/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.12474989]

How do the Hindus hold up to the Greeks? Are they the logical second step after starting with the Greeks?

[Anonymous No.12475018]

Argually, they should be the first step. But, I suppose for western people, the Greeks are more familiar.

[Anonymous No.12475058]

Ramayana is the equal of Homer, not read all the Mahabharata.

[Anonymous No.12475079]

Not that great. People like to twist and distort them to make it seem like they had all these sophisticated Western-like philosophical developments, but really, a) most of the texts they are talking about come from the post-Alexandrine, Hellenistic and Bactrian periods, meaning there is plenty of cross-contamination, and b) the only reason they can "find" so much Western-like philosophy in these sources is because they are tainted by the history of Western philosophy and go into it with preconceptions, already looking for things that are "like Democritean atomism" or "like Locke" etc.

Also, a common weeb tactic is to say "Look, Hindus invented _____ before the West did!" by tenuously interpreting some text whose date is mysterious (but is probably post-Greek by centuries). They do this a lot with things in logic, like, trying to show that Hindus or other Asians invented syllogistic inference or whatever.

In reality, while there is a lot of interesting philosophy in the Hindu tradition, it is far less interesting than the Greek and modern Western traditions. The best analogy for understanding Indian philosophy is Western medieval philosophy. Western medieval philosophy is fascinating but it's underappreciated for pretty obvious reasons, not least of which is the tedium of following commentaries on commentaries on commentaries where nobody questions the initial axioms they are debating anymore because they are literally scripture. To the modern or ancient Greek philosophical eye, which is deliberately self-conscious about its ontological commitments and radically open to proof or disproof, that is weird.

You would be most interested in reading Vedic philosophy if you have already read Plato and various followers of Plotinus and you are interested in more Plato-esque metaphysics and mysticism delivered via metaphor. You should only devote a lot of time to it if you are interested in mysticism, in other words, and even then you will probably just be squeezing it into a neo-Platonic framework.

If you are looking for seriously sophisticated philosophy that can stand up to things like phenomenology, you won't find much of it in Indian philosophy. Though some weeaboos will try to convince you that all of Derrida is contained in some Vedic hymn from 800BC (that's actually agreed by scholars to be from around 200AD), and all of phenomenology is really contained in some 1100AD Hindu school. You'll notice that the weebs saying things like this will never actually engage in discussion about the systems they claim Hinduism preempts, because they don't understand them. That is the hallmark of a weeb.

[Anonymous No.12475096]

>>12475079
t. guy who likes his thighs platonically fucked by older men of dubious racial background

lol muhancientgreekfags are insufferably dumb and biased

[Anonymous No.12475097]

>>12474989
>the logical second step after starting with the Greeks?
that would be, undeniably, unequivocally, inarguably, certainly, absolutely, resuming with the romans.

[Anonymous No.12475120]

>>12475058
both are as good as Homer, Mahabharata is even greater in some parts tbqh

[Anonymous No.12475126]

>>12475079
Cringe

[Anonymous No.12475133]

>>12475079
The principle Upanishads predate the Greeks, wtf are you talking about? It's much more likely that the Greeks copied the Indians, they were part of the Persian empire at this point

[Anonymous No.12475152]

Start here, go anywhere

[Anonymous No.12475153]

>>12475079
Cont. you a gamer dude? me and my girlfriend, we're a gamer couple alright? zombies? i don't think so. 2 rounds with the pulse rifle? take em out. i prefer the shotgun tho. shotgun'll- shotgun'll make it's- it's bad news for any zombie. i'll take on the entire zombie apocalypse, just gimme a shotgun. you ready for the zombie apocalypse? you just get back from vidcon? i-i'm goin to comiccon. did you go to the convention? i'm going to comiccon. and i'm gonna meet all my favourite ironman and all my favourite characters are gonna be there and my favourite comicbook artists. yeah i'm really-i'm really souped for uhhhhhhhhhhhhhh diablo iii. when it comes out in 2014. am i right? epic fail blizzard, epic fail... uuhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh just went to a steampunk convention. flew there in uh a steam powered gyro copter with my musket and my corncob pipe and my monocle. and an ascot and a newsie cap aaand doc martens and suspenders. and my characters name is humperdink. that's my character. humperdink. and i'm 32 years old, so i guess he's level 32. aaand i have a kid with my wife. and my wife i could've gotten, if you were gonna use a rating scale to rate women, which is disgusting, and if you do that you're a disgusting person. but my wife is a six point... eh no my wife's a five. i could've gotten a 6.5 uhhh but i'm a disgusting pig. i'm a slob. i smell. i have bad hygeine. she has the worst hygeine, which is why i'm comfortable with her because that's how i- because that's the way.. i'll make that i'll take that choice. i will make that compromise. that's my uuuh yknow. thats what i'll do. i'll forego a 6.5 in favour of a sloppy, 5. because i'm comfortable with the way i smell around her. because i smell really bad. and we have a kid. we have a little baby.. that we shouldn't of had but we did cus i don't know cus i do wanna.. i do wanna yknow. procreate. i wanna yknow. see my- my offspring in the world. cus that's important to the when uhhh you know... aaaaand i gave him some little f****t name. like arcadian. i named my kid arcadian, so that my kid has to suffer my steampunk... desires. but the good news is he'll proberly-probably grow up to be a loser and he'll like his name. he'll like the name arcadian because he'll be so stupid, cus he come from my genetic stock so he'll yknow he'll be wearing rose tinted vampire glasses. at some point. and corduroys. yknow. so it all works out.

[Anonymous No.12475166]

>>12475133
They do not, not unambiguously.
>Mukhya Upanishads, also known as Principal Upanishads, are the most ancient and widely studied Upanishads of Hinduism. Composed between 800 BCE to the start of common era, these texts are connected to the Vedic tradition.
This has been known since Müller and Deussen's philology.

>It's much more likely that the Greeks copied the Indians
This is not scholarly consensus. There has obviously been a lot of study on the subject of "Eastern" influence on the Greek Axial age, almost entirely inconclusive aside from small mentions of gymnosophists here or there, or Aristotle discussing Zoroaster.

What can't be contested is that the very real Greek invasions of Afghanistan and India created a Hellenistic empire in the Kush. I think there were already some Greek communities in that area thanks to the Persians.

>they were part of the Persian empire at this point
Unless you mean Ionia, no. And Ionia only loosely, and for two halves of a century at different times separated by a full century. Are you confusing Persia with Macedonia?

>>12475152
This is a good book though. Gotta take it with a bit of a grain of salt but it's cool.

>>12475153
Yeah, sperg out and spam the thread with unfunny butthurt replies. That'll show people I'm wrong and you're right.

[Anonymous No.12475179]

>>12475166
>Yeah, sperg out and spam the thread with unfunny butthurt replies. That'll show people I'm wrong and you're right.

the irony lololol

[Anonymous No.12475201]

>>12474989
>How do the Hindus hold up to the Greeks?
They are similarly influential (in the east) as the Greeks were to the West. Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, Tantra and innumerable smaller sects and philosophers arose out of the early Hindu period during the 1st millenium BC. The Platonic/Neoplatonic tradition aligns with the Vedic/Vedantic one quite nicely.

"The Upanishads ... are among the noblest and most inspired books in the world; in them, the whole of the Indian wisdom is already contained; later teachers could but expand and comment on them, but in no way departed from this original treasure of wisdom." ... "The Upanishads teach the wisdom of Atma, the Supreme Self of all beings; the same divine Life which Philo of Alexandria later called the Logos, the Divine Mind, the collective spiritual consciousness of our universe. They tell us that, while each of us may seem to be a wanderer and exile, lonely, desolate in our world of shadow and of sorrow, we are in reality neither alone nor desolate, but undivided, unseparated rays of the Universal Self, the Logos. What is needed to secure our immortality—an immortality which is still conditional, until this victory is won—is the realization of our oneness with the Supreme Self. The Upanishads show how, step by step, we may mount the golden stairs; they tell us what we must leave behind; what we must gain, as we tread the small, old path; what we must achieve; with the promise that we shall in the fullness of time be initiated into the fullness of that eternal, universal Supreme Self of all beings. "The whole aim of their teachings is this: to point the path by which the personal self may win immortality and divinity, by becoming united with the Higher Self, which always possessed immortality and divinity."—Charles Johnston

>Are they the logical second step after starting with the Greeks?
Yes I'd say so, if you've already read a lot of Greek philosophy that would prepare you well for it and early Hindu philosophy and related groups are a good stepping stone to the rest of eastern philosophy.

[Anonymous No.12475216]

>>12475058
>a shitskin is the equal of a white man

[Anonymous No.12475222]

>>12475216
> the ancient Aryans
> not white

> Homer
> white

HAHAHAHAHAHAHHA guys, he doesn't know

[Anonymous No.12475242]

>>12475166
>Composed between 800 BCE to the start of common era
So, yeah, they predate the Greeks

[Anonymous No.12475249]

>>12475222
check em

[Anonymous No.12475252]

>>12474989
It depends on what your goal is. The reason why everybody here tells you to start with the Greeks isn’t just because they are awesome or whatever, but because all subsequent arts, literature, philosophy and science in the west is inspired by them. Literature exists in traditions, where newer writers take inspiration from and make references to older writers, and all great authors and thinkers in the so-called western tradition have some foundation in Greek culture. By reading the Greeks you aren’t just getting the direct benefit of those great works, but it then enriches everything else you read from Shakespeare, to Joyce, to Lenin.

While the Hindu literary tradition is surely also great, the fact of the matter is that it’s influence on the literary tradition you are most likely trying to get educated in is non-existent until relatively recently and even then it’s fairly obscure. The first translation of the Bhagavad Gita in the west was into English in 1785, so if you are reading chronologically, that’s when you want to fit it in.


Now obviously if you are trying to take a sort of ‘world literature’ approach, by all means read them first, or after the Greeks or really whenever. There is no logical step as far as reading them after the Greeks, or Hindus first then the Greeks, because they are just altogether different literary traditions that don’t have any mutual influence on each other.


This is also the same reason why the whole ‘start with the Sumerians’/Epic of Gilgamesh is actually pretty silly. Gilgamesh was only discovered around 1850, so even if it’s supremely ancient, it’s role in influencing western literature only starts 170 years ago. Even if it had some sort of subterranean influence, the fact is that people like Plato or Sophocles never made explicit reference to it, nor did any other European writer.

[Anonymous No.12475259]

The Greeks stole everything from the Hindi

[Anonymous No.12475269]

>>12475242
800BCE to 1AD.

When exactly do you think "the Greeks" are? I don't want to do your homework for you, but you might want to start with 600-500BC pre-Socratics and Wikipedia around.

[Anonymous No.12475278]

>>12475269
800 BCE is before 600 BCE. The numbers go up when you go past Jesus

[Anonymous No.12475281]

>>12475252
insightful/10 post

[Anonymous No.12475285]

>>12475166
>They do not, not unambiguously.
Yes they do predate the Greeks anon. Greek philosophy starts in the 6th century BC at the earliest, maybe the late 7th century if you include Anaximander. The Brihadaranyaka and Chandogya Upanishads are usually estimated by scholars to have been composed around the 9th-7th century BC by scholars, predating the very earliest Greek philosophers by 200-300 years. The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad has been estimated before to be as old as 900 BC, not to mention many scholars have openly admitted that they were likely composed out of segments of earlier texts. So even though there is some overlap with the middle ones like Kena, Isa, Tattiriya etc, the earliest Upanishads (which are some of the largest and contain lots of metaphysical/philosophical ideas) predate Greek philosophy by several hundred years.

>What can't be contested is that the very real Greek invasions of Afghanistan and India created a Hellenistic empire in the Kush
Who adopted the already formed doctrines of Buddhism (which itself arose partly in response to much earlier Hindu philosophy)

[Anonymous No.12475286]

>>12475242
>BCE

STOP THIS FUCKING MEME. IT'S B.C.

[Anonymous No.12475294]

>>12475286
this
i literally only see bugmen do this shit

[Anonymous No.12475295]

>>12475278
>to

"This post was written from 1:25PM to 1:30PM." When was the post written?

[Anonymous No.12475299]

>>12475286
t. cucked christian

[Anonymous No.12475314]

>>12475285
Sure, a few Upanishads predate Greek philosophy. As does Eastern Zhou philosophy in a few cases.

As the other guy misunderstood the word "to," somehow, you seem to be missing the word "unambiguously." Dating for the principal Upanishads is usually ambiguous.

>Who adopted the already formed doctrines of Buddhism
Cultures don't develop like upgrades in Age of Empires 2. The fact that there were Hellenistic Greeks in the Kush means that there was probably cultural exchange in all directions. As I originally said, there was cross-contamination, so questions of primacy or obvious influence are probably impossible to establish after that point. That was the point.

No comparable infusion of Hinduism occurred in Greece, let alone in 500BC.

[Anonymous No.12475316]

>>12475299
>Adena K. Berkowitz, when arguing at the Supreme Court opted to use BCE and CE because "Given the multicultural society that we live in, the traditional Jewish designations – B.C.E. and C.E. – cast a wider net of inclusion".
literal jew puppet lmao

[Anonymous No.12475318]

>>12475295
Started at 25 and finished at 30. Much like the Hindus started doing philosophy 200 years before the Greeks

[Anonymous No.12475326]

>>12475314
>few Upanishads predate Greek philosophy
Now that wasn't so hard was it anon?

[Anonymous No.12475335]

I can smell the curry and gyros ITT through my screen.

[Anonymous No.12475342]

>>12475335
>when a litbro discovers there are intellectual cultures in which the Greeks are irrelevant and his world falls apart

[Anonymous No.12475353]

>>12475318
Plato produced the (usually) 1400-page set of dialogues that contain virtually every question in metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics, for all of subsequent history, in less than 50 years. All of them are extant, plus apocrypha. The Indians produced a few Upanishads I can pick up and read in the next three minutes that it takes you to reply, in the old Muscaro edition I have next to me right now. Some of them are even 5-10 pages long!

No one is debating that philosophy existed. As I said in my first post, what is in question is how much there is "in" the Indian philosophical tradition that is radically distinct from the Western. It took centuries after Plato wrote in Greece for the Indians to begin doing recognisable philosophy in earnest, and then, as I said, they were heavily contaminated by Hellenistic rule in the Kush so it's impossible to tell what is original and what isn't. Especially when we can't even date the great Indian sages to within centuries of their floruit.

Many speculative and wisdom traditions existed long before both of these writings were recorded, in East and West. That is not in question. But this is exactly the kind of shit that weebs and Hindu nationalists (with whom I am sympathetic) wrangle about online, instead of actually talking about philosophy, as I said in my very first post. Their wounded national pride or shallow weeabooism makes them shift the goal posts to "India did it first! Greeks didn't convert Buddhists, Buddhists converted Greeks!" like children arguing about whether Superman could defeat Batman.

>>12475326
No, it was so easy I said it in my first post. I shouldn't have used the word "unambiguous," I guess?

[Anonymous No.12475366]

>>12475096
>>12475126
>>12475153
>>12475179
A well-thought out reply, and the majority of the responses are stupid fucking memes and general idiocy. People like you are the reason this board is fucking sewer.

[Anonymous No.12475371]

>>12475366
t. big faggot

[Anonymous No.12475380]

>>12475366
how gay are you, fren

[Anonymous No.12475395]

>>12475079
Firstly, India literally had philosopher-kings in PRACTISE, in the form of the Brahmins, at least 500 years before Plato wrote of them. And the notion of non-dualism, again, was already established in the Vedas long before Plato was even born. Your post makes it seem like you are historically educated, and yet the most basic of facts you seem to have either skipped over, or blatantly distorted.

Secondly, nobody is at all impressed by modern Western philosophy, including that of Locke or Nietzche or Mill or Derrida or any of the other names which are so-respected among them, so please don't play the "Easterners are trying to align their philosophies with Western ones, to associate their impoverished ideas with the superior, Western conceptions!" card which so many on /lit/ attempt to pass. No Easterner has any care for any modern "philosophy" produced by a culture which, following the collapse of the great Grecian culture it was built on, has only been mired in the slavish, incoherent theologies of Christianism (be it the enslavement-doctrines taught by the Church to the masses, or those of Aquinas and his infamously poor "Cosmological Argument"), the hyper-rationality introduced by the Enlightenment, or the utilitarianism, materialism, scientism and nihilism which have settled in since the time after, from Modernity continuing until the Postmodernity we are in today. At no point in Western history could it ever claim to hold a candle to the Easterners in the realm of spirituality, for it has only ever possessed either the meme-precepts of stoicism, the slave-doctrines of Christianity, or the complete death-of-the-spirit that has reigned thereafter, such that today's Western culture cannot be said to have even a strand of spirituality within it.

I assure you that none of these developments, aside from the major scientific discoveries and the basic methodology underpinning the endeavours, are considered impressive to either Easterners or someone who has comprehended their philosophies. It is in fact only now, with consciousness finally coming under the microscope of the ruling investigative body, that the West has finally begun to grasp the truths of nondualism which the Eastern traditions already perfected thousands of years prior. The Dharmic philosophies of the East have not seen such an erratic history for themselves, a schizophrenic cycle of ideological transitions that only evidence the flaws of each preceding era's, therefore needing drastic correction by the next one. (1/2)

[Anonymous No.12475401]

>>12475353
>quantity=quality
Why should we care how much Plato wrote?
Interestingly you are pushing a very typical colonial mindset that if a people didn't work in the same way as the West, it somehow doesn't count. As the Native American land claims were not formalised in the European manner, colonialists did not consider them valid. Likewise, you seem to consider Hindu thought inferior because it does not follow the same scholarly conventions as the West

[Anonymous No.12475406]

>>12475314
>The fact that there were Hellenistic Greeks in the Kush means that there was probably cultural exchange in all directions.
Greek artistic styles are thought to have influenced early Buddhist art but there is not any serious evidence that I'm aware of (and I've looked) that has shown that Greek philosophy influenced Hindu philosophy. The mentions of the Greeks in Indian writings are as people who received Buddhist missionaries, as people who took an interest in Indian mathematics/astronomy and the names of Indo-Greeks kingdoms are of course recorded in some texts, there isn't anything written by Indians about Greek philosophy though and there isn't any instance of a Greek-derived idea appearing that wasn't predicated on earlier Indian thought.

We know that the inverse is true though and that the Greeks were influenced by the Indians, the 4th-3rd BC Clearchus of Soli traveled east and studied Indian thought, the Greeks also recorded that Pyrrho traveled east with Alexander and studied Indian thought and one can easily see in his Pyrrhonism a mirror image of earlier Hindu and Buddhist teachings. The Greeks also recorded that Apollonius traveled to India

>According to Christopher I. Beckwith's analysis of the Aristocles Passage, adiaphora, astathmēta, and anepikrita are strikingly similar to the Buddhist Three marks of existence,[11] indicating that Pyrrho's teaching is based on Buddhism. Beckwith disputes Bett's argument about the translators, as the other reports of using translators in India, involving Alexander the Great and Nearchus, say they needed only one interpreter, and Onesicritus was criticized by other writers in antiquity for exaggerating. Beckwith also contends that the 18 months Pyrrho spent in India was long enough to learn a foreign language, and that the key innovative tenets of Pyrrho's skepticism were only found in Indian philosophy at the time and not in Greece.[12]

[Anonymous No.12475429]

>>12475353
>s I said, they were heavily contaminated by Hellenistic rule in the Kush
There isn't any evidence of Greek thought influencing Hindu philosophy though, Greek ideas are not mentioned in any Hindu texts. The Bactrians were not carrying around copies of Plato's dialogues and proselytizing people with them, they literally converted to Buddhism and adopted Hindu iconography in their coins etc

[Anonymous No.12475439]

>>12475395
The east has taken to the writing of Karl Marx in a pretty big way.

[Anonymous No.12475454]

>>12475353
>The Indians produced a few Upanishads I can pick up and read in the next three minutes that it takes you to reply, in the old Muscaro edition I have next to me right now. Some of them are even 5-10 pages long!
The Mascaro translation skips most of the Brihadaranyaka and Chandogya Upanishads, which are the earliest and together are about 2/3rds of the early Upanishads. Try harder next time.

[Anonymous No.12475455]

>>12475395
>Secondly, nobody is at all impressed by modern Western philosophy, including that of Locke or Nietzche or Mill or Derrida or any of the other names which are so-respected among them, so please don't play the "Easterners are trying to align their philosophies with Western ones, to associate their impoverished ideas with the superior, Western conceptions!" card which so many on /lit/ attempt to pass.
Fucking this, most of these meme philosophers are clowns. Sometimes it's interesting to speculate about parallels to eastern thought but that's as far as it goes.

[Anonymous No.12475456]

>>12475395
Are you the nondualistanon who was planning on writing a book?

[Anonymous No.12475458]

>>12475439
mostly at gunpoint

[Anonymous No.12475468]

>>12475395
The weebs have arrived with their Mystical History of the Orient. Already in your posts you're lying a bunch of times, and making unsourced claims that I'd spend time rebuking only for you to shift the goalposts and dishonestly make ten more.

I'm not arguing with a cultist, especially one I strongly suspect is Guenonfag. I bet you were the one spamming "lolololol" shit earlier, like you usually do when you're having schizo meltdowns. I happily concede the thread.

>We know that the inverse is true
As I said, mainstream scholarship is suspicious of any claims like this. If you want to take rogue Blavatskians like Guenon as writ, that's fine.

>>12475401
Actually I am pushing the opposite mindset, namely that we shouldn't typecast the Noble Hindu as a Sage-Poet who perpetually walks around having mystic revelations and dispensing gnomic wisdom. That is the orientalism and colonial mindset that Edward Said and Raymond Schwab were writing about.

[Anonymous No.12475481]

>>12475079
I'm not sure if you're the same anon who always enters Indian philosophy threads desperate to tell everyone that it's basically just a shallow reformulation of a Parmenidianism (which it both preceded in period, and exceeded in depth), but regardless individuals like yourself will always show that Indian philosophies are beyond the comprehension of most 4channers, whose thought cannot penetrate or precede deeper than that of their beloved, Western™ Greeks, and must instead denigrate philosophies of other origins and ensure the hegemony of the West™ remains in place. Materially, the modern West is superior to the modern East, without question. Spiritually and philosophically, at no point has it ever been. The closest would be that of Plato's, whose foundational notions of idealism, nondualism, philosopher-kings, metempsychosis and otherwise, were, again, already established and expounded on in India well-before he was even born.

I am genuinely begging you to stop spreading the notions that "EAST WANTS TO BE LIKE THE WEST, BUT CAN'T HANDLE THE NOTIONS THAT THE WEST IS BEST". I am Indian in background, and not once in my life have I seen Western philosophies, save for Plato's, as rivalling the depths of Eastern conceptions. The only manner by which Westerners have excelled is in the material systems which they have established, of which I give them full credit, but philosophically and spiritually there is no comparison between them, and we seem to be approaching a future now wherein the conceptions of philosophies like Advaita will become mainstream for the coming eras of Western civilization.

I have also never heard of another person of my background, or another Eastern background, ever try and place claim over Western philosophies. Hindutva drones online are mentally empty to begin with, and their opinions on anything are of no consideration at all. There is no Easterner who genuinely gives a damn about anything of the West beyond the material comforts you have here, possessing a rich and unbroken spiritual tradition spanning thousands of years, just as many Westerners seek to the East for their spiritual systems which have no rival in their own culture, and otherwise enjoy their greater material standards of lifestyle. The West is spiritually destitute and materially bountiful, the East is generally the inverse, and both seek out in eachother what they each lack in. There is no competition, each have already won in their respective arenas.

So please, end these memes. (2/2)

[Anonymous No.12475490]

>>12475468
>I bet you were the one spamming "lolololol" shit earlier
It is the telltale sign of Guenonfag

[Anonymous No.12475496]

>>12475481
>not once in my life have I seen Western philosophies, save for Plato's, as rivalling the depths of Eastern conceptions

this. fuck w*stern scum india is the sacred land of wisdom

http://www.planetcustodian.com/2015/10/19/8134/over-50-scary-images-depicting-filth-of-varanasi-and-river-ganges-that-went-viral-in-china.html

[Anonymous No.12475499]

>>12475286
Nope. The reign of Christendom has finally ended, my friend. Your culture will not be forcefully imposed on me any longer, as much as you desire it to.

[Anonymous No.12475524]

>>12475481
Is this butthurt pajeet pasta?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YM2NQgIG-QM

[Anonymous No.12475527]

>>12475499
>Your culture will not be forcefully imposed on me any longer
As you say in English, on an American forum.

[Anonymous No.12475577]

>>12475458
Who’s gunpoint? Not Europe’s.

[Anonymous No.12475592]

>>12475481
based

[Anonymous No.12475601]

>>12475527
English is a language, and is based. Forcing the entire world to follow a calendar-convention relating to a specific religion? That's cringe, and bluepilled. Unless you'd be willing to follow the same for Krishna, or some other deity, you should see the hypocrisy here.

[Anonymous No.12475607]

>>12475601
You Indians are retarded

[Anonymous No.12475610]

>>12475601
To be fair the west was the only part of the world actually trying to understand and measure astronomical time in the first place so it's kind of a tradeoff, the west invents all of modern science and astronomy and the rest of the world gets to benefit from it but they have to take up our arbitrary base-10 counting system and such

[Anonymous No.12475613]

>>12475481
this feels almost more based than >Finniganswake post

[Anonymous No.12475626]

>>12475592
>>12475613
samefag and poopilled

[Anonymous No.12475640]

>this butthurt westcuck
How does it feel to know in a generation or two your entire tradition will be forgotten anyway

[Anonymous No.12475651]

>>12475626
very unbased of you fren

[Anonymous No.12475681]

>>12475610
>To be fair the west was the only part of the world actually trying to understand and measure astronomical time in the first place
Indian thinkers invented the concept of 0 as mathematical notation and invented algebraic abbreviations, came up with the Pythagorean theorem before Pythagoras, the Fibonacci numbers before Fibonacci and were the first to provide an accurate calculation of the earth's orbit. This is not even we-wuzzing bullshit but these are all mainstream claims that historians agree with, if you doubt any one part of it just ask and I'll provide a source. It's true that western science advanced farther but the Indians were the first to several important concepts.

>>12475626
see pic related

[Anonymous No.12475688]

>>12475681
>I uh, I invented the Pythagorean theorem Robin, hoohoohoo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nmuPJ3Cp9Uk

[Anonymous No.12475690]

>>12475640
India will be Christian soon though, all the lower castes are being converted to proddiestantism.

All the temples will be torn down and replaced with replicas of Noah's ark and arkeologists will be shot for heresy.

[Anonymous No.12475695]

Yakub wasn't black, he was Indian. We invented white people and shit.

[Anonymous No.12475702]

>>12475690
>proddiestantism
>Christian

pick one brofamton

[Anonymous No.12475710]

>>12475688
>The Baudhayana Sulba Sutra, the dates of which are given variously as between the 8th century BC and the 2nd century BC, in India, contains a list of Pythagorean triples discovered algebraically, a statement of the Pythagorean theorem, and a geometrical proof of the Pythagorean theorem for an isosceles right triangle.

>The Apastamba Sulba Sutra (circa 600 BC) contains a numerical proof of the general Pythagorean theorem, using an area computation. Van der Waerden believes that "it was certainly based on earlier traditions". According to Albert Bŭrk, this is the original proof of the theorem; he further theorizes that Pythagoras visited Arakonam, India, and copied it.

https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Famous_Theorems_of_Mathematics/Pythagoras_theorem

[Anonymous No.12475725]

>>12475690
Christians in India are only about 2.3% of the population and have a lower birth rate than both Hindus and Muslims, India won't be Christian anytime soon pal

[Anonymous No.12475743]

>>12475058
>we could have had a comfy thread discussing the great works of Indian literature instead of autists shouting my dad is bigger than your dad
Is the sequence where Hanuman sneaks through the demon Palace in his search for Sita, and he inspects all the sleeping qts and the luxury and the wealth, dare I say it, the greatest piece of sustained descriptive writing in human history

[Anonymous No.12475790]

>>12474989
LMFAO india is fucking stinky dude. smells like curry and cigarettes lmaoooo. you want me to read philosophy froom a stinky country lmfao. ill read ther "vedas" after theyll learn to use the toilet lol. what wisdom is to gain from india bro? how to cook disgusting overy spicie food that comes out faster than it comes in? LOL. im smirking so hard right now lmfao. what wisdom is to gain from india bro? how to not step in shit when you go for a walk? LOOOOL how to worship the cows? lmfao get real

[Anonymous No.12475799]

>>12475710

[Anonymous No.12475805]

>>12475790
based guenonfag sending chills down my spine with his mental illness

[Anonymous No.12475818]

>>12475743
Could you post of reasonably good English translation of this Hanuman scene? I'm very curious to read it

[Anonymous No.12475835]

>>12475395
can't handle the fact that*
Sorry, my phoneposting results in many awkward sentences. Also, I concede Plato's idealism (regarding abstract objects) to be unrivalled by any other, and the foundational basis of Western thought since, but many of his other conceptions were indeed preceded and better elaborated by the Indian disciplines, like transmigration-of-the-soul, philosopher-kings, and so on. The way I see it is that Brahman of Vedanta is very much like the Realm-of-Forms which (I believe) Plato thought entered matter as a result of desire.

>>12475468
Ah, there you are. So it's you. The one whose entire conception of Eastern spirituality has come to him through the lens of Western orientalists, like Blavatsky and presumably Guenon, whose views he then somehow considers to be the same as the original philosophies themselves. I don't know what to tell you, friend. Firstly, I'm not a Guenonist, I literally don't know anything about him besides his idosyncratic appearance. Secondly, you made some comments in your post that I considered incorrect, and I offered my correction of them. You then claimed me to be lying, and not even worthy of a response. How ever will a discussion function, if you proceed in such a manner? Regardless, I genuinely don't know why you seem to despise Eastern ideologies. Are you Christian? Is it an inferiority-feeling, or that Christianity has waned in influence here in the West, while Buddhism and Advaita have gained some? Or do you have some kind of gripe with Eastern peoples? Why can't you just respect another culture's tradition of philosophy, unbiasedly, without favoritism or denigration compared to your own? You realize these cultures don't even matter, right, and the ideas within them are colorless? Why must everything become a battle between civilizations? Regardless, I am not a scholar or as familiar with the history of these cultures like you are, and won't claim to know the ins-and-outs of what scholars are saying about these cultures (and if my earlier statements are wrong, then my mistake), but it just seems to me that you harbor some kind of distaste for Eastern philosophies, and I'm not sure why.

>>12475456
How could you tell? It fascinates me how much of an inescapable signature our writing styles are, that we can recognize strangers on the internet by them over spans of time.

Anyway, another successful thread showcasing the fact that 4chan will never, ever show respect for any Indian traditions of wisdom. This will likely never change, and anyone interested in said traditions should look elsewhere than here for information on them. I really don't understand why the people here can't open their conceptual borders to non-Western systems of thought, especially when the Grecian and Semitic cultures which they today see as "Western" have no relation to eachother in culture or philosophy. (save for whatever aspects of Greek culture entered into Christianity)

[Anonymous No.12475836]

>>12475058
I would argue that The Mahabharata is far better than Homer and also dwarfs The Ramayana.

[Anonymous No.12475877]

>>12475835
>I'm not a Guenonist

the saga of guenonfag continues

[Anonymous No.12475911]

>>12475835
>How could you tell?
My friend, it's me! We spoke recently on another thread, where I shared some internal predicament, and you helped with your kind and thoughtful advice.

Are you Indian by any chance? The would be a great confidence, given I'm Indian too. Your posts have been too good for this thread, dear friend.

[Anonymous No.12475919]

>>12475877
Yeah, not once did I mention Guenon, and only after you (or the other anon) brought him up did I state his name, claiming to know nothing about him besides his appearance. I have no understanding of the history behind that poster, or why people here mention him so much, but I'm not him and I've given you no reason to think that I am. Are you saying that anyone who speaks of Eastern philosophy must be one, single poster, with a motive of spreading his own personal mentor around? Can't others comment on the concepts which Guenon seemingly commented about himself?

[Anonymous No.12475924]

>>12475911
>given I'm Indian too.
The curry infestation is real

[Anonymous No.12475925]

>>12475799
that's one date, others estimate it as far back as the 7th century BC and say the author was born around 800 BC, most sources give this date, the one you quote seems to be one an exception see:

http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Baudhayana.html

>The Baudhayana sūtras are a group of Vedic Sanskrit texts which cover dharma, daily ritual, mathematics, etc. They belong to the Taittiriya branch of the Krishna Yajurveda school and are among the earliest texts of the sutra genre, perhaps compiled in the 8th to 7th centuries BCE.[1]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baudhayana_sutras

[Anonymous No.12475958]

>>12475919
The reason Guenon is always mentioned by these clowns despite nobody mentioning him until they did is that eastern philosophy on /lit/ started to get more popular around the same time Guenon did. As a last resort when people have no other argument they will bring up people like Blavatsky, Guenon, Evola etc to try to smear eastern philosophy by association or to derail the discussion, it's all very transparent.

[Anonymous No.12475983]

>>12475958
This. Stop fucking mentioning The Theosophy Gang (Blavatsky, Guenon, Evola) and these threads will return to normal. I swear there used to be real Sanskritists and thoughtful Buddhists here.

[Anonymous No.12476002]

>>12475835
>4chan will never ever show respect for indian thought
This is 4chan. No respect is given freely. And you were the one starting the we wuz dick-waving contest when you summarily dismissed the entire western philosophical tradition as inferior to the east...

[Anonymous No.12476029]

>>12475640
More wishful thinking from inferior people. It's pathetic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s6Lznha9EQ0

[Anonymous No.12476034]

>>12475818
The Penguin Classic Ramayana is a genuinely good accessible translation for a newbie, about as readable as the Fagles Homer, although it's in prose. Slightly abridged, but the original is very long

[Anonymous No.12476039]

>>12475079
Quite possibly the most based post on /lit/. Streetshitters BTFO

[Guenonfag™ No.12476051]

>>12475983
There is nothing wrong with openly discussing those people themselves if people are genuinely interested in talking about them, (inb4 im guenonfag) but yes they don't need to be brought up in every single thread about eastern thought, and the primary issue here is people mentioning them in bad faith as a way to smear the other side. Setting aside all stupid arguments about the comparative value of each, for all those authors flaws they have functioned for a subset of /lit/ as an intro to eastern thought that led people to start reading it who otherwise never would have and for that at least I applaud them.

HAIL GUENONFAG HAIL REACTIONARY THOUGHT HAIL THE CASTE SYSTEM KILL POSTMODERN IDEALOGUES FUCK MODERNITY AND FUCK JANNIES

[Anonymous No.12476068]

>>12476034
Also, public domain translations of Indian lit are like public domain translations of anything. Its all filtered through some. Victorian anglos sensibilities. Ramayana is very sexually frank and open (especially the section with Hamuman in the harem) and they cut all that shit out. Thousand and One nights has the same problem, you need an up to date unbowlderized edition.

[Anonymous No.12476076]

>>12474989
Would it be a good idea to start with the Upanishads? If it is a good place to start, is there a good seller for buying them? Are they usually put in one book or is it a multiple volume thing? Also is there a good audio book for it, in case I decide to just listen to it on my commute?

[Anonymous No.12476107]

>>12476076
Radnakrishnan's 'The Principal Upanishads' has complete and unabridged copies of all the major Upanishads in addition to the most number of minor Upanishads, the other editions have less minor ones or abridged versions of the majors, it's by far the best version IMO. I think it's in one 800 or 900 page book

[Anonymous No.12476169]

>>12476002
I was only responding directly to the comments by the other anon, dispelling the same notions he had put forward. Is it some kind of lie to proclaim that the philosophies of Locke, Mill, Nietzche and otherwise are rather shallow compared to the ruminations of something like Advaita, and the commentaries by Shankaracharya? Plato is a divine genius, and I give him full credit for his unrivaled idealism, involving a previously unseen (save for maybe Pythagoras) comprehension of the significance and nature of abstract objects like those within the realm of mathematics. But it is again a basic fact that currents of his own thought were preceded in the Indians, such as his belief that philosophers/enlightened ones should rule over society as kings, or that the soul migrates from body to body - both of these notions existed prior to him, and were more-fully expounded on, within the Indian cultures.

>>12475911
Dear friend, I presume you are who I believe you are, though I won't mention your personal details here. Have you gained a greater certainty of yourself, and what you desire to do? But yes, I'm Indian as well. Not that it matters though, since I only view the philosophical content itself and not the cultural surroundings from which it originated.

[Anonymous No.12476193]

>>12475259
/thread

[Anonymous No.12476227]

>>12474989
I'm sure the Eastern tradition has many interesting ideas but the Western tradition is my tradition and I have been shaped by it thus while I might tour Eastern thought I only understand it as an 'after.'

[Anonymous No.12476260]

>>12475286
nothing wrong with "before common era" and "common era"

don't worry, you can still believe in god. it's fine

[Anonymous No.12476303]

>>12476260
There is something wrong with it. The push to change from BC to BCE is ideological and anti-Christian. It doesn't even make any sense on a historical level because before Christ we reckoned years by how long the current ruler was in power, and because Jesus is the eternal King it's currently 'the year of our Lord 2019' instead of the 'the 2nd year of Trump'. This "common era" stuff is nothing more than PC garbage.

[Anonymous No.12476693]

>>12475395
>Brahmins
>Toward a history of the Brahmins: Current research in the area is fragmentary. The state of our knowledge of this fundamental subject is preliminary, at best. Most Sanksrit works are a-historic or, at least, not especially interested in presenting a chronological account of India's history. When we actually encounter history, such as in Rajatarangini or in the Gopalavamsavali of Nepal, the texts do not deal with brahmins in great detail.

[Anonymous No.12476708]

>>12476034
(different anon)
Penguin Classics does two, Arshia Sattar's and R.K. Narayan's, which do you mean?

Advice for anyone interested: if you're going to buy Sattar's translation, try to get it second hand, the newer "20th anniversary edition" is exactly the same but with larger font size and a higher price tag.

[Anonymous No.12476766]

>>12476693
The Dharma-sastra texts that have survived down to today start from around the 6th-5th century BC and discuss the castes and their roles and activities in great detail. These texts are predicated on and constantly reference older texts discussing the same topics which have been lost to time. The Brahmanical system is also mentioned in the Pali Canon which was assembled from oral records of Buddha's teachings in the 6th century BC. The Brahmanical system did not spring up out of nowhere in the 6th century (around the time of Plato) but from them being mentioned in both Buddhist texts and the Dharma-sastras dating from that period and from the older texts referenced in the Dharma-sastras we can infer that it had been going on for quite some time. The Brihadaranyaka Upanishad of the 9th-8th century BC mentions the Brahmins being supreme and the Kshatriyas paying respects to them. When the Greek diplomat Megasthenes traveled to and spent time in India around 300 BC, he remarked that the Brahmins were an example of philosopher-kings in practice.

nice try though

[Anonymous No.12476820]

>>12476766
Not him, but terrific rebuttal. My question to you is how the heck you memorize so much? You guys in this thread are all so well-read, somehow keeping a store of so many historical facts, of textual resources, of scholarly translations and their related details, and so much more. Do you guys read up on this stuff, every day or something? Is this what you devote much of your life towards? How do you keep such a library of information within you? I have tried to read into history before,, and I faul miserably at it. I can't keep track of it all - dates, cultures, peoples, migrations, scriptures, scholars, and everything else is a swirling mass of information to me, that I can neither follow nor remember. Does it come extremely naturally to you guys, and am I likely just mentally handicapped in a sense?

[Anonymous No.12476915]

>>12476766
I usually see the Shastras dated later, from 2nd century BC up to 3rd century AD. Also the Pali Canon was settled about the 1st century BC, though the content is older. Otherwise, excellent reply.

[Anonymous No.12477020]

>>12476820
When you spend enough time on 4chan or have been going on it periodically for enough years you start to see the same arguments over and over again. Asserting that something dates from way later than people think or that it only arose in response to something else (like Buddhism for example with regard to Hindu philosophy) is a common tactic people use to try to argue against or delegitimize something, the reason I'm familiar with all these dates is mostly because I've seen so many arguments about eastern philosophy on 4chan (and between scholars in their books, they sometimes like to snipe at each other) that in the course of investigating whether some people are right I inevitably began to develop an understanding of what the scholars mostly agree about the chronology. Of course I learned some of it from books that I was just reading for enjoyment although I wouldn't pay attention to the dates as much if people weren't constantly trying to argue "well actually X is fake and gay because it just comes from Z" about every topic.

[Anonymous No.12477037]

>>12474989
Much better than the Greeks because they're better preserved and older.

[Anonymous No.12477050]

>>12476766
Not the guy you're replying to, but what you said doesn't invalidate what he said necessarily. A priestly caste that curates and redacts the major corpus of cultural texts for any given culture is obviously going to exploit that privilege to interpret and "correct" texts in ways that support their own status as the sole interpreters and correctors of texts. This is evident in the Jewish tradition for example, basically contemporary with the collation of the Vedic canon, where you have to dig back through multiple layers and sub-layers of redaction and painstakingly reconstruct the history of the texts themselves as they passed through various hands, dynasties, and so on. The Vedas are no exception to this, but especially the Hindu commentarial traditions are no exception because they were more malleable and intertextual by far.

So yeah, early texts attest aspects of the Brahmanical "system," though the Rgvedas are generally considered by scholarship to be largely ignorant of it, ostensibly dating it roughly to the handful of centuries before 600-500BC. But that system, like anything, developed piecemeal, and there is no necessary or direct correlation between attestation in the documents we have and actual historical power or preeminence of the Brahmans at the time of the documents' composition.

Take two analogous cases from Rome. Roman coins notoriously depict the opposite of what is intended: a coin that says "Wealth and Prosperity!" probably means famine in that year, and "Loyalty of the Soldiers" probably means the soldiers were massively bribed that year to the point that it bankrupted the empire. Similarly, the Roman senate continued to take down the acts and minutes of the senate well into the fifth century, centuries and centuries after they had been completely irrelevant to imperial politics, and were practically an epiphenomenon of imperial decrees. But they were convinced of their own power, pedigree, and importance, so they trumpeted it and maintained their records. Another example: Most research on the late medieval French aristocracy's cultural self-attestations (for example in plays) is linked to the fact that they knew they were dying, gradually being squeezed out of existence by the rising absolutist monarchy. They were mourning their passing, unconsciously, and so they became more self-conscious than they ever were about who and what they were.

[Anonymous No.12477053]

>>12476820
People don't remember things like you seem to believe. They remember some facts but mostly concepts and the general vicinity of where to look if you want to re-remember certain facts.

Just like I remember there were some Greeks that spoke of the dark Southern Indians as "Ethiopians" and it would take seconds to look it up, but I don't know their name right now. I'd look it up though if I wanted to make a point about it on /lit/

[Anonymous No.12477058]

>>12474989
not the second step, but an alternative one

[Anonymous No.12477060]

>>12477050
To take one example off the top of my head, which I read in Müller ages ago, almost all the early narrative and epic texts of the Vedic period show considerable signs of tampering to highlight the position and preeminence of the Brahmans. In certain texts there will be Kshatriyas doing things that it is literally blasphemous for anyone but a Brahman to do, so the Brahmans will include extra-textual workarounds that reveal the Kshatriya's background was really Brahmanic all along. Many things like that. This is very, very similar to the layers of redaction and re-interpretation we see in the Old Testament, which is of course composed of older texts, originally oral, that need to be continually modified as they pass down. The Homeric epics are another great example of this, and they're more of a strange jumble of Archaic, pre-Archaic/Dark Age, and early Mycenaean social norms in Greece.

Most texts prior to modern conceptions of textual fidelity, print editions, and fixed historical authorship are "living" texts, and are always in some sort of flux. Bits of Plotinus were considered part of the Aristotelian corpus for hundreds of years. It was completely normal to straight up claim to be someone who had been dead for centuries when you wrote something in ancient Rome. Just read the beginning of Ernest Renan's Life of Jesus for his textual criticism of the New Testament synoptic gospels, which are famously composed by a motley crew of Pseudo-Apostles. Even the inclusion of four "canonical" gospels in the first place, with different and even conflicting accounts, points to the problems of reconciling living textual traditions.

Such things are all common throughout history. One should be suspicious of Brahmanism not only because of all this, but in particular because it is intertwined with modern Indian nationalism and with the special focused placed upon Vedanta as the "orthodox" Indian by nationalists since the Indian national awakening. Caste, nondualist metaphysics, the extreme historical primacy of Brahmans, and so on, all received massive emphasis in the self-styling of India in the last century and a half. In other words, there were concerted efforts to identify Indian history as such with very particular aspects of its actual, overall history. Buddhists certainly don't appreciate those efforts, for instance.

[Anonymous No.12477064]

>>12475640
It hurts.

[Anonymous No.12477089]

>>12476915
Yes, I should have clarified that Buddha was thought to have taught around the 6th century but that the PC was assembled and finalized hundreds of years later. It's a less concrete record of what he actually said than what most people assume, although the Brahmin priests are mentioned often enough and present enough of a polemical target that I don't think they were later additions. The reconstruction of pre-canonical Buddhism from how it's presented in the Theravada and Mahayana canons and how this interacted with Hinduism is a very interesting topic which I need to do more reading on.

[Anonymous No.12477175]

We don't host these threads often, but now that a rare one is here, can we please be friendly to eachother? The major foundational philosophy of the Western tradition and one of the major foundational cultures of the Eastern traditions - two respective titans which have since shaped their subsequent societies - can we please be civil between ourselves? Remembering that knowledge is itself beyond any culture, that ideas are themselves colorless?

[Anonymous No.12477189]

>>12477175
it's my dharma to troll faggy orientalist hippies and i must execute it with detachment, so sorry no

[Anonymous No.12477228]

>>12477175
yes

[Anonymous No.12477498]

>>12476169
I like Locke, Mill and Nietzsche. Are they shallow solely cause they are materialist? Materialism can go deep. Personally I find the religious elements of Plato less than compelling. Metempsychosis seems a fairytale. Religious experience a hallucination. Though a joyous one. And one must note that within Plato's republic the caste system is not strictly hereditary and more meritocratic thus preferable in my opinion to that of the Indians.

[Anonymous No.12477518]

>>12476303
'year of our lord' didn't start until more than a millenium after the death of the omnipresent time-transcending carpenter. on a historical level, if you want everything you do to center on Christ, you shouldn't worry too much about tiny details like CE vs. AD. redde cesari quae sunt cesaris and all that. a year marker is a matter for communicating with other people in this world. God doesn't give one wit which you use before you get to Heaven

[Anonymous No.12477549]

>>12476169
>Locke, Mill, Nietzche

you never read any of them, and can't prove that you did

[Anonymous No.12477551]

>>12477498
Not necessarily for being materialist, but in Locke's case it was a terrible misunderstanding of the nature of concepts, Mill's a severely restrictive and internally flawed model of human behavior, and Nietzche a literal proto-comic book conception of reality (Ubermenschen, Eternal Recurrence, etc) that for some reason, perhaps due to his talent at writing, has been taken seriously since then despite amounting to no more than an adolescent fantasy, in depth. These are just my opinions, of course. Each of these philosophers has some virtues to them, as I see it, but they are all highly incomplete in their models of reality, and certainly of limited depth when taken as a whole.

I won't comment on your other comments, since they are your own judgements and unrelated to what was mentioned earlier. Though personally, I will add that Varna, which later became Caste, was not on the basis of one's heriditary features, but instead on the intrinsic nature of a person, in terms of their inclinations and talents. Though I'm not personally preferring either Plato's system or that of the Hindu's, of which I am neutral to both.

[Anonymous No.12477559]

>>12477551
it's genuinely sad that you're so many levels deep in posturing that you don't even feel shame anymore for pretending to have read these philosophers

[Anonymous No.12477563]

>>12477551
Interesting criticisms. Isn't eternal recurrence essentially found in vedic thought as well however?

[Anonymous No.12477575]

>>12477559
Why do you claim this? Why would I not have, given their fame, and recency?

>>12477563
The notion of cyclical universes are, and perhaps reincarnation may parallel, but I don't think that matches Nietzche's concept at all.

[Anonymous No.12477590]

>>12477575
>Nietzche a literal proto-comic book conception of reality (Ubermenschen, Eternal Recurrence, etc)

because you're either a teenager or the saddest wikipedia regurgitator ever. i really hope you're just young, otherwise you're hopeless.

[Anonymous No.12477628]

>>12477590
Maybe not everyone believes mustache-man to have actually held that coherent a view of reality? Perhaps not everyone considers intellectual someone that you yourself likely do? You realize many criticize Nietzche for the same, of being a cultural commentator that somehow weaseled his way into being seen as a profound philosopher?

[Anonymous No.12477639]

>>12475079
The Chan and Daoist schools discuss phenomenology you sperg faggot; its bad because its garbage prose written by insects not because its not rigorous enough

[Anonymous No.12477660]

>>12477590
>e-everyone who disagrees with daddy Nietzche either h-hasn't read him or just didn't get him reeee!!!!!
Get a grip on yourself anon Nietzche was a funny writer who had some amusing takedowns of certain people and things but was not a very impressive philosopher, he was specifically reacting against his own conceptions of the problems of western society, and while he had SOME valid points in that regard, he still came up with laughable conclusions about those matters, to say nothing of that he barely understood eastern thought at all (ironically enough despite barely reading anything from it he still praised Buddhism as better than Christianity and spoke approvingly of the Brahmins), people who think he described some eternal truth valid to all cultures and times or that he really nailed the essence of things are extremely cringe-worthy, he is more interesting as a window into a specific world-view.

[Anonymous No.12477664]

>>12474989
that's not how it works mate
the start with the greeks thing came about bc all classical education is based around the greeks

[Anonymous No.12477686]

>>12477590
Funny you mention "teenager" here, since it's mostly teenagers that first read Nietzche, and form the majority of his fanbase. The guys on 9GAG, for example, love him.

[Anonymous No.12477693]

>>12475018
Correct.

[Anonymous No.12477724]

>>12477628
there's nothing wrong with dismissing nietzsche, it's just that that poster didn't do it and revealed himself to be a posturing faggot in the process.

>You realize many criticize Nietzche for the same, of being a cultural commentator that somehow weaseled his way into being seen as a profound philosopher?
no, that's what you and the other retard aren't really appreciating. no one does this. the only people who do this are people like stephen pinker and they're rightly mocked for it, because it reveals that they simply don't know enough to make a critique in the first place.

but you two morons already know that, which is why i said it's sad.

also, your misspellings are consistent across these two posts: >>12477660 >>12477628 you fucking indian moron.

[Anonymous No.12477730]

>>12477050
>>12477060
You make valid points, but there still isn't any major evidence that the Brahmins were not the rough equivalent of philosopher kings throughout much or most of the 1st millenium BC and to claim otherwise is to substantiate a massive conspiracy spanning an entire sub-continent over thousands of years across dozens of languages. The idea of Brahmins as such is found throughout many Hindu texts beginning with the earliest Upanishads (and they are described as preeminent above the Kshatriyas even in the Vedas) and is consistent with most of the other themes and ideas in Hinduism. Yes of course there were times when Brahmins and Ksatriyas struggled for power and influence but the base hypothesis that the Brahmins were not what the tradition holds them to be does not have enough evidence to substantiate it, only conjecture about how it 'might have been possible'.

Philosopher-king does not necessarily exclusively refer to Brahmins ruling large kingdoms like a literal king but it also refers to how Brahmins would hold the primary position in individual cities, towns and small villages and would often combine the functions of priest, village headmaster, adjudicator, diviner, herbalist and healer all in one. This pattern is so consistent throughout history and the texts that the idea that they were not doing so in the 9th-8th century BC hundreds of years before Plato remains an unsubstantiated hypothesis which is not enough to deflate the point that the Indians came up with the concept of philosopher-kings before Plato, although I agree you bring up valid points and there was likely an interplay back and forth between them throughout history.

[Anonymous No.12477732]

>>12477724
actually, they're consistent across all three posts:
>>12477660 >>12477628 >>12477686

i'm sure this is you as well >>12477639

what is it with you fuckers and samefagging? do you have no theory of mind, or something? is that why you assume others don't have it? is this the same reason you try to date women by posting "U r so hot babby plz be my wife" in random youtube comments sections?

[Anonymous No.12477735]

>>12477724
kek

[Anonymous No.12477741]

>>12477732
you suck at this bro

[Anonymous No.12477748]

>>12477735
>3+ posts in a row written in the exact same babbling shitskin cadence, all attacking "Nietzche"

i'm sure they teach you how to edit a jpg or use inspect element in the Code Diaper where you're from, pajeet

i can't even hate you or be angry at how stupid you are, because it's so clearly because you're indian. whatever is wrong with you is almost certainly genetic. what a sad continent.

[Anonymous No.12477763]

>>12476766
Okay, what did these great leaders do?
What did the society look like?
What was their greatest art?
What was their greatest myth and philosophy?
Sell me on their superiority.

[Anonymous No.12477772]

>>12477724
>>12477732
Incredibly cringeworthy display, friend. Such embarassments are what excessive ego will do to you, and I think you would benefit greatly from reading into the humbling Indian philosophy you so-despise - remembering that medicine is not about what tastes great, but what is good for you.

Sadly my phone has no screenshot capacity, else I'd disprove your point even further, like these anons >>12477735
>>12477741 have already done.

[Anonymous No.12477785]

To the surprise of scientists, even samples from posh areas like Connaught Place were found to be infected with bacteria.

Other famous markets where samples were tested include Rajouri Garden main market, Rajendra Place, and Subash Nagar. The normal Most Probable Number (MPN) of coliform bacteria is 50 or less as per the Central Pollution Control Board, but it was found to be over 2,400 in the samples of branded burger, vegetarian and non-vegeterian momos and other food items.

The bacterial pathogens commonly found in street eateries are Bacillus cereus (causes vomiting and diarrhoea), Clostridium perfringens (abdominal cramps and diarrhoea), Staphylococcus aureus (vomiting, appetite loss, abdominal cramps and mild fever), and Salmonella species (typhoid, food poisoning, irritation and inflammation in the gastrointestinal tract).

“This is a matter of great concern. I would never eat street food after reading this report,” said Dr Shobha Broor, microbiologist at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS).

“The report literally means that whatever we eat, we are ingesting faeces.”

>According to the Public Health Association, only 53% of Indians wash their hands with soap after defecating; 38% do so before eating and only 30% before preparing food.

[Anonymous No.12477791]

>>12477763
It's you being out of your comfort zone which is driving you into a thread about Greek and Indian philosophy and causing you to demand that people give you the answers. I have a deep appreciation for Indian thought and I rest contented in my knowledge of it's virtues, I have no interest in wasting my time trying to convince people who or may not argue in good faith but rest assured if you do the research and reading yourself you'll soon find out why so many people on /lit/ appreciate them. The Buddhist parable about the poisoned arrow applies to your question.

[Anonymous No.12477795]

>>12477772
your english teacher did a very bad job.

>embarrassing, not embarassing
>so despise, not so-depise
>"humbling" used incorrectly
>awkward shitskin idiom translated hamfistedly

stay in your shit smelling country.

[Anonymous No.12477798]

>>12477763
Nobody's selling anyone on any culture's lone superiority. We're merely contrasing the commonplace Greek conceptions which undergird Western civilization with those of the Hindu/Indian ones, which form the basis for theirs. One can certainly argue for superiority of certain ideologies to others, but it would be very immature to turn this into a clash of civilizations. And yet, people are sadly still turning it into such.

[Anonymous No.12477805]

>>12477763
It's a myth. He thinks "philosopher kings" ruled Indian villages, lol.

[Anonymous No.12477815]

>>12477748
You have 2 or 3 times in a row accused people of samefagging and been proven wrong repeatedly, it's just cringe-inducing to watch my friend. I replied with this post here >>12477741 literally 1 minute and 49 seconds after you posted it with a screencap proving you wrong, nowhere near enough time to edit it without there being obvious discrepancies. If you imagine that you are arguing "to save western philosophy" by proxy or some other silly nonsense you'd do well to stop before you keep embarrassing yourself

[Anonymous No.12477841]

We're communicating using a European language (English). We grew up surrounded by Greek-derived culture. Even our sciences, mathematics, and arts-related terminology come from Greek (like hyperbole, prism, comedy, or anaesthetic). For us, what Plato wrote about is quite familiar to us, even if somewhat old-fashioned, whereas the Upanishads and Vedas seem like exotic wisdom. Thomas Jefferson and Alan Turing were both equally well acquainted with Aristotelian classifications of nature, either directly or indirectly.
For us, starting with the Indians may expose us to a very varied and even quite interesting culture, but it won't help us understand the historical context for Shakespeare or Kant the way Ovid and Aquinas will. It's like a treasure chest that's got lots of gold coins that we'll never be able to use to pay for stuff with elsewhere. It just doesn't feel as rewarding.

[Anonymous No.12477847]

>>12477795
Oh, I severely apologize my 4chanon, for not ensuring that quickly-written posts from my phone are completely-free of any errors, so that your lack-of-actual-arguments and failed-attempts-at-proving-samefagging can next time go unnoticed, instead of embarassing you severely, as they have already done. You've won anon; I made spelling and grammatical errors, while you made no coherent arguments and a successfully-failed false-flag.

[Anonymous No.12477851]

>>12474989

Indian prime minister claims genetic science existed in ancient times.
Narendra Modi gives examples of Karna and Ganesha to support view that cosmetic surgery and reproductive genetics used thousands of years ago.
Indian Gods are real ,unlike fake western Gods.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/28/indian-prime-minister-genetic-science-existed-ancient-times

Read Hindu Texts before everything else.

[Anonymous No.12477854]

>>12477841
Wow, a good post, that accurately reflects a mindset that many Westerners are likely to have. Why can't more comments in this thread have been like this?

[Anonymous No.12477857]

>>12477847

[Anonymous No.12477862]

>>12474989 (OP)

Indian prime minister claims genetic science existed in ancient times.
Narendra Modi gives examples of Karna and Ganesha to support view that cosmetic surgery and reproductive genetics used thousands of years ago.
Indian Gods are real ,unlike fake western Gods.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/28/indian-prime-minister-genetic-science-existed-ancient-times

Read Hindu Texts before everything else.

[Anonymous No.12477872]

>>12475601
English sucks as the lingua franca because it's thematically confused between the Romance, Germanic and Hellenic worldviews. Our minds are muddled because there's no metaphysical clarity in the concepts we're trying to convey.

[Anonymous No.12477880]

>>12477805
argue with Megasthenes and tell him that what he reported seeing in 300 BC is wrong, not me

[Anonymous No.12477882]

Many Westernists™ in here are going to be deeply upset to see philosophies like panpsychism and similar take over their culture in future, and it becoming mainstream to see people reading into Advaita and other conceptions from the East that have long-spoken of such realities (though panpsychism is still incorrect and missing the mark). For any of you out there that can't stand the notion of Eastern concepts becoming popular in your beloved West, because you see life as some kind of a duel between different civilizations, I would recommend you find a way to bare such an unfortunate state of society before it arrives. Earplugs, blindfolds, and similar kinds of apparatus may assist in this endeavour.

[Anonymous No.12477887]

>>12477854
Because people get emotionally bound up in the idea of their favorite sports team being the best

[Anonymous No.12477888]

>>12477862
lol

[Anonymous No.12477890]

>>12477882
dude all your indian bullshit already came in and went out of fashion in the 60s, you're like two generations behind the times buddy

[Anonymous No.12477922]

>>12477890
Again, sadly that isn't the case, and you should find ways to prepare yourself for the coming era of nondualism-made-mainstream, which will definitely promote, whether directly or indirectly, individuals looking into Eastern conceptions of reality. You can't leave your dear civilization, of course, else your problems would be solved. So instead, try and find a way to face the absolutely dreadful, nightmarish prospect of ideas neither Grecian nor Semitic in origin entering your beloved culture, and hopefully it won't be more than a passing-fad and that glorious Grecian-Semitic™ conceptions return again soonafter.

[Anonymous No.12477924]

>>12477890
You've just outed yourself as a pleb, a true patrician would be up to date on the latest philosophical developments and would be aware panpsychism is gaining ground among western scholars and philosophical departments

>Interest in panpsychism has grown in part thanks to the increased academic focus on consciousness itself following on from Chalmers’ “hard problem” paper. Philosophers at NYU, home to one of the leading philosophy-of-mind departments, have made panpsychism a feature of serious study. There have been several credible academic books on the subject in recent years, and popular articles taking panpsychism seriously.
https://qz.com/1184574/the-idea-that-everything-from-spoons-to-stones-are-conscious-is-gaining-academic-credibility/

>Is the Universe Conscious?
>Some of the world's most renowned scientists are questioning whether the cosmos has an inner life similar to our own.
https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/universe-conscious-ncna772956

>Neuroscientists and many philosophers have typically planted themselves firmly on the materialist side. But a growing number of scientists now believe that materialism cannot wholly explain the sense of "I am" that undergirds consciousness, Kuhn told the audience.
https://www.livescience.com/53791-what-is-consciousness.html


https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/spacetime-emergence-panpsychism-and-the-nature-of-consciousness/

[Anonymous No.12477938]

>>12477924
and Sanskrit is the language of Supercomputers.

[Anonymous No.12477963]

>>12477805
Not any sort of argument. The equivalent of Philosopher-kings were in-practise within India before Plato ever even wrote of them, and if you can't offer rebuttal to this, you shouldn't muddy the waters of discourse.

[Anonymous No.12478027]

>>12477963
Dharma is not the same as αρετη. Plato encouraged people to seek knowledge as virtue, not to fulfill their divine religious duties. Even if you wanted to compare Indian philosophy to Greek philosophy, you'd never be able to find anything like Platonic virtue or Socratic dialectic in India. It just wasn't part of Indian thought. They never went beyond "What is the best possible way to live so as to reach liberation?" over to "What is good in itself?".

[Anonymous No.12478046]

>>12478027
Who is even claiming such? The discussion regarding philosopher-kings and their pre-existence in-practise within India before Plato. No clue why you brought up what you just did.

[Anonymous No.12478060]

Why is /lit/ so racist ?

[Anonymous No.12478081]

>>12478046
Then don't call them philosopher-kings. They were not philosophers in the narrow Greek sense of the word. They probably studied the Vedas and engaged in epistemological questions and stuff, but they had absolutely no relation to Parmenideian dialectic. They sought not for a perfectly free truth in itself for itself, but rather a "truth" which reinforces prior religious beliefs.

[Anonymous No.12478083]

>>12474989
To any anons here, if someone were writing their own personal philosophy, whose influences were from both Indian and Greek philosophy, would it be a sin to therefore combine the concepts of each into the one I am myself presenting? I was organically exposed to both, and after spending time following my own reflections, believe that I've found a very transparent connection of Platonism to Advaita, which I'd like to write on. Am I allowed to do this? Or would I be crucified for not adhering to a single tradition, and especially not ones from the same civilization? You guys are far more well-read than I am, and better understand how these things are treated by academia or so on. Please answer with your opinions on what I should do. Thank you.

[Anonymous No.12478121]

>>12478081
The notion of philosopher-kings, as I understand it, is that only the enlightened individuals, who possess the greatest wisdom of any, should have rule over society. If this is correct, then the kernel of this is certainly found within the Brahmin-class of the Indian Varna-shastra. I agree with you there is certainly the difference of the kind you mentioned, the sacerdotal function which the Brahmin partakes in that Plato's concept does not, but it would also be shortsighted not to admit their overlapping parallels.

[Anonymous No.12478137]

>>12478083
People like Schopenhauer, Nishida, and Radhakrishnan used concepts from both. It's not really necessary to just stick to one school, as long as you know what each one believed, and where exactly the concepts they use overlap or don't overlap. For example, understand how Brahman differs from Plotinus' O Ennos, and try to explain what exactly are your beliefs regarding such issues.

[Anonymous No.12478139]

>>12478121
Why don't you read the book before trying to talk about something you know nothing about?

[Anonymous No.12478188]

>>12477880
>argue with Megasthenes

okay

Later writers such as Arrian, Strabo, Diodorus, and Pliny refer to Indika in their works. Of these writers, Arrian speaks most highly of Megasthenes, while Strabo and Pliny treat him with less respect.

The first century Greek writer Strabo called both Megasthenes and his succeeding ambassador Deimachus liars, and stated that "no faith whatever" could be placed in their writings.[24] The Indika itself contained numerous fantastical stories of people with backwards feet, ears large enough to sleep in, no mouths, or other strange features. Strabo directly contradicted these descriptions, assuring his readers that Megasthenes' stories, along with his recounting of India’s founding by Hercules and Dionysus, were mythical with little to no basis in reality.[25]

Megasthenes states that there were no slaves in India, but the Arthashastra attests to the existence of slavery in contemporary India;[28] Strabo also counters Megasthenes's claim based on a report from Onesicritus.[29]

Megasthenes mentions seven castes in India, while the Indian texts mention only four social classes (varnas). According to Thapar, Megasthenes' categorization appears to be based on economic divisions rather than the social divisions; this is understandable because the varnas originated as economic divisions. Thapar also speculates that he wrote his account some years after his visit to India, and at this time, he "arrived at the number seven, forgetting the facts as given to him".

The gestation period of the elephants ranges from 16 to 18 months, and the oldest of the elephants live up to 200 years.[18]

tldr: there are no "philosopher kings" in india, there was a priestly caste that can be historically attested no earlier than the mid-first millennium BC and that can definitely not be attested with any reliability in the rigveda, in fact the rigveda flatly contradicts it for the most part

the very fact that i'm having to argue with a fucking stupid indian who is claiming that his country used to be ruled by "philosopher kings" shows how stupid indians are, this is literal actual WE WUZ KANGZ

[Anonymous No.12478208]

>>12478083
You won't be crucified, but as >>12477890 said, you are rehashing what EVERY SINGLE NEW AGE PERSON did

At least read about the history of Theosophy and New Age movements so you can understand how derivative it is. Journals and publishers are filled to brimming with advaita vedanta neoplatonism horseshit all day every day.

These shallow parallels stopped being exciting to scholars in the 19th century and even then they were old hat and run into the ground ten times over. No mainstream scholar buys this shit anymore. Everyone coughs uncomfortably at AHR conferences when the token Eliade weeaboos try to convince everyone, 50 years too late, for the ten thousandth time, that Plato was a secret sufi advaita vedanta mystic and all of human wisdom was secretly contained in the Upanishads. Nobody believes this or cares about quack theories about it anymore, other than the barely literate Indians in this thread and modern cult members like Guenonfag who is dangerously mentally unstable. Do your homework before wasting your time.

[Anonymous No.12478216]

>>12478139
You're right, my mistake.

[Anonymous No.12478221]

>>12478208
Also, to clarify, it's not that it's WRONG to say there is a connection between various western forms of idealism in antiquity. It's that it's shallow and obvious. Clearly there are similarities and connections, clearly there was diffusion. But only historically illiterate people start LARPing based on that, because the actual historical nuances show that transmission was much more mundane and in fact you can't say "whooooa it's like, Plato and the vedas and Taoists and Buddhists all thought there was like, an Absolute, mannnn! Hegel is really a modern mystic bro!"

It's the equivalent of people who play history video games and try to posture that they know about history. Yeah you know bits and pieces and that's not a bad thing, but you don't actually know anything of substance, you are making trivial connections and comparisons that make real nuanced historians cringe with embarrassment for you.

[Anonymous No.12478241]

>>12477791
Okay, so fake news.
Thanks.

[Anonymous No.12478249]

>>12478188
He writes in Indika that the Brahmins were considered to be above everyone else in status and wisdom, and that they were sought out for guidance and advice by everyone including the administrators, which aligns with the Hindu texts and is consistent with documented history and the observations of Europeans in the early-modern era. Despite getting some of the details wrong and despite taking some fantasical stories from Herodotus, the way he generally describes them is mostly in alignment with the Dharma-sastras. If you took the time to read some academic papers or books on him instead of desperately combing through wikipedia you'd find that while he is thought to have fudged some details, historians generally agree that he did visit India and that a good amount of what he recorded were his observations, in the cases where this aligns with all the stuff mentioned above there isn't much reason to think he got that stuff wrong.

[Anonymous No.12478255]

>>12478208
ignore this anon >>12478083
he is mentally ill and shows up in every thread

[Anonymous No.12478264]

Non-duality/neo-platonism metaphysics upholded by a reinvigorated Evropean paganism is the final redpill.

It's like you all do not even want the West to be subsumed and perhaps consumed by a new religious fervor spread by unapologetic zealotry...

[Anonymous No.12478265]

>>12478249
>what megasthenes says agrees well with what european travellers said 2000 years later!
Wow! We can learn a whole lot about India from your keen historical insight that it didn't change much in two to three thousand years, and that fragmentary, simplistic descriptions of a priestly caste can be taken at face value, comparable to dozens of statements in Herodotus making Egyptian philosopher-sages out to be an equally big deal when in fact we can't observe them historically anywhere else.

>If you took the time to read some academic papers or books on him
Could you recommend to me which books you read on him, and specifically cite which of their arguments you found persuasive? Because I am a classicist and I've read Strabo in the original Greek, so I have to know quite a bit about source criticism and so on. I'd be interested to see how my peripheral knowledge of the Megasthenes fragments differs from your in depth research.

Do you know how many travelogues and premodern ethnologies say things like "Everyone in X is very polite and all the men and women wear the finest jewels. The men are all philosophers known for their wisdom and the women are all chaste." It's a trope.

[Anonymous No.12478283]

>>12478208
How do you know that my notions will be of similar nature as to what you're describing here? I have absolutely no intention of twisting Plato into something he is not, to align him with Indian philosophy or Indian philosophy with him, I'm merely a personal mystic, who has read some of Plato and some of Advaita, and combining the concepts therein wirh my own personal reflections on reality, believe I have found a manner by which they connect. When I say "they" connect, I do not mean anything specific regarding Plato/Plotinus or the Vedas/Upanishads, I'm referring purely to the conceptions therein, involving epistomology, the nature of concepts, and so on.

I also don't have undue respect for the Upanishads, or Vedas, or anything else from Indian culture, but the core principle of Advaita is something I believe I have witnessed personally, and also added my own musings to after my own personal study of reality bore fruit to me. My question above was merely whether it is "allowed", in any sense, for an individual who propound a philosophy that speaks both of Ātman and of Forms. These philosophies did not always exist, and were the product of their originators. They are not the end-all be-all of reality, and I believe a person, influenced by them, should have the right to bring together different ideologies so long as internal contradiction is not involved, and I'm asking here basically whether I'm allowed to do that or not.

I'm sure what you're telling me of is true - that there are shallow occultists who degrade both cultures they shamelessly appropriate from, but I'm neither an occultist nor a "culturalist", merely an independent seeker after knowledge whose personal views of reality have been founded on Platonism and Advaita. The book that I'm intending to write, and asking about here, is not going to comment on the original figures or cultures thenselves, but merely speak on the conceptual framework therein, uniting both ideologies (alongside my own contributions) in a manner that has no relation to their cultural specifics, if that makes sense. I'm not trying to speak for any one or other tradition, merely present my own views on reality itself, which happen to be colored by the two schools above.

Please let me know if this made sense, and if you consider it acceptable to do this.

[Anonymous No.12478314]

>>12478208
>personal philosophy
He's not saying he's trying to just synthesize everything together and say there is no difference between Shankara and Parmenides, like some South Asian faggots and Perennialist weedfags here on /lit/ do. He probably wants to develop his own system, like Hegel or Spinoza, using both Platonist and Vedantic Hindu concepts.
I see nothing wrong with that on its own, as long as he understands that they weren't originally meant to fit together. If he ends up making some generic New Age bullshit, then so be it, but if he's somehow able to address the question of Being, or to approach dukkha differently due to the ontic-ontological distinction or something like that, then good for him.

[Anonymous No.12478343]

>>12478283
for an individual to propound*

>>12478255
Please don't insult anyone. This thread, like all such threads, has been a battlefield as the usual. Please, just be friendly to the people here, regardless of whether they're returning it or not.

>>12478221
I understand, and hopefully am not making such an error. I'm not, again, merely an onlooker trying to tenuously connect two different philosophies together and claim "it's all ONE, man", but merely that my own philosophy, which is founded upon said two, inherently incorporates both of them within it. I don't want to sound pretentious and claim to be "making my own philosophy" here, because I'm not, but I also don't want to make it seem like I'm some dilettante who wants to pen a shllow piece demonstrating that "there's actually no distinction at all between Eastern and Western conceptions of reality!". So my wording is tough, because while on one hand my views are heavily influenced by said schools, I also have plenty of my own personal "insights" to contribute that would be an original contribution to these ideological frameworks.

TL;DR - I believe in Ātman, I believe in Forms. I have many of my own personal comments to lend on consciousness, beauty, and many other realities. Given my two influences above, am I allowed to write a single text which references conceptions from separate cultures, if I am speaking solely of the ideas therein and not attempting to retcon their histories or figures?

[Anonymous No.12478354]

>>12478255
Why do you say he's mentally ill? Just curious, I don't follow these threads myself

>>12478283
That sounds pretty interesting to me and I wasn't trying to shit on your parade although it probably sounded like it. Why wouldn't it be allowed to do what you're doing? Who could allow or disallow you? If you think you have a handle on philosophical truth you should always tell people about it and try to develop it as rigorously as possible.

If you feel you have personal mystical experience and you can speak of both Atman/Brahman and a noumenal realm of forms coexisting that sounds pretty interesting to me, so why not try to write about it.

Just stay aware that you are going to be in a sea of other people doing similar things, so you have to make sure to do a really good job. One way to do that might be to become aware of the existing attempts and history of attempts to communicate such ideas, so you can see the pitfalls or laziness that other people got caught on. Not to even mention the Orthodox, Catholic and so on types who actively publish on mysticism and related philosophy. Just make sure you stand out and make sure you can meaningfully put your work in dialogue with others so you aren't simply yet another voice shouting in the marketplace.

>>12478314
You're right, I shouldn't have been as harsh. I was speaking generally to a type so it doesn't apply to him anyway if he's earnest.

[Anonymous No.12478464]

>>12478343
Dude write whatever the fuck you want. No one is gonna read it anyway. Not an insult, just the truth.

[Anonymous No.12478472]

>>12478354
Which anon are you, that responded to me earlier?

Anyway, thank you for both the response and your compliments. If I can elaborate even further, I do not view reality in either terms of East or West, or of Advaita and Platonism necessarily, in the sense that I feel bound to these specific systems of thought. Rather, what I have been pursuing and observing is simply reality itself, and at some point came to hold the basics of both Platonic and Advaitic conceptions of it, which I in no way feel I must now cling to mindlessly. I do not allow these systems to inform the basis of my thought, rather, my own musings simply agree with them. And the text I'd be writing, therefore, would have to acknowledge the ideological debt owed to these philsosophies-of-influence, but the entirety of the contents would be my own personal remarks, and not commentaries on or summaries of these same positions. I treat reality as objectively and as uncolored as a scientist does, and am not trying to expand on or add to either of these traditions, it's merely that I have been shaped by them and cannot not pay my tribute to them in doing so. The text would be a discussion of reality, not these philosophies - but I simply hold reality to be at least partially what these philosophies have spoken of, and my speech of it would therefore have to reference Advaita and Platonism inevitably. Yeah, hope that makes sense sorry. I'm writing a "text" that desires to be as "objective" and "uncultural" as the manual a heart-surgeon would write, or any other kind of physical science, but it is by nature of the ideologies that have influenced me that I'd have to reference these cultural entities. A question to ask is, am I allowed to alter concepts to match my own conceptions? If I disagree with Plato or Advaita on some concepts, but not others, can I make this clear and therefore create my own "branch" if need be? Or must I follow them to the tee, if I am to use their concepts at all? For example, the concept of Ātman. Could I take it, but alter it where I disagree with the existing notions attached to it? So long as I make clear that I'm stating so? Same with Forms, by Plato?

I'll say one last thing, that will probably not be believed, but I have gained higher spiritual vision as of some months ago, and can now perceive auras and other kinds of nonphysical phenomena (if you'll believe it, literal beings composed of higher-frequency light which DMT users have seen) which an average person does not see. Part of the text, then, would be the explanation of such phenomena, from.the perspective of someone who sees them directly, explaining such realms firsthand to an audience who otherwise could not know of them. So again, I'm merely a personal mystic, who has a range of my own experiences and "understandings" which I wish to lay out for a reader, but I also am influenced by the above two schools, and therefore need to reference too, in the spirit of proper acknowledgement.

[Anonymous No.12478487]

>>12478188
the varnas are biological partitioning of separate races, not economic conveniences that assured class privilege. There was no “division of labor” this an anthropologist and economists vanity, people whose first instinct is ant hive building and picking fruits from the jungle are always going to do these things without be trapped inside urban or barren environments, these “social institutes” are purposefully erected to protect all these kinds of humanity from eating/subsuming one another and collapsing nearby biomes with unspeakable tumult and biohazardous human sewage emigrating to new habitats to raise to the ground. Look to South Americans for what happens to all surrounding life in the vicinity of mixed race peoples

[Anonymous No.12478498]

>>12478464
This is comforting, since my only concern here is being crucified by people who were unhappy by me appropriating and combining philosophies. I don't believe said book, if written, will receive a huge response - I merely want to ensure that I am not currently setting myself up to be chewed-out by the people I have written it for. I am not deluded as to my insignificance as a person, or writer, but I'm essentially crowdsurfing preemptive "legal advice" from the anons here that will help me avoid a future "literary lawsuit".

[Anonymous No.12478595]

bump

[Anonymous No.12478671]

>>12478264
Based and /paganpilled/

[Anonymous No.12478724]

>>12477551
>but they are all highly incomplete in their models of reality
Imagine reading Nietzsche as a metaphysical realist or some sort of bugman proto-analytic. The poo-in-the-loos in this thread are genuinely retarded.

[Anonymous No.12478928]

Hindus vs Greeks
virgins vs homosexuals

[Anonymous No.12479215]

>>12478083
my bad, I was on my phone and meant to say the other person was mentally ill here >>12478255
and not you, I misquoted the posts

[Anonymous No.12479317]

epoche'

[Anonymous No.12479320]

>>12478724
Oh, he most definitely lent his own comments on metaphysics, anon. Shall I pull up some passages? If you want to pretend like he was merely a philologist or a cultural critic, let me so know, and I'll post counterevidence right away.

[Anonymous No.12479392]

>>12475079
based, fuck barbarian philosophy

[Anonymous No.12479447]

>>12479317
Pyrrhonism is just the Socratic "I know that I know nothing" taken literally. It might just be that Pyrrho happened to have reaffirmed his beliefs regarding the knowledge of nothing certain through his contact with the Gymnosophists, not that he actually came up with it himself.

[Anonymous No.12479454]

>>12479392
Yes, I much prefer my obfuscating German and autistic Anglo summary of earlier Roman, Greek (that the Greeks largely predicated on combining earlier Persian, Chaldaen and Egyptian thought in an alphabet they got from Semites) and Jewish thought (which was mostly plagiarized by the Jews from the Persians who themselves sprung from the same source as the Vedic Indians).

[Anonymous No.12479475]

>>12479454
It might be possible that everything comes from the Aryan people's religious beliefs and stuff, but I don't think Indian people ever came up with something as sophisticated as Socratic dialectic, or the Aristotelian system of categories.
If you are sure that they were, then I would like you to show me something as complex as Plato's Theaetetus dialogue.

[Anonymous No.12479540]

>>12479392
Hey, Sanskrit has that word too. Neat.

https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/बर्बर#Sanskrit

[Anonymous No.12479572]

>>12479475
>It might be possible that everything comes from the Aryan people's religious beliefs and stuff
I wasn't saying that exactly, it's true a large percentage of the philosophy and religion permeating throughout the world comes from one or another Indo-Euro group especially the Indians and Persians but I never said everything which is why I mentioned the Egyptians, Chaldeans, you could add the Chinese etc, my only point was that it's foolish to say 'fuck barbarian philosophy' when western philosophy is built on a convoluted Jenga-block tower of foreign ideas coming from non-white barbarian peoples.

>but I don't think Indian people ever came up with something as sophisticated as Socratic dialectic, or the Aristotelian system of categories.
>If you are sure that they were, then I would like you to show me something as complex as Plato's Theaetetus dialogue.
Yes, they did come up with very similar stuff but the Indian philosophy focusing on logic and epistemology, etc tended to occupy a background position because they were more mystic and religiously-inclined but they still had entire formal schools of logic, naturalism, grammer etc. People on /lit/ assume that all of Indian philosophy is just mystic stuff like the Upanishads and Vedanta when it goes far beyond that, and because they haven't read anything from it they don't realize that even stuff like Vedanta is constantly referencing the various schools of logic and other stuff in their writings. The various Indian schools (there are six main schools called Darshanas) together at one point or another discussed most of the same categories that Aristotle talked about. Vaisheshika is commonly associated with just atomism but it goes beyond that and it fact it was a kind of naturalism which focused heavily on categorizing things and distinguishing between their essence, traits, substance, quality etc and then these ideas are further drawn out in the arguments between Vaisheshika and other schools. Dialectic is used throughout many Indian philosophical texts where there will often be a dialectic between a master and disciple used to illustrate ideas and various thinkers in their works including even the mystical ones like Shankaracharya will often form a dialectic by quoting other views or writing devils advocate hypotheticals and will write dialectics dozens of pages long which each part built on the previous response. Theaetetus is a dialogue concerning the nature of knowledge. Indian philosophy had extensive writings concerning theories about means of knowledge (pramanas)

http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Pramana
http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/137453/7/07_chapter_02.pdf

[Anonymous No.12479837]

>>12478472
Can anyone respond to this?

[Anonymous No.12479841]

>>12475499
>>12475601
>haha totally pwned christians
>following a jew invented tradition is totally cool though

[Anonymous No.12479850]

>>12479841
Who is following a Jew-invented tradition?

[Anonymous No.12480344]

>>12475079
>agreed by scholars
I can't think of a better reason to assume something is actually false.

[Anonymous No.12480368]

Hindus are retards
Alt-right white aryan supremacist "2deep4u" hindus are even worse

[Anonymous No.12480383]

>>12475079
Good post

[Anonymous No.12480385]

>>12479572
Weeb post

[Anonymous No.12480408]

>>12480368
Greekaboos are worse. They seem unable to understand that the Greeks are irrelevant outside Europe

[Anonymous No.12480421]

>>12480385
nice cope anon, if you can't handle hearing answers to your questions that you don't want to hear than maybe you shouldn't ask those questions to begin with

[Anonymous No.12480436]

>>12480344
Well-said.

[Anonymous No.12480443]

>>12480408
Outside Europe is irrelevant so no one cares what is relevant there. They can't even shit in toilets, dude.

>>12480421
Your answers are weeb we was kangz nonsense, and you've never read Aristotle. Did you really think people would believe you if you said Plato stole everything from preceding preceding miscellaneous brown people?

What's really funny is that you are so desperate to hate the West that you will take any brown people, just because they're brown. As long as Plato stole from someone non-European, you win. That's such a third world mentality. No wonder your nation is a shithole.

[Anonymous No.12480484]

>>12480443
Such sophisticated answers, you really defeated that anon's arguments with ease. West is truly best.

[Anonymous No.12480504]

>>12480443
>Outside Europe is irrelevant so no one cares what is relevant there
He says as he types from a pc or cellphone that has parts made from around the world.

[Anonymous No.12480555]

so i guess the eastern philosophy threads are going to be bitter just like the chink history threads on /his/
yikes

[Anonymous No.12480624]

>>12477922
>neither Grecian nor Semitic ideas

Sounds pretty cool, what should those of us that are open to the end of the West and the return of the East read in order to prepare for this? Also do you think Indian philosophy will be the mainstream alone? What about Chinese philosophy?

[Anonymous No.12480658]

>>12475079
Based and illiteracypilled

[Anonymous No.12480673]

>>12480555
sadly the internet is full of poos with nothing to do but shitpost in defense of their beloved smelly nation

[Anonymous No.12480835]

>>12480624
Look into schools like Advaita, and try to take become spiritually-inclined if you can. Become intensely reflective, seeing yourself in every moment, and take up practises like yoga and meditation if you do so. I promise you that you will benefit immensely from beginning a spiritual journey, regardless of whether it takes you some time to grasp your footing in what is presumably a new realm for you. Just dive into it, and take your time to become adjusted.

I can't speak on Chinese philosiphy because I'm not familiar with its conceptions. I know only that consciousness has finally been recognized by the scientific authorities of the West, and that their puerile physicalism of previous is to now be-replaced by something of a panpsychism, (still ultimately incorrect and missing the mark of what it attempts to understand), which will naturally admit Advaita and other schools of nondualist/monistic thought, which have long consisted of such conceptions, to the forefront of Western consciousness. I don't know whether the Chinese identified consciousness as the ultimate substance, and therefore whether their own conceptions would become popular at the same time.

[Anonymous No.12481349]

>>12480835
>I don't know whether the Chinese identified consciousness as the ultimate substance, and therefore whether their own conceptions would become popular at the same time.
That idea and similar ones (they don't word it the exact same way but a lot of it is functionally equivalent) are a big part of Chinese Chan Buddhism. To some extent they got a lot of those ideas from earlier Indian Mahayana texts, and in fact I've read that Chan Buddhism was originally called the Lankavataran school or something similar (based on the Indian Lankavatara Sutra) although over the course of the historical development of Chan they further elaborated and built on these concepts such that they started to come up with their own impressive texts and ideas. Also, the Chinese Huayan Buddhist school teaches of a pure untainted awareness/conciousness as the ground of all phenomena.

[Anonymous No.12481943]

>>12479572
The second link is broken, お兄様.

[Anonymous No.12481950]

>>12481349
Oh, okay. Interesting. Then yeah, those philosophies may be part of the general bundle which become spoken about in the West, in years to come.

[Anonymous No.12482070]

>>12481943
I checked it on both my phone and PC and it worked for me in both cases, I'm not sure why it's not working for you. It was an article called "the concepts prama and pramana in indian philosophy" and went through the theories of knowledge held by the various Indian darshanas and some others including the Jains. Many of the same topics discussed in that article can be read about in these two, the first link talks about pramanas/epistemology in Indian philosophy generally and the second focuses on the Nyaya school specifically.

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

https://www.iep.utm.edu/nyaya/

[Anonymous No.12482148]

>>12475481
>i am indian in background
you fucked up pajeet. also you’re literally doing the same thing in this post you accuse this dude of doing lmao. go read aquinas or meister eckhart you shallow biased fraud.

[Anonymous No.12482151]

>>12475496
caste system and shit in the streets

[Anonymous No.12482164]

>>12475601
>in the year 2019
>what are we counting by again
dude youve read and shilled the first Land essay. you know India is a third-world appendage for Western material dominance.

[Anonymous No.12482171]

I guess you could say it holds up...m-arjuna-lly

[Anonymous No.12482173]

>>12482151
He was on your side, actually. Showing the Easternanons here how courteous and mature you guys are.

[Anonymous No.12482179]

>>12482164
Have never read Land. No clue what this means.

[Anonymous No.12482191]

>>12482173
>courteous
>mature
>4chan
yeah “the other” sure is a bitch aint it

[Anonymous No.12482203]

[Anonymous No.12483170]

>>12478498
>since my only concern here is being crucified by people
if nobody wants to kill you because of something you wrote, you didn't write anything important

[Anonymous No.12483179]

>>12478472
If you felt you had higher spiritual knowledge that ordinary people wouldn't understand and would thus need explaining, why do you feel you need to ask permission? Who would grant permission to you?

[Anonymous No.12483286]

>>12483170
Interesting sentiment, in a way.

>>12483179
The basic schools whose concepts I would partially-reference. I was/am worried that I am supposed to find their modern bodies and receive their permission before incorporating some of their concepts into a work of my own. It's a formality, in a sense. But you raise a good point, and I'm realizing more now that I should disconnect myself from existing traditions or the worries of them, and simply write about what I (believe to) have seen/understood. That's the general direction I'm now heading in.

[Anonymous No.12483315]

>>12483286
>I was/am worried that I am supposed to find their modern bodies and receive their permission before incorporating some of their concepts into a work of my own. It's a formality, in a sense.
Trust me, there are 1001 different "schools" of every philosophy that will claim to have some authority and ownership of the ideas. Let's say you did write the book and publish it, it doesn't matter what's in it or how supplicating you are to other people (for no reason), retards will mob you for it.

[Anonymous No.12483342]

>>12477763
Anyone?

[Anonymous No.12483373]

>>12483315
True, thank you. This stuff is so mired in endless scholarship, that someone like me, who is not a scholar or interested in being one, or a commentator of any kind, but merely a mystic myself, desiring simply to write of my own perspectives, feels like I'd be wading into a unknown, hostile territory of which I have not "properly followed the rules for". Why haven't more of these scholars or commentators taken up their own spiritual journeys, and published of their own experiences, is a question I ask. For me I find no interest in such realms of academia, of endless reading and endless commentary of what is read, and am striving towards personal understandings of reality's truths, not wishing to ever step foot into such literary traditions or to become a commentator of any kind. But anyway, you guys are right - I'll just write of what I have seen, alter existing concepts consciously and considerately where I need to (Atman, etc), and will no longer fret over such negative receptions to it. Thank you fren.

[Anonymous No.12483375]

>>12483342
nobody cares enough to spoonfeed you, least of all in a thread that's half butthurt shitposts, if you want the answer pic related

[Anonymous No.12483397]

>>12483373
In my own opinion, there probably are not any schools of philosophy or disciplic succession that can claim with 100% irrefutable certainty that they have an unbroken chain back to God's most recent dispensation to man. So seeking approval from these organizations will always leave you with some doubt. Write it anyway, despite the doubts.

[Anonymous No.12483453]

>>12483375
It's not about being spoonfed, it's about easily identifying something beautiful or powerful which could immediately draw someone in, suggesting the truth that these people grasped. This serves as an excellent introduction. I could do so easily for the Greeks and I am hesitant to go searching within books based on the patrician-shaming of the average /lit/ pseud.

[Anonymous No.12483517]

>>12483453
okay then since you posted Sam Hyde I'll give you an example, I recommend taking it slowly

https://realization.org/p/ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita/richards.ashtavakra-gita.html

[Anonymous No.12483524]

>>12483397
Yeah, true. Thanks alot. It's just a totally unfamiliar world to me, especially because I'm rather young and also never-intended to get into this - I sort of stumbled into a sporitual awakening, which I now feel it is my duty to help explain to others of. And the formalities of the process, of which I am again utterly unfamiliar with, had brought me a kind of fear that I hadn't dispensed of till now. I will do as you said, friend. I won't ask about this on 4chan anymore, I think I have my basic answers now. I'll just write an honest record of my experiences and if I'm ultimately criticized for doing so, so be it.

Also, sort of unrelated, but do you mind telling me why these realms are so full of scholarly commentaries, and so few of actual seekers themselves? What could a commentator say of spiritual experiences, which they themselves are a stranger to? Lastly, can you also tell me why philosophy has such a neverending culture of scholarship in the first place? Who does it serve? I imagine the number of papers published on Plato are already uncountable, and new ones are seemingly written each week. Those on JSTOR and the like. What is the purpose for all of this? Who is reading these, and why do these commentaries matter? To what is all the effort going towards? The anons on here are very familiar with the latest generations of Platonic scholars, and the past histories as well, yet I for my life cannot understand why a single man, who wrote single, unchanging works, should find his texts interminably studied by the people after him, such that 2500 years after him, new people are still contributing new comments to his work. Can you or someone else please explain this to me? What new comments could be made on such old texts, that haven't been said by the people thousands of years of previous? And the same applies to all the other uncountable number of texts being written by academics who study Advaita and other Eastern doctrines.

[Anonymous No.12483544]

>>12483524
>won't ask about this on 4chan anymore, I think I have my basic answers now.
You better give us a blog or a username we can search to find out where you're going with this. I wanna see where you take it. Make a wordpress site, it's free and you can easily blog there to update us on your progress or other ideas.

[Anonymous No.12483548]

>>12483524
>I'll just write an honest record of my experiences and if I'm ultimately criticized for doing so, so be it.
Nobody has ever said that their favorite thing about a book was that it was not controversial.

[Anonymous No.12483862]

>>12479320
The issue isn't whether Nietzsche spoke about metaphysics, you arrogant pajeet. I'm not even sure how you interpreted my post in that way. Anyone that has read him is aware he makes ontological claims. The issue is that you are judging his philosophy, and other philosophers, from the perspective of some species of metaphysical realist -- wherein a positive evaluation for a philosopher is to have a complete "model of reality" (in your words) -- when in fact, these are the exact sorts of questions in metaphysics that are up for grabs across all of philosophy (western or not). More embarrassingly, and as noticed by the other anons in the thread, you give this evaluation without any sort of argument or critique: you give no meta-normative argument that frames the backdrop of your specific claims as to why a complete "model of reality" allows a positive or negative assessment for a generic philosopher, and you give no negative arguments for the claims you made against specific western philosophers in the post I was responding to.

[Anonymous No.12483904]

>>12483544
I appreciate the interest anon, but I'm already self-conscious about the project in the first place - as I said, I "stumbled into" a spiritual awakening, and these siddhis (seeing auras, etc) I mentioned earlier came to me randomly as well - and so only recently did I even set out on said project. I haven't read any of the Indian scriptures, nor do I have a real grasp of what the process of writing a book looks like (I'm not an author, I wasn't writing anything before this). It's thrown me off course too, because here I am, trying to finish college and get a job, but I've severely lost my sense of personal identity - which a person needs to function as a member of society - and am seeing all these new kinds of phenomena right before my eyes, and so life has definitely gotten quite strange to say the least. I'm trying to keep it all together and function normally, but managing these new developments alongside my former commitments is not going well for me. Hence, the book I speak of is not in some steady and consistent process of creation, but my life itself is quite a wreck right now.

Given this, if you don't mind, I'd prefer to just pursue writing it solitarily, and when it's completed I'll let the people on here know. If you want, however, you can lend me your personal contact of a kind and I'll try to keep you, just you, in a basic loop of what I'm doing, or at least reach out to you once it's done (which will be some time, as I said).

[Anonymous No.12483964]

>>12483862
Where is the meta-normative argument that requires me to need to defend my position that a philosophy's strength is the extent to which it successfully models reality?

[Anonymous No.12484311]

>>12475079
>to make it seem like they had all these sophisticated Western-like philosophical developments, but really, a) most of the texts they are talking about come from the post-Alexandrine, Hellenistic and Bactrian periods
>most of the texts they are talking about come from the post-Alexandrine, Hellenistic and Bactrian periods
What the fuck are you high on?

[Anonymous No.12484334]

>>12475079
Do you have even the most basic knowledge of history? Holy fucking shit

[Anonymous No.12484888]

>>12483964

So you'll buy into some form of epistemic norms like providing "counter-evidence" when you misinterpret my original post, but when called out to defend your original assertions you won't do so and try to flip the burden of proof? I'm done here, as I'm clearly arguing with someone who has no intellectual standards at all.

[Anonymous No.12485479]

>>12484888
>>12484888
So I'm expected to provide prior justifications for very straightforward assertions of mine, but you're not expected to justify to me why I'm expected to do so? You can speak without justification for your assertions, but I can't do the same? I'm expected to justify my positions to you, but you aren't to me? What hypocrisy. I'll defend my original post, but only after you gain the reflexiveness to realize that whatever you "meta-normative" rationale you expected of me, I can demand of you too for even asking me for such a thing. And if you don't need one, then neither should I have to.

[Anonymous No.12485571]

>>12474989
yes

[Anonymous No.12485626]

>>12478027
>"What is the best possible way to live so as to reach liberation?" over to "What is good in itself?"
>Implying that anyone concerned with the former would have reason to worry about the latter

[Anonymous No.12485662]

>>12485626
This

[Anonymous No.12485692]

>>12485479
A good, self-sustaining philosophical system should be able to take everything else under it. It should explain the existence of thoughts, sensations, feelings, the limited reach of a thinking being's will. If it does not sufficiently explain it, it should at least allow for the possibility of any kind of hitherto observed phenomenon taking place.
If, as Advaita claims, all things are in fact one, then there should be no memories or different thoughts. There would be no processes, gradually unveiled sensations, nor would that-which-is ever be ignorant of anything. Therefore, because there is a possibility of change, and not all that happens to move appears to move together as one, it cannot be said that all things are one.

[Anonymous No.12485749]

If any of you are curious about the inherited similarities between Homer and the oldest Vedic layer of Indian epic poetry, read Calvert Watkins.

[Anonymous No.12486136]

>>12485692
>A good, self-sustaining philosophical system should be able to take everything else under it. It should explain the existence of thoughts, sensations, feelings, the limited reach of a thinking being's will.
That's exactly what Advaita does anon, it has explanations for all of that. Ask about any one aspect and me or some of the other anons who've studied it can give you the answer. Advaita is an internally consistent system that covers all of its bases, anyone is free to object to Advaita on the basis of not believing that it's true but the system itself has explanations that resolves all of the ostensible contradictions.

>If, as Advaita claims, all things are in fact one, then there should be no memories or different thoughts. There would be no processes, gradually unveiled sensations, nor would that-which-is ever be ignorant of anything. Therefore, because there is a possibility of change, and not all that happens to move appears to move together as one, it cannot be said that all things are one.
I'm not trying to sound rude but this is the most basic entry-level criticisms addressed in almost every Advaita text and mentioned in almost every article and book on it. If you had read more than the wikipedia page for Advaita than you should have already have gleaned the answer to this. Your objection boils down to the principle of non-contradiction, how come if everything is X than I apparently can experience and witness Y, Z and W? Advaita looks to the Upanishads for the answer, and from what they say comes up with the answer that this because of Maya, which can be translated as divine art/illusion. The perception of difference is not considered to be ultimately real. Advaita teaches that there is an ultimate reality (which is that there is only the unchanging Brahman) and then the conventional truth experienced by living beings which includes the perception of multiplicty and individuality. Advaita teaches that the illusion of the conventional reality essentially takes place within the Absolute reality, and that when one is freed from ignorance the comventional reality is subsumed in the Absolute reality, and is revealed as never having existed all along. The classic example is of witnessing a rope in the dark and having the false perception (which seems 100% real at the moment) that the rope is a snake, but this false preception is subsumed into the reality of it being a rope when the rope is seen for what it is, and this false perception never had any reality to it but only appeared due to ignornance. There is no contradiction left to apply the LNC to because in order for there to be a contradiction there would have to be two opposing claims but since one is accepted as unreal they are not in contradiction. You can object and say "I don't believe Z is unreal", which is where the objecting to Advaita on the basis of faith comes in, but just hypothetically speaking if it were true there would be no contradiction.