/lit/ - Literature

To those anons who are more situated in Vedantic and eastern studies, would it be correct to make the analogy that Buddhism seems to be as if pre-Socratic sophists formed a mystery cult? As in, they answer the dialectical problem of 'Many vs One' with an unremitting 'Many' and deny all unitary essences, i.e monads. Meanwhile Advaita Vedanta seems to be more aligned and resemblant of late Platonist doctrines expounded by figures like Plotinus. Also analogies could be drawn to other Indic traditions like Shaivite tantrik practises and their similarity to Iamblichean theurgy.

How accurate do you think these are? Guenon, being retarded, outright dismissed Plotinus and the Greeks for some reason (despite having never read any of them). I've heard Coomerswarmy is better on this issue though. But the attempt by Trads to larp as if Buddhism is reconcilable to any other religion via the assertion that anatta is just apophatic theology seems absurd.

>fedora tipping materialist who denies metaphysics and anything transcendent
>demagogue who plays to the irrational desires of the masses
>sophist/relativist who denies the objective Good and denies a universal standard of ethic
>literally tries to make 'the unequal equal'
A Marxist by default is the antithesis of Plato and philosophy. There's no wisdom in a matter-worshiping hylic cult

Pic related is the real deal