/lit/ - Literature

do you mean the upanishads or the vedic corpus as a whole, or specifically the vedas? most people don't read the vedas as a whole, they read the upanishads (1/4th of the traditional division of the vedic literature). the other 3/4s, the rgveda and the brahmanas and even the aranyakas, are mostly tedious formulary for rituals or extremely repetitive/esoteric. even specialists openly call them mind-numbing to read and philosophically uninteresting, in most cases. the brahmanas in particular.

the vedas proper are composed of an original body of ritual formulary, mythological hymns, and extremely occasional metaphysical speculations. these are then broken up into several "collections" (rgveda, yajurveda, samaveda, atharvaveda), with the rgveda being the oldest and atharveda the youngest, and the samaveda and yajurveda being selections/repetitions of the rgveda for the most part. i believe the main theory about the origins of these divisions is that the samaveda and yajurveda are selections specifically for certain grades of priests who only needed them for a specific purpose, and the atharvaveda is a separate compilation of local folk traditions and magical recipes not derived from the original rgveda. they were all collated from orally transmitted hymns and formulary, plus the folk traditions, by a "reform" vedism with a brahman priesthood around 800-500BC.

luckily there are compilations of the most famous, most philosophically interesting bits of the rgvedas. radhakrishnan's sourcebook for indian philosophy is a classic although it's somewhat biased in favor of a monistic interpretation, assuming that vedic philosophy was always internally developing towards monism (which is arguable). but it still has most of the classic rgvedic sections you would be most interested in. wendy doniger's collection is also ok and has a lot of overlap with a newer translation although she is just as biased in the opposite direction, of portraying indian thought as a plurality.

if you want to read anything "in full," be prepared for endless repetition and boredom.

>>15799160
>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 8th century AD quasi-buddhism.

pic related

>>15799253
no, the best approach is to read a source anthology like radhakrishnan/doniger so you get the highlights. this can also include interesting bits from the brahmanas and aranyakas, which are few and far between especially for the brahmanas. this is what most people do, along with reading a good history of sanskrit literature so you know what the structure is.

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 8th century AD quasi-buddhism.

>>15654058
More in depth if you're interested.

>>15555315
for anyone wondering, shankara's commentary (bhasya) of the brahma sutras (written more than a thousand years before he lived) is widely considered by both hindus in india and western scholars to be imposing buddhist philosophy on a non-buddhist monist text

here's the full details if anyone really cares enough. guenonfag is a buddhist in denial, not even real advaita believers deny the shit he does, it's wild

Is this text true? are some sorts of buddhisms an off-shot of hinduism?
within hinduism;are post-Vedic scriptures basically a hack which criticize animal sacrifice and birth casteism?

>>15464539
it makes you seethe doesn't it?

>>15456228
>Advaita is older than Buddha

the only people who think this are advaita cultists on quora.com. hindus don't think this, not even most advaitafags think it, academics don't think it.

>>15413485
based

>>15401013
I would be careful about reading Shankara as your introduction to Hindu philosophy, he is extremely reliant on Buddhist philosophy (he's 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 8th century AD quasi-buddhism.

>>15316792
Careful about Shankara, he's known as a crypto-buddhist by scholars and by almost all Hindus as well. He's just reading his Buddhism into the Vedas when it's not really there. There is a resident Shankara fanboy who denies this but he's not Indian, he discovered Hinduism through Theosophy. Stay away.

Case in point.
>>15317664
>'The Advaita Tradition in Indian Philosophy' book by Sharma
This is a very poorly regarded, obscure, mid-century Hindu nationalist book that presumes the medieval tradition of Advaita (crypto-buddhism) is the only correct interpretation of the Upanishads. He always recommends this one. See pic related for a review of it and similar books.

>>15317685
Here he is correct about Olivelle being a good translator, but again he recommends Shankara, a very late, medieval crypto-buddhist according to ALL scholars and the vast majority of Hindus.

Some American who fancies himself a Hindu after discovering it through Wikipedia is trying to swindle you into following his Hare Krishna LARP.

crypto-buddhism. scholars now accept that all upanishads except maybe the chandogya are post-buddhist and heavily influenced by nonvedic sramanas.

shankara specifically is from 1000AD, and is known as a cryptobuddhist or "hidden buddhist" because he stole his entire framework from mahayana.

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

Samkhya is pretty cool, what are you reading OP?

>>15265456
>reading cryptobuddhism

No thanks, already read Nagarjuna.

it's an offshoot of theosophy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism_and_Theosophy

>Goodrick-Clarke wrote that "educated Indians" were particularly impressed by the Theosophists' defense of their ancient religion and philosophy in the context of the growing self-consciousness of the people, directed against the "values and beliefs of the European colonial powers." Prof. Stuckrad noted the wave of solidarity which covered the Theosophists in India had powerful "political implications." He wrote, citing in Cranston's book, that, according to Prof. Radhakrishnan, the philosopher and President of India, the Theosophists "rendered great service" by defending the Hindu "values and ideas"; the "influence of the Theosophical Movement on general Indian society is incalculable."[57]

>Bevir wrote that in India Theosophy "became an integral part of a wider movement of neo-Hinduism", which gave Indian nationalists a "legitimating ideology, a new-found confidence, and experience of organisation." He stated Blavatsky, like Dayananda Sarasvati, Swami Vivekananda, and Sri Aurobindo, "eulogised the Hindu tradition", however simultaneously calling forth to deliverance from the vestiges of the past. The Theosophical advocacy of Hinduism contributed to an "idealisation of a golden age in Indian history." The Theosophists viewed traditional Indian society as the bearer of an "ideal religion and ethic."[26]

>In Prof. Olav Hammer's opinion, Blavatsky, trying to ascribe the origin of the "perennial wisdom" to the Indians, united "two of the dominant Orientalist discourses" of hers era.

guenon's primary disciple was also a pedo who ran a sex cult in the USA
>On October 11th 1991, Frithjof Schuon, the leader of an international religious order, was indicted on the felony charge of child molestation. committed under "cult pressure and influence". The indictment, passed down by a five member Grand Jury, headed by Lucy Cherbas, stated:
>"that Frithjof Schuon... did perform fondling or touching [on three girls] 15 years of age, 14 years of age and 13 years of age, respectively, with the intent to arouse or satisfy sexual desires of Frithjof Schuon, in violation of I.C. 35-42 43. [And that] said persons were compelled to submit to touching by force or imminent threat of force, to wit: by undue cult influences and cult pressures, in violation of 35-42-4-8."

>Jesus Garcia Varela, a high ranking inner circle member of the cult, had been investigated by the Louisville Police in 1991 for nude photos of his 2 young daughters. He escaped prosecution of this episode by claiming that it was a common practice in Spain to visually record a girl's puberty.

>Michael Fitzgerald's son was present at the Gatherings. The boy, then perhaps 14, had been made to watch his mother and her sister, Jennifer Casey, dance nude for Schuon at one of the Gatherings.

scholars currently think that shankara converted between several different religious movements throughout his life, but i've never heard that one

it's also confusing that he wrote devotional hymns while believing in the unreality of personal gods. many texts attributed to shankara are not actually by him though

>>15214855
yup this, "hinduism" doesn't even exist until 1000AD and then it was basically founded as a ripoff of buddhism

there is brahmanism before that, but it's mostly a confused folk religion. all interesting ascetic movements in india came out of the eastern ganges, and brahmanism only adopted them later.

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

Reminder that most Hindus and all scholars agree that advaita is "crypto-buddhism"

is this a historical context thread? my favorite historical context is the context of advaita vedanta. not only do modern scholars agree that it's a giant ripoff of mahayana buddhism, even hindus think this too. immediately after shankara wrote it all the hindus said, dude this is just "crypto-buddhism." history is interesting

Threadly reminder most Hindus and all scholars agree on calling Advaita Vedanta "crypto-buddhism" because of how much it borrowed from Mahayana

Reminder that advaita is cryptobuddhism

Threadly reminder that advaita vedanta and Shankara are called "crypto-buddhist" by nearly all Hindus and scholars

reminder that advaita vedanta is considered crypto-buddhism by all scholars and most hindus

Threadly reminder that
1- Almost all scholars and almost all actual Hindus agree that Shankara's non-dualism (called advaita) is "crypto-buddhism," meaning it's a ripoff of Mahayana Buddhism. Not just the philosophy of Mahayana either, but the institutions and culture as well. Pic related.

2- No matter how much guenonfag (pizza be upon him) denies this, or claims he is not buttmad about it, he is very buttmad about it. All advaitins are. If you want to make an advaitin buttmad, remind everyone of his crypto-buddhism. They hate it.

3- Not only was advaita just ripoff buddhism, its modern forms were heavily westernized and revived by the most embarrassing form of western occultism (Blavatsky's Theosophy), which guenonfag (pizza be upon him) also hates and is buttmad about:

4- Guenon's principal follower, Frithjof Schuon, started a cringey sex cult where he fucked his cult members' wives and fondled their prepubescent daughters, usually in front of other children. The current unofficial head of the perennialist movement, Nasr, has never repudiated Schuon (who was his teacher), and continues to praise him. Perennialists hate being reminded of this as well. Guenonfag used to post lots of Schuon and Nasr until people began talking about this, and now he claims to dislike Schuon.