>Śaṅkarācārya is undoubtedly one of the greatest philosophers of the world and a realised saint. He is gifted with extra-ordinary intelligence, a deeply penetrating mind, critical insight, logical reasoning, philosophical analysis, religious purity, sublimity of renunciation and profound spirituality. His literary excellence makes him shine as a writer of exemplary Sanskrit prose and soul-inspiring philosophico-religious verses.
Śaṅkarācārya is undoubtedly one of the greatest philosophers of the world and a realised saint...
Grayson Rivera
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
estudantedavedanta.net
estudantedavedanta.net
archive.org
archive.org
estudantedavedanta.net
estudantedavedanta.net
estudantedavedanta.net
twitter.com
Carter Gonzalez
Westerner
>Heidegger was an extremely influential but controversial philosopher.
Easterner
>Chingchong was the greatest tallest coolest guy who ever lived therefore his philosophy is correct. His teacher was Pingpong who was also the most correct because he was the coolest, smartest, handsomest man ever and he was related to a pure Brahman bloodline and he was in an unbroken line of teachers back to the most correct teacher at the beginning of the universe when tradition was first set down, who is infallible when he says that tradition is infallible and his bloodline is its infallible interpreter. We know he is correct when he says this because tradition is infallible, and he is its infallible interpreter because he is in the unbroken line of Brahman interpreters who are always correct. My teacher was ibn Yaqub Wario and he told me all this and he is the most handsome perfect pir in the world and his teacher's teacher's teachers go all the way back to Shankara and the cosmic space ape. I worship my teacher and do whatever he says.
Gee, I wonder why the West invented critical philosophy and science?
Chase Young
One of the more recent or modern heralds of Vedanta and Vedantic thought was probably Ramana Maharshi (who even was praised by European writers such as René Guénon) and he was largely considered a Jivanmukta (being who has gained and assimilated infinite and divine knowledge and power and gained complete self-knowledge and self-realisation )
Reminds me of an interesting story of Ramana's early life;
>The young renunciate sought out places inside the temple where he could sit in spiritual absorption. His peace was disturbed by “urchins” who took pleasure in pelting stones at him. He withdrew into a dark pit in an underground cave. Here his body was ravaged by vermin and poisonous insects viciously feeding on his blood. His body was besmeared with unwashed dirt, his hair became a clotted mass, and his fingernails grew so long and curly that his hands were not useful for any purpose. He sat for some weeks on a floor which was always infested by ants and, despite their constant crawling and biting, he sat for hours with eyes closed, leaning against the wall in samadhi (contemplation), which receieved the imprint of his back. The visitors could not endure for even a few minutes the ants which he endured for hours, days and weeks, losing his body consciousness. Further details about his life can be found in several excellent biography on his life.
What does it tell of a man, being so absorbed in meditation, that he disregards his bodily health, bodily needs and does not even bother to uncover his skin from the multiple insects crawling on it; just to be absorbed into the Vedantic idea of the Absolute only to be fed like a little baby by the temple priests when he would collapse from the lack of nourishment and water; only to continue his meditative practices?
Then the Western devotees of these "Holy Men" would argue something along the lines:
>“My guru is in a state of pure perception! He does not recognize anything, he does not experience anything because he is beyond the experiencing-structure!”
This is what, according to Vedantic texts, dhyana practically is.
This is the Vedantic idea of one of the highest human ideal State(s). Beyond recognition, beyond experience, beyond good & evil, beyond knowledge of the Self!
Of course, the westerner knows better; for he would lock up these people in some sort of sanitarium and treat these states the same as one treats diseases like Alzheimer’s disease or Dementia.
The highest point of Vedantic meditative practices are spontaneously achieved by dementia patients on a daily basis all over the world.
Of course, here in the civilized world, we do not treat these pathologies as some sort of "holy diseases" (like Epilepsy is/was considered some sort of divine madness in one of the more backwards understanding of the human condition), we simply try to reverse their degenerative neurological pathologies with medicine, rest and proper treatment.
Jaxson Roberts
lol, why are you so angry?
Brandon Powell
They didn't though
Benjamin Lewis
Samadhi sounds pretty darn tootin good for the self under samadhi.
nice bait
Alexander Lewis
>dementia and high level meditation similar
Gonna have to explain yourself here
Eli Cox
Benjamin King
And after he totally crushes his opponent in a debate, Shankara shoots a laser beam out of that red dot that sends him directly to Brahman.
Ryan Taylor
Sitting in a pile of shit thinking about nothing is holy. Developing farmaceutics, conquering space and understanding physics is the mark of the inferior man for sure tho.
Nathan Watson
image letting yourself get this mad
Christopher Parker
Alright user, he sounds pretty based. Now tell me the exact English translation of his commentaries/works that I should read at my earliest convenience, so that I can benefit from his brilliance for myself. I'll read him very soon if you can just point out the way for me. Thank you.
Oliver Robinson
makes sense
Carter Roberts
These are his major works translated to English, you'll probably need to read one or two books on Vedanta or Hindu philosophy first though or else it might be hard to understand, such as Guenon's 'Man and his becoming according to the Vedanta', or 'The Essential Vedanta' by Deutsch or 'A Critical Survey of Indian Philosophy' by Sharma
estudantedavedanta.net
estudantedavedanta.net
archive.org
archive.org
estudantedavedanta.net
estudantedavedanta.net
estudantedavedanta.net
Noah Davis
Made me laugh. Partially true. It's just the nature of the whole "guru-devotee" dynamic which pervades Indian spirituality. It's not all that different from Plato writing of Socrates as the "bravest, wisest and most just", given how much the student naturally reveres his teacher. That said, I agree it's quite funny to see and gives me a chuckle.
Mate, the other anons already disproved your assertions on Darwin, and here you are again peddling your 18th-century English and similarly antiquated attitudes? Civilization is not competition, and if it were, you're not arguing for a team you had anything to contribute to. Indian spirituality has a lot of virtues in it, Western medicine does so too. These are not even related, let alone in competition with eachother. Both, too, have their pitfalls, but again, I'm not comparing them or claiming one better than another - rather, they have no relation to eachother, and you shouldn't see the world through such a limited and biased lens. Everyone is grateful to the Western world for their advancements in medicine, and people are similarly appreciative of the Eastern sphere for their spiritual doctrines and practises which, without them, would leave the whole world plunged in irrational Abrahamic infighting. No culture is beyond criticizing, let's be without arbitrary partisan and simply evaluate institutions on an unbiased basis.
Grayson Ross
> muh Heidegger
He was secretly Zen Buddhist.
Samuel Hughes
Was he actually?
Matthew Brooks
>Reinhard May refers to Chang Chung-Yuan who stated "Heidegger is the only Western Philosopher who not only intellectually understands Tao, but has intuitively experienced the essence of it as well."[99] May sees great influence of Taoism and Japanese scholars in Heidegger's work, although this influence is not acknowledged by the author. He asserts: "The investigation concludes that Heidegger’s work was significantly influenced by East Asian sources. It can be shown, moreover, that in particular instances Heidegger even appropriated wholesale and almost verbatim major ideas from the German translations of Daoist and Zen Buddhist classics. This clandestine textual appropriation of non-Western spirituality, the extent of which has gone undiscovered for so long, seems quite unparalleled, with far-reaching implications for our future interpretation of Heidegger’s work."[100]
ya boy martin was smoking on some sticky
Charles Murphy
Why hide his influences, then? Seems like bad character on his part, if he indeed did.
Owen Brooks
this is hilarious to me
Adam Ward
>we do not treat these pathologies as some sort of "holy diseases"
Robert Davis
Martin Heidegger and D. T. Suzuki literally were a besties.
Ryan Watson
He's not angry, he's not even here right now, he's deep within his genetic ancestry of heroes, of conquerors, of fckin HARD DICK WARRIORS. tHis man calls crusaders, vikings, he calls navy seals his allies, his friends. He knows where he stands, and that's in a sea of blood, his ancestors blood, that he inherits and is witihn.
Ryan Morgan
Blake King
Kevin Peterson
Fuck off stemfag, Dharma is absolutely holy and based.
Nathaniel Gomez
Kevin Myers
But isn't Brahman a universal, multiplicative entity, containing every perspective, a concept which Buddhism shuns speaking of, remaining at an individual level? Sorry if wrong, I haven't studied this stuff yet.
Aiden Hill
this is so cute
Anthony Lopez
>Heidegger is the only Western Philosopher who not only intellectually understands Tao, but has intuitively experienced the essence of it as well
Jung very much, as well
Elijah King
Ayden Sullivan
Benjamin Williams
so darn cute, i love this dude's work
Adrian Roberts
URL: sil.do
CODE: debate
At the Jordan Peterson and zizek debate in Toronto. Do what you do best. Blow this shit up.
To clarify: this is a service where you can post user questions for them to ask at the end.
Anthony Reed
because then he couldn't pass it off as his own unique thought, too many philosophers fall for the games of the ego
Lincoln Harris
Childhood is Advaita and Shankara. Maturity is realizing that Bhāskara and Bhedabheda makes more sense.
Elijah Hernandez
indian women are so ugly
Jonathan Hernandez
Mandana refutes difference by means of dialectical arguments. We do not perceive any ‘difference*. Three alternatives are possible regarding perception: (1) perception may manifest a positive
object; (2) it may distinguish an object from other objects; and (3) it may manifest a positive object and may also distinguish it from other objects. In the third alternative again there are three
possibilities: (a) manifestation of a positive object and its distinction from other objects may be simultaneous; (b) first there may be positive manifestation and then negative distinction; and (c) first there may be negative distinction and then positive manifestation. Now, in the first alternative where only a positive object is manifested, no ‘difference* is perceived. The second alternative is untenable because, pure negation is an impossibility. Perception always manifests some positive object; it does not negate anything. Hence perception cannot reveal mere difference. Possibilities (a)
and (c) of the third alternative are untenable, for positive manifestation and negative distinction can be neither simultaneous nor can there be first negative distinction without positive manifestation.
Negation is necessarily rooted in affirmation. Difference or distinction is a relation between two positive objects which it presupposes. Even the negation of a non-entity like the sky-flower is only a denial of the false relation between two positive entities, the sky and the flower. Possibility (b) of the third alternative is also untenable, for perception is one unique process and there cannot be two or more moments in it. Further, Mandana points out that unity and difference cannot be combined like light and darkness. And, to say, like the Buddhist, that difference alone is real and unity an appearance, is
highly absurd, for if difference be the very nature of things, then there would be no difference among them at all. Again, difference being ‘formless’, the objects themselves would* be ‘formless*.
Again, difference being of the nature of negation, objects themselves would be of the nature of negation. Again, difference being dual or plural, no object would be the same single object for the
same thing cannot be both one and many. Hence, it has to be admitted that unity alone is real and difference is only an appearance. Difference in qualities does not imply difference in reality. Just as the same fire has diverse activities of burning, cooking and illuminating, similarly it is the extraordinary potency of the one.supreme Brahma that enables it to appear as this diverse phenomenal world.
Luis Baker
nah brah we big dicc atheist btfo all other religions so only those compatible with atheism remain and talk shit