/lit/ - Literature

The cover looked like Imajica for a second which was the only reason I opened this bait thread.

How do you guys feel about Imajica? I thought it was whinging dreck that created an outline of a world rather than the world itself, which felt hollow, and the rampant feminism irked me, but I can't help but like it looking back on it. It's not good, but it's one of those things you're glad to have read.

>>10242886
if you are a liberal, I guess it is good start

>>10242886

begome cadolig

>buddhism without beliefs
>Stephen Batchelor reminds us that the Buddha was not a mystic who claimed privileged, esoteric knowledge of the universe, but a man who challenged us to understand the nature of anguish, let go of its origins, and bring into being a way of life that is available to us all. The concepts and practices of Buddhism, says Batchelor, are not something to believe in but something to do

not even buddhist anymore but that book is heretical, shitlib "feel good" nosense, trying to make buddhism palatable to Western, secular, liberal indoctrinate minds = == throw it in the garbage.

if you want a good "modern" buddhist book look up "Thanissaro Bhikku" he writes good stuff

>>10242937
ya instead of helping OP overcome hedonism that sort of book will help him justify doing it in "moderation" i.e instead of fapping 3x a day, to just once or twice. Instead of getting drunk 5x a week to just 3 or 4.

>>10242886
have an hedonistic life but live artfully: being a hedonist doesn't mean you have carte blanche to be a lazy piggu. incidentally that ws a popular insult ignorant people were throwing at people following the principles of Epicurus way back then... even if their ways was quite sophisticated: to mock these insults some were wearing pig shaped jewelry , hue hue.

>>10242954
> incidentally that ws a popular insult ignorant people were throwing at people following the principles of Epicurus way back then
you haven't heard the Cyrenaic school of TRUE HEDONISM have you? they made fun of Epicurus saying his teachings of just being homeostatic and unworried was similar to the happiness of a corpse

>>10242973

i don't think it's a must to follow what he said to the letter , too much needless self-flagellation, but to be inspired by what's strong in it like moderation as an exercice to sharpen your taste, refine your pleasure. exit the woo woo stuff like a promise of an after life too of course, don't wait up to have fun "laters"

>>10242937
>>10242949
Thanks for the answers, guys! The description read like that of a lazy self help book but I've read some greats books with horrible descriptions that is just there to sell publications to soccer moms, so I wanted to find some opinions on it. I might still check it out if it's availableat at my local library but i'll read it with low expectations.
I'll look up that Thanissaro Bhikku guy also!

>>10242954
I get what you are saying but I want to try to live a bit more disciplined for a while to see if it's better for me.

>>10243083
what exercises are you ready to adop

Don’t listen to this guy:

>>10242937

The book you selected is a good one. The author is somehow polemical, but only because he offers his own interpretation of Buddhism, and I guess that everyone should do that (with other things as well): it’s healthy to think with your own head about any subject.

His main point in the book is that Buddhism can be extremely helpful to yourself and your live even when considered as some kind of philosophy, and not a religion. It is like Stoicism in that matter: a philosophy of how to live a good life.

The author mentions the fact that most Buddhist branches have grown esoteric with the passage of time, and that many traditions (such as the Tibetan one) have leaders that, although extremely wise and compassionate, still believe in illogical and unscientific myths. What the authors wants to do is to extirpate all dogma from Buddhism, all credos and believes that are in direct conflict with logical thinking and known facts.

He mentions one of the most interesting speeches of the Buddha to show that, in the end, you really need to think for yourself, to put the teachings under the microscope of your own being. The speech is named the Kalama Sutta, and was preached to the Kalama people. They asked the Buddha (very wisely), something like: “There are several teachers and holy man that stop in this town and mention that they have the knowledge of the truth and that all other doctrines are false. But how can we know which of this men are right, when they all accuse each other muttualy and claim that only they themselves are in the right?”

The Buddha answeared:

>"So, as I said, Kalamas: 'Don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, "This contemplative is our teacher." When you know for yourselves that, "These qualities are unskillful; these qualities are blameworthy; these qualities are criticized by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to harm & to suffering" — then you should abandon them.' Thus was it said. And in reference to this was it said.

>"Now, Kalamas, don't go by reports, by legends, by traditions, by scripture, by logical conjecture, by inference, by analogies, by agreement through pondering views, by probability, or by the thought, 'This contemplative is our teacher.' When you know for yourselves that, 'These qualities are skillful; these qualities are blameless; these qualities are praised by the wise; these qualities, when adopted & carried out, lead to welfare & to happiness' — then you should enter & remain in them.

He is saying: “Try it for yourselves, don’t believe in something just because of this or that, not even believe in myself if you eventually discover that what I teach doesn’t seem to be true to you”

>>10243388

Then the Buddha goes even further: he actually states that live after death and Karma might not be realities. He, the Buddha, was not completely free from the though and philosophy of his time, so he mentions Karma and Rebirth, and he probably believed that this was indeed a reality. Yet he was an honest man, and so he goes:

>"'If there is a world after death, if there is the fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then this is the basis by which, with the break-up of the body, after death, I will reappear in a good destination, the heavenly world.' This is the first assurance he acquires.

>"'But if there is no world after death, if there is no fruit of actions rightly & wrongly done, then here in the present life I look after myself with ease — free from hostility, free from ill will, free from trouble.' This is the second assurance he acquires.

So you see, the main problem of many Buddhists with Bachelor books (he has other books, some even better than this one you mentioned) is that he denies any believe in the afterlife, and thinks that Buddha was probably wrong when it came to the notion of Karma. Nevermind that he still shows extreme respect for the old sage, that he believes that Buddha’s teachings are one of the greatest ethical systems ever conceived by humankind, that he believes that everyone would live much better if they followed Buddha’s teachings: all of that is worthless to many people who simply refuse to see that Karma and Rebirth are a matter of faith, not of verified evidence, and that you can perfectly have great benefits by learning with the Buddha even if you don’t turn out your skepticism.

But as for books about Buddhism, I would suggest pic related as the best one to learn meditation and make it a daily practice in your life. This book is a treasure, and very comprehensive.

Also, you should check out the stoics. There are several good books about them. This website might help you start researching this great philosophy concerned with how to live well:

https://dailystoic.com/