/lit/ - Literature

>>18769605
Dangerously based

>>18694751
mfw a spooky skeleton wearing skin and flesh tells me it is eternal and everyone else is a nihilist

>>18665637
Buddhism comes before Shankara and lives rent-free in all subsequent Hindu philosophy. Kind of important.

>>18636867
If you are that obsessed with them you may be reborn as one.

>>18621303
Based if true.

>>18559311
Tradzoomers will never recover

>>18502088
Rent free

>>18436213
This is an anime website. You still lingering here after 2016 is what is the most ridiculous.
>>18436315
You shat an entire essay of brahminical scholasticism spread across half a dozen character limted posts just to say "no it's not consciousness only, it's consciousness only plus atman-brahman."

>>18403734
Based

>>18330901
Very well. I suppose we can count on your support during the fulfillment of kalachakra.
>>18330861
The Avatamsaka is so large and comprehensive that the physical book itself can be used to bludgeon enlightenment into the reader.

>>18320207
Threadly reminder that Buddhism lives rent-free inside every school of Hinduism.

>>18309615
>Unlike Buddhists, Advaitins are unable to seethe because they know that there is no existing consciousness except their own, the Lord’s, and so there is nobody else to seethe at. Only the followers of inferior pluralist doctrines like Buddhism are capable of seething, and seethe to no end they do.
Entire post is shot through with priestly ressentiment of the noble path, and appeal to possession of a supramundane private immortality.

>>17792717
>two truths doctrine, but Brahman
Yeah no wonder this gets compared to Buddhism all the time

>>17642889
>pluralism=monism
Dangerously based. You are either a spinozist or not a philosopher at all.

>>17632964
And yet a nepalese prince refuted the entirety of western philosophy 2600 years ago.
You literally cannot prove him wrong.

>>17565919
The sort of Western people who are interested in Buddhism are bored to death of whatever "god did it, but in Sanskrit" theology you think is fantastic logic. It's not. It's the very sophistry you refer to, to make things up as you go along and frantically plug the holes in experience. No matter how many times you rehash your bit about an uncaused, just-so, eternal originator, Buddhists will find the proof to be inconclusive because if the response to interdependence and relativity is literally "what about my uncaused cause, bet you didn't think about that?" it solves nothing the person interested in Buddhism was looking for an answer to. It's, as the saying goes, retroactively refuted.

>>17540981
All arguments for God were retroactively refuted by the critique of antinomies of Nagarjuna and of his later incarnation, Kant. Thus Shankara and other thomists were completely enveloped by these refutations and there is no need to take their "i can conceive of god so he is" drivel seriously.

>>17505010

>>17497312
Bodhisattvas entering the womb LITERALLY cause earthquakes and you're too low test to deal with it
Simple as

>guenonfag still stuck on the finger and blind to the moon
Everything in Buddhism makes perfect sense.

>>17446248
Too based for an Ishvara thread

>>17441812
I agree with reading the canon but just the Middle and Long discourses alone are like 2500 pages if you read the notes (you should). Most of the Mahayana works included after these are under 400 and the root verses make up even less. The outliers are the Avatamsaka or if you bother reading all three volumes of Brunholzl's translation of the MSG and its commentaries instead of just the first. Moreover, it's not Pokémon; you can read what you want and not have to slot everything into a dozen doxographical categories. Again, having read the core Suttas of the canon and the principle Madhyamaka and Yogacara texts, in my opinion an intelligent student could confidently read the texts of any later schools. Tibetan Vajrayana, Chan/Zen, Shingon, Pure Land, whatever else all pretty much postdate this chart. In fact the Tibetans study Chandrakirti and Aryadeva and the Chan schools emerged from Huayen. I also feel recommending the 50 books you'd need to cover everything is worthless for the purposes of a chart anyway, and that you are better off with bite sized groupings which progress thematically so you don't end up backlogging books you won't read. (I certainly won't recommend what I have not read for the sake of completeness). It is not a true Mahayana chart, nor is it purely non-sectarian; it is a selection of what would assist in reading of anu subsequent literature on Buddhism.

>>17429115
Looks like she is doing some kind of mudra.

>>17397377
Based huayen poster it's my favorite reading of sunyata