/lit/ - Literature

Where i start Plato? I've read all the small dialogues (Gorgias was the biggest one that i read) and i really don't know what order would be the best one.
>inb4 the "Shit Son, You want to read Plato?" Chart
I've tried it, still got out confused

>>20311891
>>20311895
You should read Buddhists or buddhologists to better understand Buddhism, not hostile polemicists. Stcherbatsky is a valuable secondary source. There is no "upanishadic atman" in Buddhism for the simple reason that Buddhists reject the Vedas as a source of authority. What you are doing is looking for atman equivalents because that is what tardlarp exegesis demands. Your "good forms of Buddhism" list that centers around Yogacara influenced schools seems based on uncritical acceptance of Gelug doxographers reading of these Buddhists' readings of tathagatagarbha as being heterodox to the prasangika Madhyamaka of Nagarjuna, Chandrakirti, and Tsongkapa, from which Tibetan rangtong/zhentong doxography emerged. In any case it would probably take the average person years of study to understand that particular debate front and back. A less Tibeticized way to put it is that the Nagarjuna-Chandrakirti derived schools are more strict about the ineffibility of the absolute, and the Nagarjuna-Asanga derived schools (which is really the last form of Indiam Buddhism, see Shataraksita/Kamalasila) try to explain it through all kinds of categories and logic systems. But both of these views agree that there is no difference between nirvana and samsara, that emptiness is (or enables) form, and so forth. And this is actual non-dualism because it accounts for experiences vs a true reality, while the non-dualism of the Vedantins is between God and the Soul, and these are both nominal or imaginary things that cannot be demonstrated in any case, so nothing is being said about the relation of phenomena and noumenon but instead a non-duality is given of two non-things! It does not matter to someone who does not accept the Vedas, but one could see why it might be useful to preserve the Vedas in India and combine them with influences from a Buddhism that was being replaced

>>20180015
Emptiness is form, keep seething brahmanoid

>>20076596
Anatman or nairatmya is inseparable from the doctrine of all dharmas or elements of experience as being momentary—hence they are identityless. This is in the nikayas and is picked up with greater emphasis by Mahayanists, who are going to attack the reification of these dharmas by the Sarvastivadins, just as if they were as soluble as the skandhas/aggregates, and the exegetical method they use (sunyata) later evolves into its own formal school. So across both the earlier Buddhist schools and into the Mahayana, anatman remains the defining characteristic of Buddhism, and that which serves to consistently distinguish it from its many sectarian and non-Buddhist dialectical partners in India over the centuries. Meanwhile "soul" is largely a translation quirk of western Christians going back to the 19th century. To say "there is no enduring identity in conditioned experience of momentary phenomena" has nothing to do with whether a God breathed life into you or not. You could perhaps comb the texts to see if there was a opinion on this or not, but would seem evident that such a notion cannot be construed as the "original" teaching prior to sectarian development.
>>20076638
based and did-the-reading pilled

>>20043297
Buddhists took over this board.

Buddhists are taking over this board.
Should they be given their own religion board?