/lit/ - Literature

>No, you can't be satisfied with an unexplainable answer, you need to have a personified God to become a holy man
>My attachment to God and fanaticism isn't proving buddhism right
>My Wikipedia page edited by pajeets says I owned buddhists even though buddhism flourished when I was alive

>>22447795
>unable to produce a quote from Buddha where the existence of the Self is explicitly denied
What's your point? Do you need a quote about water being wet too? If the buddha wanted to affirm the Vedic philosophy he could have, and then there would be no system called Buddhism or buddha-dharma. Instead we are told in the canonical discourses you can't find this "Self" anywhere in the actual experiential factors of lived reality or existence, so imagining otherwise is not conducive to liberation from the bonds of transience, ignorance, suffering and so on. It is a rejection of atmavadin Indian philosophy, not a crypto-endorsement of it. Even in later Mahayana literature where the converted brahmins have influenced the debate and systems similar to an atmavada are presented in which some concept appears to perform the same role, it is either subordinated or assimilated to the doctrine of emptiness—that is to say whatever atman or pseudo-atman we posit is in essence anatman, because all elements/entities/dharmas are lacking any permanent kernel to which they adhere.

>>20472951
>nooooo you can't have consciousness cease in the absolute because thinking about myself is proof that I am God

>>20436688
>some sects are basically indistinguishable
Hence why Shankara and Gaudapada are called "crypto-Buddhists"

>>20133844
>No I don't have to show proof

>>20117636
Buddhism lives rent-free in India and all major Hindu thinkers, Shankara included, go to great scholastic pains of stressing their most minute differences with Mahayana to avoid being called Buddhists by other Hindus.

>>20082347
>ummm, no he wasn't influenced by Buddhism at all and his system is literally just a 1:1 copy of the Upanishads and adds no new developments that took place over interim thousand years of Indian philosophy. In fact Shankara's refutations of Buddhists, other Hindus, and other Hindus who had argued against Buddhists to develop their own positions, are entirely Shankara having a conversation with himself, because the atman is brahman, so there really were no other thinkers or ideas for Shankara to argue with as they were all himself dreaming about himself in order to argue with himself about himself. So there was no dialectic, also the Upanishads wrote themselves

>>19993353
>I am a content man
>I am a happy man

>>19922603
>my view of the self is slightly different from the others so it isn't actually refuted
Yes the Brahmins are very slippery and the text already goes through like half a dozen atmans. I'm not surprised there is one that elluded the Buddhists. But no other text is as thorough about going through all the different Indian schools from a Buddhist perspective. Now if we are saying Advaitans believe cognitions are also illusions and not modes, that is hardly different from the Yogacara view anyway, which does not uphold the atman. So if the atman can be upheld using the Buddhist's axioms that would be quite the feat. But of course, Shankara was a crypto-Buddhist anyway so that was something of his entire purpose!

>>19827494
>there has to be totally unsubstantiated not-mind that is awareness of the mind that is awareness of phenomena

>>19793181
>no im NOT a crypto-buddhist please read the brahmasutrabhasya it's about brahman not sunyata

>>19781592
>everything is brahman
>uhhhh except maya that's not brahman

>>19664579
Self awareness in AV is literally awareness of nothing. There's no object. Just an entirely... empty.... subject. Anything it experiences other than the constant drumbeat of atman atman atman is an illusion. Oh but thankfully, this devoid awareness is also Brahman—because the Vedas say so—so it's definitely not poo poo stinky nastika bauddha-adharma nihilism, because the one thing Shankara hasn't denied is God and the number One

He was one of many victims of a Buddhist practice known as "brahmin breaking," in which those mumbling reciters of the Vedas were forced to learn actual philosophy instead of merely reciting scripture in order to be considered well-behaved thinkers.

>>19457541
>the eternal undivided Infinite is just there appearing *as* diversified and *as* having created, without having done either.
No creator? Sounds like atheism (Buddhism) but ok

>>19421299
Rent free. The brahmins can't meme

>>19310729
>when you're so brahmin broken that Buddhism lives rent-free in your theology

>>19069636
That it makes thomists seethe is im fact what makes it so enlightening. Whatever such involuted world-haters despise could only be noble.

>>19062108
>nooooo you can't have 12 links you need 13

>>18966911
Imagine being so brahmin broken that all you can think about is big buddhist chakra, even when you're writing your commentaries on the Upanishads. That's what Advaita Vedanta is.

>>18903315
Wherever else you decide to locate a personal self it cannot be shown to be permanent either
>>18903334
Buddhism lives rent free in India to this day. Buddhists spend no time arguing about Hinduism outside of /lit/ while every Hindu treatise is totally brahmin-broken and spends a significant portion of its text strawmanning Buddhism

>>18786683
>noooo you can't have twelvefold origination you need a thirteenth link

>>18782020
>you don't like my guru?!?! You must have been filtered

>>18665314
>we're all just god piloting himself while being ignorant of what isn't himself because god's power of illusion veils god from himself
Ah yes truly a brilliant scholastic system you've got.