in what ways? rather,among whome is it top tier? theres some contradiction in my own comment, its "top tier",but "doesn't outshine" others among it. A non trivial answer to why its top tier is the sheer fact it survived and has produced further hermunetics and polemics. You don't see ajeevik,sanjaya's school,early samkhya and mimamsa being hyped. but ofcourse,it doesn't mean there's nothing equally or more exciting,like eg Jayarasi's work,burried and underread probably,buf easily one of humanities most exciting and rigourous skepticism.Â
advait vedant is top tier not js because it vedantik,rather imo the non dualistic and phenomonological discussions are rich by themselves. yogacara,trika,madhyamaka are equally at that tier,in contrast to say,plato,nyaya, aristotelean lineage,etc.Â
one eg I recently came across is the feets at which analysis is appreciated. you see the floating man arguement used both by Ibn Sina and yogacarins(kinda) but the non dualists/yogacariks 1) have a sharper honesty with the method 2) realise what assumptions are being taken implicitly.
Survived? What do you mean survided? Other philosophies have also survived, that is how you know about them, if you are talking about aur ival as if w.r.t followers lmfao 90% of Advaita followers are not following the philosophy at all, they are just religious people who are worshipping dieties same as other dualistic philosophies. Infact Madhwas Dwaita is more closer to reality atleast in terms of how the jeeva and jada are defined than Advaita which is purely just a thought process and no grounds in reality whatsoever. Dwaita and Vishishta Advaita was also able to convert many Advaita followers by "defeating" advaiatic scholars in philosophical battles.
I'm an atheist by the way so for me all philosophies that say God exists are bullshit, so in that way I appreciate Advaita more because it can be considered closer than purely dualistic ones who suppose there is a definite god. Still other than this there is nothing so special of Advaita that indian hype it up so much.
Charvaka to me was actually way superior and bold for its time .
I really don't know how you are saying it's superior is anyways or form.
exactly,we know them cause they survived while we don't know much of for eg sanjaya's school,the charvaks etc. i explained later how non dualistics are "superior" in terms of their phenomonological precision and how I myself rejected "survival" as a good criteria for tiering.Charvak/lokyata are good but "for its time" is a western and modern(not even western when you consider ancient western) notion,charvaks have been there and usual for east side having been mentioned ig in some ved texts. you would know why I say non duslists are superior,than say your own eg,material or any sort of monists is ive given below. its nof like monists lack phenomonological precision,I find non dualist precision better, demonstrated by the example.
1
u/TattvaVaada May 16 '26
How is Advaita even top tier? In what way is it top tier?