What are some good introductory texts on Hinduism for a Western audience? Almost all the literature about Dharmic religions focuses on Buddhism.I dont really have any pic related to India or Hinduism, but pic somewhat related i guess
Here's your pic related.
>>24084772Introduction to the Study of Hindu Doctrines - Rene Guenon
>>24085130Forgot to mention that you can skip the first 90 or so pages and just go straight to the second part of the book if your interest is purely in the details Hinduism as a practice and nothing beyond that
>>24084772Bro unironically just read Wikipedia's lead article on Hinduism, then go on Amazon or good reads and look up using keywords>"Hinduism" "university"and shift through until you find something that's has good reviews, isn't overly technical and ideally has been rewritten at least after 2010 but with some subjects you don't really have a choice
>>24085130Guenon has an agenda, His notion of hinduism Is tainted by His compulsión to create a perennialist movement, that's why no modern schoolar of hinduism study him
>>24085130>>24085634https://www.researchgate.net/publication/362389378_The_Heyday_of_Rene_Guenon's_Delusions_in_The_King_of_the_World>French esoterist and compulsive comparatist, possessor of a considerable erudition, so he impressed laymen and reasonably informed readers with his writings. However, when examined more carefully, his scholarship was built on the foundations of countless metaphysical and religious beliefs, some quite fanciful, which he collectively termed "Sacred Science" and other exalting terms, so that his erudition is in the same proportion of his credulity, that is, his naivety was as great as his vast metaphysical knowledge,
>>24084921>Pooped to death
>>24084772Baby elephants are so cute!
>>24085949They really areAlso does anyone have any infographics on hindu literature? They must be floating around here
>>24084772Guenon’s intro book is good for an introduction to the pre-modern Hindu worldview, although its light on the actual details of the various schools. Its worth reading IMO but for a detailed overview of the various majors schools and their logic, doctrines, practices etc its better to read a standard academic overview, reading both of them would put you on a good foundation to start reading primary sources like the Upanishads, Shankara, Ramanuja, Yoga sastras, Tantra, Bhagavad-Gita, Puranas etc. The actual primary sources and the experience of reading them firsthand are where the actual value is.You can check out Guenon’s intro book here:https://ia801406.us.archive.org/2/items/in.ernet.dli.2015.225534/2015.225534.Introduction-To.pdfHiriyanna and Iyenger both have concise academic-style overviews of the main principles, scriptures, schools etc. Hiriyanna’s may be a little easier to read for a newcomer while Iyenger’s has sections on Shaivism and Shaktism in addition to the 6 classical darshanas.Essentials of Indian Philosophy - Hiriyannahttps://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.506393/page/n1/mode/2up?view=theater'Outline of Indian Philosophy' by Srinivasa Iyengarhttps://archive.org/details/outlinesofindian00srinrich>>24085130holy based….
>>24084772The consciousness which shines as ‘I’ in the Heart-lotus is pure (flawless) and perfectly steady (without a trace of movement). By destroying the ego, which rises (from that consciousness), that consciousness itself bestows the supreme joy of liberation. Be sure about it.With great devotion meditating constantly that "I am that Siva the form of the one consciousness that is always unsullied by any adjunct” dispel all your attachments.Giving up all notions about country, caste, blemishless community, āshrama (status as bachelor, family man, ascetic or one who has renounced the world) and associated matters, hold on to and practise always meditation upon the Self, your own natural state.I alone am. No one belongs to me; nor do I. belong to anyone else. I can see no one who call me his; neither can I see anyone who is mine. I am all alone.Know that the person who experiences the firm conviction “I am the Supreme Brahman! I am the Master and Lord of the Universe!” is the real mukta (one who has attained liberation), and that the one following conflicting paths is in bondage.The day one is able to see oneself with his inner eye as not the body, all his desires vanish, and he experiences perfect peace.He who is described in the scriptures as the unborn and Lord, I am He, the ātman (self), who is for ever without form or qualities. There is absolutely no doubt about it.I am pure awareness, immaculate, perfectly liberated; and forever present everywhere. I am indeterminable. No one can grasp me or leave me. I am free from sorrow. I am always brahma-mayam (of the nature of Brahman).I am the Self which is consciousness, absolute completeness, deathless and self-established, and which is other than this insentient body limited between the top of the head and the sole of the foot, and which, beginning with the antahkaranas (the inner instruments such as mind and intellect), is bounded by the covering of the skin.Thinking, “I am the Lord of all creations, moving or stationary, I remain as father, mother and father’s father for the universe”, aspirants for mukti contemplate with concentration and ardour only upon Me, who am that great Turiya state (the substratum of the waking, dream and sleep states).https://archive.arunachala.org/docs/sri-devikalottara
Start with the proto-indo europeans
>>24084772Great! Another thinly-veiled guenon shilling thread.
>>24087479This, but unironically.
>>24086866>By destroying the ego, which rises (from that consciousness), If the ego must be destroyed, but Is the counsciousness that from which the ego arises, then who's destroying the ego?
start with the street shitting.
>>24088503>then who's destroying the ego?It is the individual and their faculties like intellect etc which take the steps needed to arrive at the transcending or overcoming of false identification with one’s ego. The part about the consciousness itself destroying the ego can be interpreted in multiple plausible ways. One is that it is the presence of this supernal consciousness in the heart-lotus and one’s realization of its presence there that is what destroys egoism, another interpretation is that all of samsara including all creatures and their faculties is nothing but a manifestation of Brahman’s power, and that when we identify with being an agent and think “we” are taking actions, both the subject of this identification (i.e. the intellect) and the object of this identification (i.e. the actions) are not the real us (i.e. the Atman) but both are merely the display of Brahman’s energy dancing or fluctuating in a particular way, so ultimately, at the higher level of analysis Brahman’s power is what is creating minds and impelling them to various ends including enlightenment, even though at the empirical level this doesnt happen unless the intellect makes the decision to pursue enlightenment and then follow through with that. This allows for a certain kind of devotional worship inside one’s non-dualism, to an extent.
WHY CAN YOU FAGS NOT RECOMMEND ANY DECENT BOOKSSTOP TALKING ABOUT STREET SHITTING
>>24089162Prööööö :DDDD
>>24084772Guys, should I get an Indian gf to learn more about Hinduism? For context I am a white Western male.
>>24089492sure you are alex (from California).
>>24089495I am a white blonde haired blue eyed pure-blooded Norman descent. Now answer my question.
>>24089032>is the individual and their faculties like intellect etc which take the steps needed to arrive at the transcending or overcoming of false identification with one’s ego. Yeah but that individual needs to be the ego, since it can change from one state (non-destroyed)to another(destroyed) and counsciousness Is unchanging and non-multiple, but this individual has parts(it's faculties) but the ego can't destroy itself, since that imply that the ego can go beyond itself making the need for Brahman superfluous>The part about the consciousness itself destroying the ego can be interpreted in multiple plausible ways. But destructión Is an action, and actions imply change, which counsciousness cannot partake on, if counsciousness can "do things" that imply that Is mobile and multiple>but both are merely the display of Brahman’s energy dancing or fluctuating in a particular wayThis imply that Brahman Is changing, since fluctuatión Is movement and movement Is change>Brahman’s power is what is creating minds and impelling them to various ends including enlightenmentBut if Brahmans Is the one creating the mind then any form of enlightement Will be shallow and partial, since nothing guarantees my destroyed mind Wil not be created again, i'm just returning to the place that created the problem to begging with
>>24090884Is somebody paying you to pretend to be mentally retarded or do you do it for free? >Yeah but that individual needs to be the egoIt doesn't "need" to do anything whatsoever, period. Egoism simply refers to a type of mental identification engaged in by the intellect, where the intellect takes the non-Self to be what it isn't and vice-versa. The intellect can be present both when egoism is present and when egoism is absent. > since it can change from one state (non-destroyed)to another(destroyed)Egoism being a mental (mis)identification, egoism stopping simply involves the intellect correcting a mental mistake by sublating it as a false notion.>But destructión Is an action, and actions imply change, which counsciousness cannot partake on, if counsciousness can "do things" that imply that Is mobile and multipleConsciousness isn't doing anything. Awareness is intrinsically free, immaculate and unbounded. The intellect is what is undergoing the change and not Conciousness, this change doesnt involve anything that would contradict the non-duality of Conciousness but it just involves the intellect sublating its former false notions.>This imply that Brahman Is changing, since fluctuatión Is movement and movement Is changeOnly Brahman is real, the display is not real, whatever changes, division, separation etc which are ascribed to the display has no bearing whatsoever upon Brahman just like a mirage has no bearing whatsoever upon the desert in which it appears.>But if Brahmans Is the one creating the mind then any form of enlightement Will be shallow and partial, since nothing guarantees my destroyed mind Wil not be created againWhat guarantees that someone who has attained enlightenment is not subject to transmigration anymore is that Brahman naturally manifests samsara in such a way that once individual minds are enlightened and cease transmigration then they stay that way by default. What sustains an individuals continued samsaric births is the misidentification ego-complex in the intellect and the desires that result from it, when an individual intellect subtlates these false notions they are striking at and uprooting the only thing that was the reason for continued samsaric existence and transmigration for that individual, but again, as an explanation all this is ultimately unnessary since Brahman naturally and by default orders samsara in such a way that enlightened individuals are never bound or born again.
>>24087522
>>24086204I want one as a pet
>>24086204I don't but I have an infographics on the schools of Vedanta. Anyways where can I find good intellectual histories of Hindu thought?
>>24086204>Also does anyone have any infographics on hindu literature?Here is one for the Advaitin Shankara and his writings. I may make some other ones for other kinds of Hindu thought in the future.
>>24091544>Anyways where can I find good intellectual histories of Hindu thought?The two overview books by Hiriyanna and Iyenger posted here >>24086820 give general summaries of the main Hindu perspectives.If you want a more detailed summary that in addition to the doctrines of the schools also traces their history, their development, engagement with other schools etc. Dasgupta has a detailed Encyclopedia of Indian Philosophy, he died in the process of writing it I think and so it has little to no information on the development of Tantra, Shaivism and Shaktism but it mostly focuses on the 6 classical darshanas and the various sub-types of Vedanta.Dasgupta's work has various faults such as that in various areas its outdated, that he changes his opinion between individual volumes of the Encyclopedia such that they contradict one another in places, and occasionally he lapses into editorializing in place of serious analysis, but these faults are not significant in comparision to the value provided by the wealth of information that he collects togather in one text.
>>24091468>EgoismI'm not talking about egoísm, but the ego/intellect>The intellect is what is undergoing the changeExactly, but what destroy the intellect? If it's Brahmans then that means Brahman Is acting, thus moving, thus changing, if the intellect does it itself then Brahmans Is innecesary, because the intellect has the ability to trascend itself>such a way that once individual minds are enlightened and cease transmigration then they stay that way by default.What establish that "default"? Since Brahman can't stop casting the illusión that new state must in some way contradict the previous form of Brahman state as a Caster of samsara, but Brahman can't change or have múltiple states, this "default" present itself as a contradiction, so we have no reason to think this default mechanism Is actually working as intended by us humans, saying "well he's god he can't make it work" Is an appeal to blind faith and dogmatism>births is the misidentification ego-complex in the intellect and the desires that result from it, And that state of affairs arise from Brahman, so we have no reason to think it will not happen again>Brahman naturally and by default orders samsara in such a way that enlightened individuals are never bound or born again.That's just wishfull thinking if you can't actually elaborate how can Brahman can resolve it's own contradictións of being a force that cast and stop samsara at the same Time, how samsara can exist if Brahman can stop it? How samsara can stop if Brahman Is always casting it? How Brahman can do both things without being múltiple or changing?
>>24091551pssht thats not real hinduism
>>24091482Someone put a lot of effort into that
>>24091628>Exactly, but what destroy the intellect? If it's Brahmans then that means Brahman Is acting, thus moving, thus changingBrahman orders samsara without moving or changing in any way, because it's naturally in Brahman's nature that samsara plays out in the way that it does. This requires Brahman to do nothing but remain Itself immutably just as it always does, the ordering is automatic and effortless and proceeds spontanously from Brahman's nature. It is the nature of samsara that once an enlightenment man dies, the elements making up that man's intellect dissipate into a more rudimentary state and don't form another intellect, this doesn't require any active intervention by Brahman each time it happens but it's just following the pre-ordained pattern that Brahman naturally makes samsara follow, the pre-ordaining is natural to Brahman and is not an action that has a beginning or end.>What establish that "default"? That question has already been answered, can you read? The default pattern of samsara is established through it being Brahman's inherent nature to make samsara function in that way.>Since Brahman can't stop casting the illusión that new state must in some way contradict the previous form of Brahman1) Brahman doesn't have different forms except in a figerative sense.2) There is no new state, Awareness remains intrinsically free without beginning or end, and samsara remains samsara. When an intellect becomes enlightened and stops transmigration, that just involves a change in samsara and nothing more, and this is nothing incongruous as samsara is full of constant changes, none of which have any bearing upon Brahman whatsoever. >And that state of affairs arise from Brahman, so we have no reason to think it will not happen againThat's false, there are two reasons why that's wrong. The first is that in uprooting ignorance, the individual is ending the only thing that was perpetuating further transmigration. The second is that Brahman naturally orders samsara in such a way that freed individuals are never bound again. This second part is just as much a componant of the doctrine as the part about Brahman being the origin of samsara to begin with, so you are simply committing a strawman fallacy if you are going to pretend that only one of these are true and not the other. This is a strawman fallacy because you are attacking an invented false notion which you made up which is not actually taught by Vedanta, i.e. that Brahman only causes illusion and does nothing to ensure that freed souls are not bound again, Vedanta doesn't teach that so its an obvious strawman fallacy for you to pretend that this is their view and then to attack it.
>>24091628>That's just wishfull thinkingNo, its what the doctrine teaches, all the so-called "contradictions" you raise are contrived nonsense built on bad-faith willfull misunderstandings.>if you can't actually elaborate how can Brahman can resolve it's own contradictións of being a force that cast and stop samsara at the same TimeBrahman doesn't cast and stop samsara at the same time, this is another strawman fallacy. The intellect dissipating into its rudimentary elements when an enlightened man dies is not "stopping casting samsara" but its transitioning to a rudimentary state that is still within samsara, it simply ceases to be animated by Awareness anymore so there is no more sensation of embodiment or samsaric experience whatsoever for that intellect ever again, it having stopped permanently.>how samsara can exist if Brahman can stop it?Samsara doesn't exist, it's a false mirage or display lacking real existence that is manifested by Brahman, and as already pointed out above, the individual and their intellect being freed from the experience of samsara/transmigration doesn't require Brahman to "stop samsara" because the intellect simply stops being animated by Awareness anymore, like a colored gem that no longer glows with light because its no longer exposed to a light source. The constituents making up that intellect remain within samsara and Brahman continues manifesting samsara for everyone else but that individual intellect simply dissolves into the elements and no longer has experience because in a dissolved/rudimentary state it doesn't catch/reflect the light of unbound pristine Awareness anymore.
>>24091551Nice chart
>>24092843>Brahman orders samsara That already implies an action, and a relation between the two parts, but that which Is unchanging and partless can't interact with which moves and Is Made of parts, how can you mover something if you don't have any movement yourself? Something unchanging can only share atados not motion, since the difference between T1(Time 1 the first moment of Said movement)of a movement a T2 (the second moment) need to be different and an unchanging thing, at most,can only exist in one of those moment, thus it can't create the necessary requirements to orchestrate such movement, the order would be just Caster upon T1to keep being T1(since a partless thing cant possess both T1 and T2, that imply multiplicity) and T2 would never exist>because it's naturally in Brahman's nature that samsara plays out in the way that it does.That nature imply multiplicity, thus a contradictión in terms with it's supoused unchanging nature
>>24093851>>Brahman orders samsara>That already implies an action, and a relation between the two partsFalse, it doesn't imply any specific action being taken, because the ordering is something that happens automatically and effortlessly in a way that is consequent on Brahman's inherent nature. It happens automatically as a consequence of what Brahman's nature is, without requiring Brahman to do anything other than be Itself. Something being itself is not an action. Secondly, plurality is only an aspect of the illusion/samsara and it has no truth to it in absolute reality, so this doesn't involve or even imply two real parts as absolute reality is totally partless and undivided.You are simply making the logical error known as a 'category error' when you are taking dualistic terms that only have truth and relevance within the falsity of samsara and then are mistakenly trying to apply them on a level of analysis where they have zero truth to them.>but that which Is unchanging and partless can't interact with which movesBrahman manifests the display through Its inherent ability to do so. Movement, time, parts and physicality are all unreal, Reality or God or Brahman generates the unreal display through its inherent ability to do so, God doesn't need to do this using a specific means or medium that is itself false and part of the illusion like "touch" or "movement" as God's ability is not limited or constrained by anything, your mistake is again involving the above category error where you are mistakenly taking a dualistic term that lacks ultimate reality then wrongly assuming it has relevance in absolute reality that is non-dual. And not only is it a category error, but it's a question-begging fallacy when you attempt to place arbitrary contraints upon God's ability/power, there is no actual justification whatsoever for doing so.
>>24093986>because the ordering is something that happens automaticallyThat's still an action>Something being itself is not an actionBut something "ordering" something else it's Is, if Brahman being orders ir cast something else, then that being imply an action, just like the being a blacksmith imply working with metals, thus the contradictión remains, if the being of something equals an action into something else, then that being has movement and multiplicity>Secondly, plurality is only an aspect of the illusion/samsara If it was created by maya itself then Brahman Is irrelevante as a first principles, since maya pretty much can create itself, if it's granted by Brahman that means Brahman posses Said multiplicity>error known as a 'category errorNo because that would imply that Brahmans as a category Is already valid, which Is what i'm putting into question, taking for granted Brahman as a valid category to validate your point Is a petitio principio fallacy, you're the one falling into a logical error
>>24092846>Brahman doesn't cast and stop samsara at the same timeHe needs to do ir at the same Time, if not Brahmans should be múltiple, a part of Brahman cast it and the other stop it when you achieve oiberation, but if he does it at the same Time then maya and moksha are the same and liberatión has no meaning>Samsara doesn't existIt exist as a illusión, if not then this empieical world Is Real and Brahman once again becomes irrelevant>and Brahman continues manifesting samsara for everyone else but that individual intellect simply dissolves into the elements aIf that intellect dissolves but Brahman keeps manifesting samsara then nothing prevent those same elements to be Casted again, Brahman was the source of the problem to beging with, you didn't answer what kind of metaphysical guarantee Brahman provides for this to not happen again, you just Said that it wont>individual is ending the only thing that was perpetuating further transmigration. But Brahman created that ignorance, and he's still active>That question has already been answered, can you read? The default pattern of samsara is established through it being Brahman's inherent nature to make samsara function in that wayThis Is not an answer tho, just just Said, "it Is that way because it Is that way" that's no answer at all, specially when there's contradictións im the system>This requires Brahman to do nothing but remain Itself immutably just as it always does, the ordering is automatic and effortless and proceeds spontanously from Brahman's nature.This "nature" Is contradictory, implies non-movement can create movement, that's lime saying being can arise from non-being, so it's this appeal to nature Is in no way a satisfactory answer, it refuted itself logically and empirically
>>24092843>that just involves a change in samsara and nothing more, and this is nothing incongruous as samsara is full of constant changes,A "change in Samsara" Is not the same as "the end of samsara", saying that because samsara chances that would lead to the end of samsara Is a non-sequitor and a false equivalency, since enlightement Is not a change but an extintión, and samsara can't destroy anything, only change it
>>24094818>That's still an actionWhat is your definition of action then? If it's "a kind of movement that has a beginning and an end", then no, that's not an action. If your definition is "whenever something exerts any kind of influence whatsoever", then yes sure Brahman is engaged in one timeless act that is non-different from itself, but this doesn't contradict Brahman being immutable and non-dual in any way, since at no point is Brahman changing or differing from Itself in any way.>But something "ordering" something else it's Is,The ordering is inherent to Brahman casting or expressing its power, they are not two separate functions. The power is expressed in a such a way that it's naturally ordered and is never not ordered.
>>24094818>thus the contradictión remains, if the being of something equals an action into something else, then that being has movement and multiplicityFalse, this is making the category error already identified and which I already refuted, when you are taking dualistic false terms that only have meaning within the illusion and trying to apply them on a level where they have zero truth or reality. Movement and multiplicity don't exist in absolute reality. Brahman naturally expresses its own power that directly manifests samsara, but this involves no existing multiplicity or movement, both of those are logically subsequent to the power being expressed and only appear as part of the false categories that characterize the illusion. They don't exist as real categories that can be validly applied to Brahman or its influence/action, attempting to do so is a category error, which self-refutes any argument that relies upon said category error.>If it was created by maya itself then Brahman Is irrelevante as a first principles, since maya pretty much can create itself,False, since this only takes place because Brahman makes it happen, without Brahman there would be no maya/samsara, so that means Brahman is necessary for samsara to be present. >if it's granted by Brahman that means Brahman posses Said multiplicityBrahman possesses the inherent power that is responsible for the false virtual appearence of multiplicity, that power being non-different from Brahman Itself, but Brahman does not possess any existing or real multiplicity, as multiplicity is not real and has no reality, so Brahman remains one undivided reality that is entirely real.
>>24094818>No because that would imply that Brahmans as a category Is already validFalse, I'm simply explaining what their doctrine teaches and why your attempt to argue that it has contradictions is based on obvious fallacies and logical mistakes like category errors. Nothing I'm saying actually presupposes that Brahman is true, it's simply pointing out that Advaita Vedanta teaches a certain set of doctrines about this Brahman, among them that specific categories like time, movement etc are false and have no truth in absolute reality and that therefore, any argument which attempts to refute Advaita or demonstrate a purported contradiction in it which assumes that those categories like time, movement have truth in absolute reality are self-refuting because they involve a category error. 1) It's a strawman to hold that Advaita holds that those categories exist in absolute reality because they reject that. 2) Therefore, if your attempt to demonstrate a purported contradiction relies on an argument which assumes these categories have reality, then since that doesn't actually follow from the doctrines of Advaita which reject that notion, then that argument amounts to either a willful strawman fallacy (A) or an unintentional logical mistake known as a category error (B), and no actual contradiction has been shown to result from their doctrine, only from a strawman version of it with added non-Advaitic metaphysical commitments which Advaita itself rejects as wrong.>>24094845>He needs to do ir at the same Time,False, I already refuted that previously. Brahman never needs to stop casting samsara, since as already explained, an intellect stopping rebirth doesn't depend on Brahman stopping casting samsara, it only depends on a particular change happening within samsara.>>Samsara doesn't exist>It exist as a illusión, No, it only has a relative, virtual, apparent false manifestation which accounts for the empirical experience of it, but this lacks the metaphysical status of having real existence, which belongs to Brahman alone.>if not then this empieical world Is Real and Brahman once again becomes irrelevantA total non-sequitur that can be dismissed on its face
>>24094845>If that intellect dissolves but Brahman keeps manifesting samsara then nothing prevent those same elements to be Casted againFalse, I already refuted this previously. I don't know why you are making arguments that were already refuted. The fact that once dissolved those elements never again combine to make an intellect capable of samsaric experiences is part of the pre-ordained pattern that Brahman makes samsara function according to.>you didn't answer what kind of metaphysical guarantee Brahman provides for this to not happen again, you just Said that it wontThat IS the metaphysical guarantee you idiot! Brahman is a metaphysical absolute reality that exists in such a way with such an inherent nature that Brahman's patterning of samsara ensures that once freed individuals are never bound again. There is nothing else needed.>But Brahman created that ignorance, and he's still activeBrahman is responsible for its appearence in the first place but not its continued perpetuation, once present the continued samsaric experience is driven by that intellects own ignorance, and so once this is severed through realization there are zero influences or forces that would cause it to continue rebirth. It's part of Brahman's inherent nature that It doesn't recreate intellects that have ended this cycle.>This Is not an answer tho, just just Said, "it Is that way because it Is that way" that's no answer at allThat is an answer, it's saying that God or the Absolute has a certain nature that makes samsara function in an organized way such that freed souls are not bound again. That is by definition an answer according to the dictionary definition of "answer" (God is the organizing and ensuring principle), you are free to reject that answer but that's not a refutation of it. All the so-called "contradicitons" you have attempted to raise have been either category errors or question-begging fallacies, i.e., not real contradictions. Read the definition of "answer" before embarrassing yourself further with these moronic statements.>This "nature" Is contradictory, implies non-movement can create movementThere is no contradiction, as movement is unreal. The power that generates the virtual illusion does not have to do so in any way that would involve one of the false terms that belong solely to the illusion being itself real, that is a category error, I already refuted that several times. Raising arguments that have already been refuted is a tacit admission of your failure to demonstrate any contradiction.
>>24094969>A "change in Samsara" Is not the same as "the end of samsara",I didnt say it was the same you retard!>saying that because samsara chances that would lead to the end of samsara Is a non-sequitor I didn't say that either! Enlightenment in Advaita doesn't require samsara as a totality to vanish or the intellect to vanish.>since enlightement Is not a change but an extintiónNot in Advaita, the ending of rebirth in Advaita just involves the intellect entering into a rudimentary state and no longer having experiences ever again and not being associated with Awareness anymore, there is no extinction here, nothing is going extinct and nothing is ending samsara or leaving samsara. Awareness was never bound or trapped to begin with and so it doesn't need to leave or escape anything. The intellect simply transitions from having experiences (a status within samsara) to being present with zero further experiences (another status within samsara). Thus any "extinction" is entirely unnecessary for the purpose of ending the cycle of transmigration. The intellect is not even the real (you) to begin with. Advaita isn't a nihilistic doctrine for suicidal soiboys who are obsessed with becoming extinct. Neither the intellect nor the real (you) of unbound free numinous immaculate Awareness goes "extinct", the intellect just stops having experience but the constituents of the intellect remain within samsara without any further experience ever again.
