/lit/ - Literature

>>22193666
>>22194113
>>22194124
>>22194163
Imagine being this much of a poo. No wonder they dropped Buddhism—it was too simple to explain and all the brahmins would have been out of a job if they let it win.

>>20497274
Because they understood what he couldn't—Buddhism

>>19492144
>Does it have answers?
We have to bring back corporal punishment as the response to this question

>>19273479
>classical Chinese
>tonal language where a minor mistake in a tone completely changes the meaning of the word
>thousands of characters instead of an alphabet
>{noun}{no}{noun} construction for asking a yes/no question
>good
Lol, Chinese is shit.
But Sanskrit is based, true.

>>19255206
Dhammapada or Heart Sutra

>>19090731
Basado

Sneed

>>18649915
>Consider a free farmer. He works his fields, takes care of his family, and has his fairs and parties.
That doesn't sound very free.

>>18546132
Only winning move is not to die

>>18320395
>Nirvana can't be endless as Buddhists maintain if Buddhists also affirm that nothing is permanent and unchanging
Beginnings and endings are stop-off points of duration, which is a function of conditioned experience. Nirvana is again unconditioned, but since we are speaking, or rather writing, we are deforming what we are discussing for the sake of clarity (or what we think improves the other person's comprehension). I think this is where it sometimes helps to hop outside of Buddhism and read something else, like Plato, or Nietzsche, or Bergson maybe, and then revisit Buddhism, and even if you reject it at that point, its concepts will seem less obscure. Alternatively you could read Nagarjuna or commentaries on him from Chandrakirti, Aryadeva, Shantarakshita, etc., which go to the most minute ends of argument about nirvana and its relationship to samsara.

>>18222222
The pores of just one monke contain all the buddha-fields in the universe more numerous than all the bananas in the jungle.

>>18212812
The point, dear midwit, is that the heterodox/orthodox distinction doesn't really exist in Buddhism the way the prior poster had implied. Sectarianism in Buddhism usually takes the form of an elitism or an esoteric/exoteric distinction, meaning that the other guys aren't wrong or heretics etc., just following an inferior grade of practice. So properly speaking, what you ought to get from the mahayana schools, esoteric or not, is a different version or expression of ideas in the Pali nikayas

>Desperate christers are turning to people they would otherwise call satanists to defend their puerile religion from dharma bulls.

>>17541570
>muh iq
ngmi

>>17427111
>things aren't dependent on other things
>births are not conditioned by previous lives
>we can't learn anything that would help us to become free from delusion and pain
>my self is permanent and has a unique esssence
>having a galaxybrain isn't a superpower
>not having a personal cosmology or umwelt, etc.
Imagine being this lost

>>17381985
I don't like the Buddhist chart that always gets posted but am too lazy to make a better one. As for OP start with Bhagavad Gita for Hinduism and the Dhammapada for Buddhism.

Aryadeva's Four Hundred Verses on the Middle Way

The answer is right here.

>>17271294
>the Abrahamic faiths can be reconciled with Dharmic religions as both pointing to the perennial truth
Why do so many modernist pseuds believe this? A basic study of history would demonstrate this view is completely false and not how these religions think of themselves, let alone what they think of each other. Sure if you discard all the contextual baggage of a religion and conduct a dispassionate secular synthesis of the most philosophical strains of them you get that 'all' 'religions' teach the same experience-denying sublime quietude, but this to me says more about sages working in contexts which may be hostile to them than it does about the religions. A better question than what do all religions teach in common is who produces the most sages, as opposed to moralists, sentimentalists, beserkers, etc., or whose teachings point in that direction most consistently?

Yes he started on the path. The trees are of great significance. When you breathe under a tree you breathe the same air our monke forebears did, not the carcinogen-rich pseudo-atmosphere of the erectoid spinal menace.

>>17218848
I think I will, thanks

Most Buddhist schools of thought are rigorously sceptic and would argue the self has no inherent existence, that it is a construction imposed on top of phenomena, sensations, experience etc. and dependent on those to exist. You probably already know this but don't think about it this way usually; try to come up with a definition of your self and you will find all sorts of dependent explanations and antinomies. Are you your body, your mind, both, neither, some assemblage of character traits, a historical person with a name and biography, some Oedipal chimera of mommy and daddy, a locus of experiences? There are more complex explanations given in canonical literature which imply a sort of atomism, and in the later Mahayana sutras ,which basically retort that even the particles have parts, so there are in fact no ultimate building blocks either and these are equally as illusionary as selves. Strictly speaking there is no reincarnation of a soul into a new body as per Greek metempsychosis or other Indian doctrines. The common metaphor for Buddhism is the flame, in that life is fire and (karmic) actions leading to birth are fuel. A fire not put out will feed itself by burning through what it contacts; it is attracted to fuel and so prolongs itself. But fire, like the water in a flowing river, is in flux as it burns through fuel. When people talk of a river they assume a permanent geographic feature because that is relevant to the needs of navigation. Just so viewing of a fire as a fire and not the burning of ever newer fuel is appropriate to describing a process in covenient shorthand. A self is a species of this coventional view.

>>17155280
I go on /lit/ daily to receive my (You)'s in my bowl, then I study texts, then I sleep and do it all over again

Too many cats in this monke thread.