Vaj wrote: > That's only because the three are related in terms > of emergence. Non-dual Shaivite Hinduism is likely > derived from Zhang Zhung rishi's pre-Buddhist > Mantrayana and Mahasandhi. > What in the hell are talking about, Vaj? There's no mention of "non-dual Shaivite Hindusim" in Patanjali's Yoga Sutras. "Hinduism" wasn't even invented in Patajali's time. If it was, he would have mentioned it, would he not?
> Advaita Vedanta is a Hindu reaction to Nagarjuna's > Madhyamaka. > What does that have to do with Patanjali? There's no pre-Buddhist "Mantrayana" in Indian history either. You're confused - Mantrayana came much later with the tantric alchemists during the Gupta Age. In fact, there's no "pre-Buddhist" history in India. Indian history begins with the historical Buddha - everything before that is pre-history. > One should not confuse advaita with advaya. >
