/lit/ - Literature

>>21716495
>How the fuck do I enter Advaita Vedanta as a westerner?
Traditionally, it never really had any niche carved out for laypeople who want to "enter it" but only go halfway, one can only formally "enter it" by becoming a celibate monk that renounces all possessions and remains that way until death. In my personal opinion if it had been your destiny to become a traditional Advaitin monk then you have would been born into a fairly traditional Brahmin family. A westerner who nonetheless feels an intensive attraction to Hindu or Advaita-based monasticism can still join the Ramakrishna Order (countless examples) and also the Chinmayananda Order (eg Swamini Umananda); a westerner who was fluent in a common Indian language would probably also be accepted by some of the roaming naked Naga monks that still traverse India today (many of whom are Advaitins and who often don't care about caste), however a westerner almost certainly would not be allowed to become a monk and join the other monks as equals in residing at the 4 main Mathas of Advaita in India. Shankara's recommendation for non-monks (most of society) is that it's best for them to practice karma-yoga as taught by the Bhagavad-Gita which is capable of indirectly leading to the same goal as monasticism either in this life (if you're eligible for eventual entry into monasticism) or in the post-death state (if you're not).

One of the many beautiful things about Advaita though is that Shankara's writings, to the discerning mind, are spiritually enriching to the point of being life-changing, even if you are studying them as an autodidact or at university, without any formal connection to the tradition, and that when all the points in his various commentaries start to fit together like a puzzle and it really hits you, it leads to an inner peace and calmness that never really goes away, it also totally eradicates any sort of deep existential fear or angst. You find yourself resting naturally in a place that people would otherwise spend years meditating in hopes of reaching. You can study his works and reach this point and then still participate in any kind of religion or mode of practice that you want or none at all, it's up to you.

>How do I into the ebingrossadvaitiums? How?
Read Shankara, see pic related

>>21710244
This is the chart for his works. IMO his best works are his Brahma Sutra Bhasya and his Brihadaranyaka Upanishad Bhasya, honorary mention goes to Taittiriya Bhasya and Katha Bhasya. If you dont read some secondary literature first that explains the context and Sanskrit terminology you risk getting filtered.

>>21710287
That’s not by Shankara

>>21589010
>Where do I go after this?

You go to the final red-pill and the culmination of metaphysics: Advaita Vedanta as explicated by Sri Shankaracharya (pbuh)

>>21568788
>I'm interested in Vedanta. Where do I start?
Pic related is the guide to studying the original source texts of Advaita Vedanta

For Vishishtadvaita Vedanta a guide would probably be something like:

1) The Face of Truth - Lipner (or an equivalent secondary source providing an overview of Vishishtadvaita)
2) Upanishad commentaries - Ranga Ramanuja Muni (optional)
3) Bhagavad Gita commentary - Ramanuja
4) Vedartha Sangraha - Ramanuja
5) Vedanta Sutras commentary - Ramanuja

>>21489343
>What should I read to deepen my insight on this topic?
pic rel

>>21395726
read through this and then you'll be ready to join the big-boy threads

>>21389598
>I have a few questions if you dont mind me asking since its evident that you know what youre talking about
I don't mind brotha!
>>Are Atman and Brahman the same?
Adi Shankara and his Advaita Vedanta school say yes, that they are completely the same without any sort of difference between them. The other types of Vedanta schools (like Vishishtadvaita etc) disagree and each describe the relation between Brahman and Atman as being different in their own idiosyncratic way
>>What would you say are the key elements or ideas were both Buddhism and Advaita Vedanta become almost one and the same?
A lot of the similarities are 'Upanishadic' or 'dharmic' ideas generally that apply to Jainism and the other schools of Hinduism too like liberation, samsara, transmigration (of some sort). It's hard to pin down differences where it's more closer to Advaita specifically because it's not clear exactly Buddha's positions were on a lot of things and which later Buddhist school is closer to his actual intended teaching. As one sort of example there is a greater emphasis on monastic renunciation in Advaita compared to other types of Hinduism (just like in original Buddhism this was a big emphasis), but even in the other Hindu schools where ascetic renunciation is not required or isn't seen as the main spiritual path (like in Advaita) it's still typically seen as a respected thing that a minority of adherents of that school engages in regardless.
>>Does the idea of the illusory world form part of both doctrines?
It's not clear in what way Buddha meant to say the world is illusory or possibly that our perception/view of it is, some Buddhist schools interpret him as saying so but others disagree. The notion does play an important role in Advaita
>>Were should one start with Advaita Vedanta? Is it the Upanishads with the Shankara commentary?
Yes. Shankara's Upanishad commentaries explain how to interpret them and what they teach, and all his other writings and commentaries on other texts are derived from and are intimately related to this understanding expressed in his Upanishad commentaries (pic related is a guide to read Shankara). Reading through all of his main commentaries (his other works are good but optional) is the best way to understand Advaita as an autodidact or student or whatever, and then this understanding can be build on further with the many other Advaita texts by other authors. I don't think you need any other sort of author to "interpret" Shankara for you or guide how you understand him, but I think he explains himself very well and lucidly, however I do recommend nonetheless starting with 1 or 2 of the intro books in this picture just so you properly understand the words and concepts he refers to in his commentaries

>>21325762
>Books for this conundrum?

>>21288868
Once you have read enough 'intro' and 'academic overview' type works to understand what they are talking about in the source texts then you don't have to waste your time reading anything written within the last 200-300 years and can stick to the original texts and sources of the pre-Medieval and Medieval-era India, which are much better. Pic related is the guide just for Adi Shankara's writings who is the central Advaita metaphysician. After him you can read the works of post-Shankara philosophers in the Advaita tradition like Suresvara, Vidyaranya, Madhusudan Saraswati etc, also there are numerous other texts that are express non-dual ideas in interesting ways at points like the Bhagavata Purana, Ribhu Gita (from one of the other Puranas), Ashtavakra Gita, Avadhuta Gita, Jnaneshvari, various collections of minor Upanishads, The Yoga Vasistha, Tripura Rahasya, Devi Mahatmya etc.

>>21285058
>Where do I start with Monistic philosophy?
With the final red-pill and the end-game of all metaphysics: Advaita Vedanta as explicated by Sri Shankaracharya (pbuh)

>The literary style of the Acharya, while it excels in its power the rolling sound of the thunder clouds which rise above the ravings of the sullen wind-tossed sea at the out-break of the monsoon, resembles in its charming agreeableness the sweet fragrance coming from a garden of jasmine flowers. His prose and poetical works, flawless and pleasing to read, are a veritable encyclopaedia of learning. While delectable like nectar, they are entrenched in such sound reasoning that they are impregnable to the attacks of opponents with their malicious questionings and criticisms. Full of positive and ennobling ideas, they are capable of removing the miseries of life and guiding man to the goal of salvation.

>>21264277

>>21215646

>>21206610

>>21041681

>>21023218
based

>>21017960
skip all the bs and go straight for the main course, Sri Shankaracharya

>>21007642
Do the needful good sir

>>21002449
This (pic related) is the chart for the main Advaita philosopher Shankara, if you just follow the chart you can read through Shankara’s works, the writings of all the post-Shankara Advaitins are unnecessary although some are very interesting and you dont need any of them to “explain” Shankara’s works for you as they are self-explanatory.

>>21002613
I would advise against uncritically accepting SS Saraswatis interpretation of Advaita, which I think some people are inclined to do so simply because lots of his stuff is available in English and there is a paucity of similar material on the views of other modern Shankaracharyas and monks of the mathas who take different views and who disagree with him. Some of SS Sarawatis views or positions seem to differ notably from Shankara like SS Saraswatis separation of maya and avidya into two entirely distinct things which Shankara himself never endorses but he rather uses them to refer to the same thing; and this has rather significant consequences/implications (for one thing some of Ramanujas critiques actually acquire some validity if maya and avidya are distinct, which these critiques would otherwise lack, since he is pointing out that the false understanding or delusion of an individual cannot produce things like this whole multifaceted world of experience but this lacks teeth as an argument if said ignorance is just the maya that Brahman by nature projects as It’s power). I was looking through one of SS Sarawatis works and for a number of claims he had citations from Shankaras work listed in support of said claims but when he came to the claim that avidya and maya are different he didnt have any citation from Shankara to support his claim. SS Saraswati is right to reject later Advaitins who attribute ‘positive existence’ to avidya-maya, but I think he overreacts in doing so and throws the baby out with the bathwater by rejecting certain ideas Shankara accepts by dismissing them as ideas of the ‘mulaaavidya advaitins’. Lastly, SS Saraswatis works can get highly technical and will often presuppose some understanding of Advaita and Shankara’s style of writing and expressing ideas and so someone who has never read Shankara will likely be at a loss as to what is being talked about.

> because first of all you need to know the METHOD of advaita (adhyaropapavada)
You dont need other books to explain this as Shankara himself explains this in his works, which SS Sarawati admits.

>>20994736
they don't want you to know your real Self

>>20998298

>>20904466
This is the right chart to read to understand this discussion (starts with Sharmas intro book first; Guenons book is optional but I enjoyed it)

Does anything like this (https://docs.google.com/document/u/1/d/1y8_RRaZW5X3xwztjZ4p0XeRplqebYwpmuNNpaN_TkgM/pub)) exist but for eastern philosophy?

The only sort of roadmap or guide I've found is picrel

>>20881247
This chart is just for Shankara, who is only one author of the eastern canon and one who wrote philosophy and not literary fiction; but who is a great read nonetheless

”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."
- C. Sharma

>>20873626