725
How does it feel to know that Guenonfag worships you?

[Anonymous No.17503733]

>>17503651
>uhhh yeah do not tremble before battle for you shall earn many cattle and that's what religion means
>no I'm not worried about being slain I am become death the destroyer of worlds, you on the other hand should just go along with it

[Anonymous No.17503750]

>>17503733
Translation fag here. Kek

[Anonymous No.17503753]

>>17503725
Pajeet mutts don’t even understand their own religion

[Anonymous No.17503773]

>>17503750
There's just some stuff in the ontological language of Sanskrit that cannot be rendered into unclean human speech. If you've ever seen the Ridley Scott film Prometheus, the part where the android attempts to communicate with the engineer god alien in broken reconstructed PIE results in the god going beserk, which is basically our relationship with Sanskrit. Only a hereditary caste of bronze age pastoralists are capable of interpreting this language, not any of the simulacra beneath them which merely appear human.

[Anonymous No.17503780]

>>17503753
Hinduism is based on the Vedas not the Bhagavad Gita. The Bhagavad Gita is just an epic poem

[Anonymous No.17503782]

[Anonymous No.17503783]

>Buddhism lives rent free in every Hindus minds
The absolute state of pajeets...

[Anonymous No.17503789]

>>17503773
Surprisingly accurate anon. We preserve what we can. As far as translations go look for Upanishads translation by Eknath Easwaran or by Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan.

The book is a bit long and dull at times but coherent none the less.

Hope this helps.

[Anonymous No.17503801]

>guenonfag got BTFO so hard in the other thread, he had to make this to cope

[Anonymous No.17503812]

>>17503269

God I hate that stupid poem by that one guy called "The Village Atheist" where he's in truth but then whoa baby he reads the Upanishads and his mind is blown.

[Anonymous No.17503821]

>>17503801
Lol the Buddhists got BTFO and ran away

[Anonymous No.17503831]

>>17503821
Then why did you make this cope thread you little pup?

[Anonymous No.17503834]

>>17503753
Don't see how this contradicts anything I said.

[Anonymous No.17503850]

>>17503495
>muh based Hindu castes
Hinduism manages to be one of few faiths that are repressive to the point Islam becomes preferable

[Anonymous No.17503854]

>>17503850
Kek. I hope you get to see Islam in action anon. Thathaiwa cha.

[Anonymous No.17503883]

>>17503854
There is a reason millions upon millions of Hindus chose to become Muslims, and later Sikhs and Christians. Many were undoubtedly forced to do so, but the sheer numbers that did means something else was at work, namely the abuses suffered in the caste system. That system is an anchor around Hinduism's neck.

[Anonymous No.17503885]

>>17503854
I hope your wife gets to see Hinduism in action after you die.

[Anonymous No.17503886]

Ok here I go. I request all Anons to express what they find wrong with Hinduism. I will try to answer all.

[Anonymous No.17503896]

>>17503885
Sure she will. Thanks for your well wishes Anon.

[Anonymous No.17503897]

>>17503886
Sanskrit is obviously not an eternal language.

[Anonymous No.17503920]

>>17503886
It's just unappealing to me, too many unnecessary things when you can just be a Neoplatonist without any stupid rituals or hard to defend metaphysical specifics.

[Anonymous No.17503925]

>>17503897
Absolutely true. The people who spoke ancient Sanskrit were the first to lay the ground work for a methodical language. For them forming a language was so great, specifically since no other pure languages existed at that time, that Sanskrit automatically became divine. It also helped that Sanskrit was very difficult to learn and understand thus adding to its charm and earning it the name of eternal/God's language.

[Anonymous No.17503927]

>>17503920
>neoplatonism
>no hard to defend metaphysics

[Anonymous No.17503939]

>>17503927
You got me, but I haven't slept in more than a day. I mean you can cut the middleman and go straight to any monotheism of your choice.

[Anonymous No.17503944]

quick rundown on dvaita vedanta

[Anonymous No.17503947]

>>17503920
>Neoplatonism
I'm unfamiliar with this plz enlightened me.

>Unappealing
All roads lead to Ishwar. As long as you don't needlessly harm others you are free to practice what you like. Hinduism is not about forcing people to follow our ideology.

If however, you do follow Hinduism, it is expected you do it right.

Ask if you have more questions.

[Anonymous No.17503959]

>>17503939
But why choose Abrahamism or whatever else over Hindu monotheism?

[Anonymous No.17503978]

[Anonymous No.17504006]

>>17503944
>Dwaita
Literally means two.

>Vedanta
Literally means "End of Vedas or derived/applied from Vedas".

Dwaita Vedanta is the simple philosophy of Dualism or pluralism. It is essentially a belief system which dictates that Soul(Atman) and God(Paramatma/Vishnu/Shiva/insert_random_God) are separate entities with independent existence. Though some schools believe that the soul directly depends upon God and cannot exist without him.

It's stark opposite is Advaita Vedanta which states that God and soul are the same and virtually indistinguishable. Also they say that Soul and God are at same level, neither of them reins supreme over other.

Ask if something is unclear.

[Anonymous No.17504012]

>>17503495
>who refuted every Buddhist he came across
That’s the thing, he never came across a Buddhist despite travelling up and down the subcontinent. So you’re right in a way.

[Anonymous No.17504045]

>>17504012
This. Shankara has never debated a single Buddhist, he was either too scared or Buddhism was already gone (which advaitins argue otherwise). According to Advaita tradition, their school existed even when Buddhism peaked although any text pointing to it is conveniently lost. So why did it take so long for them rid India of the Buddhist menace? Why did it take a cryptobuddhist to somehow do it? These are questions they are too ashamed to answer.

[Anonymous No.17504179]

>>17503269
hating buddhism is NPC tier.

[Anonymous No.17504191]

>>17503269
I see you, Mara.

[Anonymous No.17504193]

>>17504179
Buddhists are literal NPCs. It is a part of their philosophy.

[Anonymous No.17504204]

>>17503269
GG

[Anonymous No.17504216]

All the old toilets from western nations get sent to india to be broken down and recycled. Why dont they just use those?

[Anonymous No.17504247]

>>17503269
Patrick Olivelle (Oxford) or Valerie Roebuck (Penguin, NOT the Juan Mascaro one)

[Anonymous No.17504331]

>>17503269

[Anonymous No.17504350]

RENT
FREE

[Anonymous No.17504425]

How come the poos are still seething about the buddha, 2500 years after his teaching?

[Anonymous No.17504534]

Buddhist Monk: Come on Acharya! You too teach the unreality as cause of suffering and grief and pain. The world is nothing but an idea – a dream-like construct where nothing is real (Idealism in Buddhism/Vijnanavada). And now why do you criticize our unreality while professing yours?

Acharya: No. You have not understood the true essence of Advaita then. The unreality of external world that I teach is not based on nothing (It is not Nihilist). My unreality does not base on absence of reality – but on flawed perception of reality. Unlike you, I don’t say there is NO reality at all! I say there is reality and only ONE reality, but the way we perceive or take cognizance is erroneous because of Avidya, Ajnaan and Maya. Once the perception of snake goes away from the rope on the floor, there remain to Snake, only a rope! And there was never a Snake at all, it was rope all throughout. So, the unreal (Snake) was real till the true real (Rope) was realized. After realization, there was never a snake. Likewise, after you realize Brahman, you will experience that there was never a World of otherness. There was always Brahman, here there, inside outside. You are Brahman. It is an absolute identity and this is ultimately proved simply by psychological experience. Shruti has maintained "Tat tvam asi" (That art Thou); "Brahmasmi" (I am Brahman). This is no ‘similarity’ as if we should say, "I am something like Brahman", but full and complete identity, “I am the Brahman” and “Brahman is Me”.

The Great Tathagata saw suffering, but never endevoured to go deep into its causes. He saw the unrealness of the work-a-day, realized it fully, but he did not realize the true cause (Avidya) and the entity beyond the cause (Brahman). He did not see that strand of argument.

Buddhist Monk: Nah! Sakyamuni did not believe in philosophization or polemics. In Shoola Malunkyovada Sutta, the Tathagata has clarified that he won’t venture into questions of philosophy of suffering, but only the method as to end suffering - "The important thing is to get rid of the poisoned arrow (Suffering) that has pierced your heart, not to inquire where it came from (Source of suffering)”.

Acharya: I know. But then, what did the ilks of Nagarjuna, Vasubabdhu, Asanga, Dharmakirti, Aswaghosa, etc. do? Then why all of them attempted complex philosophisation? No wonder that they failed to bring out a holistic Theory of Being due to inherent contradictions and flaws in the basic tenets. Were they not Vipra Bhikshus (Buddhist Bhikshus at exterior, Brahmin Vedists by intellectual disposition) rather than Buddhists? I also know the Great Buddha avoided philosophical and metaphysical questions. He did not look deep enough. He just sensed the symptoms of the ailment of suffering and not the true cause. Desire, bondage and attachment etc. are symptoms, not causes.

Buddhist Monk: Acharya!

[Anonymous No.17504536]

>>17504534
cringe

[Anonymous No.17504595]

>>17504536
Acharya: No, don’t say Nothing ever again! The Great Buddhist teachers did ‘exist’ and so did Tathagata. If you firmly believe in Tathagata; then you believe in his existence too! Their mortal embodiments were temporal, but teachings eternal, their thought eternal. That Jnana is eternal. That’s where Brahman shines. It is the light by which everything is seen, the light of which the sun and moon are pale reflections. It is not only real but so egregiously real that the work-a-day world fades into mist beside it.

Buddhist Anon: Starts to leave muttering No, No, No…..

[Anonymous No.17504629]

>>17504534
Can you dumb this down?
t. brainlet

[Anonymous No.17504634]

>>17504629
tl;dr: hindu cope and missing the point yet again

[Anonymous No.17504641]

>>17504595
Read the diamond sutra

[Anonymous No.17504664]

>>17504425
Because deep down they know he was right

[Anonymous No.17504793]

Buddhist Monk: Yes, that’s the statement. Everything in the empirical world is only a stream of passing Dharmas, which are mere processes - impersonal and evanescent processes. These Dharmas can be characterized as Anatta (Anatma - Bereft of Self), i.e., being without a persisting self, without independent existence. [The Dharma theory of Buddhism]

Acharya: Ok. I get your point of view about momentariness, impermanence and Anatta. May I ask you a very simple question? When you started the sentence “The Question is immaterial and irrelevant” – it was immaterial and irrelevant to whom? What or who is the Subject to whom those perceptions appeared?

Buddhist Monk: (Enraged) To no one in particular. There is nothing more to this alleged (sic) world’s existence than the co-ordinated flux of wide variety of elemental, co-dependent factors (Dharmas), which bring forth collective experience of world-consciousness in individual and universal aspects. So, the perception occurred to some non-existent entity.

Acharya: Ok! Hypothetically accepting your view, tell me Monk, who is the witness to these arising of dependent elements? Who/what is the witness to the flux? Against what the flux is not static? If you are moving in a train at the same speed with another train, you will see both trains as stationary. A perception of speed requires comparison with a stationary object. Likewise, perception of flux requires a changeless object for measure of standard. Who/What is that?

Buddhist Monk: I object! What is the necessity of a Witness? That too, eternal permanent witness?! No way such a thing exists. People die and their trace vanishes, things get broken, Worlds get destroyed – all without leaving trace. Where is permanence?

Acharya: Hold your breath, Holy Monk. A witness is necessary in order to have a cognition of any phenomenon – take the event of your momentariness or flux. A witness can only say something is transitory or momentary. If there is no Witness, who would perceive and who would make a statement? – Who is it that who sees and says Everything is impermanent – That entity has to be present, existent and permanent”)

Buddhist Monk: If you say there has to be a Witness, who will witness that witness? How would you establish that Witness exists? What you say is wrong because there will be infinite regress. You say a Witness is necessary to claim cognizance. Fine, then tell me, who will say that there is a Witness? Where will this infinite loop end? In your Theory, everything has to be present to make the Witness known. This is nothing but Dependent Origination.

Acharya: Dear Friend, there is no logical necessity (Akanksha) for something to grasp the grasper. The witness stands self-proved. (This is one of the greatest sources of Pramana – Arthapatti as used by the Acharya)

[Anonymous No.17504797]

>>17504793
Why do you seethe about buddhism since you're a crypto buddhist?

[Anonymous No.17504970]

>>17503495
this

[Anonymous No.17504980]

bump (will continue posting objection/response material)

[Anonymous No.17504983]

>>17504793
>What or who is the Subject to whom those perceptions appeared?
Lmao what a brainlet.

[Anonymous No.17504990]

>>17504980
>i-i need more time to concoct my imaginary debate please
>*restart router*
>bump, please hold the line

[Anonymous No.17504994]

What is happening in this thread?

[Anonymous No.17505000]

>>17504994
Shankara has never debated a Buddhist, so we're pretending he did in order to expose Buddhism.

[Anonymous No.17505001]

>>17504994
search archives for 'guenonfag' for explanation

[Anonymous No.17505008]

>>17504994
The hindu schizo is samefagging again

[Anonymous No.17505010]

>BUDDHABUDDHABUDDHA
Mind = Broken

[Anonymous No.17505027]

>>17505010

[Anonymous No.17505066]

>>17503920
>too many unnecessary things when you can just be a Neoplatonist
except that this would be LARPing because Neoplatonism has been dead for a very long time and you cannot become initiated into it, whereas its still possible to receive an authentic initiation into Hinduism

[Anonymous No.17505074]

>>17505066
>initiation
Traditionalists are so tedious. Just go for whichever system makes the most sense to you.

[Anonymous No.17505089]

>>17504994
buddhist NPCs are getting rekt left and right and they can only cry out impotently as Chad Indians and their westerner brothers unite to expose the sophistic nihilism known as Buddhism

[Anonymous No.17505092]

>>17505089
cope, cryptobuddhist

[Anonymous No.17505112]

>>17505089
>Chad Indians
isn't that an oxymoron?

[Anonymous No.17505117]

>>17505089

[Anonymous No.17505126]

>>17505112

[Anonymous No.17505129]

>>17505126

[Anonymous No.17505171]

>>17505066
You can receive a legitimate Neoplatonist initiation through Isma'ilism.

[Anonymous No.17505181]

>>17505129
You will never have the confidence of a horny Indian man browsing the internet.

[Anonymous No.17505244]

>>17505171
Is Neoplatonism non-dual? I know they want their souls to “ascend” and become one with God, but I’m not sure if they mean this literally or not.

[Anonymous No.17505322]

>Upoonishads
Sorry puthujjana, I don't deal in wrong views.

[Anonymous No.17505330]

>>17505322
based

[Anonymous No.17505331]

>>17505171
The Isma’ilis would likely dispute that it’s a Neoplatonist initiation at all. As far as I’m aware they don’t trace their chain of initiation to any of the Neoplatonists but rather to the prophets and Ali. Just because some of the Neoplatonist writers may have read some Arabic translation of Plotinus and accordingly wrote about some concepts in the same manner as the Neoplatonists does not amount to an initiation into a chain of teachers stretching back to Plato and Plotinus. The Isma’ilis who wrote the core texts of Isma’ilism likely never actually interacted with any Neoplatonist philosopher or authority in person.

[Anonymous No.17505345]

>>17505322
>buddha
refuted by Shankara

>From whatever new points of view the Buddha's system is tested with reference to its probability, it gives way on all sides, like the walls of a well, dug in sandy soil. It has, in fact, no foundation whatever to rest upon and hence the attempts to use it as a guide in the practical concerns of life are mere folly. Moreover Buddha, by propounding the three mutually contradicting systems, teaching respectively the reality of the external world, the reality of ideas only and general nothingness, has himself made it clear that he was a man given to make incoherent assertions or else that hatred of all beings induced him to propound absurd doctrines by accepting which they would become thoroughly confused…Buddha’s doctrine has to be entirely disregarded by all those who have a regard for their own happiness."

Brahma Sutra Bhasya 2.2.32.

[Anonymous No.17505370]

>>17504534
It's funny how close to zen buddhism acharya gets, especially with
> Likewise, after you realize Brahman, you will experience that there was never a World of otherness. There was always Brahman, here there, inside outside. You are Brahman.
basically replace brahman with dharma or true nature

[Anonymous No.17505391]

>>17505370
Yes, some of the Ch’an and Zen thinkers realized the Hindus were right so they rejected the nihilism of no-self and Nagarjuna and made Tathagatagarbha their Atman. Some of the Tibetans do the same

[Anonymous No.17505396]

>>17505322
Absolutely Based

[Anonymous No.17505399]

[Anonymous No.17505411]

>>17505322
checked + based

[Anonymous No.17505807]

>>17505322
baste

[Anonymous No.17505822]

>>17503783
arent buddhists pajeets and chinks too? bhutanese and sri lankians kek

[Anonymous No.17505834]

>>17504425
buddha was a poo too tf u mean

[Anonymous No.17505847]

>>17503621
Pretty much, yeah.

[Anonymous No.17505861]

>>17503621

[Anonymous No.17505863]

>>17505322
Get in the Atmangelion, Shankara-kun

[Anonymous No.17505877]

>>17505391
Do the Hindus ever say that atman is synonymous with sunyata?

[Anonymous No.17505930]

Just go with the flow, bro

[Anonymous No.17505954]

>>17505877
No, they are very different. The Atman has eternal, undecaying, independent, unconditioned, and self-established existence and self-nature, which sunyata is incompatible with.

[Anonymous No.17505958]

>>17505391
Isn't Zen fully invested in the idea of Sunyata/Anatta?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPeCLPSEO1g
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vA2c7ViZx-I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKBDXcmRpAY

[Anonymous No.17505961]

>>17505954
Sounds like tathagatagarbha is not an atman then

[Anonymous No.17506061]

>>17505958
No, Huangbo’s writings clearly articulate a vision of Tathagatagarbha or Buddha Mind which is practically the same as the Vedantic Atman, and other Zen texts like the Record of Linji also do this at times. Compare the Zen Teaching of Huangbo to the Ashtavakra Gita or the Avadhuta Gita for example. Dr. Hu Shih once described Zen as a Chinese revolt against the alien doctrine of Buddhism that was imported from India

https://terebess.hu/zen/Huangpo.pdf
https://realization.org/p/ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita.html
https://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/Avadhoota-Gita.pdf

Spoken at a Dharma-Hall Convocation: "Beyond the red-meatball [mind] there is the one true person [true mind or buddha nature] who can't be ranked. [I.e., who does not belong to the 'buddha' ranking and does not belong to the 'sentient-being' ranking.] [That true person/true mind] is constantly exiting and entering from the face-gates of all of you people [like the dazzling rays of light emitted from the face-gate of a buddha]. Those who have not seen with their own eyes -- look! Look!"
At one point there was a monk who emerged to ask: "What is the true person who can't be ranked?"
The Master got down from the [curved-wood] Chan chair, and grabbed him by the collar, saying, "C'mon! C'mon!"
The monk dithered.
The Master, thrusting him back, said, "[This] 'true person who can't be ranked' -- what a magnificent piece of dried shit!" And he at once returned to the fangzhang [personal chamber, ten-foot square].

https://www.bowzwestchester.org/2017/07/jun-28-jul-4-bos-38.html?m=1

>>17505961
Not all schools of Buddhism accept tathagatagarbha as synonymous with sunyata, the Mahayana sutras generally speak of them as different things and relate them to one another in different ways according to the sutra in question

[Anonymous No.17506121]

ENTER

[Anonymous No.17506134]

>>17506121
CH-CHADGARJUNA-SAMA?!?!
I KNEEL!!

[Anonymous No.17506162]

>>17506121
>>17506134
How do we keep winning, nagarjunabros?

[Anonymous No.17506208]

>>17506134
kek

[Anonymous No.17506215]

>>17503780
The Bhagavad Gita is a philosophical dialogue inserted into the epic of Mahabharata. This is wikipedia tier info that you're missing.

[Anonymous No.17506275]

>>17506134
GET UP SHANKARA NOOOOOOOOO

[Anonymous No.17506283]

>>17506215
Fateshit makes me want to read the Mahabharata but is it worth the time? It's obscenely long

[Anonymous No.17506506]

>>17506061
>No
You sure? Every Zen text I’ve read is filled with talk of emptiness. I’m sure there a few masters that mention Buddha mind but they also consider Sunyata as part and parcel of it.

[Anonymous No.17506594]

why do these threads invariably devolve into schizo rambling? so bizarre

[Anonymous No.17506712]

>>17506594
probably because a schizo made it for the purposing of schizo-ing

[Anonymous No.17506791]

>>17506594
>>17506712
Schizos are mara/demiourgos trying to keep you off the path

[Anonymous No.17506801]

>>17506791
What is
>the path
?

[Anonymous No.17506848]

>>17505322
>dresses like a nun
lol

[Anonymous No.17507168]

>>17503621
What did the Kurukshetra War had to do with the caste system? The Kaurava's were doing a ton of things wrong.

[Anonymous No.17507496]

>the tathāgatagarbha is just the Atm-
“The tathāgatagarbha is without any prior limit, is nonarising, and is indestructible, accepting suffering, having revulsion toward suffering, and aspiring to nirvana. O Lord, the tathāgatagarbha is not a substantial self, nor a living being, nor ‘fate,’ nor a person. The tathāgatagarbha is not a realm for living beings who have degenerated into the belief of a substantially existent body or for those who have contrary views, or who have minds bewildered by emptiness." -Śrīmālādevī Siṃhanāda Sūtra

[Anonymous No.17507756]

>4 years of guenonfagging go by
>guenonfag's knowledge of hinduism is still wookiepedia trivia tier
why don't you learn it for real

[Anonymous No.17507851]

>>17507496
the tathāgatagarbha is the true self

[Anonymous No.17507852]

>>17503886
Do you have to be an Indian and live in a caste context to properly follow it?

[Anonymous No.17508505]

>>17507852
If you are European you become a brahmin upon imitation

[Anonymous No.17508512]

>>17508505
Lol no

[Anonymous No.17508519]

>>17508512
lol yes

[Anonymous No.17508527]

>>17508505
No I'm a mutt. Please leave your gay Nazi mysticism out it.

[Anonymous No.17508783]

>>17508527
Hinduism have a spot among the dalits for you as well anon

[Anonymous No.17508903]

>>17507852
> Do you have to be an Indian and live in a caste context to properly follow it?
No, non-Indians cannot receive an upanayana initiation which is only for the twice-born castes, but the Samasrayana initiation in all forms of Vaishnavism as well as the Agama-based initiations in Shaivism and Shaktism don’t have any caste, racial or ancestral requirements

[Anonymous No.17509904]

>>17506791
>mara/demiourgos
Was gnosticism just buddhism all along
Or the opposite

[Anonymous No.17510507]

>>17509904
No, it is a less coherent Neoplatonism. Neoplatonism is esoteric Catholicism and Gnosticism is esoteric Protestantism.

[Anonymous No.17510608]

>>17510507
gnosticism has been around since before 2nd century ad
what does it have to do with protestantism in the slightest? protestantism teaches that career success is the determining factor whether you go to haven or not it couldn't be any further from gnostic teachings