/lit/ - Literature

Persuasion and Rhetoric
The author killed himself after saying true happiness is living every day like it's your last.

>>17568452
>Life is not worth living.
Yeah you got it figured out. Now what?

>>17568490
I-I don't know. I need boons to tell me.

>>17568452
>Life is not worth living. All the things you value: love, peace, food, family, stability are just an expression of your survival instincts. They can never point to anything higher than life meaning the negatives in life add up with no chance of ever getting anything positive out of it.
Good. Drop and give me 100.

Saṃyuktāgama
81. Discourse on Pūraṇa

Thus have I heard. At one time the Buddha was staying at Vesalī in the Hall with the Peaked Roof by the side of the Monkey Pond.

At that time there was a Licchavi by the name of Mahānāma, who every day used to roam around. While he was approaching the Buddha, that Licchavi thought: ‘If I were to approach the Blessed One in the morning, then the Blessed One and the monks known to me will all be meditating. Let me now approach the ājīvikas and heterodox practitioners who are at the Seven Mango Trees.’ He approached the place where Pūraṇa Kassapa stayed.

Then Pūraṇa Kassapa, being the leader of an assembly of heterodox practitioners, was surrounded on all sides by five hundred heterodox practitioners, who were making a loud clamour discussing worldly things. Then Pūraṇa Kassapa, on seeing from afar that the Licchavi Mahānāma was coming, told his followers that they should stay quiet: “You be silent! This is the Licchavi Mahānāma, who is a disciple of the recluse Gotama. Among those who are white clothed disciples of the recluse Gotama in Vesalī he is foremost. They always delight in quietude and commend quietude. He approaches quiet assemblies, therefore you should be quiet.”

Then Mahānāma approached the assembly of Pūraṇa and exchanged polite greetings with Pūraṇa. Having friendly greeted each other, he withdrew to sit at one side. Then Mahānāma said to Pūraṇa: “I heard that Pūraṇa gives this teaching to his disciples: ‘There is no cause, there is no condition for the defilement of living beings; there is no cause, there is no condition for the purification of living beings.’

“In the world, is there such a doctrine? Is this truly yours? Or is this a saying by an outsider to discredit you? Is this composed by people in the world, is this your teaching or is this not your teaching? Are there people in the world who have discussed this with you, closely questioned you about it, and criticized it?”

Pūraṇa Kassapa said: “It is true that there is such a doctrine by me, it is not handed down wrongly in the world. I have established this doctrine, this doctrine is in accordance with my teaching and doctrines. I proclaim this teaching, it is all in line with my teaching and no person in the world has come and, closely questioning me, criticized it. Why is that? Mahānāma, I have this view and make this proclamation: ‘There is no cause, there is no condition for the defilement of living beings; there is no cause, there is no condition for the purification of living beings.’”

Then Mahānāma, hearing what Pūraṇa had said, was not pleased in his mind. Having disapproved of it, he rose from his seat and left. He approached the Blessed One, paid homage with his head at the Buddha’s feet, withdrew to sit at one side and told the Buddha fully the discussion he had had with Pūraṇa.

>>17568589
The Buddha said to the Licchavi Mahānāma: “What that Pūraṇa has said, giving vent to his ideas, is not worth being remembered. Pūraṇa is thus a fool, he does not differentiate and is unskilful. Denying causation, he says this: ‘There is no cause, there is no condition for the defilement of living beings; there is no cause, there is no condition for the purification of living beings.’ Why is that? There is a cause, there is a condition for the defilement of living beings; there is a cause, there is a condition for the purification of living beings.’

“Mahānāma, what is the cause, what is the condition for the defilement of living beings? What is the cause, what is the condition for the purification of living beings?

“Mahānāma, if bodily form were entirely dukkha and unpleasant, not followed by pleasure and not nourishing pleasure, being without pleasure, then living beings would not give rise to delight and attachment because of it. Mahānāma, because bodily form is not entirely dukkha and unpleasant, but is followed by pleasure and nourishes pleasure, being not without pleasure, therefore living beings are defiled by attachment to bodily form. Because of being defiled by attachment, they are tied to it. Because of being tied to it, there is vexation.

“Mahānāma, if feeling … perception … formations … consciousness were entirely dukkha and unpleasant, not followed by pleasure and not nourishing pleasure, being without pleasure, then living beings would not give rise to delight and attachment because of it. Mahānāma, because consciousness is not entirely dukkha and unpleasant, but is followed by pleasure and nourishes pleasure, being not without pleasure, therefore living beings are defiled by attachment to consciousness. Because of being defiled by attachment, they are tied to it. Because of being tied to it, vexation arises.

“Mahānāma, this is called the explanation of: ‘there is a cause, there is a condition for the defilement of living beings.’

“Mahānāma, what is the cause, what is the condition for the purification of living beings?

“Mahānāma, if bodily form were entirely pleasant and not dukkha, not followed by dukkha and not nourishing sorrow and pain, being without dukkha, then living beings would not give rise to disenchantment because of bodily form. Mahānāma, because bodily form is not entirely pleasant and is dukkha, is followed by dukkha and nourishes sorrow and pain, not being without dukkha, therefore living beings give rise to disenchantment towards bodily form. Because of being disenchanted, they do not delight in it. Because of not delighting in it, they are liberated from it.

>>17568551
kek. based

>>17568599
“Mahānāma, if feeling … perception … formations … consciousness were entirely pleasant and not dukkha, not followed by dukkha and not nourishing sorrow and pain, being without dukkha, then living beings would not give rise to disenchantment because of consciousness. Mahānāma, because feeling … perception … formations … consciousness is not entirely pleasant and is dukkha, is followed by dukkha and nourishes sorrow and pain, not being without dukkha, therefore living beings give rise to disenchantment towards consciousness. Because of being disenchanted, they do not delight in it. Because of not delighting in it, they are liberated from it.

“Mahānāma, this is called the explanation of: ‘There is a cause, there is a condition for the purification of living beings.”

Then Mahānāma, hearing what the Buddha had said, rejoiced and was delighted. He paid respect to the Buddha and left.

>>17568452
> All the things you value: love, peace, food, family, stability are
first and foremost human cultural concepts that have nothing to do with “instincts”, whatever that may mean. However, some people prefer to ignore their deepness and complexity, and pretend that simple explanations based on vague stereotypes are enough.

>>17568452
>Life is not worth living.
practice what you preach and kill yourself

>>17568452
Silenus.

>>17568634
Killing yourself is too painful. For you and those around you. Case in point: Someone who wasn't born could never kill himself.

>>17568452
>>17568452
Survival instincts are a linguistic rationalization of my self-evident valuation of love, goodness, peace, family. Why does theory come before the the certainty of my immediate experience?

>>17568452
>All the things you value: love, peace, food, family, stability are just an expression of your survival instincts.
such brainlet take
litteraly my survival instincts telling me to sacrifice myself for my kid, KEK.

>>17568674
My instincts are telling me that you're a failed father if you're still posting on fucking 4chan.

>>17568677
my instincts tell me I should raze your village and take your woman as my own since you're clearly a limp wristed weakling.

>>17568674
>litteraly my survival instincts telling me to sacrifice myself for my kid, KEK.
Yrah exactly. Do you not know how evolution works? It's not about you it's about your offspring. You can pretend to yourself all you want that you sacrifice yourself for your kid in a selfless act but in the end it's just a submission to your base instincts. It's not heroic or noble. Every dog would do the same.

Seek and create beauty. It's one of the few things humanity does right. Painting, music, textile arts, wood carving, sculpture, planting flower gardens, it's all unnecessary for survival but is such a universal reminder to all men that there is something sacred in the world even if we can't fully understand it.
All art is finite as well, just as we are.

>>17568697
Goes to show that only delusional escapists think life is worth living. Yeah buddy I'm sure you will leave your mark on history as a great man and then you can brag in your grave for all eternity. Oh wait you can't. Glory is just a way to gain social status (ressources) to preserve life. It's not above life

>>17568711
What you consider beauty is predetermined by your genes your experiences and your upbringing.
A free mind could only create uglyness. Beauty is copied not created.

>>17568452
The world as will and representation and then you can kill yourself.

>>17568697
Kek, I live in a tribalist town where communities are still segregated according to Vedic caste system. So yeah you should try this western larper.

>>17568452
I value things outside of my survival instincts though because I'm not a fucking animal. Get a hobby you sad faggot.

>>17568720
>A free mind could only create uglyness.
But it wouldn't be ugly to them. Beauty can still be subjective, it is the creation of it that is valuable, and then it solely exists, just like a man to be loved or hated. Beauty is our homunculus.

>>17568724
sure pajeet, it it by the power of the atman that you're connected to the internet? kek

>>17568714
I mean people, do I really need to answer?
look at how he seethes just for a counter joke to his joke.

>>17568708
>Do you not know how evolution works?
I do clearly you don't because you ascribe to it final causation.

>>17568749
Kek, nah the Krishna himself is connecting me to internet through the shakti of his hairs.

>>17568527
Why? If life is not worth living, then get rid of it. Reading 200 books on nihilism will not change it and just prolong your suffering.

And if you want people to convince you otherwise then just say so instead of acting like a fucking prima Donna bitch.

>>17568816
Your missing the point. Just because life is not worth living doesn't mean the act of killing yourself with all it's condequences is worth it. Life is just damage control.

>>17568846
Then the act of "coping", whatever it is, is making it worth living because you value it more than your freedom to get rid of it and end it all right now.

Just do it already.

>>17568871
>Then the act of "coping", whatever it is, is making it worth living
I said it is damage control it cannot add value. Why are you so obsessed with suicide?

>>17568764
you are a cool guy, hindubro

>>17568711
This is beautiful

>>17568467
Persuasion and Rhetoric changed my life but I think you misunderstood this author and his book.

>>17569000
How so?