/lit/ - Literature

if you join buddhism they give you a free asian gf

>>17411315
I feel you, OP. I was very drawn to Buddhism a few years ago but after actually studying it, and I'm talking the serious traditions, not the mcMindfulness, "just let go bro" variety, I came to the same conslusions as you. It's like Pascal's wager in reverse, and it absolutely 100% depends on endless rebirth for the entire thing to be worth it, and that comes with a ton of philosophical problems aside from the fact it's simply not provable. Imo, real Buddhism is like Pascal's wager but in reverse. If the religion is wrong, you missed out a lot more in life by trying to deny youself even healthy desires.

I feel you, OP. I was very drawn to Buddhism a few years ago but after actually studying it, and I'm talking the serious traditions, not the mcMindfulness, "just let go bro" variety, I came to the same conslusions as you. It absolutely 100% depends on endless rebirth for the entire thing to be worth it, and that comes with a ton of philosophical problems aside from the fact it's simply not provable. Imo, real Buddhism is like Pascal's wager but in reverse. If the religion is wrong, you missed out a lot more in life by trying to deny yourself even healthy desires and attachments that make a normal life worth living.

I just like the anti-positivist views on logic Buddhism pits forwards, koans are a good tool for any mystic. I could even see other traditions developing similar practices, the stories of Nasreddin sort of work like Islamic koans funnily enough, though no one sees them like that (I think).

I feel you, OP. I was very drawn to Buddhism a few years ago but after actually studying it, and I'm talking the serious traditions, not the mcMindfulness, "just let go bro" variety, I came to the same conslusions as you. It absolutely 100% depends on endless rebirth for the entire thing to be worth it, and that comes with a ton of philosophical problems aside from the fact it's simply not provable. Imo, real Buddhism is like Pascal's wager but in reverse. If the religion is wrong, you missed out a lot more in life by trying to deny yourself even healthy desires and attachments that make a normal life worth living, and if it turns out to be right, well you have eternity, literally, to follow the path. It kinda defeats itself in that respect.

What books on Buddhism have you read?

>>17411804
In the Words of Buddha, the Dhammapada, some assorted Vajrayana books which admitted wasn't read for Buddhist reasons so to speak; I was interested more in the Tantric/dream yoga aspect so I'm sure that doesn't really count, and I guess a book's worth of constant Buddhist related arguments observed here or on some other forum.

For the westerner a lot of the appeal is just the aesthetic. For the easterner the appeals of Buddhism range from the idea of the simpler easier path (compared to the heavy ascetic Hinduism at the time, modern Buddhism is at times today just as harsh or more harsh as that Hinduism was) to the metaphysics and logic arguments of folks like nagarjuna, to and believe it or not this is a large reason in India and was throughout a lot of Asia, social justice tier reasoning. Example in India there’s the rather large Navayana movement which is basically “all of Buddhism is wrong but Muh equality and Buddha was always just social justice” there is also the appeal of the history of sages, there is the appeal of the wrathful practices, there is the historical appeal that something like Zen had, of being basically boarding schools for had kids. Vajrayana has the appeal of basically mixing Mahayana with the local traditions of Bon and that allowed more integration and modernization. And to each group in Asia you can find various other reasons. Example the Mahayana take on compassion isn’t necessary in Hinduism, compassion is often a result of attainment but not a goal or practice in and of itself.

I once read an early buddhist poem wherein a woman was extolling the sangha, not for any spiritual reason, but rather because she prefers it to having to cook water snakes and dirty old pots and pans for her family. Then of course there’s mystics who genuinely find sunyata, nirvana, anatta and so forth to be most logical and coherent.

But let’s be honest about the westerner, the major reason a westerner is attracted is purely 100% aesthetics. Oooo strange foreign Asian mysticism so exotic and strange, just like my oriental painting/anime! Not to say there’s no westerners who have been attracted for a greater reason, but most of the westerners who become Buddhist also develop a phony personality and even a phony cadence to their voice. I’m sure if you exposed these types to the beautiful cultural stuff of Christianity or Judaism or Islam or the like they’ll feel a large pull there also.

>>17412088
based Frater as always

>>17412088
What's wrong with Navayana? It's some top tier gymnastics, sure, but so is all of Mahayana for Theravadins.

Sounds like you got filtered by wikipedia since you're fixated on SUFFERING and various details of the Buddha's biography

>>17412088
Navayana was invented in the 20th century by one of India's founding fathers to keep Dalits from becoming Christians.

>>17412236
The fact they reject the basis of Buddhism entirely, Mahayana still assumes you’re reading the canon of Buddha’s teachings and then branch out with the “hidden” teachings, the revelations, commentaries, local related cult stuff and so forth. Mahayana’s conception of Sunyata and focus on liberating samsara as a whole as a requirement can be discerned from a close reading and certain interpretation of the Theravadin abhidharma systems concerning the dharmas as relational laws which exist as laws only in relation to each other. This doctrine easily morphs into Pratītyasamutpāda. Vajrayana is also logical as a integration of Hindu tantra into Mahayana along with local cultic stuff, and Vajrayana and Mahayana both assume you’re going to read the original buddhist doctrines just with special interpretations.

There’s a reason why the tendai sect/school/collages were able to collect all of the divergent sects texts and doctrines and have specialists of each part of Buddhism in-house while still developing their own unique idiosyncratic beliefs, the line of interpretation and addition is more or less logical and reasonable/feasible even if it doesn’t seem so to the modern western secular conception of these religions and conceptions of validity.

navayana Is cultural-Buddhism that has abandoned the fundamental basics in the name of local politics and current events tier social movements and progression. I honestly cannot respect a school that throws out the spiritual for the political and social.

>>17412278
This is also true, I also have a bias as I am a Gypsy, which is basically European-Dalit admixtures. I see the religion as something the worst aspects of my ethnicity WOULD go for and that disgusts me. Eradication of everything genuinely intellectual and spiritual to allow for a temporal short term gain. I cannot respect something like this.

>>17412308
I don't have a horse in this race but from a pan-Indian perspective of sorts, it makes sense. The alternative is letting Christian missionaries swipe the lowest caste from Hinduism by doing what they do and that would cause futher sectarianism in India long term. The only Buddhists of lineage in India are the ones in Ladakh (part of the province China claims belongs to them) and the Tibetan exiles (also a sticking point with China). Navayana is just Buddhism imported back to India for Dalits; it's not really a school anyone would study outside that context if they are interested in Buddhism from say a Western background.

>>17411315
The point of buddhism is that it is the best way to alleviate the suffering of one's self therefore of others (since there is no difference), which something a moral and rational person is obligated to do in order to qualify as either of those things

>There is just so much vague, confused, or straight up unanswered questions in Buddhism

I don't agree, go find a 和尚 who knows the Tripitaka and they will be able to answer anything you can think of.

>>17412373
>I don't have a horse in this race

Eh, I can say the same, I study world religion and philosophy, I think a level of distance to Buddhism is superior for us when dissecting it.

>but from a pan-Indian perspective of sorts, it makes sense.

Only in a political sense, and I have no respect or care for politics in comparison to my care for religion and philosophy.

>The alternative is letting Christian missionaries swipe the lowest caste from Hinduism by doing what they do and that would cause futher sectarianism in India long term.

And that would be a good thing, let the conflict occur, if one religion grows or fades let it be because of genuine religious sensibilities, urges and evangelization.

>The only Buddhists of lineage in India are the ones in Ladakh (part of the province China claims belongs to them) and the Tibetan exiles (also a sticking point with China). Navayana is just Buddhism imported back to India for Dalits; it's not really a school anyone would study outside that context if they are interested in Buddhism from say a Western background.

Again, I have no special place in my heart for Buddhism so the title of Buddhism isn’t an honorable thing in of itself; but even then you aren’t getting Buddhism, big deal you have the name Buddhism and the name siddhartha but none of the spirituality, none of the practices and texts truly remains. Such a Pyrrhic victory is not worth winning and the March of Islam and Christianity in India shows it isn’t one that shall prove sustainable in the long term.

>>17412423
Pretty sure the missionaries aren't much more genuine than the Navayanists if you want to talk about "genuine religious sensibilities," since they are effectively targeting people on lines of class and ethnicity

>>17412506
Eh, most missionaries I’ve seen go due to having their own passion and hunger for their own religion. But if you believe that both are equally soulless and without genuine religious sensibilities than neither is superior and both are equally worthless and should be spat upon.

>>17412523
I mean if they want to do charity or whatever and lead by example by following their favorite saint or whoever that's all and well but 1. if we are discussing English speakers they already live in heathen countries no matter their brand of Jesus so there's no reason to go abroad to India and 2. the missions in India are frankly exploiting a sociological issue in India which finds justification in Hindu scripture and if the Hindus don't care to 'fix' it that's on them, the market is at work, *but* given the choice between a neo-Buddhism derived from Indian religious tradition and a foreign one which is known for vicious intolerance of polytheists I would still maintain from an Indian perspective that mass conversion of their underclass to Christianity will lead to future conflict, suffering, death, etc., potentially worse than the existing Hindu-Muslim tensions

>>17412563
It boggles my mind they still find some justification for their caste system somehow, and that the untouchables for the most part adhere to it.

>>17411315
Suffering isn't a very good translation of dukkha. It means something more like "satisfactoriness" or "a sense of incompleteness". Suffering has a different semantic range. Dukkha is everything from feeling somewhat bored because your internet is out all the way to being burnt alive. You wouldn't say that you are suffering because your internet is out.

>>17412613
*unsatisfactoriness

>>17412563
>2. the missions in India are frankly exploiting a sociological issue in India which finds justification in Hindu scripture

I take issue with calling it an issue because that presupposes a religious ontology, form of ethics, politics and so forth. You can say that on a market level it’s less appealing but to speak of it as objectively a wrong is to prefer Buddhist and secular ideas over the Hindu conceptions. This isn’t fair when the topic is a majority hindu country which whole heartedly believes in that form of ontology and ethics.

>and if the Hindus don't care to 'fix' it that's on them, the market is at work, *but* given the choice between a neo-Buddhism derived from Indian religious tradition

Eh, you already know the killings and fights over buddhist and hindu doctrine differences, how sure some Hindus might consider Buddha an avatar but others a blasphemer. On a religious level their form of Buddhism denies all spiritual and religious aspects of Hinduism and Buddhism, here are the laws of this buddhism.
“I shall have no faith in Brahma, Vishnu and Maheshwara, nor shall I worship them.
I shall have no faith in Rama and Krishna, who are believed to be incarnation of God, nor shall I worship them.
I shall have no faith in Gauri, Ganapati and other gods and goddesses of Hindus, nor shall I worship them.
I do not believe in the incarnation of God.
I do not and shall not believe that Lord Buddha was the incarnation of Vishnu. I believe this to be sheer madness and false propaganda.
I shall not perform Shraddha nor shall I give pind.
I shall not act in a manner violating the principles and teachings of the Buddha.
I shall not allow any ceremonies to be performed by Brahmins.
I shall believe in the equality of man.
I shall endeavour to establish equality.
I shall follow the Noble Eightfold Path of the Buddha.
I shall follow the ten paramitas prescribed by the Buddha.
I shall have compassion and loving-kindness for all living beings and protect them.
I shall not steal.
I shall not tell lies.
I shall not commit carnal sins.
I shall not take intoxicants like liquor, drugs, etc.
(The previous five proscriptive vows [#13–17] are from the Five Precepts.)
I shall endeavour to follow the Noble Eightfold Path and practice compassion and loving-kindness in everyday life.
I renounce Hinduism, which disfavors humanity and impedes the advancement and development of humanity because it is based on inequality, and adopt Buddhism as my religion.
I firmly believe the Dhamma of the Buddha is the only true religion.
I consider that I have taken a new birth.
I solemnly declare and affirm that I shall hereafter lead my life according to the teachings of Buddha's Dhamma.”

With this they also reject the notion of the soul (which is a normative interpretation of Anatta) but they also deny reincarnation, they also politicize and radically reinterpret the doctrines of nirvana, dukkha and many others. As bad as new ageism

Cont

>>17412088
hey tripfag, you're alright. good post

>>17412088
embarrassing drivel. I've seen you post interesting stuff about william blake but this is one of the most ignorant effort-posts about Buddhism I have ever seen on this website.

>>17411315
I don't like Buddhism because it's too intellectual. Religions shouldn't be too intellectual. It's why Christianity is the perfect religion. Judaism is too cloistered, Buddhism too mental, Hinduism too weird, Islam too smelly, but Christianity got it just right.

>>17412599
If you watch the news lately you will learn that half India's labor force is employed in agriculture, which is the god-mother of feudalism.

>>17412648
If not worse due to the eviscerating of all spiritual and religious aspects in the name of politics.

> *but* given the choice between a neo-Buddhism derived from Indian religious tradition

In name and aesthetics only, it denies everything.

>and a foreign one which is known for vicious intolerance of polytheists

Do you think the many sages of Hinduism would prefer a vicious monotheist system which is spread and practiced with spiritual zeal or one that pretends to be of the ancients but rejects all spiritual doctrines and corrupts them for political aims?

>I would still maintain from an Indian perspective that mass conversion of their underclass to Christianity will lead to future conflict,

In terms of politics maybe, which shouldn’t be anyone’s measure for the spiritual worth of a religion or school of a religion.

>suffering, death, etc., potentially worse than the existing Hindu-Muslim tensions

So a kind of utilitarianism? The genuine Buddhist would argue perverting the teachings of the Buddha and performing this profane faith would extend significantly their time in samsara, extending their amount of incarnations, long term suffering; amount of deaths and so forth so this calculation isn’t correct. The Hindu would say you’re rejecting The Gods for samsara and this is an extreme sin no matter the suffering reduction as suffering doesn’t inherently matter nor does death. The Christian and Muslim will both argue that you’re giving these people eternal damnation instead of temporal conflicts between sects.

So the only argument where this is valid is a secular political angle, which no one should consider when the question is spiritual and religious in nature.

the tibetan stuff always seems like a tourist trap, and the south east asian stuff always seems too authentic for westerns to go into in the since that your buddy from vietnam/cambodia would have to stifle a credelous smile if u told him u were into it, but like zen seems sort of not bad which is weird cuz i hate most japanese shit

>>17412706
wow i should have spell checked that oh well fuck it yolo

>>17412664
Which part do you disagree with? On a statement by statement level its title as middle path refers to the in between of indulgence and asceticism.


The Buddhist logic systems and rhetoric of the likes of nagarjuna are world famous I don’t think that needs to be proven nor do I think it is arguable.

The social justice angle is referring to movements like the Navayana which is massive. One need only open the linji roku to see the amount of force and training that was applied to students of zen and it isn’t at all an uncommon practice in monasteries to integrate bad kids, the insane and others and try to rehabilitate them as monks.

The point I’m illustrating is there’s many reasons in Asia, or do you disagree with the statement that many westerners go into Buddhism for purely aesthetic and orientalist reasons? Like which things in particular do you disagree with friend? I’m not asking in a argumentative way.

>>17412648
I don't think Hinduism should be allowed some sort of privileged stasis which immunizes it from critique or engagement. It is a living breathing religious tradition, system of metaphysical beliefs, and cultural attitudes which holds sway over a billion people. If we can say Navayana is historically flimsy vis a vis the other Buddhist schools we can certainly take issue with points of Hinduism.

>>17411315


buddhism is more about removal of false identification than anything you mentioned, some people just want perfect self control

>>17412694
>So the only argument where this is valid is a secular political angle, which no one should consider when the question is spiritual and religious in nature.
Oh this is going to be a fun century isn't it. We tried ideological war, now it's time return to tradition with holy war. Yes there is no valid reason to prefer a more stable society as opposed to one where sociopolitically motivated religious movements are arm wrestling for control of disenfranchised people.

>>17412088
good poste

>>17412741
You can hold Hinduism up to criticism but it has to be from a place of either its own concerns or a metaphysical ontological and ethical system you presume is better. For the nation of India the ruling system is the multitude of forms of Hinduism the majority of which if pressed will ultimately back the caste system. And again all of the negative political aspects of Hinduism can be derived from their spiritual system, meanwhile the navayana has sacrificed all aspects of its spirituality for political benefit. Sure you can say according to your personal belief it is superior but I personally find it weak and not acceptable from the view of basically any other religion.

>>17412736
>But let’s be honest about the westerner, the major reason a westerner is attracted is purely 100% aesthetics.
how far up your own ass did you have to reach to dig out that chestnut

>>17412760
>Oh this is going to be a fun century isn't it. We tried ideological war, now it's time return to tradition with holy war.

My concern is religious and not political, When the question is someone’s spiritual well-being, their eternal soul, nirvana, moksha, heaven and hell and so forth, I do not care whatsoever about war, death and short term increases in suffering. If I was a Buddhist I would argue the teaching of the Buddha is worth more than a hundred wars and the kalachakra tantra explicitly says war with the non Buddhists is preferable, both internally and externally than allowing them to live and taint/destroy the teachings.

>Yes there is no valid reason to prefer a more stable society as opposed to one where sociopolitically motivated religious movements are arm wrestling for control of disenfranchised people.

Yes from a religious angle I see no reason to prefer temporal politics to the question of eternal religious truth. Nor shall I ever.

>>17412776
>all of the negative political aspects of Hinduism can be derived from their spiritual system
lol. it's okay, bruh, i enjoy talking out my ass too.

>>17412798
But the majority of westerners I’ve met and spoken to get into Buddhism because of aesthetics, either in their anime or in art of the mysticool and profoundly dark and strange foreign and exotic religion. Are you offended because it’s an obvious insight or do you disagree that many get into it because of aesthetics?

>>17412817
But this is true, we can trace a relationship between the priests, offerings, reincarnation doctrine and caste systems in a little spider web. Scholars of the Upanishads and vedas have noted this often, Kali Kaula is one text that analyzes this part of the history and how these beliefs flourished dependent upon each other. Like explain in detail how I am wrong and how the caste system problem isn’t rooted in Vedic religious structures and how these aren’t deeply connected to their conception of reincarnation.

>>17412810
>Yes from a religious angle I see no reason to prefer temporal politics to the question of eternal religious truth. Nor shall I ever
Which for you is not Hinduism so you support the missionaries. Sheesh just say so

>>17412819
its not an "insight" at all your casual encounters with people you barely know do not constitute knowledge

>>17412912
>>17412819
have you even met anyone in real life that had an interest in buddhism because of anime? that just sounds like the fruits of too much web surfing. real people in the real world are usually not as trivial as you're making them out to be

buddhism is basically taking the hallucinatory meditative states of a 2000 year old curry to be veridical experiences of fantastical realms, beings and forces.

without samsara, I think under the buddhist mindset you just kill yourself. parinibbana is essentially how an atheist conceives death anyway.

at the end of the day its a religion like any other. it's mythology, bullshit.

although he does have interesting things to say about the worth of life, the nature of objects, change, suffering/pleasure. read the suttas but from a critical angle. when they start talking about wind gods, monks touching the sun and moon, torture realms and god realms, treat it as if youre reading greek mythology.

>>17412904
Eh I’m an occultist, I’ll support the one that’s striving hardest for spiritual and mystical truth. Again the kalachakra tantra prefers war and killing to the teachings of the Buddha being corrupted and lost. Again devotion is one of the biggest parts of Hinduism and they explicitly reject the gods and soul. The only advantage is political.

>>17412912
But I’ve had many friends who have admitted it to me, in fact some of the most decadent aesthetic obsessed people I know irl focus on Buddhism as their preferred spirituality because they love the art and aesthetic of it. There’s nothing to be offended about if you’ve been taken in by aesthetics and Art, it’s not honorable but it’s nothing to be ashamed of. We can find this in all world religions.

>>17412819
>art of the mysticool and profoundly dark and strange foreign and exotic religion
What about all the tradzooms raised by atheist gen-xers who keep posting priest wojacks and pictures of medieval cathedrals retouched in the 19th century by romantic architects as proof of how based Christianity is? How is that any different from people thinking Buddhist statues and mandalas are pretty? The Chinese were according to legend converted by a pretty statue. Christian saints did Egyptian magic tricks to convince proles in the Roman empire. And so on.

>>17412929
Oh yeah, one of the lads I’m closest to admitted that he got into Buddhism and Taoism due to his interest in anime and because it made him feel like his animes. It’s no different from huysmans saying he chose Catholicism because the aesthetic of the churches, poetry and music. Again it’s not the worst and it’s not the most respectable. Art and aesthetic is meant to convey ideas, cause internal change and advance myth, lore and subjective knowledge. This being the impetus for conversion, initial interest and the primary benefit to many shouldn’t be considered that bad of a thing. Again how many people become trad caths today for the aesthetic? This isn’t unique to Buddhism but it is certainly a phenomena.

>>17412934
>kalachakra
Yeah it's pretty telling (and sad imo) that Buddhists developed millennarian holy war doctrine as a response to the Muslim invasions of Asia, to the point where the scriptures start describing the invaders in detail and saying this time we're going to get Maitreya for reals. But little did they know it was communist China who was going to grab Tibet.

>>17412935
See my other posts, it’s the same thing, it’s not bad and it’s not good, it just is. There’s no difference between tradcaths converting due to that, or I’ll give another real world example I know a dude who converted to Norse paganism because he saw the show Vikings.

Is what it is, I don’t think it’s a stretch that Buddhism, a religion which has no roots in the west except for the strands in random aspects of Greek skepticism and other such which developed so much in the west due to the work of theosophists who had no literature translated really and mostly made it up, orientalists addicted to the aesthetic, occultists like Bennett who saw it as another notch on their belts and various new agers, this religion which to this day is still spread largely via Asian media influx and influence into the west(through anime, the beats and many others ), I do not see how saying aesthetics is the primary drive is somehow a wrong or bad take.

>>17412953
OK so one person. You know one person who did this and now you're bloviating on internet forum about how
>But let’s be honest about the westerner, the major reason a westerner is attracted is purely 100% aesthetics
>>17412934
>But I’ve had many friends who have admitted
i dont think i can believe this, you spend way too much time on 4chan to know that many people. in any case, even if you are not lying, your artsy friends and their unusual interests do not give you grounds for making arrogant generalizations about white buddhists overall.

>>17412956
Yeah, you know I get a lot of flack when talking to Buddhists in name when I discuss aspects of Vajrayana and Mahayana which are a bit non-savory to the western lens. But a lot of common Buddhist doctrines or just practices get a lot of reactions when given to the westerner who’s been practicing a secularized form of these traditions. You know even that Sam Harris shills for dzogchen/Vajrayana, I always found it odd that people will go to him for their rational anti religious arguments and then go full force dzogchen/Vajrayana mode.

But in any case, my point still stands, many Buddhist would sooner die and fight for their religion to the death than let it decay or be replaced.

>>17413003
But where is the average westerner even getting to know about buddhism, are you telling me you think the average generic Buddhist convert is converting for purely intellectual reasons? Because he agrees with the doctrine of anatta or because he’s swayed by the Pali canon? I’m sorry but this just isn’t true, the primary way Buddhism spread in influence in the west has been orientalist popularizers like Allan watts, which is again mostly an aesthetic experience. You’re free to disagree but I honestly do not believe the generic new agey western Buddhist is converting because of his deep study of the Pali canon or because of how much he agrees with the doctrine of Anatta.

>>17413003
Also for what it’s worth, I use 4chan in bursts, so I’ll use it for a good deal of time in marathon, then drop it completely, then use it for a long while. Rinse repeat according to how the desire arises. I see it as no different from another’s usage of say Instagram.

>>17413029
>deep study of the Pali canon or because of how much he agrees with the doctrine of Anatta.

The emptiness of the 5 skandhas is a very basic and well-known doctrine. It's referenced constantly in mahayana sutras. It doesn't take that much deep study to notice and understand. I don't think anyone would convert to Buddhism without understanding and agreeing with it beforehand.

Heart sutra:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjWZz839T8w

>>17412976
Western Buddhism missed the boat when the Seleucids let Euthydemus do his own thing in Bactria since they had wars to fight on the Mediterranean side of the empire. Otherwise within a hundred years there would have been a Buddhist province in the last Hellenistic empire instead of an Indo-Greek kingdom cut off from Europe. But in any event I don't think it is fruitful for Westerners to just pick a wholesale sect of Buddhism from Tibet or Japan and call themselves rishis or whatever. Buddhism was established in those countries by random favoritism for different sutras or teachers that eventually morphed into independent localized schools. So as of now we've had what... theosophy and mcmindfulness? Not a great start.

>>17413069
I disagree, I used to go to group meetings of new agers (to try to shill them to go to better textual resources for stuff both eastern and western )both online and off( I’m in New York you can imagine how many of these exist.) and in that time I met hundreds if not thousands of people claiming to be Buddhist, chanting Om mani padme hum and so forth and having no capacity to explain any part of Buddhism and they haven’t read any core text of Buddhism other than new ageist and secularized texts. You’re over estimating the average new age westerner and under estimating how large they are. Perhaps my biases are colored in from my large exposure to new agers but it’s true really. There are so many like this.

>>17413070
Oh no it’s a crapshoot and I’m not even against the spread via aesthetics, I’ve known Buddhists who claim that the secularization, mindfulness and other such movements are in the long term good since that’ll eventually develop into western-local schools which fuse the western fixation on rationality and basically atheism with Buddhism which would allow for wider spread in the west, but idunno. If I had to bet I can only see Christianity, Islam, new ageism, westernized new age forms of Zen and Taoism and some wicca/neo-paganism being the spread of religious doctrines in the west in the near future.

>>17413101
>Group meetings of new agers

OK there you go, your experience is based on going to pretentious hippie buddhist groups. I'm sure there are plenty of ignorant hippies in the west but I'm not sure if they're the majority. To meet serious buddhists I would look at Buddhist retreats that have residents or buddhist centers that are branches of global organizations based in Asia like Hsi Lai in L.A.

>>17413138
Eh growing up I actually lived next to a Buddhist temple, I’ve exposure to serious Buddhists and the majority of western Buddhists are not the serious Buddhist variants, hell I even got empowerment’s in Vajrayana up to the Vajrakila Level in the Gelugpa tradition. Of course there’s serious western Buddhists, but again even these get initially attracted most often in my experience from aesthetics, media, orientalism and other such. Again is it so bad to admit many people get attracted due to exotic orientalism?

>>17411315
It's marketed as escapism in Hollywood and that makes it popular in the rest of the world.

Personally I'm shocked that Buddhism ever gained a foothold at all.
I really like Theravada, but I only know about it because I read books by edgy teachers like Chogyam Trungpa. Who by my standards now isn't even a real monk.
Buddhism constantly dies out and has to be restarted. Sri Lanka literally had all of their monks die and they had to get Burmese(or Thai?) monks to come and reordain people.
I hope it doesn't die out. It's really helpful for people like me who need morality, but struggle to believe in God.

>>17413029
if you are not lying about your friends, your flippant judgments about them are so close to contempt ('mysticool'? really?) as to be unreliable. people might become "interested" in buddhism for all kinds of reasons, but out in the world where people work jobs they don't necessarily like to survive and have ordinary problems (and exceptionally painful 'mental health' problems) to deal with, most new people come to dharma looking for answers because they have a lot of suffering in their lives. they've often tried many things - relationships, drugs, having children, other religions, psychotherapy, distractions of all kinds, you name it - and came up short.

interesting that you're trying to make this about "the average generic Buddhist convert", a purely hypothetical being who can be projected onto with anything you feel like saying, so we don't have to talk about concrete reality, because you know your position is weak

I'm trying to get something through to your opinionated ego (look at you projecting a view onto me about "purely intellectual reasons" you really are full of it aren't you). has it occurred to you that when you start ranting about "western buddhists" people who are actually trying to live that path are on this forum right now reading what you say? i don't give a shit about what you think about Alan Watts, I know people in the real world who go to dharma talks and retreats, I know why they come, and its not the silly reasons you insist on with your goofy slang idiom of "mysticool new agey anime," you're not going to bluff past me with these flailing vulgarisms. I'm not claiming to be the ambassador of dharma but I know a lot of people who go to talks, who go on retreats, who have been practicing for years or decades, and the common denominator of almost all of those people is intense suffering and the desire to alleviate it - not that they're necessarily in intense suffering NOW, but the experience of such suffering was the motivating factor for investigating dharma. Aesthetics can factor in initially for some and on some level all of desire is mediated by aesthetics to some degree, but you made a very strong claim about how significant of a factor that is, far far too strong

p.s. your point about alan watts is especially silly unless you're trying to say something about baby boomers 50 years ago

>>17413041
maybe its time for to take another break because this is silly shit

>>17413227
That’s a whole lot of emotion and not a whole lot of argument. Sure a large portion might come to Buddhism because of suffering but the initial interest isn’t because they think it’s intellectually the best way. Generic charismatic Christianity has just as much claim to being the first thing people suffering with drugs and other such turn to in the west and if not the aesthetic appeal that is the religious choice most will pick first in my experience.

And what do you mean a purely hypothetical being, we do not know each other so we cannot point to material examples from our life experiences, what is wrong with using an abstraction drawn from what ive seen in my life? I do not share a hate of abstraction.

And eh, I’m not against having an opinionated ego we all have one, friend, if you didn’t you wouldn’t be arguing! As for there being serious Buddhists here reading what I’m saying, how does that change the fact of anything I’ve said that many get interested because of a new age appeal, orientalism, exotic, and yeah I’ll use terms like mysticool why wouldn’t I? Are you offended for those hypothetical imaginal beings you mentioned earlier?

You can claim you know and have seen people as can I, neither of us then can claim more authority as our source of authority is our lived experience dealing with western Buddhists. I have said even in that same post it is not the sole reason but a large and majority reason many get attracted, I stand by that because that’s my experience and I do not believe Allan watts is so out of popularity when he’s still discussed among Us here and commonly in new age groups, again I know many Buddhists in real life who have gotten into Buddhism from watching and listening to watts and using him as a launch pad, being interested in the aesthetic experience of listening to his talks and his overall orientalism.

As for if I should take another break, grab hold of your passions why don’t ya?

>>17412088
buddhist aesthetics are absolute trash. Christianity is and always will be the absolute GOAT and the only real aesthetic religion
t. western buddhist

>>17411315
what if phenomena and the object of experience were a psychoanalytic object? To do away with the attempt to surpass the pleasure principle and achieve like a uh, metaphorical nirvana peace.

>>17411315
Taoism is the only real way.

>>17411315
You're spending too much time on here. Your confusion comes from the fact that you're listening to /lit/ instead of reading primary sources and forming your own opinion.

>>17414236
tao te ching #16
The ten thousand things flourish and then
each returns to the root from which it came.
Returning to the root is stillness.
Through stillness each fulfils its destiny.
That which has fulfilled its destiny
becomes part of the Always-so.
To be aware of the Always-so is to awaken.

Those who innovate while in ignorance of the Always-so
move toward disaster.
Those who act with awareness of the Always-so
embrace all, are not possessed by particular desire,
and move toward the Tao.
Those who are at one with the Tao abide forever.
Even after their bodies waste away, they are safe and whole.

#17
The best leader is one whose existence is barely known by the people.
Next comes one whom they love and praise.
Next comes one they fear.
Next comes one they defy.

If you do not trust enough, you will not be trusted.

True Persons do not offer words lightly.
When their task is accomplished
and their work is completed,
the people say, “It happened to us naturally.”

>>17412088
there is an aesthetic component to every religion, you dumb pseud

>>17413101
You're taking the dumbest and least authentic group and using it as an example of the inauthenticity of western Buddhism. This is disingenuous.

>>17411315
>The confusion of terms, the constant argument,
Spend less time on forums and more time learning about the actual teachings, preferably from someone who knows what they're talking about.
Also keep in mind that experience is incomparably more important than intellectualization and that failure to understand this is why most of /lit/ doesn't get Buddhism.
>I despise
That's not the point.
>I wouldn't wish to cease experiencing it
Read the parable about the leper. Of course you don't want to stop experiencing this, you've never experienced anything better.
>for the goal of reaching the possibly cessationary or transcendent experience of nirvana
The fact that it is the end goal does not mean that the path is not worth anything by itself. The methods the Buddha laid out have value even if the end goal of liberation is removed. From start to finish, it is a path to help alleviate dissatisfaction and pain, and replace them with serenity and happiness.
>doesn't seem like a good reason
If this is how you feel, it's fine. If the path doesn't seem worth practicing to you right now, then you shouldn't practice it.
The Buddha never said you had to do anything you didn't want to do. He said that if you are unsatisfied and wish for that to stop, his path was the way to the cessation of dissatisfaction. But if you think you can bear with the dissatisfaction of samsaric existence, you can keep going.
>Life is suffering
Bad translation. Idam dukkham is literally translated to "this is pain". A more adequate translation would be "pain is".
>doesn't sound like a statement that would spark the sort of journey that Buddhism takes you on
Because you're taking the mundane meaning of dissatisfaction as a mild inconvenience to your daily life, rather than in the broadest sense, as a fundamental characteristic of existence that encompasses every painful experience.
>even the state of nirvana seems unsatisfactory
Then you have not understood what liberation means. There are many explicit suttas on the subject.
>There is just so much vague, confused, or straight up unanswered questions
Buddhism is not a metaphysical framework, it is (in its purest form) a system that seeks to eliminate dissatisfaction. It doesn't provide answers like Christianity seeks to. Some questions are left unanswered because they are not necessary. Necessary to what? The cessation of pain.
>if you aren't actually an Easterner
The overwhelming majority of Buddhist scripture has been translated and commented. Many western monks take the austerity of monastic life to heart much more seriously than a lot of eastern monasteries, whose practices have degenerated over time.
The people ITT telling you western Buddhism is inauthentic are biased or misinformed.
>why would anyone seek to be an practicing Buddhist
To put an end to dissatisfaction and attain bliss.
>For all I know the Buddha could have been
Studying the texts will point towards your doubts being unfounded.

>>17414269
This.

What a dumb thread

>>17411802
>It absolutely 100% depends on endless rebirth
Yes, rebirth is a part of Buddhism. I get the impression that you were assuming Buddhism was somehow exempt from leaps of faith, which is not the case, as it is a religion. Secular Buddhism doesn't exist.
>for the entire thing to be worth it
Not true. The eightfold path yields results when it is applied sincerely, regardless of your "level" of advancement.
But yes, Buddhism is incompatible with hedonism.
>a ton of philosophical problems
>not provable
As I said above, Buddhism is not a metaphysical framework. You seemed to have studied it with the expectation that it would give you answers of the empirical kind, which was never its aim. The only goal it has is the cessation of pain and subsequent attainment of unconditioned bliss. Anything that does not contribute to reaching this goal is seen as unnecessary at best.
>If the religion is wrong, you missed out a lot more in life
This is not true except for a hedonistic mindset, as I said previously.
>deny yourself even healthy desires and attachments
Buddhism does not claim you should relinquish all desires and attachments, and clearly states that some of them are skillful and worth holding on to until you don't need them anymore.
Someone who doesn't believe in rebirth cannot be a Buddhist, but they can benefit from the eightfold path.
>you have eternity, literally, to follow the path
Why do you think there is laity in Buddhist countries?
To follow the path seriously presupposes you see no other action worth undertaking, that you are now ready to put an end to samsaric existence. Those who wish to stay in Samsara a little longer and experience its pleasures and pains are free to do so. Never at any point did the Buddha say otherwise.
This is a common wrong assumption about the path. It isn't meant for everyone. Though everyone will benefit from following some of the precepts, because they are conducive to a happier existence, not everyone is ready to commit themselves to the path entirely, and that's fine.

>>17412671
Well it has to be, because you're trying to see through and get around the "trick" of reality. This isn't an easy thing to do.

>>17412671
>it's too intellectual
>the fundamental premise of the religion is "stop obsessing over words and experience things for yourself"
Have you ever read anything about Buddhism aside from /lit/ threads? Be honest.

>>17411315
When you realise the suffering Buddhists talk about is just caused by their vegetarian diets and unstable genetics caused by racemixing.

No reason for a (mostly) pureblooded meateater to experience life as suffering.

I read about an intepretation of Buddhist cosmology that had the six realms, Mara and other "supernatural" entities and things explained as metaphors symbolizing different aspects of the human experience of life.
Does anyone know if such interpretations exist outside of Vajrayana?

not reading the tldr in OP, but for me, simply, serenity of mind

midwits are ladles, they can't fathom the purpose of upaya, thus they take it all at face value and get real upset

>>17414991
>midwits are ladles, they can't fathom the purpose of upaya, thus they take it all at face value and get real upset
Could you elaborate on this?

>>17414711
Yeah and it's all brainy stuff. Not for me

>>17411324
oof nice

>>17414998
The Dhammapada is extremely straightforward and intuitive, as are the core tenets of the Path.
By the Buddha's own admission, the entire mass of the teachings is nothing compared to experience. This directly goes against what you're saying.
You call Buddhism too mental but rigorous philosophical inquiry has been the cornerstone of Catholicism ever since the establishment of the Church, by the way. Christianity probably has the most complex, developed and sophisticated philosophy of all religions.

>>17414997
the dimwit reads a book about mindfulness, maybe does a little meditation, tries to be more aware of their own actions, feels better for it.

the midwit dives into the canon, failing to understand that all buddhist scripture is upaya (i.e expedient means, just as Jesus spoke in parables). they obsess over rebirths and convoluted steps to enlightenment and the like. they stress over different schools... which one is best, has Nagarjuna been refuted, is the Visuddhimagga heretical, etc. they become more obnoxious and bigoted for it, they develop more attachments than they had to start with.

>>17415040
Ah, okay. You're right then.
Diving into the canon is the first step though, I don't think it's bad to want to learn those things as long as you keep in mind there is no absolute realization to be found in the writings themselves.

>>17411315
New Age Boomer types were told anatta was a noun, allowing them to inject their brand of nihilism into it to mean whatever they liked.

>>17415262
It is a noun, it just doesn't mean "no self".

>>17415040
So what is the right way to learn about buddhism in your opinion?

>>17411315
Ah, so much. Too much to type. If you, OP, address me, I will reveal the answer to your question.

https://youtu.be/0gloEua0RSs?t=427
>[...] I will abandon fear and terror, and I will recognize whatever appears as a projection of my own mind.
Does this extend to other aspects of existence or is it only in the "post-death state"?

>>17415040
story of organized religion tbqh

>>17415414
not op but go ahead

>>17414666
>Secular Buddhism doesn't exist.

Isn't zen buddhism essentially secular, or no?

>>17416362
dude you're asking if a religious establishment and its institutions are secular

>>17416394
k.

>>17415424
Tantras have multiple meanings (outer, inner and secret) and citation you provided can serve as meditation advice useful in Dzogchen practices, especially Thogal practice.

>>17416875
What's the appeal of tibetan buddhism?

to make your butt less stinky

>>17416362
Zen has been secularized in western countries (especially the USA) because of pop mindfulness movements, but actual Zen/Ch'an/Seon Buddhism is very much a religion.

>>17417183
Where can one read up on "rea" Zen?

>>17417156
It's colorful and full of diverse practices. If you're not bothered by it's esoteric secrecy, lots of cultural baggage and strict obedience to your guru, then it might be for you.
>>17417183
>>17414666
Rebirth was in denied in Zen long before modern times.

>>17417251
>Rebirth was in denied in Zen long before modern times.
Not true, it depends on the teacher.

>>17417256
>it depends on the teacher.
So it was denied. Teachers in Zen enjoy a lot freedom in creating their own flavor of Dharma.

>>17417302
>So it was denied
By some. You're making it sounds like the doctrine of rebirth was unanimously rejected by "Zen" as an institution, which is false.

>>17417309
Zen they preached was still Zen and teachers were free to propagate their teachings further into their students. Do you deny they were Buddhists? Buddhism is not a monolith, Zen included.

>>17417417
Yes, I know. I didn't deny they were Buddhists. What's your point?

>>17417420
Does Buddhism depend on literal rebirth? Does secular Buddhism exist?

>>17417473
Zen doesn't, so no. And it's not secular either

>>17411315
escapism. study Castaneda: life is a challenge, not suffering.

>>17418528
>Castaneda
LMFAO
>not suffering
not what the buddha said anyway

>>17411802
>the fact it's simply not provable.
Then I dont think religion is for you

>>17416362
Zen is like Protestant Buddhism. It looked at what came before it said no to all the traditions and decided it would just simply follow the example of the Buddha.

>>17414666
In all honestly the only real Buddhists are monks and they're the only ones my criticisms are concerned with. If you really belive in the religion, then being a lay Buddhist is at best a larp, at worst, moral cowardice.
>>17420426
It most certainly isn't.

bum

>>17420451
This is completely untrue.

>>17421087
>the only real Buddhists are monks
Wrong.
>they're the only ones my criticisms are concerned with
And your criticisms are unfounded even when applied to monks.
>being a lay Buddhist is at best a larp, at worst, moral cowardice
You are wrong but you don't want to understand, it seems to me you're only interested in throwing a tantrum about Buddhism, or rather your misunderstanding of it, for whatever reason.

>>17411315
The seeming emotional nullification kind of turns me off. Emotions should be acknowledged and used.

>>17423262
Non attachment to emotion is not the same as no emotion

>>17417251
>>17416875
>>17417417
Zen and tantras are not compatible with buddhism.

>>17414986
>>17414986
>Does anyone know if such interpretations exist outside of Vajrayana?
pragmatic buddhism, more generally, any ''buddhism'' loved by atheists. Oddly enough, they are all on plebbit.

>>17423653
Is vajrayana reddit?

>>17411315
>>I despise the phenomena and conditioned world in some ways, an absolute searing hatred depending on the object/concept, but I wouldn't wish to cease experiencing it at least in part.
yes unenlightened people crave for consciousness, it's their deepest wish. They just want to wander around, over and over. Like watching movies over and over, even though there is nothing of value in this. Zoomers call this binge watching.

>>17411315
>Especially since the alternative experience, nirvana, is (purposely) ill-defined that no one truly knows what it actually is.
Nirvana is the cessation of desire.

>>17423702
Careful bro he's gonna call you a nihilist

>>17423702
So what do you do all day?

>>17419466
would you lmao at this woman? lmao at your mirror, degenerate faggot shill.

>>17423898
seethe schizo

>>17412933
>buddhism is basically taking the hallucinatory meditative states of a 2000 year old curry to be veridical experiences of fantastical realms, beings and forces.
So true omg
/thread

>>17424018
Completely inaccurate

>>17411315

In my honest opinion, Buddhism is a pessimistic and psychological degeneration of Advaita Vedanta. I'd suggest you to read about Advaita, It Is still about the end of perceptions but it's more neutral and less pessimistic.

>>17424141
It's only pessimistic if you're a hedonist. Advaita is cryptobuddhism anyway

>>17414184
grow up

>>17424215
???

>>17412599
the caste system is based and red-pilled

>>17423905
what? Of course Carlos Castaneda is on the shills blacklist, goys must not be warriors, goys must be hipster faggots, buddhists, christians, philosophers on meds.

I don't know either. I actually don't know why there's no middle way between worshipping Moloch, Mammon, and Ishtar (going full degenerate) and autistic self-annihilating asceticism. There's nothing inherently wrong with sex, food, healthy competition, etc. so long as they happen in an environment where sensible self-control is practiced and treasured as a virtue.

I’ll be honest. I have an aesthetic attraction to Buddhism and I’ve seen people I can identity with also develop affinities for it. I want to understand Buddhism so I can just form my own opinion but I’ve done almost no “looking into” for a few reasons. One is that I just don’t even know where to start. It seems like people disagree on it so much and since there’s no structured body as far as I know there’s no authority on how to interpret Buddhist philosophy. Another is that the various schools are so confusing. Apparently, Tibetan Buddhism has many gods and the other don’t and that has special implications, etc. I just don’t understand. Lastly, I was born and raised Catholic, developed affinities for Orthodoxy, and I haven’t quite abandoned that belief. All in all, I’m just so confused that I don’t even know who to synthesize and process everything.

>>17424680
seethe schizo

>>17424715
Read In the Buddha's Words, then the Dhammapada. You'll then know more about buddhism than 99% of /lit/

>>17424696
>autistic self-annihilating asceticism
This is a thread about Buddhism, not Jainism.

>>17424716
shill, do you know other words?

>>17424738
>you're a shill because you don't like my pseud hack author
Castaneda is a retard, deal with it

>>17411315
Confucius was right, reject Buddhism.

>>17411315
>I despise the phenomena and conditioned world in some ways, an absolute searing hatred depending on the object/concept, but I wouldn't wish to cease experiencing it at least in part.
Then don't. Just know that life is shit for most people, more than not. To stick around and help the rest of the world up - this we call the Bodhisattva path. And if that's what you decide to do, it will be embraced.

>>17424722
I don’t think that’s the best strategy. I wouldn’t recommend that someone who has no clue what Christianity is or how it varies from place to place, etc to just read the Bible.

>>17411315
>Especially since the alternative experience, nirvana, is ill-defined that no one truly knows what it actually is.
It's actually rather simple. Nirvana is being out from under the universe.

>>17424851
In the Buddha's Words is a great introduction written by a monk, not scripture.

>>17424819
>the Bodhisattva path.
And it's not necessary, on top of being exceptionally hard

>>17424715
>where to start
What the Buddha Taught. Then, read Red Pine's Heart Sutra translation. The first is literally written with people like you in mind (English speakers who have no clue what the fuck a "skandha" is). The second is literally written with people like you in mind (laymen who have no idea what "Sunyata" is).

Strictly speaking, all schools of Buddhism "have" Gods. The Buddhist cosmology is a modification of the Hindu one in that acceptance of Asuras and Daevas (an Asura is basically just a "bad God", not necessarily a demon however) is just a simple fact of life. It'd be like "not believing" in fungi, or cats. Rather, the role of these entities in the Buddhist practice is important. In the Theravada, they're just things, and you have to deal with it, so burn the incense so the Gods leave you alone. In most Mahayana, the treatment is similar, but there's many Gods that will actively help the laity and worshipers "do Buddhist stuff". Tibetan Buddhism takes this further, with there being many special entities that are basically Gods but aren't really (like Tara) that solely help you with "Buddhist stuff".

However, a Bodhisattva is something different. These are essentially Saints, but cranked up to 11. Some who takes the Bodhisattva Vow endeavors to, upon death, use their advanced and enlightened knowledge to hold-off on Nirvana to become a more-or-less-God to help others attain enlightenment. In practice, these fall under the "special God" category.

Really, though, anything cosmological is beyond the basics and frankly isn't really all that important. The focus on God(s) is a Western affectation and not one that is present in Buddhism in Asia. It's also not really present in Buddhism in the West (actual Buddhism, not meme-buddhism) either for that matter. The Gods are, or they aren't, neither answer affects Buddhism.

I've never read a criticism of Buddhism on this board that didn't stem from a fundamental misunderstanding of the doctrine.

>>17424750
Castaneda is professor of anthropology, and you are puny anonymous shillfag. you are very stupid pederast lol

>>17424894
The guy asked where to start, why do you disingenuously shift the focus to Mahayana instead of at least giving him the choice?
The Heart sutra is an introduction to Mahayana, which is a specific branch of Buddhism that diverges from what the Buddha taught on fundamental points (such as the alleged unity of Nirvana and Samsara). It's not an introduction to Buddhism.

>>17424899
dear stupid degenerate imbecile, your fucking Buddhism is a cope, has no measurable scientific goal, it is all about talking. Buddhism didn't produce a single man of knowledge. Buddhism is for degenerates who want to kill time in fetishized larp.

>>17424911
Plenty of college professors are retards, you impressionable faggot

>>17424931
>measurable scientific goal,
ok bugman

>>17424920
Whether your basic-bitch American Protestantism likes it or not, the Mahayana IS part of Buddhism as it exists in Asia, which the Theravada accepts. He's going to have to understand the basics anyways, especially since the Heart Sutra is (in its metaphysics, ignoring its dunk on Shariputra and the Bodhisattva vow) accepted by the Theravada as entirely valid. If you don't like that the Theravada tradition accepts that the Mahayana tradition is at its core valid and a path to Dharma, then that's on you. Even if he becomes full-on Thai Forest Tradition-boo, he's going to have to know what a Bodhisattva is. Even if he reads the entirety of the Pali Canon, he's going to have to know who Tara is.

Anon has no idea where to start. He doesn't know what a "Way of the Elders" or a "Great Vehicle" is. He has no capacity to compare the Theravada and Mahayana traditions, and neither do you. You have no idea what you're talking about, and I will ask you to refrain from poisoning the well by trying to start a fight on the internet.

>>17424941
you sound like real buddhist. "bugman".

>>17424932
plenty are not, but you shill have no arguments. you are very stupid faggot, glowie. Buddhism is right for you! lol

>>17424987
>>17425007
seethe schizo

>>17424931
based goyim following the jews

>>17424949
>Even if he becomes full-on Thai Forest Tradition-boo, he's going to have to know what a Bodhisattva is. Even if he reads the entirety of the Pali Canon, he's going to have to know who Tara is.
Not at all.>>17424949
>>Anon has no idea where to start. He doesn't know what a "Way of the Elders" or a "Great Vehicle" is. He has no capacity to compare the Theravada and Mahayana traditions, and neither do you.
Yeah and giving him mahayana sutras is sending on the wrong path.

>>17424949
For some reason my reply didn't go through.
>Protestantism
Again with this shit? You're obsessed.
>understand the basics
The Heart sutra is the basics of Mahayana. It isn't the basics of what the Buddha actually taught. You can go through as many mental gymnastics as you want, nothing will change this. The basics is the Dhammapada, if anything. The Heart sutra is the basis of Mahayana, like the Pure Land sutras are the basis of the PL tradition, or the Lotus sutras the basis of Nichiren. You are being dishonest.
>entirely valid
Now you're lying. Theravada has never accepted sunyata as a valid teaching, for good reason since it goes against the third noble truth. You can try to work around this with "muh upaya" but if your skillful means go against the most fundamental teachings, you're doing it wrong.
>Anon has no idea where to start
Indeed. Which is why you only recommending a Mahayana sutra and being dismissive of Theravada is disingenuous and hypocritical. If you wanted to help him in good faith, you would've at least mentioned some suttas, but you didn't because you're proselytizing.

>>17425062
To be fair, the bodhisattva vow exists in Theravada as well, so he'll learn about it at some point even if he doesn't read any of the "Buddha talks to an assembly of six trillion devas in heaven and tells them about a super secret teaching that he conveniently didn't teach to any of his actual monks because it'd blow their minds too much even though they're arahants" sutras

Why do you feel the need to find some ideology to attach yourself to? Can't you just appreciate and apply some of the wisdom in its teachings and then move on to the next thing you want to do?

>>17425272
Sometimes it comes naturally and you find yourself agreeing with pretty much every tenet of an ideology.

>>17411315
Your current existence is one of the least painful. You could spend eternities as a hell-being in so much pain you are unable to comprehend the meaning of beauty. Life as a human is relatively good compared to many of the other possible lives. Ultimately though you won't be experiencing those pains so much as your next life, so it's more compassion for yourself and others' suffering leading you to nirvana. You as you are now will only be experiencing humanity as it is.

>>17425335
Just enter the stream

>>17420426
Many things in religion don't have primary evidence, true, but there are secondary and tertiary matters around those things which nevertheless render them compelling. Reincarnation is lacking in this respect.

>>17425358
There is no reincarnation in Buddhism

>>17424899
I’ve never met Buddhists who fundamentally agree on the doctrines.

>>17425015
knowing you glowies shill against Carlos Castaneda is all people need to know.

>>17425392
Because there are different schools of Buddhism. Just read the scriptures and make up your own mind if you're struggling to see through the disagreements between branches.

>>17425406
take your meds

>>17412088
>But let’s be honest about the westerner, the major reason a westerner is attracted is purely 100% aesthetics. Oooo strange foreign Asian mysticism so exotic and strange, just like my oriental painting/anime! Not to say there’s no westerners who have been attracted for a greater reason, but most of the westerners who become Buddhist also develop a phony personality and even a phony cadence to their voice. I’m sure if you exposed these types to the beautiful cultural stuff of Christianity or Judaism or Islam or the like they’ll feel a large pull there also.
you earned this one

>>17425195
See >>17424894. Recommended literature for someone who is totally new, like you are, was already provided.

>>17411315
"Even though a disciple of the noble ones has clearly seen as it actually is with right discernment that sensuality is of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks, still — if he has not attained a rapture & pleasure apart from sensuality, apart from unskillful mental qualities, or something more peaceful than that[4] — he can be tempted by sensuality. But when he has clearly seen as it actually is with right discernment that sensuality is of much stress, much despair, & greater drawbacks, and he has attained a rapture & pleasure apart from sensuality, apart from unskillful mental qualities, or something more peaceful than that, he cannot be tempted by sensuality.”—MN 14

>>17425712
Sure, keep deflecting.

The early discourses frequently describe a particular causal sequence that results in samādhi. The initial step of this sequence (denoted as “x” just below) appears in many varied forms, but the rest of the sequence is remarkably consistent and proceeds like this:

x pāmojja (gladness) pīti (delight) kāyopassaddhi (bodily tranquility) sukha (pleasure) samādhi

What are the various things that begin this causal sequence? Or, more to the point, what are the various things that cause pāmojja to arise?

Recollecting one’s confidence in the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha and reflecting on one’s progress in giving up the kilesas (MN 7)

Seeing one’s mind purified of akusala states (MN 40)

Saddhā: faith, confidence (SN 12.23)

Guarding the sense doors, resulting in the mind not being soiled (SN 35.97)

Abandoning the ten courses of unskillful action, pervading all directions with the brahmavihāras, and reflecting on the “safe bet” of adopting the right view of kamma (SN 42.13)

Diligently practicing in solitude for further progress (SN 55.40)

Living in harmony with one’s companions, looking on them with kindness and muditā, resulting in cetovimutti (AN 3.95)

Hearing, teaching, reciting, or pondering the Dhamma, resulting in inspiration in the Dhamma (AN 5.26)

Grasping well a cause/object (nimitta) of samādhi, resulting in inspiration in the Dhamma (AN 5.26)

Recollecting the Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha, one’s pure moral conduct, one’s generosity, or the qualities one shares with those born into heavenly realms (AN 6.10)

Wholesome moral conduct with resultant lack of regret (AN 10.1)

Seeing that the hindrances have been abandoned (DN 2)

Bringing to mind a gladdening or inspiring theme (SN 47.10)

A broad view of this list seems to reveal two main themes. Most of the items here fall into the category of either inspiration or purification. Rearranging the list makes this more evident:

Inspiration

Recollecting one’s confidence in the Buddha, Dhamma, and Sangha (MN 7)

Saddhā: faith, confidence (SN 12.23)

Reflecting on the “safe bet” of adopting the right view of kamma (SN 42.13)

Hearing, teaching, reciting, or pondering the Dhamma, resulting in inspiration in the Dhamma (AN 5.26)

Grasping well a cause/object (nimitta) of samādhi, resulting in inspiration in the Dhamma (AN 5.26)

Recollecting the Buddha, Dhamma, Sangha, one’s pure moral conduct, one’s generosity, or the qualities one shares with those born into heavenly realms (AN 6.10)

Bringing to mind a gladdening or inspiring theme (SN 47.10)

Purification

Reflecting on one’s progress in giving up the kilesas (MN 7)

Seeing one’s mind purified of akusala states (MN 40)

>>17425934


Guarding the sense doors, resulting in the mind not being soiled (SN 35.97)

Abandoning the ten courses of unskillful action (SN 42.13)

Wholesome moral conduct with resultant lack of regret (AN 10.1)

Seeing that the hindrances have been abandoned (DN 2)

Of the few from the main list not so easily categorized, #6 (diligently practicing in solitude for further progress) is general enough that it could be in both categories, and the ones dealing with the brahmavihāras (#7 and part of #5) could also be seen as both inspiring and purifying.

So it seems that pāmojja, in the context of samādhi, arises from the interplay of inspiration and purification. Directing the mind to inspiring themes will purify it, and the mind’s purity generates inspiration. Pāmojja naturally ensues.

>>17425712
>>17425926
Oh and by the way, I did read the Heart sutra, and it was actually garbage.
>everything is empty
There I summed it up for the other anon. How beautiful, how profound!
Also, What the Buddha Taught is too succinct for someone who wants to learn what Buddhism is about and not just become acquainted with a list of terms to regurgitate and pretend to know what they're talking about (like you). In the Buddha's Words is better.

>>17425442
castaneda is based, and you are faggot :)

>>17425959
Based on lies apparently since it's now common knowledge that everything he wrote is fiction lmao

>>17425970
castaneda is truth, and you shills are stupid faggots. your destiny is to be pigs in shit.

>>17425712
>unironically recommending the heart sutra as the intro to buddhism
you do know it was written in china by some random dude centuries after shakyamuni's death right?
why do mahayanists insist in shoehorning their unrelated religion every time people ask about buddhism?

>>17425938
imagine being so boring degenerate. why do you live, zombie?

>>17425977
seethe schizo

>>17425938
Didn't the Buddha say you could just bruteforce liberation simply through mindfulness of breathing?

>>17411315

>I really do not see the point of Buddhism

This is going to sound pretty funny and even like mere convenience but, people shouldn't be looking so hard for a point anyway. If to let go of everything would mean one would have to let go of practicing whatever branch of Buddhism they were into, it would be pretty Buddhist to do that so yeah, lol

>>17426009
>If to let go of everything would mean one would have to let go of practicing whatever branch of Buddhism they were into,
This is literally a part of the Buddha's teachings anyway
Once you crossed over to the other shore, don't keep carrying the raft with you

>>17425984
>their unrelated religion
Why do you have to present the correct side so retardedly? Mahayana is very much related and the heart sutra is a great piece of buddhist literature. It's not even ads odds with Theravada.

>>17425997
you will never be a man

>>17426008
all people breath, yet all are stupid NPC faggots.

>>17426809
>It's not even ads odds with Theravada.
not true, sunyata is definitely at odds with the theravadin conception of samsara and nibbana

>>17426917
I have no idea what any of these words mean please explain

>>17427270
>sunyata
a concept in one of the two main branches of buddhism known as mahayana that states everything is "empty" of self-existence
for more on emptiness, read the heart sutra
>theravadin
that pertains to theravada, i.e. the other branch of buddhism
theravada is very barebones and relies on a compilation of discourses (suttas) called the pali canon, it doesn't concern itself with much else than what the buddha taught and that alone, because of this it's sometimes seen as austere
mahayana in contrast has its own canon on top of the pali suttas, which it calls sutras, there are many of them but the most important are the heart sutra, the diamond sutra, and the lotus sutra. mahayana is much more complex than theravada and much more focused on philosophy, it has a very complete cosmology and introduces many concepts that are not present in the buddha's original teachings, which is why some say it isn't as pure as theravada
theravada's goal is nibbana, the cessation of suffering, while mahayana's goal is to be a bodhisattva, which means delaying the attainment of nibbana/nirvana in order to help other people
the main doctrinal disagreement between theravada and mahayana is sunyata
>samsara
the cycle of rebirth and suffering, basically. to escape it is to realize nibbana
>nibbana
explained above

>>17411315
>I really do not see the point of Buddhism.
It combines a proselyting moralism with the alluring promise of sedation. The aspirants own social failures and feelings of inferiority and despair become validated by the teaching of Buddhism that our lives in samsara are inherently full of suffering and the inability to satisfy desires, "Wow, this is literally me" thinks every vapid teenager and Wham, you've got a modern religious movement. That it can easily and often is coopted by materialists is only natural.

>>17427437
Exceptionally retarded post.

>>17427314
>everything is "empty" of self-existence
how is that not the same in theravada? thanks btw appreciate it

>>17427447
in mahayana, sunyata is seen as a truth underlying all concepts, therefore nirvana and samsara are empty as well, and therefore are one and the same ("form is emptiness, emptiness is form"). for mahayanists, there is no difference between samsara and nirvana, and to realize this is to be enlightened
the theravadin view is very different, as they hold that samsara and nibbana are most definitely not the same thing. there is a notion of lack of self-existence the buddha taught called paticcasamuppada (or pratityasamutpada, "dependent origination") that basically boils down to the idea of everything being reliant on something else in order to exist. however this only applies to conditioned phenomena, which means everything in samsara, but the theravadin view is that nibbana is unconditioned, and therefore such concepts do not apply to it

basically mahayanists say nirvana and samsara are the same because they are both Empty, while theravadins don't subscribe to this idea of emptiness and say that everything in samsara is dependently originated, but that nibbana is something else entirely
not sure if my explanation is clear.

>>17427488
Yeah thanks. Does theravada ascribe to a cloud of unknowing type of deal regarding nirvana or are there knowledge claims about it?
I.e. you'll see when you get there

>>17427447
There are certain antecedents, but the pali canon mostly doesn't touch on it either way. The Buddha's teachings, at least what remains, are primarily focused on liberation. He does make claims, and present his reasoning, but again he is mostly focused on telling people how they can try it themselves, rather than seeking to defend his claims from every possible avenue of attack. After a certain point there is a kind of "Just shut up and see for yourself if it works" attitude present in early Buddhist writings.

Mahayana is much more concerned with presenting a total accounting of life the universe and everything, and defending these positions with philosophical rigour. I think this is likely due to it developing later, and being surrounded by more competing schools of thought and other religions, so it had to defend itself much more vigorously from external and internal critique than when the Buddha was alive and simply recounting his personal experience. However, because of this, and the need to lend authority to these ideas, they invent a suite of Super-Cosmic Buddhas, Ultra-Buddhas, Buddhas of Buddhas. It becomes a sort of Buddhist version of Hindu cosmology, which is something that The Buddha didn't necessarily discount, but considered largely unimportant. And within all this you can find concepts that arguably seem to run contrary to teachings in the pali canon, but then you have special interpretations to explain how this isn't the case, and it sort of becomes a matter of taste at that point.

>>17427560
the buddha said that nibbana was impossible to really describe with words or to cognize with rational thought, it can only be experienced. however he did give some descriptions of it, so that people would know what they were getting into at least.
the main statement that can be made about nibbana is that it is the absolute cessation of suffering. but there are sometimes other descriptions of it in the suttas, like pic related for example.
so yeah, you'll see when you get there, in the meantime no words can truly explain what it's like, but we have some approximations.

>>17427613
>rather than seeking to defend his claims from every possible avenue of attack.
there are quite a lot of suttas in the majjhima nikaya regarding refutations of other views and elaborate arguments, mostly against the worldviews expressed by brahmins
the buddha does say that it's useless to overthink it and that you can only reach the truth through experience, but he doesn't say "just shut up and do what I tell you" either

>>17427613
>but then you have special interpretations to explain how this isn't the case
Please elaborate on that king

>>17427646
Yeah, I think this is all in line with what I said, so I agree.

>>17427650
not him but a lot of mahayana sutras are presented as higher teachings that were disclosed by a buddha or bodhisattva to devas (gods), or teachings that were only shared with the buddha's closest disciples or with other special people. as such, some mahayana teachings are meant to be seen as "encompassing" in relation to the pali canon's parables, an example would be in the heart sutra in which sariputta (shakyamuni buddha's wisest pupil) is taught about sunyata and how it basically supersedes every other teaching: in the heart sutra, sariputta is told that sunyata applies even to the four noble truths, and that those truths are therefore empty, even though they represent the most important pillar of buddhist teachings according to the pali canon.
not sure if that's what the other guy meant by special interpretations, but it's good to keep in mind that mahayana basically "incorporates" theravada into itself through sunyata and the two truths doctrine. whether this is a good or bad thing is up to you.

>>17411315

Nirvana is tantamount to death

>>17427750
Death of suffering and dissatisfaction, yes

>>17427750
'Everyone dies' is not the core teaching of Buddhism.

>>17427750
>literally named "the deathless" by the buddha
>tantamount to death
quality post right there

>>17427650
In Vajrayana, or at least some lines, they come to a conclusion that is awfully similar to the Atman-Brahman equivalence found in some Hindu schools, which is why when you find Traditionalist who accept Buddhism as valid, it is nearly always the Tibetan strain of Vajrayana they accept. Hopefully someone more familiar with both can give a more detailed response, as this isn't really my area.

>>17427816
>when you find Traditionalist who accept Buddhism as valid, it is nearly always the Tibetan strain of Vajrayana they accept
haven't read much of the traditionalists, but evola in the doctrine of awakening very clearly states that the only schools of buddhism he likes are theravada and zen/chan

>>17427816
When Buddhists use these sorts of atman-esque constructs they are always within the context of Madhyamaka, in other words even if you are claiming a dharmakaya or some cosmic body of Vairochana Buddha as the ultimate ground for reality, dharmadhatu, and so forth, this is equated to the teachings on emptiness, sunyata. The non-Buddhists do not equate henosis or pantheism or other related ideas to emptiness. It is less that Vajrayana or Shingon or whatever are teaching atman and more that they are teaching emptiness to people conditioned to believe in henosis or pantheism.

>>17427834
Evola isn't really good for gaging what the majority of Traditionalist thought. Some don't even count him among their ranks as he diverged with them on a quite a few points, like placing the warrior caste above the priests.

>>17427887
yeah I guess you're right
some anon once told me coomaraswamy was sympathetic to buddhism as a whole but I haven't gotten around to reading him yet.

>>17427795
>>17427807
>>17427811

The Buddhists teach their followers that differentiated existence is illusory, that desire is the source if suffering and non desire is freedom. Its a death cult lmao. You become non differentiated when you die, your individual self dissolves into the greater whole of material reality. Ergo nirvana, you made it champ. And if course a total abnegation of desire leads to death. Rip you finally did it bucko. Literally a death cult

>>17427905
the position of annihilationism was clearly rejected by the buddha, as was the idea of nibbana being nothingness. desire for nonexistence is one of the three forms of craving after all
you don't seem to understand buddhism very well, pic related will probably help to clear away your misconceptions

>>17427896
If you are interested Marco Pallis is the Traditionalist who actually brought the others around to Tibetan Buddhism. He actually travelled there and spend time living and learning about it first-hand and wrote books on his experience.

>>17427933
How does fhammapada reject annihilationism?

>>17427950
okay, thanks. gotta say I know jack shit about vajrayana, maybe I should learn about it.

>>17427956
if you want a clear rejection of annihilationism you're better off looking into the majjhima nikaya, but recommending a 1400 page compilation of discourses to someone who knows nothing about buddhism is stupid
I recommend the dhammapada because when I read it for the first time I found it very life-affirming, surprisingly so, which makes me think it's a good first read for anyone who wrongly equates buddhism to a nihilistic philosophy.

>>17428018
thanks

>>17427956
>>17427990
also, thanissaro has a good take on this subject. he says that the reason a lot of people find buddhism pessimistic or depressing is because they put the three marks of existence above the four noble truths, when the opposite should be done.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpU6zG8kIBQ (he talks about it right at the start)