Same thing can be said about Buddhism. For an outsider examining different schools and methods of practice, it is hard to believe that they belong to the same doctrine.
Did Adi Shankaracharya defeat Buddhism?
Re: Did Adi Shankaracharya defeat Buddhism?
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
Re: Did Adi Shankaracharya defeat Buddhism?
Thanks Kim. I'll get reading...Kim OHara wrote: ↑Tue Jun 18, 2019 10:52 amAccording to Wikipedia, it was both of these reasons and a couple of others.Sam Vara wrote: ↑Tue Jun 18, 2019 9:13 am Well, something defeated Buddhism in India. If it was merely thousands of monks being slaughtered and monasteries burned by people wishing to extirpate it, then that's regrettable but only of historical interest. If, however, it was defeated by Shankaracharya's logic, then I guess we ought to know about it and see if that defeat can be avoided in ourselves. ...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_o ... m_in_India
Kim
-
- Posts: 10262
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: Did Adi Shankaracharya defeat Buddhism?
Yes, it's even more diverse and pluralistic than Buddhism.
For example the Samkhya school is arguably atheistic, and the six schools have quite different philosophies.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
-
- Posts: 10262
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: Did Adi Shankaracharya defeat Buddhism?
I can't argue with that! Perhaps it comes down to different assumptions about the goal of practice? And different assumptions about what meditative or "spiritual" experiences signify?
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Re: Did Adi Shankaracharya defeat Buddhism?
Of course. And these assumptions tend to be articulated, as part of the doctrine.
Hic Rhodus, hic salta!
Re: Did Adi Shankaracharya defeat Buddhism?
He also taught that all things (presumably both conditioned and unconditioned) were anatta, which means that even non-objects are not self, which is distinctly disadvantageous if you think you are one and would like to remain one.Bundokji wrote: ↑Tue Jun 18, 2019 10:56 amI still fail to see how the idea of Atman adds anything useful. The Buddha taught that all conditioned things are Anicca, Dukkha and Anatta. The term "conditioned" implies objects of knowledge because it is quite legitimate to ask: conditioned by what? so the process of "objectifying" is integral to making things knowable.
-
- Posts: 10262
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: Did Adi Shankaracharya defeat Buddhism?
Though if not self means not personal, then that probably applies to Atman too. Atman isnt really a "soul", it's more like a reflection of Brahman, which is said to be the underling reality. I'm not suggesting that Atman is the same as Nibbana, just that both can be viewed as non personal, not "me" or "mine". And of course anatta does also negate Atman.Sam Vara wrote: ↑Tue Jun 18, 2019 12:32 pmHe also taught that all things (presumably both conditioned and unconditioned) were anatta, which means that even non-objects are not self, which is distinctly disadvantageous if you think you are one and would like to remain one.Bundokji wrote: ↑Tue Jun 18, 2019 10:56 amI still fail to see how the idea of Atman adds anything useful. The Buddha taught that all conditioned things are Anicca, Dukkha and Anatta. The term "conditioned" implies objects of knowledge because it is quite legitimate to ask: conditioned by what? so the process of "objectifying" is integral to making things knowable.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
-
- Posts: 10262
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: Did Adi Shankaracharya defeat Buddhism?
Yes, and as part of the practice system. Different methods of practice can lead in different directions.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Re: Did Adi Shankaracharya defeat Buddhism?
Absolutely. That seems to be the "impersonalist" view of the speaker in the first video. Because "self" can mean so many things in English, there is the potential for people to talk at cross-purposes here.Dinsdale wrote: ↑Tue Jun 18, 2019 12:46 pm
Though if not self means not personal, then that probably applies to Atman too. Atman isnt really a "soul", it's more like a reflection of Brahman, which is said to be the underling reality. I'm not suggesting that Atman is the same as Nibbana, just that both can be viewed as non personal, not "me" or "mine".
Re: Did Adi Shankaracharya defeat Buddhism?
"Unconditioned" and "thing" seem to be mutually exclusive. If you agree, the unconditioned as "anatta" is merely a figure of speech in the same way non-objects is a figure of speech, while the conditioned as "Anatta" is descriptive and possibly directive.
If the above makes sense to you, equating the two can be misleading.
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
Re: Did Adi Shankaracharya defeat Buddhism?
Re: Did Adi Shankaracharya defeat Buddhism?
Can you name an object that is not a thing?
If not, we are back to square one: what is the use of naming Atman as a self when they say it is formless/unknowable?
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
Re: Did Adi Shankaracharya defeat Buddhism?
I think it is more about being able to name things which are not objects. The lure is to be (or know) a thing which is free from what afflicts all objects.
-
- Posts: 10262
- Joined: Fri Mar 05, 2010 10:32 am
- Location: Andromeda looks nice
Re: Did Adi Shankaracharya defeat Buddhism?
Actually I think Atman can be known, but as with Nibbana a great deal of practice is required to reveal it. And referring to Atman as a "self" is misunderstanding it, IMO.
Buddha save me from new-agers!
Re: Did Adi Shankaracharya defeat Buddhism?
Do you find any meaningful difference between "soul" or "essence" and between "self"? If so, could you please highlight it?
And the Blessed One addressed the bhikkhus, saying: "Behold now, bhikkhus, I exhort you: All compounded things are subject to vanish. Strive with earnestness!"
This was the last word of the Tathagata.
This was the last word of the Tathagata.