/lit/ - Literature

>>2986269
When Antisthenes was old and dying from a disease, Diogenes Laertes elates that he received a visit from Diogenes of Sinope, who came with a sword in his hand. Antisthenes said, "Who can deliver me from this suffering?" and Diogenes replied that the sword could. Antisthenes rejoined, "I said from suffering, but not from life!”

For now there's enough joy to counter the suffering to make it worthwhile for me. And with a bit of practice you can take a lot of the suffering away whilst being alive. You just need to fix your buggy OS, no need to brick your computer right away.

People generally want to live, for whatever reason that is, but they dislike suffering. So the sensible thing to do would be to take away the suffering, not life.

Anything by Alan Watts.

>>2506813
That's true. But he doesn't seem to come back to the apparent shallowness of the way their pursuit of the worthwhile life ultimately seems to have. The impossibility of nonconformity is addressed, not it's vanity. At least in On the Road. The Dharma Bums and Big Sur are more interesting concerning that matter.

>>2495382
I've always found stoicism a bit too rigid to be compared with Zen Buddhism, although I can see the parallels. Pyrrhonism has that "no-mind" approach to things with the total suspension of judgement, which reminds of me of Zen and Taoist sages. Diogenes and the Cynics come to mind too. Epicureanism would be another almost Buddhist like school of philosophy, especially in the search for tranquility, the middle way (as in neither extreme hedonism or asceticism) and a sort of existentialist, atheistic or apatheistic approach to life. What they all have in common seems to be some sort of quietism though.

Concerning the question of gradual or sudden enlightenment/insight: It would very well be a case of both, in the same way that one can fiddle with a lock for a long time in order to get it right, but it springs open instantly and suddenly.

>>2495389
I've read Watts carefully myself and I'm very fond of him. It is however undeniable that his style was partly a product of his time, be it intentionally or unintentionally. While I find him very insightful, I think he is sometimes ready to dismiss serious spiritual practice as superfluous behaviour. This may not be his intention, but he makes it easy for his readership to dismiss discipline and practice because "we're all there anyway and there is nothing to gain" which can lead to lazy, smug pretension instead of sincere understanding.

That said, he was of course more of a scholar and interpreter and shouldn't be held responsible as some sort of guru, which he clearly stated he wasn't on multiple occasions.

A lot of ideologies, religions and philosophies have some ideal type that can be said to be more than a mere man, OP. If you want some goal to work towards in your life and you want to fit within some sort of tradition or frame of thought, I suggest you look into these types.

Look into the dog-like, austere living ideal of ancient Cynicism. Look into the imperturbable sage of Stoicism. The serene well-being of Epicureanism. The suspended judgement of Pyrrhonian skepticism. The enlightenment of Buddhism and Hinduism. Nietzsche's Übermensch. Marquis de Sade's ruthless libertine. Kierkegaards knight of faith. The Christian saints in general. There are a lot of interesting and beautiful ideals out there. You could even look into modern transhumanism or something like that.

What sort of direction were you thinking of?

>>2477197
I'm the universe too.