/lit/ - Literature

/lit/ is nothing but whiny contrarians, and this is the next stage after christlarping

>>20260828
if you think buddhism is nihilistic then you need to dig a lot deeper, try with some bob thurman vids, he likes to focus on the life embracing aspect of the religion

>>20260828
>implying there is not Christ in Krishna

>>20260828
Look into it, and learn. Dumbass.

>>20260828
If you think Buddhism is sad then you're missing the entire point. Its purpose is to solve the problem of suffering.

>>20260828
>sad and nihilistic
???????

>>20260828
It's impossible to think buddhism is nihilistic if you're not either mentally challanged or trying to push a narrative against it.

>>20260831
But then you too are a whiny contrarian among whiny contrarians. So better take refuge in three jewels with us, or be an inauthentic larper.

>>20260828
some buddhist rethoric could seem to asethic or sad, but that's just that, a form of rethoric, buddhism is the opposite of sad, it path is to overcome ontological suffering and sadness, and achieve that by embracing life, the good and the bad, the opposite of nihilism

>>20260828
Stop being a whiny bitch,
Over come your suffering,
Follow in my footsteps
-buddha

Its only people who are severely attached to their ego or idea of themselves that think this. Let go and see for yourself the freedom it offers.

>>20260828
It says sad things but it hits different

>>20260828
You're basically a sheltered western pussy and discussion of reality scares you

>>20260828
It's for incels who got filtered by Christianity. It's just a phase.

>>20260828
Buddhism, Hinduism, Daoism, and Eastern traditions in general were created by human beings.
Abrahamic traditions were created by extraterrestrials like Jenovah or maybe a Computer AI communicating from the future (Solid State Intelligence).

"Nihilism" comes from a few different readings. One is the Nietzschean, which interprets a general notion of Buddhism in alignment with Schopenhauer as a pessimistic doctrine of rejecting the world and thus considers it nihilism. But Nietzsche doesn't really care what Buddhism is per se and is using it as an example of world denial without ressentiment, to be contrasted with the Christian world denial, which is based on ressentiment. Nietzsche doesn't have access to substantial Mahayana literature that would expound on the non-duality of samsara and nirvana either, since this is decades away from getting translated and disseminated by indologists studying the prajnaparamita literature or by Japanese advocates of Zen. Understanding this, one would see it is not world denial, and there goes one form of nihilism.
Another nihilism charge is that of the theist opponent of the Buddhist. This should be extremely familiar, as in the West, extant Christians assume atheists are nihilists because they deny the ultimate reality of god. In Indian discourse this is Brahma(n) or Ishvara. The specifics don't matter much, it's enough that Buddhists deny a creator of the universe to be labeled as nihilists. This is a very foul smelling argument because it would suggest the theist only believes in god to avoid being called a nihilist. So if you want, you can pick up Nietzsche here even though he doesn't agree with Buddhism and use him as cudgel, since they were both arguing with some of the same priestly people who had ceded their power to evaluate to "God."
Finally there are negating or apophatic doctrines like anatman or sunyata. Anatman is in every form of Buddhism and denies a permanent ego-substance or own self-nature. As you may recognize if you are familiar with Platonism, immortal souls and immortal God go hand in hand, so Buddhists are totally consistent here in saying no to both rather than picking and choosing. Madhyamaka is the school that makes sunyata its core and influences the rest of Mahayana Buddhism. This "emptiness" doctrine is really just an elaboration on anatman in its most basic sense, nothing has a self in the sense of that permanent enduring substratum. Nagarjuna is taken to be the founding thinker here, and for him and his tetralemma methodology, we cannot say of anything that it is x, not x, both x and not x, or neither x nor not-x, and this has been a nightmare of doxography ever since, with a long list of Indian, Tibetan, Chinese, Japanese, and also Korean Buddhists attempting to say "yes, but how do I explain non-dualism using language?" The consistent denial of any objects of discourse to be ultimately real is what gets this Buddhism called nihilism. But all Buddhists disagree that this is nihilism and provide many arguments to the contrary, generally to the effect that appearances are affirmed as appearances and that any theory beyond that is unsatisfactory, leading to errors.

>>20260980
Buddha, a whiny bitch,
Stop being in my footsteps.
Overcome your follow suffering.

>>20262484
getting "filtered" by christianity is a good thing, larper

>>20262504
>Extraterrestrial tarded stories
Goddamn nigger cattle love their branded nigger cattle stories of nigger cattle rustlers.

>>20262539
Filtered thing
is getting larped
by a good Christian

>>20260828
Why is he always smiling then? Buddha was the happiest religious leader after maybe Laozi

>>20262530
"If you see the Buddha on your path, kill him" - Chinese monk

>>20262557
Look up the vinegar tasters, retard

>>20262552
Niggers are far more admirable than Abrahamists. West African Bantus would have never industrialization. All of Abrahamism was created by extraterrestrials, most likely from Saturn, as a form of predictive programming for industrialization and now the Fourth Industrial Revolution. The black rock Muslims circle most likely emits certain unseen frequencies to control them and the Christians enact the ritual of cannibalizing one of the extraterrestrials that is not purely localized by time and space.
There is no way Abrahamism originated from this Earth *unless* the Earth itself has a suicidal impulse, which I do not accept. It came from some kind of Jenova entity. Destruction of old growth forests and oceans was always in the telos of Abrahamic traditions. The eventual industrialization was likewise in its telos.
It's possible most of West Eurasia's chronological history is fake.

>>20262579
Ignore typos.
>industrialization
industrialized*

>>20262579
Remarkable and RHesus negative pilled

>>20260955
It's impossible to be an authentic Buddhist and go on 4chan.

>>20262612
It's impossible to be an authentic [any religion] and go on 4chan.

>>20260828
>Why are people getting into it? It's pure nihilism.
They have an emotionally-rooted antipathy towards 'being' , typically because they suffer from inwards flaws that make them seek to disassociate them from themselves, to metaphysically 'cuckold' themselves out of existence as it were.

>>20262616
You've never known being, but certainly ressentiment from the look of things

>>20262615
that's where you're wrong kiddo

>>20262627
>You've never known being
knowing is being, so in the act of knowing I am being, "I know therefore I be"

>>20262635
we're all jews here

>>20262658
we have to get as much posting in before Shabbat starts at sundown!!!

>>20260828
Give me a QRD.

>>20262647
>being is having passing thoughts
big if true

>>20262668
Is it forbidden to type on the sabbath? What if I dictate my degeneracy-promoting shitposts via speech to text?

>>20262668
My gf is a shabbos goy. She reads posts for me and then I dictate my funposts.

>>20262696
we cannot use electricity Chaim!
>What if I dictate my degeneracy-promoting shitposts via speech to text?
find yourself a shabbos goy from /pol/ to type out all your texts and you will be kosher

>>20262612
why is that

>>20262706 >>20262707
jewish meme magic

>>20260828
For me
>thinking about God/Christianity
>seems pretty retarded, just a sect of Judaism, which is even more retarded
>hm what other religions are there
>read about Buddhism
>self is an illusion, all creatures stuck in a cycle of birth and death (samsara)
>you can go to heaven through good deeds, but even that isn't eternal and Gods are stuck in samsara too
>makes sense, how do I escape?
>bro just meditate and live the spiritual life, one day you will be enlightened
>don't even half to cut my foreskin off? Sign me up

>>20262720
You have to school the Devas to get good grades in order to fulfill the final life

>>20262579
Black and
Shamanic iboga pilled

>>20262720
Sounds like something for the lazy and intellectually stunted.

>>20262720
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Self,
is in fact, dependently originated anatman, or as I've recently taken to calling it, GNot Self.
Self is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component
of a fully functioning Gnosis system made useful by the epistemological five aggregate phenomonen, nouminal
utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by Aryastangamarga.

Many conscious beings run a modified version of the GNot self every day,
without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNot Self
which is widely used today is often called "self", and many of its users are
not aware that it is basically the society of spectacle, developed by the Gnuddha Project.

There really is a Self, and these people are using it, but it is just an ephemeral contrivednpart of the system they use. Ego is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine's resources to the other programs that you run.
The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself;
it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Self is
normally used in combination with the GNot Self operating system: the whole system is basically GNosis with Self added, or GNowing thy self. All the so-called "Self"
distributions are really distributions of parinirvana catsukoti of all samsara.

>>20262788
*Developed by Maya and Mara

>>20262788
>>20262796
Neobuddhist cult blending theravadin teachings with late 20th century CS terminology when
Aum Shinrikyo ended up being disappointing

>>20262788
some peopel liek Bob Thurman call it the relative self, i think is a good enough name

>>20262807
First draft m8 give it time

>>20262688
the awareness which reveals them is unborn, constant, non-arising, non-ceasing, unchanging and always spontaneously present

>>20262818
>unchanging
how does it think then? Or become wiser?

>>20262688
One of my fucking favorite one liners to be coined after the election

>>20262818
>unborn
because it is empty or because the poopeepeeshads say so?

>>20262809
For me it's (You)NIX

>>20262807
I will turn the wheel of DARPAchakra with my big brain

>>20262897
TETSUO!!!

>>20262818
not really, the awareness needs to change in order to keep up with the rest of the skandas, all of them seem substancial since all of them can be victims of abstraction in themental process, that is, i think awareness is constant and the same because the different moment of awareness let me create the idea of a pure awareness, but the same can be said about , feelings, mental compositions and matter, all of them create this illusion of necessity, but taht's just how the mind works, throught the process of abstraction everything seems unborn, constant, non arising, non ceasing, unchanging etc, but then you end up in a world where movement is impossible, that is a false world

>>20262904
SIDDHARTHAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

>>20262841
>how does it think then? Or become wiser?
Just like how a lamp reveals changing objects while remaining unchanging itself, different thoughts about different subjects including wisdom are revealed in succession to the same unchanging awareness before being replaced with thoughts/sensations about something else, just like how an unchanging lamp can illuminate and thereby reveal 20 different changing and moving objects in the span of an hour, all without itself changing.

>>20262876
Because it never emerges but is instead always present as far as we can tell. Something that was always present is never "born". We never have confirmation of it emerging or being born in experience.

>>20262905
>not really, the awareness needs to change in order to keep up with the rest of the skandas,
This incorrect claim is refuted by the empirical example of the lamp. Lamps can reveal changing objects while remaining unchanging and this empirical example of this phenomena provides an illustration of how awareness does the same thing. There is no non-dogmatic reason to assume awareness has to change too.

>>20262946
So it's an energy transforming system itself? Because a lamp just takes electricity and turns it into light (failure of light bulbs not included). How does that constitute a conscious mind, when really it's just a fancy consciousness made conversion mechanism? How does this deal with the problem of eternal attainment of stream consciousness for example?

>>20262946
>Because it never emerges but is instead always present as far as we can tell. Something that was always present is never "born".
You were born. Awareness is something you have. So it is not unborn. You have to rely on your scripture to go any further and this thread isn't about your religion

>>20262967
You're complaining about memory not awareness.

>>20262612
This site does not violate any of the 5 precepts. Monk sure, but a lay person is safe browsing.

>>20260831
is it actually the same people moving from Christianity to Buddhism?

>>20262996
>or durg
They had those 2500 years ago?

>>20262612
How is it impossible to follow the 5 precepts and go on 4chan? Oh, right, you know nothing about buddhism and think that "true buddhists" are only monks

>>20262965
>So it's an energy transforming system itself?
No, awareness is a sentient presence that discloses itself to itself, and it also discloses the insentient presence of any phenomena within the range of its illumination
>Because a lamp just takes electricity and turns it into light (failure of light bulbs not included). How does that constitute a conscious mind, when really it's just a fancy consciousness made conversion mechanism?
I didn't say that lamps constitute a conscious mind, maybe you should work on your reading comprehension and not put words in my mouth that I never said. The lamp example shows how luminous unchanging awareness reveals different changing mental-states as insentient objects that are disclosed by the lamps illumination, the mind itself is not the lamp (awareness) but is an object illuminated by it.
>How does this deal with the problem of eternal attainment of stream consciousness for example?
Can you elaborate on what you mean by this and why you think its a problem?

>>20262967
>You were born. Awareness is something you have. So it is not unborn.
This is making an unsubstantiated identification of awareness with the body, which we have no empirical confirmation of or any other kind of confirmation. We have no evidence disproving that our awareness is unborn and existed before the present physical body was born. This is you just making a statement of your belief, it's a statement of faith by you and nothing more, it's not an actual argument from experience that contradicts anything I've said, you are retreating into pure credence.

>>20262975
If you aren't "alive" or "born" or "conceived" you don't have awareness. It is dependent on those states. If you can prove otherwise (although you've already said ad nauseam in other threads you don't have to prove your position), if you can prove you have awareness without being... alive... go right ahead.

>>20263010
>We have no evidence disproving that our awareness is unborn and existed before the present physical body was born
That doesn't sound like a reason to believe you. Why should I take your position on faith when mine is reasonable?

>>20263013
>If you aren't "alive" or "born" or "conceived" you don't have awareness. It is dependent on those states.
This is simply a statement about your beliefs, its not something that has ever been proven and its not something that can be empirically demonstrated.

>>20263005
Westoids think that Buddhism is all good vibes bro, let's do vikram yoga, and get some coffee brewed from conflict free beans namaste.

>>20262996
>sexual misconduct
so like sodomy?

>>20263023
Why are you responding to me with this? I know westerners have a rose-tinted glasses view of Buddhism. That doesn't change how 4chan doesn't violate any of the five precepts, moron. Do you think every "authentic" Buddhist in Asia is living as a monk?

>>20262996
can you post some monk precepts that you violate coming here? or just post some in general

>>20263017
>That doesn't sound like a reason to believe you. Why should I take your position on faith when mine is reasonable?
Because you've forgotten the context of why we are discussing this:

I stated that awareness is unchanging and always spontaneously present, due to each and every one of our lived experiences occurring through an awareness that reveals them—this is a claim that we can confirm by examining and recalling our own immediate and past experience and so far it doesn't rely on faith. It only involves faith when taking about it existing before the present body.

In order to disprove the above statement about awareness being unchanging and constantly present IN LIVED EXPERIENCE which can be substantiated through reference to experience, you had to make a statement of faith that awareness didn't exist before the body.

Your argument has not justification whatsoever because it's trying to disprove something observable about our immediate experience (that awareness is always present) via an unsubstantiated and unfalsifiable statement of faith.

>>20263046
Nice try, you are asking me to believe we are eternal because we have thoughts so long as we are alive and not retarded, and pretending that I am the one who is making faith-based claims for saying that awareness depends on us being alive. Go ask some corpses what they think of eternity

>>20262996
>refraining from taking any intoxicant or drug
That's the hardest one

>>20263034
Not him but it is hard to imagine "debating persons with wrong views about Buddhism" violates any of the vinaya

>>20263031
Why are you harshing the vibes bro. Peace and love namaste.

>>20263005
The spirit of the law, not the letter, anon

>>20263034
After looking at the patimokkha, 4chan does not violate any rules. Buddhism does consider music, theater, and literature as sensual pleasures that are bad, but none are banned!

All 227 rules for a monk:
https://en.dhammadana.org/sangha/vinaya/227.htm

>>20262612
You're all barking up the wrong tree, there are at least a few authentic Buddhists on /x/.

What makes some things permanent and some impermanent in Buddhism?

>>20263058
>Nice try, you are asking me to believe we are eternal because we have thoughts so long as we are alive and not retarded
No, I'm not. I never stated that once in the thread and it's a violation of the Buddhist precept of right speech to lie about me by saying that like you just did. You have a problem with telling lies, it's the Buddhist teaching that you perhaps struggle with most. I have called you out on it for telling lies before and will keep doing so, out of my compassion, in the hopes that you can be a better Buddhist.

I'm not asking you to believe we are eternal, I just made the true observation that all of our lived experience is permeated all throughout by the quality of awareness, and we never find instances of the contrary being true.

>and pretending that I am the one who is making faith-based claims
You did rely on a faith-based claim to (unsuccessfully) challenge my argument from empirical experience.

>>20262946
>Lamps can reveal changing objects while remaining unchanging
not at all, you need to light the lamp first, "something needs to happen to the lamp in order to function" that's the whole point of bhavana
not to mention that lamps are made of parts, and are interdependent with the objects that reveal, not only that, the lamp itself is an object and with a lamp you can see all kind of material needed to "construct" another lamp, thus the lamp let you know that is in fact a composit object, made of other more simple objects in a specific configuration, the lamp is not something that exist outside this world, with the lamp you can see and understand the natue of the lamp and it's interdependence with everything else

>remove desires that cause cyclical suffering
>bro, that's soooo nihilistic and sad

>>20263138
>all of our lived experience is permeated all throughout by the quality of awareness, and we never find instances of the contrary being true.
No, you are lying yet again. That is the position I have presented, not yours. You are the one going "tee hee, you can't prove I won't be aware after I die or was aware before I was alive" whereas my position remains that awareness is associated with and arises with life, and life is a temporal process, and therefore we have no reason to expect life to defy itself.

>>20263046
>this is a claim that we can confirm by examining and recalling our own immediate and past experience
no, you can confirm that awareness exist, but not that is unchanging, there's nothing in the self disclosure of awareness that indicates it can exist outside of time as a unchanging thing, that's just a leap of logic, every moment i'm aware of awareness is a moment in time, every moment of awareness also need objects to be aware of, a body, a place, sensations, "thinking" that awareness is an object on itself outside of time and space is just a presuposition that arise form the nature of the mind to abstract notions of reality, just the same way materialist say that matter is neccesary and concsiousness is contingent, you can invert the terms and say that awareness is neccesary and mater is continget or illusory, both of those arguments rely on a play on words, in both cases you end up being a slave of the constructs of your mind

>>20263211
>a slave of the constructs of your mind
the only perennial feature of guenonfag's posts

>>20263205
The proof of that is memory, and memories can cease, hence why your position is unprovable.

>>20263085
sekhiya 64:
"Not to teach the dhamma to someone who is lying down"
Monks should probably preface any posts they make with "DO NOT READ THIS POST IN BED PLEASE, I WILL GET IN TROUBLE"

>>20263211
The concept of awareness is the one that, no matter how different, you can at any point go "I'm aware" and be correct. That concept is unchanging, even if it's contents aren't

>>20263185
You know how in The Matrix, the protagonist is told that people have been so thoroughly indoctrinated into the system that's enslaving them that they'll fight to defend it even as it's actively harming and devouring them

I think the average person's knee-jerk reaction to being told that the conditioned world is unsatisfactory is kind of like that

>>20263223
>say something exists with no evidence supporting it
>tell others they can't prove it doesn't exist because there's no evidence
Truly the last refuge of the priestly nihilist

>>20263244
>say something exists with no evidence supporting it
At any point that you have awareness you have the opportunity to prove it, and even with cases where you don't such as sleep, you can do meditative practice to engage your mind well enough during the period to be aware. There is no "observable state" from your perspective where you are not aware, which is obvious.

>>20263259
I am aware that I am aware, insofar as I am alive. You are the one who takes that observation and concludes that awareness is the eternal atman that is God contemplating himself. There is no reason to believe that outside of an uncritical acceptance of a particular school of Hindu theology, which is unrelated to the thread

>>20263281
>You are the one who takes that observation and concludes that awareness is the eternal atman that is God contemplating himself
What? The key position is that actual practice and attainment of Buddhist virtue lets one realize their own awareness in situations where this wasn't previously the case by samatha, in a harmonious manner that doesn't involve either the karmic "universe overwhelming you and deciding things for you" like your rebirth (through ignorance) nor the false idea of "your actions being absolute, independent of the rest of the universe". Based off that awareness, perform vipassana.

>>20263297
You must be new to these threads. "Awareness" is the other guy's euphemism for "Atman-Brahman" because otherwise it's too obvious he is doing theology, which is categorically dismissed by Westerners with an interest in Buddhism

so do Buddhists aim for total nonexistence, in the atheistic sense of the word? they acknowledge higher realms and gods, so that's pretty bleak

>>20263403
No, that's just a specific subset of Buddhists that believe Nirvana is annihialationism but you need to reach it, so it's often misunderstood that all Buddhists believe that.

>>20263412
I see. what's the most based form of Buddhism?

>>20263428
Zen or Pure Land. You can fuck whores and wage wars it's all good. You can proy smoke crack too.

>>20263440
isnt pure land buddhism just christianity with chinese characteristics

>>20263002
you're kidding, right?

>>20263428
Theravada if you want to be Trad and mostly unchanged, easy to follow Buddhist, Tibetan (which is Mahayana) if you're into hardcore tantric practice and some weird ideas "interpreted" after Gautama which don't entirely exist in Theravada. Non Tibetan Mahayana is boring.

>>20263403
Nirvana is neither existence or non-existence.
>>20263444
They share characteristics, the type of salvation through grace or good will of celestial being.

>>20263403
Read the Vimalakirti Sutra
>>20263444
Pure Land is the most "Christian" form of Buddhism since it centers around praying to a celestial Buddha to be reborn in his "heaven," because a Pure Land is supposed to be an easier place to attain nirvana in than the immediate world we live in. This is dharma aimed at, shall we say, people of a rather bleak capacity.

>>20263428
Hua-Yen

>>20263444
It's more like Calvinism is Pure Land with Jewish characteristics. Pure Land developed before Constantine created Christianity, which is something that needs to be kept in mind in regards to the supposed "un-tradness" of Pure Land. It's also really just the Chinese inserting their native ideas of 神 into Buddhism, with Amitabha being Heaven.

>>20263403
No, Buddhism completey rejects the idea of non-existence. The goal of Buddhism is to radically change how you exist (within a seamless framework).

>>20263412
There are no schools of Buddhism that believe in "annihilationism", by definition. Annihilationism is one of the Wrong Views that the Buddha himself argued against.

>>20260828
Only if you see suffering as a bad thing rather than as an important lesson.
Life is like a school you cannot drop out of, you can rebel and hate it for as long as you like, but one day you will finally start taking it seriously and finish it.

>>20263590
>but one day you will finally start taking it seriously and finish it.
Correct, and that's when you become a Renunciant and achieve Nirvana.

>>20263590
You learn study much better when not suffering. Suffering is not opposite to pleasure. What youre describing plain and simple is cope

>>20263229
>That concept is unchanging
exactly, because is a concept, concepts need to be unchanging to be functional, to grant identity to things, you can't derive that awareness can exist outside of phenomena just by saying that,
you can say the same thing about the substanciability of objects, in your experience the objects change but the fact that you're always perceive an object remains, just as you can come up with the idea of pure awareness you can also construct the idea of a pure object, what materialist do

>even if it's contents aren't
contents always change but the fact that yuo need content to be aware of remains, just as the person that is aware changes all the time, from moment to moment, form place to place,from iving to death, but awarenes remains, if we follow your logic we end up in a inconsistent dualism where matter and cognition are two separated things ,two self sufficient substances, which is illogical since our world need both to manifest, thus the idea of an ontology of relationships like the one buddhist created (they weren't the only ones, most school of philosophy today follow similar systems)becomes more coherent than an ontology of substances which always end up creating multiple self sufficient worlds

>>20263403
>so do Buddhists aim for total nonexistence
on the contrary, buddhist aim for hyper existence, an existence outside the realms of constructs like the self or the vicios circle that is eternity, even beyond the realms of gods, as the mantra of the heart sutta said "beyond, beyond, completly beyond, completly on the other side, enlightened"

>>20262737
buddism is highly academic and has many various sects that are divided on issues of logic and ideas about psychology.
but im sure contradicting semetic demon stories are more intellectually fulfilling

>>20263603
>You learn study much better when not suffering
not on this case, since suffering is the item of your study

>>20263403
>so do Buddhists aim for total nonexistence..?
No. Buddhism embrace the existence, just not one based upon false notions of reality like God/soul unitary singular essences. Buddhist place emphasis on relational existence, the dependent origination of existence, aka the pratityasamutpada.

>>20263768
It hurts to learn hurt fampaitchi

>>20263528
B*sed and Chronologically Geopolitically Prefunctory pilled

>>20263403
Tranny man hands typed this post

>>20263071
Criticise and rebuke one deserving of criticism and rebuke.
Praise one deserving of praise.
My nikaya, its all in the suttas.
Get rekt, bhitch

>>20262737
>Something for the lazy and intellectually uninspired
Practicing Buddhism is hard as fuck dude, achieving enlightenment is actually difficult and requires a lifetime of dedication and training. If anything, Jews, Christians, and Muslims are intellectually uninspired for thinking all they need to do for their personal salvation is to prostrate before some prophet and babble a bunch of prayers, and feeling super emotional at the appropriate times (like feeling bad after doing bad things and feeling good after pledging your life for some sandnigger that died a thousand/ two thousand/ three thousand years ago)

>>20263528
>Constantine created Christianity
Buddha condemned lies.

>>20260830

what does this even mean?

>>20263979
This is unironically probably one of the best summations of the Buddhist point of view I've seen, I think the inability to see things in relational terms is what trips so many people up when they view Buddhism as nihilistic or annihilationist

>>20263224
lel that's good

>>20263128
No things are permanent

>>20263128
things ''impermanent'' are ''conditioned''

so it goes like this
-a thing is conditioned
-so it is dukkha
-so it is not self

a thing is conditioned if it arises from a condition and ceases from the destruction of the condition which makes it arises

it turns out the 5 aggregates are conditioned, so they are impermanent.

>>20266077
>Nirvana/Nirvana entry

>>20263528
>There are no schools of Buddhism that believe in "annihilationism", by definition. Annihilationism is one of the Wrong Views that the Buddha himself argued against.
I read some Buddhist scholar who indeed claimed there was a school or group that did.

>>20263768
No, you're learning how to steady your mind and perform skilled actions. Also dukkha isn't just suffering like CBT.

>>20263742
I think you're instituting the idea that to have something to think of, you must be looking at something external, or using something that is your body (ie using your brain). In the Buddhist context, the pure emptiness is self contained and not dependent on either forms of external reality. If we do presume a person needs something external to think of, we get a ridiculously external dependent reality of the blind leading the blind that is wholly unsatisfying, and Buddhist doctrine at it's heart has the removal of such dependent thinking.

>>20260828
It's not nihilistic at all. Buddhism in the west just suffers from mass public misunderstanding.

>They want you to empty your mind bro it's woo woo!
No, Buddhists just practice a bunch of different techniques to integrate what they learned, that people are prone to falling victim to illusions. Sometimes the illusions are mild, sometimes they ruin people's lives. The techniques are supposed to help people return back to a more refined form of personal experience where they can engage with things in their purest form rather than just focusing on some headcanon larp of what those things -might- be in a given moment.

>Dude lmao end of suffering?
No, the whole point of the teachings is its reduction. It's easy to become enlightened, but difficult if not impossible to remain that way. This is why Bassui Tokusho often emphasized that he would teach people to their own capacity, because some people could intuit Buddhism quickly and embrace its practices while others would require the same practice but much more time to intuit the same conclusions. The point of Buddhism is to keep on trying because it's the journey that is the most important factor no matter how wise you are.

>They just want to submit to the natural order of things bro it's messed up!
No, because if we went back to natural law we'd lose the institution of Buddhism. Buddhism is more about accepting one's position in the cosmos and not getting drunk on ideas of gaining a higher position or becoming exempt from it altogether. You can still temporarily change the world or the lives of people around you for the better while remaining a fallible mortal who will someday die.

But none of this should be taken as a gospel, I am just someone who read deeply into Zen Buddhism in the past, I am not a monk in any way.

This thread was moved to >>>/his/13204785