i got mad at my hindu philosophy professor while he was lecturing so i wrote this in notepad in response

anirvacaniya - "cant explain it"
haha what bull shit.
ignorance in brahman?
there is one brahman, brahman is oneness, it is consciousness itself. consciousness does not have the capacity for ignorance. nor does it have the capacity for knowledge. consciousness does not have the capacity of differntiating between right/wrong, knowledge/ignorance, truth/false. consciouness only watches, only observes, utterly unaffected.

brahman is not a freaking circle. ignorance is not outside nor does it cover that circle. ignorance is only within the maya of brahman. maya and brahman are one anyways. ignorance, knowledge, all dualities are no longer dualities in brahman. there is only oneness. there is no from, neither is there formlessness. there is no knowledge, niether is there ignorance. there is only brahman. in the maya, all these work out. there is ignorance in maya since there is duality in maya. there is niether ignorance nor knowledege in brahman b/c there is non-duality in brahman. there is just brahman, no opposites.

brahman does not produce imperfection. the world, first of all, isnt imperfect. evil and good, dualities, create a type of perfection. just b/c there is suffering doesnt mean there is no perfection. jeez. just b/c u suffer doesnt mean the world is imperfect. maya is perfect, this creation is perfect, people are perfect, no matter what happens, no matter how they act. everything is perfect as it is. n00b. brahman does not produce, stupid professor, brahman just watches. maya produces, maya has evil in it, no one wants to say that, why fucking not?? its called expanded perspective. obviously maya has parts. maya has parts - good/evil, dualities, but it as a whole, a total, is one. maya comes from brahman. maya is brahman. maya is non-differnt from brahman. maya is a superimposition. nothign more. maya is like wetness of water. hahaa. go sri ramakrishna!

people like him are idiots. arguing against advaita, using dvaitic arguments against shankara.

"all vedantins have an achilles heel" - achilles heel - the boy was shot in the heel b/c it wasnt covered by the water of immortality when his mom dipped him in, so he died, even though he was immortal. "every assertion, fact, has an acchilles heel" - no it does. advaita does not have an acchilles heel, come talk to me, i will shoot u down. weakness?!? advaita does not have a weakness. there is fear, insecurity, doubt etc in anything dvaita. advaita transcends all this.

Shruti smriti purananamalayam karunalayam|
Namami Bhagavatpada sankaram lokasankaram||
I salute the compassionate abode of the Vedas, Smritis and Puranas known as Shankara Bhagavatpada (at the feet of the lord), who makes the world auspicious.

go adi shankara, u are the man of men, u are the original awesome advaitin cuz u rock.

my hindu phil teacher is a n00b. not a newbie - b/c that means its tolerable. n00b.