The Upanishads

What's the overarching message of the Upanishads?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=_B4Z1PB97KY
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Considering there are 108 of them, you'll need to be more specific.

I doubt that there is one. Polytheism exists as the end result of extreme tolerance. Polytheism is created by the merging of worship of several different gods. There is no overarching message because polytheism is less like a religion and more like the culture that exists once all religions are considered equally valid.

The holy commandment "never poo in loo." Is the main them of all 108 of them.

>There is no overarching message because polytheism is less like a religion and more like the culture that exists once all religions are considered equally valid.
But there are plenty of cults that don't wind up with Upanishadic basis.

If we had to TRY to ascribe an underlying meaning to all 108 texts I'd say the myths, rites, and protocols for:
>The pre-Vedic basis of the elaborated religions
>renunciation
>Misc materials
>Vishnu
>Shiva
>Shakti
>and yoga

Isha Upanishad verse 1
>‘Whatever there is changeful in this ephemeral world, all that must be enveloped by the Lord. By this renunciation, support yourself. Do not covet the wealth of anyone.’

Gandhi said that:
>"If all the Upanishads and all the other scriptures happened all of a sudden to be reduced to ashes, and if only the first verse in the Isha Upanishad were left in the memory of the Hindus, Hinduism would live for ever."

And? All that means is that their beliefs were never written down in the form of a series of epic poems.

Well, it would imply that polytheism isn't less like a religion and more like a culture that considers all Gods equally valid, particularly considering the sort of discrimination you'll face as a Saivist trying to interface with Vaishnavu.

monism.

I said equally valid, not equally important.

But for what are you arguing? If saivism is not tolerated by followers of vaishnavu, are you then arguing that hinduism is not one religion but many?

>If saivism is not tolerated by followers of vaishnavu, are you then arguing that hinduism is not one religion but many?
I'd say my main argument is that "Hinduism", like "Gnosticism", is a term of convenience, applied by outsiders, to catch many parallel doctrines which may or may not be particularly related to one another.

At one level you're correct; the cult of Bhairava and the cult of Krsna stem from the same cultural sphere. All puja, to Ganesha or to Hanuman, is going to follow the same rough order of operations, but on the other hand, there's MUCH contention about the object of these henotheisms about who is truly Parameshvara.

I guess my point is that this shit isn't easily reducible.

>I guess my point is that this shit isn't easily reducible.
The whole point of language is to reduce highly complex things to simple words.

>The whole point of language is to reduce highly complex things to simple words.
The concept of infinity is a complex and abstract idea that is very hard to define by simply saying it means everything. It is both literal and figurative which is what is assigned to the description of God, so everything applies there so it isn't easily reducible.

Beyond,
Extend this to a few dozen cults which all have their own myth cycles, cultural origins, linguistic interpretations, ontological and epistemological assumptions, ritual doctrines, text traditions, etc., and you'll see why I say it's hard to reduce this shit.

Or I could just tell you the letters, from from a to kña, are armor of my Aspiration and the garland at the neck of Great Mother.

That thou art.

/thread.

I think this guy has it right.

youtube.com/watch?v=_B4Z1PB97KY

He has it too. But I have it in the most concise possible way. The whole philosophy of the Upanishads can be resumed in these three words: tat tvam asi.

>The whole philosophy of the Upanishads can be resumed in these three words: tat tvam asi.
The Kashmiri Saivists reduce that to two :^)

so'haṃ haṃsaḥ

But that's just a reduction of Sah+Aham, which is essentially tat tvam asi, tweaked because aesthetics.

Do you have anything of value to add to the thread or are you just here to memespam?

When you gaze long into the loo, the loo gazes also into you.

Poo not unto others as (You) would not have poo unto the loo

*poops on u*

>Hinduism is polytheism

Sounds like a Google expert.

Okay so I bought this recently not expecting it to be a fucking brick.

Any advice how to start reading this stuff? Just open a page go at it? Are there "essential" ones to start off with?

what did he say?

>falling for the indian jew

t. anarya.

>muh post-British Raj incarnations of one deity myth

Please. You Abrahamists try to call everything monotheists when you're not beheading them.

but they were

>what is the mahabharata.

Reminder that karna is the epitome of bro tier.

if you have the standard 10prinicpal ones then there all you need, which version did you get, all the versions i have have been a fairly standad 300-600 pages

Bump to break up the seven or so shitposts on the front page.

hi ape! Do you have recommendations how to get into kashmir shaivism and tantra? im somewhat familiar with shankara and advaita vedanta. Is John Woodroffe good for tantra?

except Hinduism is not polytheistic

the right answer

>how to get into kashmir shaivism and tantra
You can probably get a leg up with Tantra Unveiled but it's rather low impact. After that move on to the actual core texts; Kaulajnananirnaya, Kularnava Tantra, Paratrishikavivirana, Spandakarikas, Tantrasara, Tantraloka, etc.

Woodroffe is alright; he redacts some of his stuff and we've come a long way since him, but if that's what you've got access to, go for it.