/lit/ - Literature

>>12913986
I’m starting to see Buddhists pop up in other unrelated threads, patronizing other traditions or people’s philosophical/religious beliefs, in attempt to convince them of Buddhism. I think this is not a good idea. AFAIK, evangelism is downright counter-productive if the goal is to get people into Buddhism. All you’ll really do is turn people off and create aversion towards the religion. It’s also against right speech to be patronizing and to speak when it isn’t called for, or to speak for the sake of arguing and one-upping others, even if it is about Dhamma:
>“Monks, a statement endowed with five factors is well-spoken, not ill-spoken. It is blameless & unfaulted by knowledgeable people. Which five?
>“It is spoken at the right time. It is spoken in truth. It is spoken affectionately. It is spoken beneficially. It is spoken with a mind of goodwill.
>“A statement endowed with these five factors is well-spoken, not ill-spoken. It is blameless & unfaulted by knowledgeable people.”
AN 5:198

>>12913986
“Those who discuss
when angered, dogmatic, arrogant,
following what's not the noble ones' way,
seeking to expose each other's faults,
delight in each other's misspoken word,
slip, stumble, defeat.
Noble ones
don't speak in that way.

If wise people, knowing the right time,
want to speak,
then, words connected with justice,
following the ways of the noble ones:
That's what the enlightened ones speak,
without anger or arrogance,
with a mind not boiling over,
without vehemence, without spite.
Without envy
they speak from right knowledge.
They would delight in what's well-said
and not disparage what's not.
They don't study to find fault,
don't grasp at little mistakes.
don't put down, don't crush,
don't speak random words.

For the purpose of knowledge,
for the purpose of [inspiring] clear confidence,
counsel that's true:
That's how noble ones give counsel,
That's the noble ones' counsel.
Knowing this, the wise
should give counsel without arrogance."
AN 3.67

>>12914002
I would personally recommend only discussing Buddhism with other Buddhists, and only introducing it to another if they themselves are asking for an introduction (ex. “I am interested in Buddhism and don’t know where to start. Any recommendations?”). I don’t think it’s a good idea to push it with people who have their own views and have no interest in Buddhism.
>“Monks, a talk is wrongly addressed when, having weighed one type of person against another, it is addressed to these five [inappropriate] types of persons. What five? A talk on faith [in the Dhamma] is wrongly addressed to one devoid of faith; a talk on virtuous behaviour is wrongly addressed to an immoral person; a talk on learning [the Dhamma] is wrongly addressed to one of little learning; a talk on generosity is wrongly addressed to a miser; a talk on wisdom [in the Dhamma] is wrongly addressed to an unwise person.”
AN 5:157

Literally watered down hinduism, get btfo by sankaracarya pretty badly desu

>>12914115
Do you have any reading I could do on Sankaracarya's refutations of Buddhism?

>>12914134

Not that guy but I have a book on my pc at home with some of them that I can post when I get there in an hours. Here is an article that also talks about some of his criticisms, although the formattings kinda messed up. 4chan thinks the link is spam so i put it in pastebin

https://pastebin.com/QNgTE7FH

>>12914563
Much appreciated.

>>12914115
Based. Are you the fabled Guenon-fag? People seem to hate him here, but he is always very helpful and kind whenever I see him, and full of great information about Hinduism. He is one of the better posters on this board.

>>12914602
I haven't read Guenon and am not the anon you are taking about but I am familiar with Hinduism pretty well and can confidently shit on any Buddhist autism.

>>12914818
Why come into this thread then?

>>12914821
To shit on your pseudoreligion.

94:9.6.
Buddhism is a living, growing religion today because it succeeds in conserving many of the highest moral values of its adherents. It promotes calmness and self-control, augments serenity and happiness, and does much to prevent sorrow and mourning. Those who believe this philosophy live better lives than many who do not.
------------

94:12.4.
The great strength of Buddhism is that its adherents are free to choose truth from all religions; such freedom of choice has seldom characterized a Urantian faith. In this respect the Shin sect of Japan has become one of the most progressive religious groups in the world; it has revived the ancient missionary spirit of Gautama's followers and has begun to send teachers to other peoples. This willingness to appropriate truth from any and all sources is indeed a commendable tendency to appear among religious believers during the first half of the twentieth century after Christ.

>>12913986
“Whatever, Ānanda, is subject to disintegration, that is
called 'the world' in the noble one's discipline. And what, Ānanda, is
subject to disintegration? The eye, Ānanda, is subject to
disintegration, forms are subject to disintegration, eye–consciousness
is subject to disintegration, eye–contact is subject to disintegration,
and whatever feeling that arises dependent on eye contact, be it
pleasant or painful or neither painful nor pleasant, that too, is
subject to disintegration. Whatever is subject to disintegration,
Ananda, is called the world in the noble one's discipline.
“ The world. the world, so it is said Venerable Sir, But how far, Venerable
Sir, does this world or the concept of world go”?
“ Where there is the eye, Samiddhi, where there are forms,
where there is eye consciousness, where there are things cognizable
by eye- consciousness, there exists the world, or the concept of the
world. “
“Where there is no eye, Samiddhi, where there are no forms,
where there is no eye - consciousness, where there are no things
cognizable by eye- consciousness, there the world does not exist nor
any concept of the world."
“Friend, that by which one has a perception of the world and a
2
conceit of the world , that in the discipline of the noble ones, is called
the world? By what friend has one perception of the world and a conceit
of the world.?
By the eye" friends, one has a perception of the world and a
conceit of the world, by the ear …………. by the nose …………. by the
tongue…….. by the body ………… by the mind, friends, one has a
perception of the world and a conceit of the world . That friend by
which one has a perception of the world and a conceit of the world,
that in this discipline of the noble ones, is called ' the world'.
(S iv 95)

>>12913986
On the perception of infinite consciousness:
>"Furthermore, with the complete transcending of the dimension of the infinitude of space, [perceiving,] 'Infinite consciousness,' Sariputta entered & remained in the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness. Whatever qualities there are in the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness — the perception of the dimension of the infinitude of consciousness, singleness of mind, contact, feeling, perception, intention, consciousness, desire, decision, persistence, mindfulness, equanimity, & attention — he ferreted them out one after another. Known to him they arose, known to him they remained, known to him they subsided. He discerned, 'So this is how these qualities, not having been, come into play. Having been, they vanish.' He remained unattracted & unrepelled with regard to those qualities, independent, detached, released, dissociated, with an awareness rid of barriers. He discerned that 'There is a further escape,' and pursuing it there really was for him.
- MN 111

Alright someone help me out. I've actually been considering Buddhism for the last couple weeks. Where the hell do you start?

>>12915227
Check the OP
>>12913986
>Try In The Buddha's Words by Bhikkhu Bodhi for a beginner anthology (if you are averse to Bodhi for whatever reason, read different translations of the suttas available through the links above, especially obo genaud).
>Move onto reading entire Nikayas for more, read the works of Nyanananda (available from seeingthroughthenet) for stuff on the absolute deepest concepts in Buddhism.
If you're interested in meditation as well there is the middle column of books in the chart in the OP. Though remember, Right Mindfulness and Right Concentration are the last 2 parts of an Eightfold Path. There are not the whole of the path. As the chart says, sila before samadhi, virtue and morality before concentration and unification of mind (you'd find it hard to meditate with bad morality/virtue because your mind would be spinning and unstable).

>>12915227
start with giving and shiet

LAUDING THE INFINITE ONE
1. Since He who is Infinite attained unto the Wisdom Supreme, the long, long ages of ten Kalpas have rolled away.
The Light of His Dharma-Kaya is in this world eyes to the blind.
2. Seek refuge in the True Illumination! For the light of His Wisdom is infinite.
In all the worlds there is nothing upon which His light shines not.
3. Take refuge in the Light universal.
As the Light of His deliverance is boundless, he who is within it is freed from the lie of affirmation or denial.
4. Seek refuge in That which is beyond understanding,
For His glory is all-embracing as the air. It shineth and pierceth all things, and there is nothing hid from the light thereof.
5. Take refuge in the ultimate Strength, for His pure radiance is above all things. He who perceiveth this Light is set free from the fetters of Karma.
6. Seek refuge in the World-Honoured.
Since His glorious radiance is above all He is called the Buddha of Divine Light. And by Him is the darkness of the three worlds Enlightened.
7. Excellent is the Light of His Wisdom. Therefore is he called the Buddha of Clear Shining.
He who is within the Light, being washed from the soil of Karma, shall attain unto the final deliverance.
8. Take refuge in the Mighty Consoler. Wheresoever His mercy shineth throughout all the worlds, men rejoice in its gladdening light.
9. The darkness of ignorance perisheth before His light. Therefore is He hailed as the Buddha of Radiant Wisdom. All the Buddhas and the threefold choir of sages praise Him.
10. His glory shineth for ever and ever. Therefore is He called the Buddha of Everlasting Light.
Most excellent is the virtue of this light, for he who perceiveth it is born into Paradise without dissolution of being.
11. The glory of the Infinite is boundless, therefore is He known as the Buddha of Light Past Comprehension.
All the Buddhas glorify the majesty of His holiness that leadeth all the earth into His Kingdom.
12. His clear shining transcendeth all revelation, nor can human speech utter it. Therefore is He named the Buddha of Light Unspeakable.
All the Buddhas glorify the glory of the Infinite One who is Buddha through His promise of Light immeasurable.

>>12914563
>>12914134
I got home and have more that I can post. From 'The Advaita Tradition in Indian Philosophy'. The author takes the view that Buddha taught basically the same doctrine of spiritual absolutism as in the lineage of the Upanishads but from a different angle and emphasis and that most of the disagreement arises from misunderstandings having to do with terminology and language. In his view the closest to what Buddha actually taught is Madhyamaka, although not in a way that really disagrees with Advaita. I more or less agree with his argument. The famous early Buddhist scholar Rhys T David also agreed that Buddha was continuing the tradition and teachings of the Upanishads. As the author points out "among the views mentioned and rejected in the Brahmajdla Sutta (Digha Nikaya), the Upanisadic view of the Atma is not included."

From this perspective Shankara's arguments have to do with the logical flaws in the various Buddhist doctrines/philosophies constructed by Buddhists on top of Buddha's original teachings, and less with his original ideas. There are definitely things that Buddha himself taught that Shankara criticizes as illogical and wrong, although if the view above is correct and if Shankara became aware of what Buddha actually taught then most of his objections would have to do with his method/descriptions and less so with the underlying spiritual absolutism. Anyways:

x n . CRITICISM OF SARVASTTVADA BUDDHISM
Shankara says that the Sarvastivada school of Buddhism believes in the reality of the momentary atoms and the momentary ideas. These atoms and ideas are also supposed to form two kinds of aggregates (sanghdta). Shankara points out that belief in the theory of momentariness goes against the formation of such aggregates and renders all empirical life useless. The momentary atoms cannot combine by themselves. The momentary ideas too cannot unite themselves into the aggregate of five skandhas. And no self, individual or universal, is admitted in Buddhism which may be responsible for the unity of the aggregates. Moreover, when difference alone is taken as real and unity is discarded as illusion, how can the Buddhists logically talk of aggregates as no aggregate can be formed without unity? Even in the wheel of relative causation, the preceeding link may be taken as the immediate
efficient cause of the succeeding link only, not of the whole series. But on logical analysis, the antecedent link in the causal series cannot be regarded as the efficient cause even of the subsequent link, because the antecedent link ceases to exist when the subsequent link arises. If it is urged that the antecedent moment when fully developed (Parinispanndvasthah) becomes the cause of the subsequent moment, it is untenable, because the assertion that a fully developed moment has a causal efficiency necessarily presupposes its connection with the second moment and this repudiates the theory of momentariness.

>>12913986
On anatta:
>22. "You may well take hold of a possession,[26] O monks, that is permanent, stable, eternal, immutable, that abides eternally the same in its very condition. (But) do you see, monks, any such possession?" — "No, Lord." — "Well, monks, I, too, do not see any such possession that is permanent, stable, eternal, immutable, that abides eternally the same in its very condition."

>23. "You may well accept, monks, the assumption of a self-theory[27] from the acceptance of which there would not arise sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief, and despair. (But) do you see, monks, any such assumption of a self-theory?" — "No, Lord." — "Well, monks, I, too, do not see any such assumption of a self-theory from the acceptance of which there would not arise sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief and despair."

>24. "You may well rely, monks, on any supporting (argument) for views[28] from the reliance on which there would not arise sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief and despair. (But) do you see, monks, any such supporting (argument) for views?" — "No, Lord." — "Well, monks, I, too, do not see any such supporting (argument) for views from the reliance on which there would not arise sorrow and lamentation, pain, grief and despair."[29]

>25. "If there were a self, monks, would there be my self's property?" — "So it is, Lord." — "Or if there is a self's property, would there by my self?" — "So it is, Lord." — "Since in truth and in fact, self and self's property do not obtain, O monks, then this ground for views, 'The universe is the Self. That I shall be after death; permanent, stable, eternal, immutable; eternally the same shall I abide, in that very condition' — is it not, monks, an entirely and perfectly foolish idea?" — "What else should it be, Lord? It is an entirely and perfectly foolish idea."[30]
- MN 22

>>12915368
Again, if it is said that the mere existence of the preceeding moment means its causal efficiency
(bhdva evdsya vyaparah), this too is untenable, because no effect can arise without imbibing the nature of the cause and to admit this is to admit the continuity of the cause in the effect which would overthrow the theory of momentariness. Again if the preceeding moment is admitted to last till the arising of the succeeding moment, cause and effect will become simultaneous; and if the preceeding moment perishes before the arising of the succeeding moment, then the effect would arise without a cause. Hence, either momentariness or causation is to be given up. Again, these Buddhists believe in three uncaused (asamskrta) reals (dharmas) which are evidently not momentary for they are uncaused. These are space (akdsha), the revolution of the wheel of causation or pratityasamutpdda in which the destruction of each momentary link after its arising is eternally going on (apratisankhyanirodha) and nirudna where the process of the causal wheel is stopped for ever through pure knowledge (pratisahkhyd-nirodha). If these three are admitted as uncaused eternal realides, then the theory of universal momentariness is given up. And if, to save the theory of momentariness, these three are declared not as ‘reals’, but as ‘negation’ (abhava-matra) further contradicdons would arise. It would be illogical to regard space as merely ‘negation of covering' or emptiness (avaranabhava), for space provides room for extension of things.1 Again, to say that the causal wheel is merely ‘negation of permanence’ would be untenable, for this ‘negation of permanence* (nityaivabhava) applies only to a momentary link, and not to the wheel itself which is eternally going on, even though the liberated may escape from it. Even to say that the process or the flow of the series is ‘eternal’ only in the sense of ‘enduring’ (santati-nitya) is to give up momentariness. Moreover, there must be some unchanging eternal conscious being to perceive
this flow, as consciousness of change necessarily presupposes an unchanging consciousness.

What is the general Buddhist stance on consumption of meat? I understand that it was "accepted" if the meat was not intended for the monks during the Buddha's time. But now that we have a bit more knowledge it seems that being vegetarian or vegan is more in line with the teachings.

>>12915379
Again, if each unit flashes only for a moment, then even the talk of the flow is ruled out, for there is nothing to flow. This would lead to complete annihilation of all empirical life. Further, to treat nirvana as mere ‘negation of suffering* (duhkhabhava) would be to give up nirvana as Buddha taught and to give up nirvana would be to blow up Buddhism. If nirvana is complete annihilation, none will try to attain it. Again, if Ignorance is destroyed by Pure Knowledge then the theory of universal destruction without any cause is given up; and if it is destroyed by itself, then the path of spiritual discipline prescribed by Buddha becomes futile. Again, the facts of knowledge, memory and recognition give a death-blow to the theory of momentariness. Knowledge necessarily presupposes the eternal transcendental Self as its foundation. Everything else may be momentary, but not the undeniable Self which is self-shining. Memory also presupposes the self. Memory and recognition imply consciousness of at least three moments —the first moment in which something is experienced, the second moment in which its past impression is revived or it is again experienced and the third moment in which the first and the second moments are compared and the thing remembered or recognised as the same. Even if identity is rejected and similarity substituted in its place, a subject who persists for at least three moments is necessary to compare and recognise two things as similar. Again, if the self is a stream of momentary ideas, the law of Karma and the moral life and bondage and liberation will all be overthrown. One momentary idea will perform an act and another will reap its fruit. One idea will be bound, another will try to obtain liberation, and still another will be liberated. It is thus clear that the theory of momentariness destroys all empirical and moral life and renders the teachings of Buddha about bondage and liberation useless.

>>12915389
XIII. CRITICISM OF VIJÑÁNAVÁDA BUDDHISM

Shankara says that the Vijnanavadi Buddhists maintain that Buddha taught the reality of the objects to his inferior disciples who cling to this world, while his real teaching is that Vijnana alone is real. If external objects exist, they should be either substances having qualities or wholes made up of parts. We know only qualities which are mental; we do not perceive any substance over and above qualities. Again, if atoms are regarded as the units and the objects are said to be their aggregates, this view is unsound. Neither the atoms can be proved to be indivisible units nor can their aggregates be possible, as these aggregates can be neither identical with nor different from the atoms. It is the ideas themselves which appear as external objects, as a pillar, a wall, a pot, a cloth, etc. The fact that the idea is identical with the object is proved also by the rule that both are always experienced together (sahopalambha-niyama), the object and its perception are one, esse est percipi. If it is urged that this rule is negative in character and that ‘the ego-centric predicament* is common to both realism and idealism, Vijnanavada supplies the positive proof for the identity of idea and object by an analysis of illusory and dream objects.

Just as in illusion or dream there are no external objects but the ideas themselves appear as objects, so in the waking state too ideas themselves appear as objects. To the objection that illusion or dream should not be universalised, Vijnanavada replies that the dreaming and the waking states are on a par, because the fact of experience, qua experience, is the same in both, and because in both the states the creativity of consciousness is clearly manifested. Again, the plurality of ideas need not be attributed to the plurality of the so-called external objects. It can be satisfactorily and logically explained as being due to the difference of impressions (vdsana), which are the seeds of ideas. In this bcginningless world, impressions and ideas, like seeds and sprouts, go on conditioning each other. It is far more logical to believe that an idea is generated by a mental impression rather than by the so-called material object. Hence there are no external objects; consciousness itself assumes the ‘form* of the object and projects and perceives it as objective.

>>12915368
>>12915379
>>12915389
AFAIK the teaching of momentariness or mind-moments is a Theravada Abhidhamma teaching without real basis in the Early Buddhist Texts. I'm not invested in that teaching at all, and I already disagree with it.

>>12915394
After giving this correct exposition of Vijnanavada, Shankara proceeds to criticise it. Shankara believes in epistemic realism and ontological idealism. He is equally opposed to subjective idealism and ontological realism. For him, the empirical reality of this world of subject-object duality cannot be denied nor can its ultimate reality be upheld. The world is empirically real and transcendentally unreal. It would be absurd to suppose that Shankara, while criticising Buddhist idealism, compromises with his own idealism or becomes a realist or uses the arguments of realism in which he himself does not believe. Shankara accepts and defends only epistemic realism as it is not incompatible with his absolute idealism. His criticism is directed mainly against subjective idealism. He also carefully distinguishes his Vedantic idealism from the Buddhist idealism which he criticises. Vijnanavada condemns the subject and the object as totally unreal; they do not enjoy even empirical reality. They are purely imaginary (parikalpita). Only their ‘forms* which appear in knowledge are empirically real; they are superimpositions on the modification of consciousness (vijnana-parinama). Consciousness, infected with transcendental Illusion of Objectivity, appears in the form of subject and object. Consciousness assuming these forms is empirically real, for it is conditioned by avidyd (paratantra). Pure Consciousness which is totally free from this avidya and the subject-object duality projected by it is the ultimate reality (parinispanna). Shankara’s main objection is that the denial of even empirical reality to the individual subject and the external object is extremely illogical and contrary to our experience. From the empirical standpoint, it is illogical to separate the ‘form* of consciousness form its‘content' and retain empirical reality for this ‘form’ and reject the ‘content’ as totally unreal. When both the form and the content appear in knowledge together and both vanish together, what is the sense in making this uncalled for and impossible separation between the two? And when even this ‘form’ is discarded as ultimately unreal, why this needless partiality in favour of the‘form' and the prejudice against the ‘content'? You cannot cut a hen into two to cook one half and reserve another half for laying eggs, says Shankara. The individual subject and the external object enjoy equal status. Both are empirically real, though transcendentally both are superimpositions on pure consciousness. But their empirical reality cannot be questioned and they cannot be rejected as purely imaginary (pankalpita). To do so is to disturb our empirical life without any compensatory gain.

>>12915348
13. Take refuge in Him who is Holiest of Holy. Sun and moon are lost in the ocean of His splendour. Therefore is He named that Infinite in whose radiance Sun and Moon are darkened. Before whose Divine Power even that Buddha made flesh in India himself faltereth in ascribing praise to the Majesty of His true glory.
14. Far beyond human numbering are the wise in the high assemblage of the Infinite One. Therefore let him who would be born into the Land of Purity seek refuge in the Great Congregation.
15. In Paradise are the Mighty unnumbered, Bodhisattvas ranked in that hierarchy nearest to the Perfect Enlightenment. Thence are they made flesh upon earth according to the way of salvation that all having life might be saved.
16. Take refuge in the ocean-deep Soul Universal.
For the sake of all dwelling in the Ten Regions hath He kept the fullness of all the Teachings, in His divine and mighty promises.
17. He who is Infinite never resteth, for together with the Bodhisattvas of Compassion and Pure Reason He laboureth, that the souls of them that duly receive Him may have salvation, enlightening them with the light of His mercy.
18. When he who is born into the land of Pure Peace returneth again into this sinful world, even like unto that Buddha made flesh in India, he wearieth not in seeking the welfare of all men.
19. Seek refuge in the World-Honoured, for His Divine Power is Almighty and beyond man's measure, being made perfect in inconceivable Holiness.
20. The Srāvakas, the Bodhisattvas, the Heavenly Beings and Souls in Paradise, they in whom wisdom is made equal unto beauty, declare their attributes in order, according to their former birth.
21. Seek refuge in Him in whom all strengths are equal.
Nought is there to compare with the excellent beauty of the Souls in Paradise, for their being is infinite as space, and far are they above celestials and mortal man.
22. Whoso would be born into Paradise shall in this life be made one with those men that return no more unto birth and death.
In that Pure Land is none who hath stood among doubting men, and none also who hath trusted in his own deeds for Salvation. To this do all the Buddhas witness.
23. If all having life in the Ten Regions hear this Holiest Name of Him that is Infinite, and attain unto the true faith, they shall obtain joy and gladness.
24. For when a man with joy accepteth the sacred vow of Him that is infinite who saith, "I will not attain unto perfect Enlightenment unless in Me shall all the world be made whole," at that very time he shall assuredly be born into Paradise.

>>12915388
Generally, consumption of meat is allowed though among Buddhist circles vegetarianism or veganism is viewed very positively. As I understand it, monks cannot refuse food even if it is meat.

>>12915402
Hence Shankara declares: The object cannot be rejected as utterly unreal because we experience it. It does appear in knowledge as an object and is perceived by us as such. The fact that the idea and the object are always experienced together (sahopalambha-niyama) does not prove that the esse of an object is percipi. Their simultaneous presentation in a knowledge-situation does not establish their identity. This argument is merely negative; it can neither prove idealism nor disprove realism. ‘The egocentric predicament’ is common to both realism and idealism. It merely asserts that we cannot know without knowing. To be perceived by the mind is not to be a portion of the mind. If objects depend epistemologically on the mind, it does not mean that they cannot exist ontologically apart from the mind. The proposition ‘Objects cannot be known without mind* is certainly not equivalent to the proposition ‘Objects cannot exist without mind'. Nobody normally takes his perception as identical with the perceived object. The arguments of the Vijnanavadi in denying the external world, though he is himself experiencing it, are like the words of a person who while he is eating and feeling satisfied says he is not eating or feeling satisfied.

Again, if there is no object, how can its ‘form’appear in knowledge? A form, unrelated to a content, is an impossibility. Even the ‘objects' which appear in illusion or dream presuppose our experience of world-objects. A person who has never seen or heard of a snake can never mistake a rope for a snake nor can he dream of a snake. The contention of Vijnanavada that the idea of objectivity is a transcendental Idea and not an empirical one, and therefore, even though there are no real objects, the Idea of objectivity does the trick is untenable, because the transcendental Illusion of objectivity can work only by projecting objects which are empirically ‘given* to us and are experienced by us as real and objective. When the transcendental Illusion is set aside, the subject-object duality may be realised as unreal, but as long as we are engrossed in this phenomenal world we have no option but to take the subject and the object as equally real. The form and the content of knowledge cannot be separated here. So if there be no object given to us, even its form cannot appear in knowledge. Even the Buddhist while explicitly denying the external object implicitly accepts it. Dinnaga says that ‘the internal idea itself appears as if it were something external’2. Now, if there is no external world, how can he say that the ‘form’ in consciousness appears as if it were external?

>>12915411
Indeed, no sane person says that Visnumitra appears like the son of a barren woman. There can be no hypothetical without a categorical basis. Possibility always implies actuality. The possibility or impossibility of things can be determined only through means of right knowledge. That is possible which can be proved by valid means of cognition; and that is impossible which can be so disproved. Now, the external objects are apprehended by all valid means of cognition. How can their existence be then legitimately denied? It is therefore established that ideas and objects arc distinct. It cannot be argued that just as in illusion or dream consciousness assumes the form of the object and projects it as objective, without there being any real object, similarly in waking state too consciousness itself appears in the form of objects, for the simplereason that dream and waking states cannot be placed on a par. Things seen in a dream are sublated in waking state. Their falsity is realised when the dreamer awakes. But world-objects are never contradicted in empirical life. Moreover, the projection of the object in illusion or dream is possible because of our experience of the real object in waking life. Without the object being ‘given' to us in waking state, even its form cannot appear in illusion or dream. Again, illusion and dreams are private, while waking life is public. Even if this world is an illusion, it is a transcendental illusion, and even if it be a dream, it is a cosmic dream. It is wrong to treat dream and waking states on the same level on the pretext that both are experienced through consciousness. Even the VijnanavadT Buddhist realises the difference between the two and what is directly experienced cannot be refuted by intellectual jugglery.

>>12915419
Again, the difference in ideas is due to the difference in objects. The idea of a jar is different from the idea of a cloth, because ajar is different from a cloth. This means that an idea is different from an object. The Buddhist assertion that the plurality of ideas is due to the plurality of impressions and not due to the plurality of objects is wrong, because if objects do not exist then impressions themselves cannot arise. Moreover, impressions are mental modifications and they need a self to inhere. But in Vijnanavada there is no substratum where impressions may inhere. Alayavijnana too which is held to be momentary cannot be, like individual cognitions (pravrtti-vijnana), the substratum of impressions. Those Vijnanavadins (Svatantra-Vijhdnavadins) who uphold the reality of the momentary vijnanas only make the position worse by degenerating into solipcism. Shankara says that his criticism of the theory of momentariness also applies to Vijnanavada. Momentary ideas cannot ideate themselves. They can neither apprehend nor be apprehended by themselves. There must be a permanent self to synthesise the fleeting ideas and give them unity and meaning. If the VijnanavadI Buddhist replies that the idea is self-conscious and is self-shining like a luminous lamp, he is wrong, for to say that the momentary idea illuminates itself is as absurd as to say that fire burns itself. Infact, it is only the eternal Self which is self-luminous and self-proved as the undeniable foundation of all our knowledge A momentary idea which arises and falls cannot be treated as self-shining. An idea is apprehended by the self. An idea is just like an object in relation to the knowing self, who is the subject. If the VijnanavadI Buddhist says that by idea he means pure consciousness and that we Vedantins too who accept the ultimate reality of pure consciousness accept his view, he is utterly mistaken because for us an idea is only like an object to be illumined and known by the self (vijhanasyapi avabhasyatvdt). It is the self, not a momentary idea, which is pure consciousness. Again, if the VijnanavadI rejoins that our transcendental Self which is self-shining and self-proved is only his idea in disguise, he is wrong, because whereas his ideas are many and momentary and are no better than scattered objects originating and dying away and depending on the self for being illumined and known, our Self, on the other hand, is non-dual and eternal and is the transcendental Subject, the foundation of all knowledge and experience, which synthesises these scattered ideas into a unity and illuminates them and makes them known. If the momentary vijnana were the only reality and there is no self, then there would be no experience at all. And all empirical life, morality, spiritual discipline, bondage and liberation, etc., will crumble down.

>>12915424
For Shankara the correct way to prove the ultimate unreality of this world of subject-oject duality is not to reject the subject-object duality even empirically, but to show the essentially self-contradictory character of this world as indescribable either as real or as unreal or as both, and thus prove its falsity from the ultimate standpoint, by treating it as a projection of avidyd on the ground reality of pure Consciousness. As Vijnanavada as well as Svatantra-Vijnanavada both accept idealism par excellence, both epistemologically and ontologically, Shankara’s classic criticism of epistemic idealism applies to both these schools. But as Vijnanavada believes in absolute idealismand its Absolute called the Vijnanamatra is pure, non-dual and eternal consciousness which is beyond avidyaand its subject-object duality and which can be realised only by immediate spiritual experience, it is partly saved from Sharikaracharya’s criticism to this extent. His criticism applies with full force to Svatantra-Vijnanavada which has degenerated into subjective idealism and has vigorously revived the theory of universal momentariness

XIV. CRITICISM OF SHUNYAVADA BUDDHISM
Acharya Shankara summarily dismisses Shunyavada by taking it to be self-condemned nihilism. He says that Shunyavada is contradicted by all valid means of cognition and is below criticism, for this phenomenal world, the empirical reality of which is established by all valid means of cognition, cannot be negated without reference to and realisation of transcendental Reality which must be admitted as its ground. It is now well known that Shunyavada is not nihilism; it is absolutism which believes in transcendental reality and negates the world only with reference to it. Nagarjuna himself defines tattva or ultimate reality thus: ‘That which is realised in immediate experience, that which is calm and blissful, that where all plurality ceases, that which transcends the categories of thought and is super-sensuous, that non-dual experience is Reality; this is its definition.' Shankara takes Shunyavada in its popular sense of nihilism, but his above criticism may imply that if Shunyavada believes in transcendental Reality then it is absolutism. Shankaracharya makes it clear that he has criticised other views not for any interest in discussion for its own sake, but for the sole purpose of helping the aspirants for liberation to enable them to reject false views hindering the true path leading to pure Bliss. The self-awareness of thought of its own limitation should lead to a firm conviction in the truth of the Vedanta teachings and finally to its realisation through spiritual discipline.

>>12915431
You could've linked a PDF, I hope you're not gonna be copy and pasting an entire book or multiple chapters of one.

>>12915437
nope that's the end

>>12915456
Ah ok, thanks.

Is Buddhism saying that you must give to the poor for 3 hours a day or a way to find peace and meaning in life?

>>12913995

>Evangelism is downright counter-productive if the goal is to get people into Buddhism. All you’ll really do is turn people off and create aversion towards the religion

Buddhism did not travel the width and breadth of the Ancient Indian subcontinent and Eastern Asia on the strength of passive men with passive words. Its one thing to be patronizing and dismissive, its another to have banter on an imageboard, and quite a separate thing from both to Evangelize the word of our Lord Buddha.

I don't oppose calling out people who are not being polite, but don't fall into the trap of thinking we are not a faith that proselytizes. We proselytized from Bactria to Japan, and if we want Buddhism to last another generation, we must proselytize from California to Russia.

>>12915478
The latter. It promises cessation of suffering above all else. The Buddha regularly summed up his teachings as "the truth of suffering and the truth of the path to the cessation of suffering."

>ITT: Theravada Supremacism

And while the Dalai Lama is in a hospital too.
Smh desu senpai.

>>12915485
There is time for debate and spreading the teaching, but it should be participated in according to the guidelines the Buddha provided on Right Speech. The posts I was referring to that I've been seeing were indeed dismissive and patronizing. Clearly done with the intention to put down and 'submit' the other person, not done with a mind of good-will.

>>12915500
idk anon I don't see anything that would imply Theravada sectarianism. One anon disavowed the Theravadin Abhidhamma commentaries, and the chart in the OP includes Nagarjuna.
I haven't seen any direct putdowns of entire sects yet, as though they don't all have at least some wisdom to be found in them (despite many having faults as well).

>>12915227

Find a local Temple or Buddhist Center and talk with the resident priest. Buddhism may be written but it is first and foremost an oral tradition.

If you cannot explore local temple(s), read a general introduction or three on the different schools of Buddhism (Theravada, Mahayana, Vajrayana) and pick one to start investigating with more seriousness.

Meditate! But avoid going much further than simple breath meditation. More advanced techniques typically need an instructor, and if you're interested in Vajrayana, most of those techniqures *absolutely require* an instructor.

If you want one particular recommendation for a broad overview of general Buddhism, including all 3 major traditions, I'd go with Essential Buddhism by Jack Macguire. It's very much 101 and once you get further you might cringe at some of its oversimplifications later, but it was my start and it served me well.

>>12915227
This anon:
>>12915553
Has good advice. Although I must say reading is still very important, at least for Theravada and Mahayana. It is imperative that you read the suttas. Again, In The Buddha's Words is a great introduction.
But yes if you're interested in Vajrayana, a teacher is basically required, since it is a mostly esoteric sect.

>>12915227
I also wouldn't say to hold off on meditation techniques beyond simple breath stuff. The techniques found in works like With Each and Every Breath, or The Mind Illuminated, or variations of the Mahasi noting vipassana technique, can all be started solo. Once you start advancing though, as the other anon said, it is good to see a teacher to instruct your meditation for obvious reasons.
The importance of reading suttas however is to keep your views strong, since monks are falliable but the word of the Buddha is not (since this is after all about the Buddha's teachings).
Not that the later works have no value (like the Platform Sutra, Diamond Sutra, works of Linji, works of Nagarjuna, which are all brilliant), but they are valuable only for the reason that they illuminate what is taught in the suttas.
Suttas>all

>>12915637

Its worth noting that the Vajrayana takes a very diffirent interpretation of the value of the Suttas - especially the Pali ones. They were spoken for the benefit of those unable to realize the value of the Prajnaparamita Sutras, or even more supremely, to practice the Anuttarayoga Practices. The value of the Sutras is limited as well, from our perspective, and cannot lead you beyond a somewhat elementary point.

They have value, but the oral traditions passed on by your Guru - or at least the head of your lineage - are the true source of infallible dogma.

>>12915701
While that is fair, it is debatable and shouldn't be taken as the sole way of viewing the Early Buddhist Texts.
I still think it is important for any Buddhist to read the suttas to understand what the historical Buddha taught. It is Buddhism after all, and Vajrayana is one sect (not to discredit it).
If the practitioner comes to the conclusion that later sects/teachers developed a superior path than the one taught by the Buddha, that's their call, but they should know exactly what path it is that they are leaving for a 'greater' one before they leave it.

>>12913986
>>12915227
It is worth considering these words from this sutta, spoken by the Buddha during his final dying days:
>31. And the Blessed One recovered from that illness; and soon after his recovery he came out from his dwelling place and sat down in the shade of the building, on a seat prepared for him. Then the Venerable Ananda approached the Blessed One, respectfully greeted him, and sitting down at one side, he spoke to the Blessed One, saying: "Fortunate it is for me, O Lord, to see the Blessed One at ease again! Fortunate it is for me, O Lord, to see the Blessed One recovered! For truly, Lord, when I saw the Blessed One's sickness it was as though my own body became weak as a creeper, every thing around became dim to me, and my senses failed me. Yet, Lord, I still had some little comfort in the thought that the Blessed One would not come to his final passing away until he had given some last instructions respecting the community of bhikkhus."

>32. Thus spoke the Venerable Ananda, but the Blessed One answered him, saying: "What more does the community of bhikkhus expect from me, Ananda? I have set forth the Dhamma without making any distinction of esoteric and exoteric doctrine; there is nothing, Ananda, with regard to the teachings that the Tathagata holds to the last with the closed fist of a teacher who keeps some things back. Whosoever may think that it is he who should lead the community of bhikkhus, or that the community depends upon him, it is such a one that would have to give last instructions respecting them. But, Ananda, the Tathagata has no such idea as that it is he who should lead the community of bhikkhus, or that the community depends upon him. So what instructions should he have to give respecting the community of bhikkhus?
- DN 16
This should be considered when determining the worth of the Early Buddhist Texts and the early Pali Suttas, which are as far as I know, universally agreed to have been the words of the historical Buddha, if not the words significantly more likely to have been the words of the historical Buddha than any other text.
These words were spoken to Ananda, the Buddha's personal attendant, who compiled all of the suttas he heard the Buddha give, at the first Buddhist council.

>>12915966
- Mahaparinibbana Sutta
>It concerns the end of Gautama Buddha's life - his parinibbana - and is the longest sutta of the Pāli Canon. Because of its attention to detail, it has been resorted to as the principal source of reference in most standard accounts of the Buddha's death.
>"I have set forth the Dhamma without making any distinction of esoteric and exoteric doctrine; there is nothing, Ananda, with regard to the teachings that the Tathagata holds to the last with the closed fist of a teacher who keeps some things back."
hmmm

>>12914002
Boring

>>12915227
Try /ourmonk/ Pannobhasa Bhikkhu...

>>12916229
That is a pretty based quotation

>>12916229
Do you have anything else on Pannobhasa Bhikkhu? Any works or talks you like?

>>12916029

Funny, he very much did not say that according to the Mahayana Mahaparinirvana Sutra

We have minority different accounts of his death, but *very* different accounts of his last words

>>12916292
>On the basis of philological evidence, Indologist and Pali expert Oskar von Hinüber says that some of the Pali suttas have retained very archaic place-names, syntax, and historical data from close to the Buddha's lifetime, including Mahāparinibbāṇa Sutta. Hinüber proposes a composition date of no later than 350-320 BCE for this text, which would allow for a "true historical memory" of the events approximately 60 years prior
>Nirvana Sutra is a Tathāgatagarbha sūtra of Mahāyāna Buddhism.[note 1] It's precise date of origin is uncertain, but its early form may have developed in or by the second century CE.
Not to be dismissive, but I will at least say I know which one I trust.

>>12913986
What is the Buddhist stance on esotericism? Does it believe in such a format of transmission? Or advocate knowledge to be given to everyone?

>>12916321
The Buddha of the Pali Canon (the earliest recorded words of the Buddha) had no room for esotericism, as mentioned in this post:
>>12915966
However, most of the later Vajrayana sect sees esotericism positively, and is even based around esotericism.

>>12913986
A reminder to everyone in the thread that the Pali Canon predates Theravada Buddhism, and Theravada has revisions of its own (which can be found in the commentaries) that don't line up with the suttas

>>12916348
Thank you. Man, I feel like from the outside, the inheritors of Siddhartha's doctrine have veered from it quite a bit. Is this a valid assessment? Is so, is it something to feel upset over? I am disappointed to know that living Buddhist cultures may not be the best representations of his doctrine, compared to the inert transmission left on paper. Which nation would you say has the Buddhist culture most in line with the Buddha himself?

>>12916378
>Is this a valid assessment?
I'd say so to be honest. However, do not let the negatives of the sects fool you into thinking they have nothing of value to offer. The Platform Sutra, The Diamond Sutra, (especially) the works of Nagarjuna, and the Record of Linji are all brilliant works precisely because they illuminate the teachings already present in the Pali Canon.
>Is so, is it something to feel upset over?
That depends on you to be honest. I think the best reaction is to help preserve Buddhism as best as you can by starting on the individual level: reading and becoming proficient in knowledge of the suttas, and helping to teach others what you learn.
The Buddha predicted himself that his teachings would be degenerated rapidly after his death. I think Buddhism is especially prone to revisionism and degeneration because it is not a teaching that appeals to the passions, making it very unique, as well as distasteful for those who see its incredible profundity but still cling to their passions, eternalist world views...etc.
>Which nation would you say has the Buddhist culture most in line with the Buddha himself?
This is impossible for me to say. All monks are falliable, and there is no place in the world that practices "perfect" Buddhism without revision as it was taught in the Early Buddhist Texts.
That said, the monk Venerable Nyanananda (who unfortunately passed away not long ago) I think was the foremost modern monk in adhering strictly to the original teachings. And before someone accuses me of being a Theravada sectarian: Nyanananda was labelled a heretic by other Theravadins for referring to Mahayana texts when appropriate and when the texts in question illuminated the teachings of the suttas in a better way than any Theravadin commentarial texts could. He even called out the Theravada commentaries regularly for their inconsistencies. I would recommend his works in addition to the suttas over any other monk I know of.
Lastly, you might be thinking "well damn do I have to follow the path to its end all by myself since all the traditions are degenerated in their own little ways?" and the answer is no. In my case, I utilize the help of Theravada monasteries for meditation training and to give alms, one monk I visit in particular I disagree with massively since he is a hardcore Theravadin who adores the commentaries. The point is, no teacher is perfect and that is only a problem if you want to adhere to guruism, and get all your information from the teacher. Compare everything you're told by a monk or teacher to the suttas.
As for traditions, I appreciate some of the Ajahn Chah forest tradition teachers, and the Mahasi Sayadaw tradition teachers when it comes to meditation. For a specific nation? I don't know, maybe Thailand or Sri Lanka, though it is really hard for me to say that. Consider everything else I've said in this post when you read that answer.

>>12916292
>>12916276
I like his older blogs on Buddhism and his own journey of becoming and remaining a monk of the Theravada tradition, to be found at nippapanca.org, including his article "What did the Buddha Really Teach?". His latest stuff is more social commentary from a Buddhist perspective, which is also cool. He is very approachable and happy to talk about Buddhism to sincere seekers.

>>12916443
Thanks anon, I'll check that stuff out

>>12916254
He is a pretty based guy.

>>12916450
De nada! Links to all his blogs are on navakavada.org plus he has a minds.com account.
:-)

>>12916479
Another great line. Awakening in Buddhism is not an attainment of something, but a letting go, particularly of attachments, fetters and delusions.

>>12913986
I've recently become able to perceive a new kind of visual phenomena, involving an all-pervasive "static" found throughout the air and hovering around every object, including the known concept of "auras". Assuming this to be a kind of "siddhi", a meditative attainment documented in Hindu-Buddhist tradition, is it something I should be developing further? If so, might a local Buddhist monk be able to lend me, a random outsider, guidance in navigating such a development? I'm not Buddhist, and may become one in the future after I study it properly, but for now I desire to better understand the nature of this newfound experience that's opened up to me.

>>12916504
Do you meditate to a great enough degree that you would expect such effects to occur in your perception? If not, I'm not sure if it's worth mentioning. Even if it is a result of meditation, I don't know if perception of energies or auras is considered a siddhi in Buddhism. My best guess is that, if it is indeed a product of meditation, it is some sort of kundalini phenomenon as they Hindus explain it. There also seems to be a lot of overlap between kundalini phenomena from Hinduism and the Arising and Passing Away insight stage in Buddhism. I'd look into both (again if its from meditation) and see if anything matches up.
If it is in fact the A&P stage, I'd recommend getting guidance from a vipassana teacher (the monks that do teach it, teach it free of charge).

>>12916504
It could also be a classic case of this:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_snow

I heard about kyudo the other day and the concept of a martial art focusing on technique and elimination of external distractions is appealing to me. Unfortunately there isn't any in my city. Do you guys know of any similar activities?

Someone suggested yoga but I don't know anything about different types and which would be most similar. Also it seems much less badass than archery.

>>12916479
If I can recommend a monk for you to check out too, I recommend the works of Venerable Kaṭukurunde Ñāṇananda Bhikkhu. He's already been mentioned multiple times in this thread, but his works brilliantly explain such deep concepts in an understandable yet not at all watered down way.
His works are all freely available on seeingthroughthenet.net/books

>>12916550
I don't know maybe Qi Gong, though that is some real advanced stuff.
I'm not really well versed on any mixes of martial arts and Buddhism other than that the famous Shaolin temple mixes kung fu with Chan (or Zen) Buddhism.

>>12916524
I don't meditate, but before this came to me I was undergoing a very intense psychological crisis within myself, that I later believe might have had a spiritual dimension to itself. Not a kundalini awakening per se, but something, of some kind. My ignorance on it prohibits me to speak further. That said, it isn't merely >>12916533, as that was the first topic I looked into after this happened to me, and only captures part of what I'm experiencing. I can quite clearly see colors around people if they're in front of a plain, uncolored surface, like a white wall, and can see a general glow around all objects at all times. What I've read on the subject of auras corresponds with my personal perceptions, but I'm not too familiar with this domain beyond the basic belief that it's not a visual dysfunction, and matches the existing literature on what auras appear as.

>>12916584
I don't really know what to say, I'm not aware of any equivalent in Buddhism other than that many people experience wild phenomena during the Arising and Passing Away insight stage (sensations of shocks of energy pulsing through the body, rapturous bliss, seeing auras, having unusual visions, things of that nature).
Perhaps with the further pursuit of something like meditation you can see if it grows into anything else.
Although admittedly, in Buddhism, all meditative effects and sparks and whistles are to be regarded as impermanent, unsatisfying, not-self, and not worth getting attached to. This applies not only to experiences like you're having, but also to extremely profound meditative states where all sense of the physical body and physical senses disappear and there is only perception of infinite space, consciousness, nothingness...etc, so don't feel bad.
All in all, I wish you good luck in finding what you're looking for

>>12916607
Thanks a lot anon. I'm not familiar with Buddhism yet as I said, and so your terminology of the Arising and Passing stage is unknown to me at this moment, but I'll take up your suggestion of finding a Vipassana teacher and see if they can help me here. Either way, don't worry about the egotism that might come from it, I've hopefully overcome that stage which I was originally in after I first began seeing these things. I no longer identify it as a part of myself, or care for it being there, but I figure that if it's already with me regardless, and can be improved upon like any other ability, I may as well attempt to if doing so doesn't hurt me. It will not detract me from a higher spiritual pursuit, or become a source of personal ego.

>>12913986
This thread is exactly what I needed in my life. Thank you.

Buddhism is a retarded fucking religion which is focused entirely around being satisfied with achieving and creating nothing. Fuck this disgusting Eastern cancer infecting young Western minds with its hideous teachings of complacency and laziness.

>>12916863
really mean, anon

>>12916868
Yes, but true.

>>12913986
What's the point of Buddhism exactly when the Gita exists?

>>12916863
>Achieving nothing
I don't know anon, the teachings on metta are incredibly clear about the significance and importance of helping other beings. It doesn't recommend everyone just meditates in a cave their whole life. Why do you think the Buddha himself went and taught instead of sitting around doing nothing? It was because of his compassion and loving-kindness, the foremost drive for action in this life

>>12913986
>“Monks, to whatsoever person malice is arisen, towards
him universal love (mettā) should be developed.
(ii). “Monks, to whatsoever person malice is arisen, towards
him compassion (karuṇā) should be developed.
(iii). “Monks, to whatsoever person malice is arisen, towards
him equanimity (upekkhā) should be developed.
(iv). “Monks, to whatsoever person malice is arisen, towards
him unmindfulness and inattention (asati amanasikāro)
should be exercised.
(v). “Monks, to whatsoever person malice is arisen, towards
him the attitude of taking into account the fact that he is
the owner of his own deeds (kammassakatā) should be
adopted. “That Venerable one is the owner of his own
deeds, heir to his own deeds, deeds are the matrix for
him, deeds are his kin, deeds are his refuge, he will
become the heir of whatever he does.”
- A. III 185.
>"Monks that noble disciple, thus free from covetousness,
free from ill-will, undeluded, fully aware and mindful pervades
one direction with thoughts imbued with mettā (Universal Love),
likewise the second, likewise the third, and likewise the fourth.
Thus upwards, downwards and across all around and all over the
world he dwells pervading with thoughts imbued with mettā
abundant, grown great, boundless, free from wrath and anger. He
knows thus: ‘Earlier my mind was petty and undeveloped. But
now my mind is boundless and well developed. Whatever limited
kamma that has been done could not leave any residue there, that
would not withstand it.’ What do you think, monks if this boy
from his childhood itself would develop Deliverance of the Heart
through mettā, will he do an evil deed? “No indeed, Venerable
Sir.” Will suffering touch a person who does not do an evil deed?
“No indeed, Venerable Sir. How can suffering touch one who
does not do an evil deed, Venerable Sir?”
- Karajakāya Sutta
>‘The monk who abides in Universal Love
Pleased in the Buddha’s behest
May attain to that state of peace
The blissful stilling of preparations’
- Dhp. V. 368

>>12913986
‘….. may they be happy and safe
may all beings be happy at heart
whatever beings there are
whether frail or stable – none excepted
whether long or large
middling, short, minute or massive
whether seen or unseen
those dwelling far or near
born or seeking birth
may all beings be happy at heart
Let one not deceive another
nor despise anyone anywhere
in anger and with malicious intent
let no one wish ill for another
Just as a mother would protect her son – her only son at
the risk of her life
so let him towards all beings develop a boundless heart
a mind imbued with mettā in the whole world, let one
develop boundlessly
upward, downward and across
unimpeded with no hate or enmity
whether standing, walking or seated
or lying down as long as one is awake
let one resolve this mindfulness
this, they say is the Divine Abiding here.'
- Metta Sutta

>>12913986
"There are these three things that are (genuine) mother-&-child-separating dangers. Which three? The danger of aging, the danger of illness, the danger of death.

"A mother can't get (her wish) with regard to her child who is aging, 'I am aging, but may my child not age.' A child can't get (its wish) with regard to its mother who is aging, 'I am aging, but may my mother not age.'

"A mother can't get (her wish) with regard to her child who is growing ill, 'I am growing ill, but may my child not grow ill.' A child can't get (its wish) with regard to its mother who is growing ill, 'I am growing ill, but may my mother not grow ill.'

"A mother can't get (her wish) with regard to her child who is dying, 'I am dying, but may my child not die.' A child can't get (its wish) with regard to its mother who is dying, 'I am dying, but may my mother not die.'

"These are the three things that are (genuine) mother-&-child-separating dangers.

"There is a path, there is a practice, that leads to the abandoning and overcoming of these three mother-&-child-uniting dangers and these three mother-&-child-separating dangers.

"And which is that path, which is that practice...? Just this very noble eightfold path, i.e., right view, right resolve, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, right concentration.

"This is the path, this the practice, that leads to the abandoning and overcoming of these three mother-&-child-uniting dangers and these three mother-&-child-separating dangers."

— AN 3.62

>>12913986
"Whenever you want to perform a bodily act, you should reflect on it: 'This bodily act I want to perform — would it lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Is it an unskillful bodily act, with painful consequences, painful results?' If, on reflection, you know that it would lead to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it would be an unskillful bodily act with painful consequences, painful results, then any bodily act of that sort is absolutely unfit for you to do. But if on reflection you know that it would not cause affliction... it would be a skillful bodily action with happy consequences, happy results, then any bodily act of that sort is fit for you to do.

"While you are performing a bodily act, you should reflect on it: 'This bodily act I am doing — is it leading to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both? Is it an unskillful bodily act, with painful consequences, painful results?' If, on reflection, you know that it is leading to self-affliction, to affliction of others, or both... you should give it up. But if on reflection you know that it is not... you may continue with it.

"Having performed a bodily act, you should reflect on it... If, on reflection, you know that it led to self-affliction, to the affliction of others, or to both; it was an unskillful bodily act with painful consequences, painful results, then you should confess it, reveal it, lay it open to the Teacher or to a knowledgeable companion in the holy life. Having confessed it... you should exercise restraint in the future. But if on reflection you know that it did not lead to affliction... it was a skillful bodily action with happy consequences, happy results, then you should stay mentally refreshed and joyful, training day and night in skillful mental qualities.

...[similarly for verbal and mental acts]...

"Therefore, Rahula, you should train yourself: 'I will purify my bodily acts through repeated reflection. I will purify my verbal acts through repeated reflection. I will purify my mental acts through repeated reflection.' That is how you should train yourself."

— MN 61

>>12913986
"Birth is dukkha, aging is dukkha, death is dukkha; sorrow, lamentation, pain, grief, & despair are dukkha; association with the unbeloved is dukkha; separation from the loved is dukkha; not getting what is wanted is dukkha. In short, the five clinging-aggregates are dukkha."

— SN 56.11

>>12913986

>>12916782
>>12916868

>>12913986
He who, knowing, declared
release for all beings
from the snare of death,
welfare
for beings human & divine,
the methodical Dhamma —
seeing & hearing which,
many people grow clear & calm;
who is skilled in what is & is not the path,
his task done, influx-free:
is called
one of great wisdom,
bearing his last body,
awake.

>>12913986

>>12913986
>>12915227
>>12915553
>>12916229
>>12916378
>>12916504
>>12916782
On the question of whether a lay-follower, still enjoying sensual pleasures, not-celibate, not a total renunciate, can still realize stream-entry:
>"Leaving aside Master Gotama, the monks, the nuns, and the celibate laymen, is there even a single layman disciple of Master Gotama—white-clothed, enjoying sensual pleasures, following instructions, and responding to advice—who has gone beyond doubt, got rid of indecision, and lives self-assured and independent of others regarding the Teacher’s instruction?” “There are not just one hundred such laymen enjoying sensual pleasures who are my disciples, Vaccha, or two or three or four or five hundred, but many more than that.”

MN 73

>>12913986
Has Buddhism replaced Catholicism as /lit/'s flavour of the month set of beliefs to follow? I haven't browsed in a year and half

>>12917880
Nah that would be Hinduism

>>12916229
Culadasa says similar things, albeit in less harsh tone.

>Buddhist chantards

>>12916229
pretty shallow phil desu

>>12913986
Here's a free download link for a great book on Buddhist cosmology, for anyone interested:
https://arrowriver.ca/book/cosmoBook.php

>>12916378
Sri Lanka is the closest. People will say "that's just 20th century anglo Buddhism" but it really is the closest to the earliest texts. Flawed, obviously, but less so than other countries' Buddhist traditions

bump

>>12913986
>>12915227
>>12915553
>>12915637
>>12915701
>>12915810
>>12915966
>>12916029
>>12916292
>>12916312
>>12916366
>>12916378
>>12916504
>>12916229
"Herein again a monk might say:..

This is Dhamma,
this is Vinaya,
this is the Master's teaching.'

Now the words of that monk
are neither to be welcomed nor scorned,
but without welcoming,
without scorning,
the words and syllables thereof
are to be closely scrutinized,
laid beside Sutta
and compared with Vinaya."
- AN 4 180

>>12915368
so basically he plagarized his critique of Abhidharma from Nagarjuna?

bump

>>12913986
How is the Bhikku Bodhi translation of the Suttanipata?

>>12920997
I wouldn't trust it. Bodhi has a tendency of getting things wrong/inaccurate when it comes to the really deep suttas, and the Sutta Nipata is arguably the most filled with those kinds of suttas than any other book in the Pali Canon. I'd recommend the Pali Text Society translations as recommended in the OP.

>>12913986
one last bump

>>12916863
Doesn't sound like it promotes complacency or laziness to me:
>Then Anathapindika the householder went to the Blessed One and, on arrival, having bowed down to him, sat to one side. As he was sitting there the Blessed One said to him: "There are these five benefits that can be obtained from wealth. Which five?

>"There is the case where the disciple of the noble ones — using the wealth earned through his efforts & enterprise, amassed through the strength of his arm, and piled up through the sweat of his brow, righteous wealth righteously gained — provides himself with pleasure & satisfaction, and maintains that pleasure rightly. He provides his mother & father with pleasure & satisfaction, and maintains that pleasure rightly. He provides his children, his wife, his slaves, servants, & assistants with pleasure & satisfaction, and maintains that pleasure rightly. This is the first benefit that can be obtained from wealth.

>"Furthermore, the disciple of the noble ones — using the wealth earned through his efforts & enterprise, amassed through the strength of his arm, and piled up through the sweat of his brow, righteous wealth righteously gained — provides his friends & associates with pleasure & satisfaction, and maintains that pleasure rightly. This is the second benefit that can be obtained from wealth.

>"Furthermore, the disciple of the noble ones — using the wealth earned through his efforts & enterprise, amassed through the strength of his arm, and piled up through the sweat of his brow, righteous wealth righteously gained — wards off calamities coming from fire, flood, kings, thieves, or hateful heirs, and keeps himself safe. This is the third benefit that can be obtained from wealth.

"Furthermore, the disciple of the noble ones — using the wealth earned through his efforts & enterprise, amassed through the strength of his arm, and piled up through the sweat of his brow, righteous wealth righteously gained — performs the five oblations: to relatives, guests, the dead, kings, & devas. This is the fourth benefit that can be obtained from wealth.
(1/2)

>>12916863
>>12923042
>"Furthermore, the disciple of the noble ones — using the wealth earned through his efforts & enterprise, amassed through the strength of his arm, and piled up through the sweat of his brow, righteous wealth righteously gained — institutes offerings of supreme aim, heavenly, resulting in happiness, leading to heaven, given to brahmans & contemplatives who abstain from intoxication & heedlessness, who endure all things with patience & humility, each taming himself, each restraining himself, each taking himself to Unbinding. This is the fifth benefit that can be obtained from wealth.

>"If it so happens that, when a disciple of the noble ones obtains these five benefits from wealth, his wealth goes to depletion, the thought occurs to him, 'Even though my wealth has gone to depletion, I have obtained the five benefits that can be obtained from wealth,' and he feels no remorse. If it so happens that, when a disciple of the noble ones obtains these five benefits from wealth, his wealth increases, the thought occurs to him, 'I have obtained the five benefits that can be obtained from wealth, and my wealth has increased,' and he feels no remorse. So he feels no remorse in either case."

The Buddha didn't just tell everyone they had to become a monk, he advised lay followers on success and happiness in lay life as well, if they asked him.

>>12916948
this is a question I find myself asking. The buddha just seems not to mention Krishna. But renouncing the fruits of work and seeing all things as the same and as belonging to Krishna is pretty similar to buddhist teachings.

Have any of you guys succeeded in deep concentration? The breath sensations start to fade away after some time and I don't know what to do next.

>>12924829
>The breath sensations start to fade away after some time and I don't know what to do next.
let go the sensation that there's something that needs to be done

>>12924829
Focus on energy and rapture in your body.

>>12924829
Try to get instruction from a teacher. Monks at monasteries and temples will provide meditation instruction for free, provided that you have a solid foundation of right view.
What helped me was progressively trying to constantly reify the attention on the breath every couple breath cycles (every in-and-out breath. I would do a sort of mental reset, checking the quality of my attention on the breath, how clear it is, if my mind has wandered....etc). Then I would do this reset every single breath cycle (after every single in-and-out). Then I would make do this mental reset of attention after every single in-breath and every single out-breath. I should mention that these "resets" are like very very feather-light nudges to keep the ball rolling in the right direction.
You could also try giving yourself a mental reward everytime the breath is particularly clear, by cracking a little smile and smiling with your eyes to produce positive feelings for the mind to associate clarity with. If it is hard to produce positive feelings or joy (piti), try doing some additional daily sits of metta meditation (feels contrived for the first week or so but once it gets going, it's going). That would help tremendously.
After awhile of doing this all consistently (reset nudges, positive reinforcement...etc) the mind will get what is going on, and do it all automatically, by having exclusive attention on the breath, and by correcting automatically anytime there is some wandering or if the sensations get muddier. Once this starts happening its kind of surreal and feels like there's a sentry of some sort in your head watching and scanning for any hindrances (wandering, disappearing or losing strength of attention of the breath) and automatically correcting on its own without your intention.
Of course, sila and right view can ALWAYS use improvement and they contribute directly to meditation ability, so keep developing those even if they're not particularly underdeveloped.
Don't listen to the "do nothing dude lmao just sit down and don't do anything in particular with your intention:" that only happens in a very advanced stage of meditation that I am almost certain you (or the people who would make that suggestion) are not at yet, unless you're just accidentally falling into the 4 rupa jhanas every sit.

>>12924829
Also sits can probably be longer if they're not already. A very solid practice is 45m a day (provided that it is focused and done with strong intentions, and not just going through the motions), and an absurdly strong one is 45m sits twice a day, and overkill I'd say is anything from 2-6+ hours TOTAL a day.

>>12925076
*If you're only doing 10m sits, try and bump it up progressively over time as comfortably as you can. Start doing 5m extra, then when that's comfortable, add another 5m, until you can get up to something like 45m.

>>12924829
try the book The Mind Illuminated, it's probably the most detailed modern book about samatha meditation, and it mixes it with vipassana towards the later stages. You can also try out Leigh Brasington's book Right Concentration, once you reach TMI's 'Stage 7,' or honestly even Stage 6.

>>12924829
>>12924869
>“Mendicants, I have learned these two things for myself—to never be content with skillful qualities, and to never stop trying. I never stopped trying, thinking: ‘Gladly, let only skin, sinews, and bones remain! Let the flesh and blood waste away in my body! I will not stop trying until I have achieved what is possible by manly strength, energy, and vigor.’ It was by diligence that I achieved awakening, and by diligence that I achieved the supreme sanctuary. If you too never stop trying, thinking: ‘Gladly, let only skin, sinews, and bones remain! Let the flesh and blood waste away in my body! I will not stop trying until I have achieved what is possible by manly strength, energy, and vigor.’ You will soon realize the supreme culmination of the spiritual path in this very life. You will live having achieved with your own insight the goal for which people from good families rightly go forth from the lay life to homelessness. So you should train like this: ‘We will never stop trying, thinking: “Gladly, let only skin, sinews, and bones remain! Let the flesh and blood waste away in my body! I will not stop trying until I have achieved what is possible by manly strength, energy, and vigor.”’ That’s how you should train.”
AN 2