Buddhism and Vedanta on Nature, Art and Aesthetics

[Anonymous No.18108435]

You would think that since one considers all dharmas as empty and the other as maya or illusion, you would think that these philosophies would be contemptuous of aesthetics, but since world views are never entirely coherent, I’m curious as to their respective views.

[Anonymous No.18108810]

>>18108435
All things are dharmas. The dharma of this very world contains all dharmas. The dharma of one's self contains all other dharmas. All dharmas are empty, like a mirror reflecting things, things do not stay in the mirror after they pass, the mirror only hold their reflection while they are in front of it.

Thereby dharmas of aesthetic and art are dharms of buddha. Budhha nature, the thathagatagharba is the nature of all dharmas. The tathagatagharba is dondual, and empty, like a mirror.

Understanding this, you understand your own nature. Understanding your own nature, you understand the nature of all dharmas in your awareness.

Dharamas in your awareness are thoughts, these dharmas are empty, and only kept in your consciousness like reflections in a mirror.

Buddha has an outward nature. His outward nature is to teach the world of dharmas and the joy of the Buddha way. One Buddha is present in each world in the same way there is only one leader to an organization. The organization's underlings can fully understand the philosophy of the leader of that organization and help actualize it, but because they are respectful of the leader for initiating the organization, they follow instead of competing for lead. Thereby boddhisattva-mahasattvas can have full anuttara-samyak-sambodhi and have the same knowledge and understanding the Buddha does, but not fulfill his role.

[Anonymous No.18108827]

>>18108810
>Thereby dharmas of aesthetic and art are dharms of buddha. Budhha nature, the thathagatagharba is the nature of all dharmas. The tathagatagharba is dondual, and empty, like a mirror.
This was never taught by the buddha btw.

[Anonymous No.18108829]

Can you tl;dr your question or are you just spouting off your unorganized thoughts somewhere where you'd like to receive some type of attention in the form of a response?

[Bihari No.18108859]

>>18108435
>>18108829
Please do this.

[Anonymous No.18108868]

>>18108827
All dharmas are taught by the Buddha. Buddha teaches of all of one's self nature to be the Buddha nature. The Buddha nature is empty, and contains all dharmas. By realizing one's buddha nature, one conquers all dharmas and attains the unsurpassed understanding.

How is this? Dharmas of aesthetic are empty as all other dharmas are. Because the buddha nature that is the nature of all dharmas contains all other dharmas, these are not excluded.

The buddha nature is nondual. Since all things are the buddha nature, which contains all dharmas, all things are nondual and contain the buddha dharma.

Because the Buddha teaches the way of the single supreme buddha vehicle of the buddha dharma, how could he not teach this? Give up your contentions and contemplate your true nature. Then you will see the buddha dharma and attain the unsurpassed way.

[Anonymous No.18109767]

>>18108435
>you would think that these philosophies would be contemptuous of aesthetics
Why should they be? The stories and metaphors contained in the Upanishads have wonderful aesthetics, just because you say that the phenomenal world is an appearance of God doesn’t negate that beauty is found in it or that it has its use in communicating knowledge or God through symbolism and so on. Vedanta doesn’t have a moralistic bent where they say “hurr durr nobody should enjoy life and beauty because muh illusion” but instead it addresses itself to and concerns itself with a smaller group of monks and not the general population; if you’re a monk who has uprooted desire you’re at no risk of getting your passions inflamed by aesthetics and so you have no particular reason to avoid it. Shankara wrote elegant verse and poetry alike.

[Anonymous No.18110696]

>>18108810
The implication of emptiness is solipsism. Bodhidharma was right about this.

[Anonymous No.18110794]

They make these wax sculptures of famous monks in Thailand. It's way more aesthetic than those mummies they have in other places.

[Anonymous No.18110818]

>>18108829
>>18108859
What are Vedanta’s and Buddhism’s respective views on aesthetics. I thought it was clear enough in the OP.

[Anonymous No.18112357]

Bump

[Anonymous No.18112364]

>>18110794
how do they rationalize this as not being a form of unhealthy attachment?

[Anonymous No.18112419]

>>18112364
Because they are not truly free from attachment. Buddhism is idealism. Advaita Vedanta is freedom.

[Anonymous No.18113149]

>>18112419
vedanta is shit and glorification of rituals and mantras lol

[Anonymous No.18113271]

>>18108810
I swear reading shit like this makes me forget my own nature, only when I spend some time away from buddhist ramblings I get re-enlightened

[Anonymous No.18113292]

>>18112419
Irrevocably based.

[Anonymous No.18114500]

>>18112419
Huh, literally the opposite is true though?

[Anonymous No.18114526]

>>18114500
Only if you're a tranny

[Anonymous No.18114845]

>>18113149
The Upanishads contain the highest wisdom possible. There is no need for ritual, special colors, clothes, food, or anything required to understand Aham Brahmasmi. Krishna is in the middle of a war and he teaches Arjuna to accept his Dharma and enter the battle as a fierce warrior. True understanding of Brahman is not the pacifist worldview of the Buddhist. You see, when the Buddha began preaching he was going city to city and he didn't have the time to educate people on the nature of reality so he told them to sit down down shut up. Buddhism is still apara vidya because it believes all is mind (idealism), that perceiver and perceived are identical. Advaita Vedanta states in Maya, we are not the same, but the thread which runs through each bead of life IS the same. Though a bracelet and a ring are different, both are made from gold and that is their ultimate reality. Buddhism stops one layer too soon from reaching the conclusion of Advaita Vedanta. Buddhism denies the reality that is right in front of us.

>>18114500
Buddhism states all is mind. Advaita Vedanta states all is Brahman. It sounds the same, but there are large differences.

[Anonymous No.18114937]

>>18114526
kek

[Anonymous No.18114972]

>>18114845
>it believes all is mind
wrong

[Anonymous No.18115292]

>>18114972
Cool

[Anonymous No.18115514]

>>18112419
>>18113292
How do you rationalize this is not being a form of unhealthy attachment? There's no difference between a wax sculpture and an image.

[Anonymous No.18115544]

>>18115514
Posting an image and worshipping a statue are different.

[Anonymous No.18115840]

>>18115544
It's not a statue. They don't worship it either.

[Anonymous No.18116027]

>>18110794
All false religions end up worshipping man/oneself at some point. Every. Time.

[Anonymous No.18116476]

>>18115840
Okay a wax sculpture. Yes the idolize and worship forms. That's why you see Buddha statues everywhere. You might say pay "respect" to the statue but it is an idea in the mind which they worship, they worship an aspect of Maya and not Absolute Reality or Brahman. But to your point, if it's not a statue and they don't worship it, then what's the big deal about posting an image?