/lit/ - Literature

no, god is a personal trinity whose essence is unknowable

>>12277362
ladies and gents
a self contradiction

>>12277382
how

>>12277382
I see.

>>12277362
If he's a personal trinity, isn't that awareness of his essence in and of itself?

>>12277403
please don't get him started

>>12277403
no, god's personhood (hypostases) is not his essence. we can know god's personhood and his energies, but we can't know the essence

>>12277411
go to bed, Jay Dyer

>>12277424
that's standard eastern theology dude

>>12277362
Why should I believe this?

>>12277475
because a "dynamic" and personal deity who creates purposefully has a lot more explanatory value vis a vis our world than some abstract supreme principle that emanates our world for no reason.

>>12277503
no, cause then you've got a theodicy on your hands you need to work out.

besides, a trinity vs. a simplex? nah. you're just weak and can't take the dive into imperonal emenationism, christians need to personalize their absolute so they have a metaphysical shoulder to cry on.


if you fully accept the premise of apophatic theology, why even bother with the middle man?

>>12277503
>more explanatory value
Not necessarily, only if it's true

>>12277503
Why do you assume there is a reason for anything? Why can't things just be

>>12277518
>you're just weak and can't take the dive into imperonal emenationism, christians need to personalize their absolute so they have a metaphysical shoulder to cry on.
Personalization is a logical conclusion to the concept of Deity.It is hardly a Christian idea. Your prejudices are showing. It is you who are terrified of the implications and seek refuge in what is basically a Nihilism.
Also, actual Buddhism teaches Personality within Deity (Being, Consciousness, Bliss etc). I believe you to be the California brand of buddhist or whatever hodgpogde of Eastern teachings you are misinterpreting are and further interaction with you would be fruitless.

>>12277536
Because Intentionality exists. This cannot arise from a cosmos that lacks Teleology. "Just being" gives rise to rocks, not Humanity. (And I doubt it evens gives rise to rocks)

>>12277354
absolutely, unequivocally, perhaps the most based man to ever live

>>12277548
>Also, actual Buddhism teaches Personality within Deity (Being, Consciousness, Bliss etc)

You fucking stupid nigger Advaita literally defines Brahman as Sat-Chit-Ananda (conciousness-awareness-bliss)

>>12277384
fucking retard, i don’t want to defend Vedantists but you all need to be thrown in a mass grave and buried alive you insect faggot
>>12277503
holy shit

>>12277616
i'll pray for you, anon

>>12277622
>i-i’ll pray for you (sinner faggot sodomite, demon)
lol ok man thanks, i would have been worried about burning for all time in excruciating agony for not thinking like a subhuman and having a toddler’s understanding of induction

>>12277640
get it all out
just let it out

>>12277640
it's never too late to repent and confess your sins :)

>>12277662
>confess my sins
I don’t write nearly as much about how dangerous philosophical theism is, and I wish i spent more time with my cats, they’re getting old and don’t have a lot of time left.
>>12277648
>talks like parental figure/psychologist
Ha i wonder why you take that tone? Its really odd that religious people default to paternalism and psychologizing when they know they’re about to be exposed for being stoopid

>>12277640
>i would have been worried about burning for all time in excruciating agony for not thinking like a subhuman and having a toddler’s understanding of induction
So you are making some major mistakes here. i) Having Hell be an actual spatial region with physical fire, rather than an ontological state. And ii) thinking "eternal damnation" would equal "burning for all time" as if Eternity was merely an extension of temporality into perpetuity, making it a matter of quantity.
Either you were raised by protestants or you just haven't absorbed the literature that you think you have consumed and your anger is just further proof of your petulant nature. You should stop posting on here and study things a bit more before attempting to engage in discussions about them if being wrong upsets you so much.

Or, conversely, going by this post >>12277677, you are actually just a teenager.

>>12277677
actually i'm anti theist desu
you need to breathe in, breathe out slowly

take the katha upanishad pill /lit/, thank me later

>>12277693
you’re a retarded, deceitful, pretentious, hate filled, arrogant nigger.
>>12277705
>devil’s advocate tone policing
>im an anti-theist
go back >>>/r/eddit

Poo poo stink bad
>>12277354
Poo poo

>>12277503
Being a 'dynamic' and 'personal' deity who would disturb the perfect tranquility of His own consciousness by deciding to suddenly to create a universe and then monitor the actions of beings in that universe and deal out rewards and punishments accordingly makes a lot less less sense than a monad diety who simply shines unceasingly and effortlessly in all directions like the sun.

>>12277551
>Because Intentionality exists. This cannot arise from a cosmos that lacks Teleology.
Not if intentionally itself is illusionary.

>>12277765
>>12277613
these

>>12277934
>not knowing that poop is literally Brahman

>>12277503
>doesn''t realize that the world is never actually emanated

lmao

No, emanationist monism is fundamentally incoherent. It doesn't explain creation and contingency, only explains it away with sophistry. Its abstractions, from particulars to universals and contingency to form, are really important as beginning moves in a true philosophy and true mysticism, but they aren't the final moves. Mistaking that process of abstraction for the final logical principle of reality itself is dumb.

Orientals and pathetic orientalist wannabes are mostly drawn to the quietist chic that goes with being a generic Vedantist/Taoist/Buddhist, especially now that everybody on the Internet wants to claim to be a Guenonian. These people are mostly failed hippies and inbred Muslims.

>>12278849
Also having an impersonal "God" (or some sort of supreme principle) that doesn't care what you do or how you live your life is a lot less imposing than a King and Judge of the universe. It's just way more convenient. You can go around feeling at peace, that you are just another "manifestation of God".

>>12278862
Some people draw admirable conclusions from their impersonal pantheism or panentheism, like Spinoza's initial popularity was often among free-thinkers who loved his democratic ideals and desired freedom from censorship by churches. But yeah mostly it's just lazy half-assed mysticism, and people going with the first thing that sounds like it explains drug/mystical experiences of depersonalization. "That feeling of oneness you get when you're high or in sense deprivation, or that mystics report? That's oneness with the original One!" "Makes sense to me."

>>12278849
>>12278862
and just like that the Gordian knot is severed.
don't let the unwashed masses of weeaboos and dudeweedlmao's that are about to descend upon you shake your resolve.

>>12278849
>No, emanationist monism is fundamentally incoherent.
Non-dualism is separate from monism and is the proper term to refer to Advaita. Emanationist is more proper for Platonism, in some sense it describes Advaita but it's perhaps the worst of the still fitting words because a central doctrine of Advaita is that nothing ever actually emanates or originates (absolute reality is considered unchanging), and so the name implies the opposite of what Advaita teaches, (also, nowhere in your series of posts do you explain where it is incoherent!). For an example of what I'm talking about see for instance the ajāti vāda doctrine of Gauḍapāda which is upheld in traditional Advaita writ large;

https://www.iep.utm.edu/gau%E1%B8%8Dapad/

>Its abstractions, from particulars to universals and contingency to form, are really important as beginning moves in a true philosophy and true mysticism, but they aren't the final moves. Mistaking that process of abstraction for the final logical principle of reality itself is dumb.
Can you elaborate? you don't provide any line of reasoning for why anything Advaita says in wrong here, this is very vague.

>Also having an impersonal "God" (or some sort of supreme principle) that doesn't care what you do or how you live your life is a lot less imposing than a King and Judge of the universe. It's just way more convenient. You can go around feeling at peace, that you are just another "manifestation of God".
As if how "imposing" anything is has anything to do with what is ultimately true, lmao; this line of attack begs the question are you just being fooled into believing in a separate Deity due to a superstitious and primitive fear of an imposing sky-daddy coming to punish you?

>>12278887
>But yeah mostly it's just lazy half-assed mysticism, and people going with the first thing that sounds like it explains drug/mystical experiences of depersonalization. "That feeling of oneness you get when you're high or in sense deprivation, or that mystics report? That's oneness with the original One!" "Makes sense to me."
This is a non-specific criticism which really has nothing to do with Advaita, you can quite easily extend it all of religion and philosophy, "That feeling of being listened to when you pray? That's God really listening to you" and so on.

>>12278893
>and just like that the Gordian knot is severed.
Blatant same-fagging, but I'll pretend it wasn't and humor you by pointing out that you didn't, as highlighted above you provided very little reasoning and what little you did have was faulty; it amounted mostly to vague insinuations and arguments that apply just as much to Christianity and most of philosophy. There are actually some halfway decent criticisms of Advaita that actually make one stop and think and in some cases one may have to double-check the Vedanta literature for the answer, but your posts more or less consisted of reddit-tier arguments.

>>12277362
daily reminder that there is no good arguments or logic in support of the trinity, not even Aquinas tried to prove it

>>12277968
>Being a 'dynamic' and 'personal' deity who would disturb the perfect tranquility of His own consciousness by deciding to suddenly to create a universe and then monitor the actions of beings in that universe and deal out rewards and punishments accordingly makes a lot less less sense than a monad diety who simply shines unceasingly and effortlessly in all directions like the sun.
Yes exactly! Be with the two, friend. I'd love to hear more. It's hard to find people on this board who aren't Christian and can explain eastern thought well.

>>12277362
The trinity is literally just a way to fit Plato and the logos into Christianity.

>>12279071
You remind me of my guitar teacher in high school who was an acid burnout babyboomer pseud who had lived in India for a few years and had oral herpes. He was not an intelligent man.

>>12279121
Why do Christ-cucks insist on humiliating themselves by making posts like these?

>>12279167
Your defensive buttpain makes me think you have oral herpes too.

>>12279192
>HAHA because I had no arguments and used a totally irrelevant ad-hominem attack and then because you replied by pointing out that I'm acting foolishly that shows that you are butt-hurt hahaha

>>12277548
>Also, actual Buddhism teaches Personality within Deity (Being, Consciousness, Bliss etc).
Holy shit, absolute state of guenonfags.

>>12277548
>nihilism
Bad news anon...

>>12277551
you are embarassing yourself anon. you obviously havent read the first canonical analysis of intentionality.

>>12278849
dude you’re literally just waving around terms you dont understand. it takes the minimum philosophical training to look at your criticism here and see how devoid of substance it is.

>>12279220
Don't worry anon, you won that one. I think I recognize the other anon as well, he was in an Indian philosophy thread recently basically embarassing himself by reducing all Indian thought to "dude WEED lmao we are all ONE man". He clearly doesn't understand Monism himself, the notion of reality as being a Dream of which all of us are the original Dreamer, and possibly prefers superficial and time-constructed (meaning, many men put this web together across a span of time) Jewish fairytales to explain it. Instead of "you are the original Dreamer, and this your Dream" he prefers "dude God, also called YHWH, made Heaven and Earth and made Adam and Eve like the first humans, but then Satan made them eat the forbidden tree man so now we are sinful and then Christ came and was sacrificed for that sin bro, so now all you have to do is say by your mouth that 'Christ is Lord' and you're saved basically, everyone else gets punished lol. also don't be gay or the same thing. God created the Earth for us to like be happy and stuff and made all peoples but also expects everyone to follow Jewish culture only and if you don't you goin to hell lol". My, what a "profound" philosophy.

Advaita is born directly from experience, not constructing any sort of narrative from existing tales which we aren't even aware of the real significance of. But Christians believe in the constructions of men, like Paul combining Genesis and Jesus together to make Original Sin. Prior to Paul connecting them, Jesus had never once mentioned anything from Genesis (Adam and Eve, Garden of Eden, Tree of Knowledge) or of sacrificing himself for everyone's sins, but after Paul wrote it, it became canon, and is still seen so.

Those who follow the spiritual paths, which Shankaracharya did, and anyone else who does, will reach the same conclusions as he reached, the same ones which form the basis of Indian philosophy. It's experiential, requiring no external texts to memorize or adhere to, but those texts themselves came from the internal state which the sages had entered. And if it's not arrogant to say, I can say I have tasted nondualism myself, and therefore understand its reality directly. It's not a fanciful speculation, it is a revelation you will see clearly when you have shed a certain level of the ego. I'm actually planning to write a text on it myself that'll walk any layperson onto the path of realizing it. Also, it's important not to assume differences where they may not be any. For example, I believe in both a Creator-Being (Vishnu/Krishna) and a Monistic Substance, it's simply that the Creator-Being is itself still part of that Substance, an emanation of it even though much higher in stature than we are. Yet Parabrahman is highest above all.

I'd write more but no space. Let me just tell you, Monism as expounded on by the Indians is definitely the correct direction, and you should look into it further. Seek especially to experience yourself, and not merely read of it.

>>12279614
how do this anon. ive been reading generally around indian philosophy and started the gita but i kinda crave the blutness of, say, dogen.

>>12279614
>Those who follow the spiritual paths, which Shankaracharya did, and anyone else who does, will reach the same conclusions as he reached, the same ones which form the basis of Indian philosophy.

>everyone will naturally agree with the stance I think is correct if they think hard enough about it
>anyone who hasn't agreed with me just hasn't thought hard enough about it yet

So this is the power of Eastern "philosophy".. It's no wonder it hasn't changed or developed past basic Parmenidean spitball speculation in thousands of years. They don't actually understand what philosophy is.

>>12277503
You literally don't know the first thing about Shankara. There is nirguna Brahman (God without qualities) and saguna Brahman (God with qualities). God or the Absolute is ultimately not describeable, but it manifests as the knowable personal God which we can describe and worship.

>>12280620
That doesn't contradict what he said at all.

>>12280650
obvious samefag. calm down sub19 yr old

>>12280657
Do you want to explain how it contradicts what he said, or do you just want to schizopost?

To Guenonfag: You do realize you've probably never convinced or successfully proselytized to a single person on this board because you come across as such a fucking lunatic, right? You've actively turned people away from Guenon most of the time.

The content of your posts is always "It be what it is, Shankara just werks," for some reason padded out with fifteen paragraphs of you demonstrating that you've read a few standard commentaries and know the Sanskrit jargon. You even got blown the fuck out by actual Sanskrit/Indian philosophy experts multiple times.

>>12280685
The former. Please continue to dig your hole.

>>12280690
Well, thanks for singlehandedly ruining Guenonposting with your autism, I guess. It used to be pretty comfy, before the board somehow attracted your schizo autist Muslim shit.

>>12280700
what are you talking about lmao. im waiting to hear why a samefagging asshole sees a contradiction in based Indianpost and instead I get a bunch of buzzwords including, now get this, "Muslim."

>>12280730
..Why are you switching typing styles between posts?

>>12280750
you are literally insane

>>12280750
Oh lol sorry dude I misread one of your posts because you used the word "contradict" like a retard. You weren't accusing the Indianposter of contradicting someone, you were accusing him of not contradicting your criticism. What I meant to say was: you are a samefagging retard who has some explaining to do i.e., you need to point out how Indianposter is somehow not responding to your retarded claim. Enough with this schizo shit though you had me second guessing.

>>12280403
>So this is the power of Eastern "philosophy".. It's no wonder it hasn't changed or developed past basic Parmenidean spitball speculation in thousands of years. They don't actually understand what philosophy is.

It's so transparent when plebs like you mouth off on subjects you don't know anything about. Vedanta is firmly grounded in epistemiology and ontology, as is much of ancient and classical Indian religious philosophy whether Hindu, Jain, Buddhist and even in some cases Tantric. Just within orthodox Hinduism alone there were various schools and sub-schools of logic, naturalism, epistemiology, grammer, debate, etc.

See:

>Gauḍapāda is best known for his analytical exposition on the tenets of Advaita Vedānta that provided a firm ontological grounding to Vedānta philosophy. Gauḍapāda’s expository interpretation of the Upaniṣadic literature in the light of logical reasoning is a critical apparatus of epistemological exposition in the Advaita tradition.

https://www.iep.utm.edu/gau%E1%B8%8Dapad/

>The exercise of reasoning and the practice of argument are recorded in the early texts of India. Preoccupation with the nature of reason and argument occurs in the earliest philosophical texts, where their treatment is intimately connected with questions of ontology, epistemology and dialectics. These questions continued to be at the center of philosophical discussion through the classical and medieval period of Indian philosophy.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-india/


>Theory of knowledge, pramāṇa-śāstra, is a rich genre of Sanskrit literature, spanning almost twenty centuries, carried out in texts belonging to distinct schools of philosophy.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/epistemology-india/

>>12279614
>I'm actually planning to write a text on it myself that'll walk any layperson onto the path of realizing it
Nice, the most accessible text in terms of hand-holding and easing someone into that I've found so far is the first few chapters of the Ashtavakra Gita (this depends on translation though, I've read both great and awful translations of it).

>>12280032
That depends, how extensive is your knowledge of Sanskrit terminology and Hindu philosophy? If it's not very good, you should stick to the simpler 'Gita' style texts that consist of series of short verses, of which there are still many. There are much more dense and complicated Hindu texts in prose such as the writings of major Hindu thinkers which includes commentaries and often these are like full-on books.

I am not the poster you directed your question to, but like them, from reading and meditating on Hindu literature and particularly Vedanta I have been able to experience ecstatic and oceanic states of oneness and bliss. I get this more with careful study of the denser book-like texts than the shorter Vedanta texts in verse, but I still have been able to get it from the later. In order to really get something out of the denser texts you really need to have a strong grounding in Hindu philosophy, and should already understand the basics of that school. If you want to get into the denser stuff, some of the stuff you need to know you can adsorb from the shorter texts but you should really also read a book that goes over and explains many of the doctrines and words, like Hiriyanna's or Radnakrishnan's books which provide overviews of Indian philosophy. Aside from reading more dense/esoteric/higher-level stuff you can also try seeking out a teacher in person or reading scriptures while tripping or something.

>guenonfag is replying to himself again

terrifying

>>12281342
>when you've been btfo repeatedly and have to resort to claiming that actually there is just one person faking a conversation with himself

The absolute state of anon. Try going on goodreads, going on the current Gita reading group discord, or just lurking more. Having read one Vedantic text or another or at least having a decent overview of its main ideas is now about as common (for /lit/ posters) as things like the Tao Te Ching and Dhammapada.

>>12281375
post more walls of text in response to your own walls of text, you berber faggot lmfao

>>12281395
>doesn't know what it's like in North Africa and Egypt

Do you think Berbers have the luxury to around all day pretending to be multiple people on a forum? Everyone there is dirt-poor, they all have to work constantly just to have a place to eat and sleep.

>>12281428
better get to it, then. gotta leave enough time for your daily mosque visit with the revered sheikhs who would balk at your westernized pseudo-sufism.

>>12281375
>>12281428
Isn't it odd. All this supposed familiarity with such a deep spiritual doctrine, and yet you have the emotional fortitude of a fifth grader. Obviously not assimilating as much of it as you presume.

>>12281470
>>12281485
>Letting yourself get this angry that you are still trying to throw insults
>getting upset because oh no people like talking about eastern philosophy in 3 or 4 threads out of however many in the catalog and it happens to one who he-who-must-not-be-named (!) liked.

kek, you guys are amusing. I enjoy talking with the anons here who actually read this stuff, but you guys are the icing on the cake

the endgame of all eastern philosophy is buttsex magick and wallowing in your own feces. prove me wrong

>>12281550
That's only an Upaya in Tibetian Tantric Buddhism

>>12281535
i can't speak for him but that other guy seems mostly concerned that you react like a thin-skinned, spastic child to posts on the internet. i'm mostly just calling you a retard.

have you considered becoming a real muslim and not spending all day on an internet forum pretending to be a theosophical mystic, dude?

All of this is weak, keep trying to find who fire the dart, I'll be leaving this shithole.

>>12281575
more likely, true to guenonfag form, you'll make ten more posts pretending to be some disinterested third party who just so happens to agree with guenonfag. one of your calling cards is that you samefag spam like fucking crazy.

you did it in that other guenon thread earlier, the shitpost one that got deleted. weird, out-of-place, reddity spam posts kept appearing, but the IP count never changed. your berber genes truly are wild.

>>12281606
At last, I was gueno fag after all.

>>12281611
sorry if i mistook you. i thought it was him pulling an
>That's it, fuck this. I'm quitting animeheaven.proforums.com forever. Everyone block and delete me on Skype.

guenonfag.. please come back to us.

>>12281615
Ultimately, there is no absolutely real distinction between anyone of us anyways, so all the speculation about Guenon-fag becomes moot. The Atma observing the illusion of Guenonfag is at once the perfectly devoid of the essence of Guenonfag and at the same time the Self and witness of all beings.

>>12281626
it gives me great pleasure to watch wojak defeat pepe for some reason

>>12281626
pantheism is for brainlets and relies on a logical trick that, as stated somewhere above, parmenides already thought up and worked to its logical conclusions at the very beginning of western philosophy, at nearly the same time as the few important upanishads were being written down.

maybe this is why the west has actually developed a philosophical tradition and the east just keeps spinning its wheels and repeating the same sophistical logic trick for eternity. the west actually thought it through, making it possible to move beyond it.

>>12281767
>pantheism is for brainlets
Vedanta is only partially pantheism, that's just one aspect of it, even for Advaita alone.

>, parmenides already thought up and worked to its logical conclusions at the very beginning of western philosophy, at nearly the same time as the few important upanishads were being written down.
OH NO NO NO NO NO BRUH ... LOOK AT THIS DUDE

Parmenides is ~500 BC, while there are already clear and unequivocal expositions of non-dualism in the long Brihadaranyaka and Chandogya Upanishads which most scholars date to ~900-800 BC and ~800-600 BC respectively and many also acknowledge these likely included older pre-existing texts (to say nothing of them being implicitly stated in pre-Upanishad portion of the Vedas. Even 800 BC is so long before Parmenides we can't rule out that in some way or another the idea made its way from the Indians to him. The Indians have a very long history of trading and cultural interaction with Persia, Mesopotamia and even further west. WE WUZ GREEKS AND SHIT MY NIGGA :^)

>maybe this is why the west has actually developed a philosophical tradition and the east just keeps spinning its wheels and repeating the same sophistical logic trick for eternity. the west actually thought it through, making it possible to move beyond it.
Oh you mean like how the Indians had the same schools of grammer, logic, epistemology, ontology, astronomy, math and so on but they didn't happen to be the ones who become largely atheistic, nihilist and so on or allowed moral-relativism and overwhelming acceptance of degeneracy to become the norm.

>>12281888
>the exotic orient was never disenchanted, they're still in touch with their mystical side!!! hindus invented everything!

hahaha, you're a caricature of every third-rate blavatskian. i thought you guys all died out.

it's a shame, many guenonians are very interesting, but you have somehow confused being a theosophist roleplayer for being a guenonian.

>>12277503
lmao
>sufficient reason
the biggest stain on Western Philosophy

>>12281920
despite all the appeals to rationality, this the last stance of a true /lit/izen. never change anon :,)

for real though how much of an arrogant prick do you have to be to equivocate ancient hindu philosophy with theosophy. just lay down and accept it when you’ve been presented with a worldview bigger than one you’ve been aware of. and even if based Indianposter is just covert guenonfag, the shit he’s referencing supersedes all the hip Western channels you’re citing.

>>12282072
>equivocate

you mean "equate." equivocate is intransitive.

>equivocate [sic] ancient hindu philosophy with theosophy

no, as i said in the post you're replying to: you are a theosophist, not a hindu philosopher. the worst thing about theosophists is how they distort other traditions and call themselves adherents of those traditions. you do this, in the exact ways that blavatsky and her followers did it. you are much more blavatskian than guenonian, and you don't even really understand guenon.

>>12282113
>they distort other traditions and call themselves adherents of those traditions.
name one thing said about Hinduism in this thread which is distorted

>>12282346
the whole framework of simplified, ultra-reductive pseudo-metaphysics you apply to hinduism, plus your general credulity and condescending attitude about LE EXOTIC ORIENT. this has been proved time and again, including several times when real scholars showed up on /lit/ and immediately made you look like an embarrassing dilettante.

you are a wannabe mystic and wikipedia scholar. you are on par with fat chicks on facebook claiming to be buddhists. you are a theosophist. guenon would be ashamed of you.

>>12282366
I asked for an example in this thread, something specific that was said Vedanta that was wrong. There is something about Guenon and/or Hinduism that drives you to compulsively try to derail these sorts of threads and attack people despite not knowing anything about Hindu philosophy, and so you have to try to drag in Blavatsky to tar Vedanta (the subject of this thread, nobody was even talking about Guenon until you showed up) by association. It's all very transparent and amusing.

>>12282405
i already told you, theosophy shill. try going up and reading it. in fact, that's a good strategy for you in general. try actually reading guenon and the upanishads, instead of just projecting blavatsky's ideas onto them lol.

>>12282113
im a separate anon, anon. thanks for the pedantic grammar lesson for real tho you little shit. your schizo posting and content dodging only makes you all the more insufferable.

>>12282366
you are back-peddling so hard peterson-style here my guy. you got your ass blown out and now you are changing the discussion to mask this.

>>12282415
If you are unable to point out anything specific that was said about Vedanta by me or one of the other people who obviously study it in this thread which was wrong, than it's tantamount to conceding that I'm right and that you're wrong.

>>12282421
>>12282428
if you post theosophy i'm going to call you a theosophist. please, discuss shankara in the thread, not theosophical interpretations of him.

>>12282425
>peterson-style here my guy

what. is english your first language?

>>12282433
i havent posted theosophy. thats whats so funny. ive merely followed the discussion and see through your bullshit and have decided to post to call you out. you think you’re responding to one person but multiple people in this thread have cornered you and are demanding you explain yourself. yet you still just writhe and squeal. and wtf do you mean >>12282433 here. that’s fucking slang because i can type anyway i want on an anonymous forum. get over it dude being an uptight weenie isn’t going to save your lack of legit argumentation.

>>12282448
>you still just writhe and squeal.
>that’s fucking slang because i can type anyway i want on an anonymous forum.

actual question, are you off your antipsychs for christmas?

>>12282453
>no you

>>12282433
>not theosophical interpretations of him
Literally nobody was talking about Theosophical interpretations of Shankara until you showed up, you don't know enough about him to distinguish the difference anyways

>>12282457
>you don't know enough about him to distinguish the difference anyways

i am not an expert, i suppose, but i know a hell of a lot more than that guenonfag guy (the theosophist one).

not sure if you're familiar with him, but he's been posting pro-theosophy shill shit on this board for well over a year. he used to be more obvious about it, directly linking to theosophical interpretations, but when he got called out he started pretending he was only a reader of guenon.

>>12277362
Brahmān/Paramātma/Bhagavan is also a trinity

Wow you guys all sound so enlightened and spiritually attuned lol

>>12283041
thanks

>>12277503
And what is this purpose, anon? Why did God create us? To form ourselves into heterosexual pairings and bear children, who repeat the process ad infinitum? To worship him, again for eternity? And why was pain created as well? Why couldn't we be spared of that suffering, if this reality was made entirely for us to appreciate? What ultimate questions are answered by the concept of a personal, Creator-Deity?

Tell me, do you know anything at all about what this God actually involves? What its Nature, Will and whatever else consists of? No? You've literally never once stepped-into this God's Mind and seen the exact answers to these questions therein? Nor can you seemingly ever do so, given the nature of this Deity relative to yourself? Then why not look inward instead, focusing on what spiritual realities you CAN see with certainty, instead of projecting speculations as to the nature of a Being, which may or may not exist, but in either case you have never interacted with nor can fathom in your current form, and therefore can't say anything about with any certainty?

It ends up being every individual human's own personal opinions, presented as if they came from a "higher, authoritive source". A homophobe will claim God to be against homosexuality, when the only thing known with certainty is that the speaker is himself against it.

It would be better if everyone focused on their own soul's, and not attempt to comprehend what is by nature incomprehensible for them.

>>12279071
>Christ
>Yoga
These missionaries are ruthless, evil and need to be stopped

>>12279071
Children as young as 4 are brainwashed and converted. Interesting how they have not converted a single Muslim in India

Pooinloos on suicide watch in this thread

>>12277362
brainlet

>>12283381
>>12283388
Why does the Indian government allow them to continue their exploitation?

>>12281375
>guenonfag is in the 'Gita reading group'
thanks for outing yourself

>>12283560
Is there a guy in there who responds to all criticism by saying things like "OH NO NO NO AHAHAHA >: ^) Hahaha lmfao lol rofl you really believe that don't you?"

>>12283772
There is no criticism because the discussion mostly stays on topic without getting derailed by people with a bone to pick against Hinduism/Vedanta etc, joining the discord is too much effort for someone just trying to troll so when there is conversation it's good. :^)

Has anyone enjoyed reading any other of the Vedanta commentators? How do they compare to Shankara?

>>12279419
That was not a Guenon-fag but someone arguing for Christianity

>>12283354
not him but i agree with you anon desupai

>>12279071
I really enjoyed this post, sorry for all the other Christ fags that only come to troll.

>>12277551
>"Just being" gives rise to rocks, not Humanity.

I wish I was the type to save smug anime girl reaction images.

>>12279614
>Jesus had never once mentioned anything from Genesis (Adam and Eve, Garden of Eden, Tree of Knowledge) or of sacrificing himself for everyone's sins, but after Paul wrote it, it became canon, and is still seen so.


I really hate how Paul and canonization fucked Christianity.

>>12277411
>we can know god but we cant know god

>>12286380
Same, dude. Even though I'm ethnically Hindu, and align with its doctrines most, I still consider Jesus as Divine, even if I'm not familiar with the Christian doctrines and if that seems hypocritical or whatever. All I hold is that Christianity really ruined itself after Paul and subsequent movements (Nicene Creed, etc) which piled on dogma after dogma, unrelated to Christ and his own words and purpose, that was then made canon and overshadowed the original Jesus himself. If you removed Paul and these other doctrines which muddied the waters, Christianity would have seen a far more beautiful history to itself and would likely be followed by many more people today. But sadly, Christians are told their scriptures are the literal Word of God and must be adhered to perfectly, possessing no errors in them at all. The culture overtook the original messenger, and then mutated into something which I don't think resembles what said Messenger wanted for it at all.

>>12283454
>indian (((government)))
https://youtu.be/5gpd8KbvPh8
Fuck (((Gandhi))), desu

>>12286440
Gandhi beat his own wife desupai, I can never respect a "man" like such. Sigh, I hope our cultures remain alive. :(