Started Aug 15, 2012 0 Replies 1 Like
I hope David Reigle does not take this the wrong way but intrigued by his reference to Shankaras criticism of Buddhism in the commentaries on the Brahma Sutras I find the reasoning there less than…Continue
Started Aug 11, 2012 0 Replies 3 Likes
Having just read David Reigles 'Confusing the Esoteric with the Exoteric: T. Subba Row on Advaita Vedånta' I find him criticizing this passage from. “Tibetan Teachings,” in H. P. Blavatsky Collected…Continue
Started Apr 2, 2012 0 Replies 1 Like
these terms are in the Cheng Wei-Shih Lun ( Doctrine of Mere-Consciousness) ebook:…Continue
JOHN KEITH JACKSON has not received any gifts yet
© 2024 Created by Theosophy Network. Powered by
Comment Wall (3 comments)
You need to be a member of Theosophy.Net to add comments!
Join Theosophy.Net
There is no dissonance between the tenets of Sankara and Buddha , an anachronistic view of refutations of the buddhist doctrine and vedanta (as we percieve) would lead to interminable discussions on the merits and demerits of each . It is a very simple issue that is resolved with a little wisdom - Buddhism had deteriorated to a large extent from the basic tenets of Gauthama and all Shankara had done was to refute the more average contents of the philosophy which was not part of the more matured one but held sway due to the very fact that they were easily understood being average , but non productive. The corrupt versions of Buddhism (as not practiced by Gauthama nor advised by him ) believed the intellect to be the soul and discernible only intermittently - more akin to saying "In deep sleep I was aware of nothing, so I was not there at that time ".
Even the ancient Greeks would have laughed at such a fallacy , for all Shankara espoused was that in relation to the self (or oneself or to the inquiry as to who one is ) a person should look at the following 4 aspects and satisfy himself -
aspects being :
1. It is always the known.
2.It need not be known.
3. It cannot be known.
4. It can be known .
People only discuss of Shankara vs. Buddism , but Shankara has also refuted the Materialists, the Rationalists, the Idealists and the Nihilists most people are not aware of this fact , for if one goes carefully through the original portions of his refutation one finds that Buddhism in its many aspects as practised in those times had become so entrenched and absorbed all philosophies indiscriminately that he had to educate people that the Buddhism that they knew had parts of all the other philosophies inappropriately thrust into it . It was the Buddhists that he refuted not Buddhism which advocated transmission of knowledge through silence . And hence the use of the word Veda to indicate wisdom . In passing some food for thought for the lovers of wisdom -
On waking from deep sleep a person denies the existence of the Knower, Knowing and the Known - but never Knowledge .
ModeratorDeb said…
Welcome to the forum! Look around, get comfortable, and let us hear from you. We're glad you're here!
ModeratorJohn said…
Welcome!
please feel free to browse around here and participate in discussions !!