/lit/ - Literature

>>19329915
>but I wouldn't call it monism
Classical non-dualism (Advaita) isn’t monism or dualism but is its own unique category, qualified non-dualism (Vishishtadvaita) and certain kinds of Shaivism are more like monism.
>There is a lot about virtue and vice, and how one must overcome their hellish passions in order to reach divine heavenliness. What does this mean for the good and the evil if we are built with these internal passions that we choose to act upon?
The Gita teaches that it is prakriti (insentient nature comprised of gunas) that acts and not our Self, discriminating wisdom in part consists in knowing that one’s Self or Atman is a non-doer and that something other than oneself is what acts, and in remaining unattached to actions and their fruits. People who are unfit for Jnana-Yoga are supposed to instead perform Karma-Yoga, remaining unattached in the midst of actions, with their mind dedicating actions and their fruits to God. That people confuse theirselves with Prakriti is a basic condition of being a transmigrating being in samsara.

"The actions (karmāṇi) are performed (kriyamāṇāni) completely (sarvaśas) by the qualities (guṇaiḥ) of Prakṛti (prakṛteḥ). One who is deluded and bewildered (vimūḍha-ātmā) by (his) ego (ahaṅkāra) thinks (manyate): 'I (aham) (am) the doer (kartā... iti)'"
Gita 3.27


>If someone is reborn with their corresponding Karma, does that mean something similar along the lines of what Socrates detailed in the Republic, i.e., reincarnation and virtue?
Can you elaborate?