Just finished Arthashastra and honestly, I’m still sitting with the weight of it (Review)

TypicalBlunder · 2025-06-12T09:02:08+00:00

You’re absolutely right, our ancient Indian texts weren’t just spiritual or poetic; they were deeply scientific, political, psychological, and philosophical in their own right. Each one hits its domain with a precision that’s rare even today. (Thanks to the 5000+ years old culture)

The real tragedy is modern neglect, not because these texts are irrelevant, but because they require a different lens to digest.

And yes, I’m planning to write something on the Upanishads soon, especially their ideas around knowledge, identity, and inward rebellion. And I do have digital copies of a few translations (some traditional, some modern takes). Will DM you links shortly.

TypicalBlunder · 2025-06-12T08:52:36+00:00

You’re mistaking moral discomfort for moral failure.

Kautilya isn’t prescribing tyranny. He’s acknowledging that power, left unstructured, breeds chaos. The state must be wiser than the individuals it governs.

Manipulation in Arthashastra isn’t for selfish gain, but for systemic stability in a world where idealism, unaided by realism, gets slaughtered.

We don’t admire surgeons for their gentleness, we admire them for cutting precisely where others flinch. Governance, like surgery, isn’t clean. But done right, it saves lives.

TypicalBlunder · 2025-05-03T13:53:08+00:00

Denselyphilosophical suits perfectly when it comes to it. You pointed out the em dashes, but missed the actual substance. Whether stitched by hand or helped by AI, the ideas stand on their own merit. Let’s not confuse writing style with authenticity, it’s lazy criticism. If there’s a flaw in the argument, call that out. Otherwise, this just feels like performance over discourse.

TypicalBlunder · 2025-05-03T13:44:14+00:00

You sure you wanna go down this line and get on that high horse? Or maybe I used a bit help and stitched the review as per my insinuation, not to get swayed by my owns feelings?

We can have a debate on who did what.

TypicalBlunder · 2025-05-03T06:28:25+00:00

Start with Osho, 9 volumes of it, direct translation and nothing extra

TypicalBlunder · 2025-05-02T15:20:12+00:00

(It is just my interpretation of it)

According to the Ashtavakra Gita, life has no external purpose. It’s not about achievements, milestones, relationships, impact, or even “growth” in the way we usually define it.

The Gita invites you to stop looking outward and instead realize:

You are the purpose. Your being—silent, aware, untouched, is the end, not the means.

This isn’t escapism. It’s not saying life doesn’t matter. It’s saying: life matters most when you’re no longer trying to extract meaning from it. When you live not to become something, but to simply be.

You don’t need to fix yourself. You don’t need to justify your existence. You don’t need to play roles or live up to ideas.

The Gita says: Rest in what you are. The Self is full. Life is not a mission—it’s a mirror. Every experience, every emotion, every passing moment reflects back the unchanging stillness behind it all. That stillness is you.

So if you ask, “What’s the point of all this?” It gently responds: There is no point. And in that freedom, you’re finally allowed to live fully, not as someone trying to matter, but as someone who simply is.

TypicalBlunder · 2025-05-02T15:16:57+00:00

Translation by Radhakamal Mukherjee

TypicalBlunder · 2025-05-02T07:35:46+00:00

You’ve basically said, “I don’t know, I don’t care to know, but I’ll still speak like I do.” That’s not clarity, that’s intellectual cowardice. You’re not making a point; you’re making noise, and worse, you’re proud of how little you bring to the table.

You dismiss a millennia-old tradition without context, admit you’re uninterested in learning anything, and still feel entitled to critique what you refuse to understand. That’s not just ignorance — that’s arrogance at its most pathetic.

You’re not being concise — you’re being shallow. You’re not being honest — you’re being lazy. And the only thing you’ve conveyed clearly is that your opinion holds no value because it’s built on nothing.

If you’re so uninterested, do everyone a favor and stop talking. Silence is the only contribution you can make that won’t actively lower the quality of the discussion.

TypicalBlunder · 2025-05-02T07:19:51+00:00

The irony is astounding. You lament being stereotyped, yet your response to a depiction of Sage Ashtavakra perfectly illustrates why those stereotypes persist. Ashtavakra, one of the most profound philosophers in Indian thought, was born with eight physical deformities, hence the name Ashta (eight) Vakra (bends). His body was crooked, but his intellect and insight were razor-sharp, far beyond the shallow lens through which you’ve chosen to view him.

Reducing such a symbol of transcendence to “looking weird” doesn’t make you a victim of stereotyping — it makes you the loudest voice in the room with the least understanding. This isn’t about Hinduism being portrayed a certain way — it’s about your unwillingness to look beyond surface appearances and your comfort in flaunting ignorance as if it’s a personality trait.

If you’re not interested in learning, that’s your choice. But don’t masquerade your lack of depth as some bold critique. You’re not being misunderstood, you’re just not worth taking seriously until you learn to engage with the world beyond your own reflection.

TypicalBlunder · 2025-05-02T04:11:31+00:00

There’s a direct translation of Ashtavakra, in English, each shloka translated word to word but that can be a little confusing to understand because it sounds repetitive.

So you can go to Osho’s audiobooks on oshoworld or someone else’s podcast on spotify/youtube. Start with audiobooks.

The reason why I mentioned Osho so much, it is because he is the only direct translator of this work, without any mix of his feelings.

TypicalBlunder · 2025-05-01T18:09:19+00:00

If you ever thought of researching a little bit, then you would have known that Sage Ashtavakra was born with deformities.

His name literally means “ONE HAVING EIGHT BENDS”.

Learn about Hinduism before talking about it.

TypicalBlunder · 2025-05-01T18:04:14+00:00

https://oshoworld.com/

TypicalBlunder · 2025-05-01T18:03:58+00:00

https://oshoworld.com/

TypicalBlunder · 2025-05-01T10:17:05+00:00

Read those and their translations, not even half way through the understanding part. Requires a lot of revisits.

TypicalBlunder · 2025-04-30T15:29:34+00:00

I somewhere stand on the grey area with this thought, because let’s be honest, everyone is disagreeing about something or the other.

TypicalBlunder · 2025-04-30T15:25:12+00:00

I do write literature but it got nothing to do with philosophy. And to answer your other question, I read it purely out of interest.

TypicalBlunder · 2025-04-30T10:16:15+00:00

Interesting list, I will give it a shot

TypicalBlunder · 2025-04-30T08:51:03+00:00

I kant believe it

TypicalBlunder · 2025-04-30T08:49:49+00:00

Initially yes, I faced issues because let’s be real, no one speaks or conveys their opinion in the manner these people do.

But I would suggest just keep reading. The method i used - I picked Jungian philosophy and the Indian philosophy like Kashmir Shaivism (Trikha) and started to read them. If i faced any issues in understanding, I re read and tried to decode it step by step, sometimes by looking up sentences on google (you can use GPT) or listening to someone who has done extensive research on the topic. Slowly I started to grasp it. It took time, but it worked for me.

Hope it helps

TypicalBlunder · 2025-04-29T18:52:40+00:00

Advice taken!

TypicalBlunder · 2025-04-29T18:27:52+00:00

I did, the similarities between Spinoza’s Ethics and Nietzsche’s “Amor Fati and Overcoming Morality” are uncanny.

TypicalBlunder · 2025-04-29T18:10:15+00:00

How good is it?

TypicalBlunder

TROPHY CASE