/lit/ - Literature

I crafted a long rambling essay in response to this with reference to Buddhism’s debates on and ultimate rejection of the extremes of both eternalism and nihilism (which latter would correspond with annihilationism), with extensive reference to how Buddhism’s cosmology also paradoxically is very similar to a conventional interpretation of “eternalism” despite claiming to be arguing against the conception translated as “eternalism”, suggesting a Buddha could “exist” eternally, except simply without the fetters of having a localized, centralized, definitive sense of a “self” that could be defined apart from voidness and dependent arising, using various Sanskrit terminology from various schools of Buddhism (the Dharmadhatu, the Dharmakaya, the Tathagatagarbha, the Bodhisattva ideal of Mahayana, shunyata, pratītyasamutpāda, and so on), but then I remembered I am not a fully enlightened Buddhist and do not entirely understand and still get confused by Buddhism myself, so hence cannot have the pretension to fully answer your question. Also, it’s dubious answering you would do any good even if I WERE a fully enlightened Buddhist without doubts about Buddhism, since there’s no way to tell whether you’re a serious student or enquirer for whom this answer would do any good, or just someone wanting some momentary fleeting entertainment, or to try to get people into loops answering you so you can make the Buddhists and Western New Agers who like the Buddhists look stupid.

Hence, I am just not going to answer you, OP. Have a nice day.