/lit/ - Literature

Recently learned of The Angulimala Sutta, very beautiful story.

>>22714872
https://www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/buddhism/disciples13.htm

I hate engaged buddhism.

>>22714887
Thank you

>>22714889
what do you mean by engaged buddhism?

https://www.dhammatalks.org/

>>22714866

Why should i embrace buddhism? Is it not the same as all the other religions? I mean, arbitrary. A case can be made for meditation or understanding-what-conscience-is but catholic monks did something similar (for not saying _the same_). Another case can be made for the way it makes you act but couldnt we get those principles and live by them without believing in buddhism? (Yes)

>>22715337
>Why should i embrace buddhism?
Do as you wish, the dharma will be here for you when you are ready to practise.

>>22715337
Buddhism merely comes down to this: do what you KNOW to be good (rooted in non-greed, non-aversion, non-delusion) and abandon everything you KNOW to be bad (rooted in greed, aversion, delusion). The extent to which you do this is the extent to which you will not suffer from external circumstances. Now, if you disagree with any of that, then there's isn't really much to say. If you put it into practice, however, you'll quickly see that irrespective of religion, belief, labels, opinions, comparisons etc., by your own experience alone, it is true.

>>22715389
I already practice the good and avoid the bad and dont we crave or cling to impermanent states and things. But my reasons are other than trying to get into nirvana or not wanting to harm any sentient being or any other buddhist profess. I am an absurdist, thats all. And, all actions being equal, it is better to do good than bad. So, according to your definition, im a buddhist but i dont consider myself such because im good for goodness sake, not because i believe buddha, nirvana or any other concept of the kind exist

>>22715448
>I already practice the good and avoid the bad and dont we crave or cling to impermanent states and things.
If this is really the case than you are already an arahant. I suspect instead that you have largely intellectualized your practice. Can you really say that your daily behavior perfectly reflects your claim? Could you really watch someone imprison, torture and execute your only beloved child (AN 7.53) or have your own limbs cut off with a two-handed saw (MN 21) and still not have the slightest intention of ill-will, greed or delusion? Could absurdism, could "believing in good for goodness sake", could any intellectual principle or any philosophy (including Buddhism as mere intellectual or philosophical tradition) equip you with such steadiness of mind?

The other day I came across a book that was posted here, written by a 30 year old man, in the prime of his youth and virility, who irrevocably lost the use of his body from below the level of his nipples from a motorcycle accident. The book is an elaborate suicide note written by an obviously bright young man (about to earn a PhD in Philosophy no less) who is driven to such an extreme of suffering that he can conclude no other alternative but suicide. Now, can you confidently say, that if you were put into a similar privation you could still maintain that steadiness of mind? That regardless of that or any external circumstance, you could not suffer, you would be UNABLE to suffer?

The greatest care should taken in such claims, to understand what it is one is claiming and what the terms actually mean. Do you know what craving and clinging and impermanence actually are? And does your behavior reflect such an understanding (which is the only true verification of that understanding to begin with)?

>>22714866

>>22714866

Can somebody explain difference between tehse three?

1> Right View - sama ditthi
2> Right Resolve - sama samkapo
3> Right Mindfulness - sama sati

>>22715337
What other religion teaches anything equivalent to anatman?

>>22714866
>https://r.readingfaithfully.org/?q=sn18.3
click "Random Sutta" and get
>AN 5.191
>Dogs
>“Mendicants, these five ancient traditions of the brahmins are exhibited these days among dogs, but not among brahmins. What five?
>In the past brahmins had sex only with brahmin women, not with others. These days brahmins have sex with both brahmin women and others. But these days dogs have sex only with female dogs, not with other species. This is the first ancient tradition of the brahmins exhibited these days among dogs, but not among brahmins.
>In the past brahmins had sex only with brahmin women in the fertile phase of the menstrual cycle, not at other times. These days brahmins have sex with brahmin women both in the fertile phase of the menstrual cycle and at other times. But these days dogs have sex only with female dogs when they are in heat, not at other times. This is the second ancient tradition of the brahmins exhibited these days among dogs, but not among brahmins.
>In the past brahmins neither bought nor sold brahmin women. They lived together because they loved each other and wanted their family line to continue. These days brahmins both buy and sell brahmin women. They live together whether they love each other or not and they want their family line to continue. But these days dogs neither buy nor sell female dogs. They live together because they’re attracted to each other and want their family line to continue. This is the third ancient tradition of the brahmins exhibited these days among dogs, but not among brahmins.
>In the past brahmins did not store up money, grain, silver, or gold. These days brahmins do store up money, grain, silver, and gold. But these days dogs don’t store up money, grain, silver, or gold. This is the fourth ancient tradition of the brahmins exhibited these days among dogs, but not among brahmins.
>In the past brahmins went looking for almsfood for dinner in the evening, and for breakfast in the morning. These days brahmins eat as much as they like until their bellies are full, then take away the leftovers. But these days dogs go looking for dinner in the evening, and for breakfast in the morning. This is the fifth ancient tradition of the brahmins exhibited these days among dogs, but not among brahmins.
>These five ancient traditions of the brahmins are exhibited these days among dogs, but not among brahmins.”
The last time I saw an amusing sutta was when I read random stuff from Vinaya.

>>22715542
>you are already an arahant
I wouldnt say that because i would be vain and because im not perfect, that is, i am "enlightened" like 90% of the time but sometimes i fail—not big failures because i realize im failing and rectify, but failures nonetheless.

>Could you really watch someone imprison, torture and execute your only beloved child (AN 7.53) or have your own limbs cut off with a two-handed saw (MN 21) and still not have the slightest intention of ill-will, greed or delusion?
I would say yes. I dont swear it because one cant be sure about hypotheticals but i have reacted like that in similar (in nature, not so tough) situations

>could any intellectual principle or any philosophy equip you with such steadiness of mind?
I think so or, at least, it is my case because the way i interpret the world affects directly and greatly the way i react to and interact with it. And i think the same (their beliefs affect the way they act) happens to everyone.

>you could not suffer, you would be UNABLE to suffer?
I could suffer physically but (supposedly) not mentally or emotionally. I have not that kind of disability but i have other adversities and they affect me virtually never

>Do you know what craving and clinging and impermanence actually are?
Yes, and i am not an arahant according to those requirements. Im was just adhering to your definition (do good and avoid bad).

>>22716288
Hinduism, i know the concepts are different in each of them, but it exist in both. Anyway, what has that to do with my question? Asuming the anatman is an actual phenomenon, one could know it and interact with it without believing Buddhism

>>22716318
>I would say yes.
In that case, there's nothing more to say. Either you are speaking honestly and authentically and have achieved a level of wisdom and restraint far beyond an ordinary human being (i.e at the level of at least an anagami), in which case everything I or anyone here could post would be completely redundant, or you aren't speaking honestly, in which case the conversation is equally fruitless.

>>22716631
Or he just doesn't know what enlightenment is

Ah a ha sha sa ma
Ma ma koling samanta

let's see paul allen's householder cope

Reposting

STREAM ENTRY FOR LAYPEOPLE - by Bhikkhu Anīgha
>Clarifying some common misconception about what it takes to become a sotapanna and how can a lay person do it.
https://youtu.be/o2AWxZnxeYk

"Stream Entry and How to Get There" by Ajahn Brahm - 20230609
https://youtu.be/dZzLu-d1qMQ

>>22717394
I'm aiming for complete buddhahood as a layperson

>>22715389

You are describing Liberal intentionalism and naive emotionalism (both of which serve Materialism, of course, "coincidentally" also a Buddhist tenet).

>>22716631
>or you aren't speaking honestly
I am being absolutely honest, the worst situation is me being wrong about myself but i made the effort to speak as truly as i can

>the conversation is fruitless
No because you could teach me about buddhist theory or history or something outside buddhism or i could teach you something

Anyway, my point is that i or any other person can reach a high level of enlightment through paths other than buddhist beliefs and practices. Or could reach a high level in one aspect but not in another eg have an absolute steadiness of mind but incur in sexual desire. Or even, one could be near nirvana by chance, without knowing anything about buddhism, just because life has molded him thay way

>>22715337
>Is it not the same as all the other religions?
no religious people are NPCs and those people just create devotional cults and rituals and useless mental gymnastics

>>22715337
>catholic monks did something similar (for not saying _the same_).
no christians are awful at meditation. they can barely do the first jhana. This is because the jews have always preferred larping through mental masturbation over putting some work on their behavior.
Even the orthodox are bad at meditation>>22715337
>Another case can be made for the way it makes you act but couldnt we get those principles and live by them without believing in buddhism? (Yes)
everybody can do the 5 precepts. Even wrong meditation can get you at the peak of mundane life. Buddhism is needed to break into nirvana from mundane meditation.

How do you faggots overcome your attraction to women? I'm tired of thinking about sex and women and would like to set my mind to better things.

>>22718681
The real method is meditation. Otherwise you just extend the post nut clarity as much as you can by being absorbed by some normie activity, but devoid of women of course. This can go from day trading to bird watching or learning whatever field you can find and becoming an autistic sperg about it.

>>22718702
>being absorbed by some normie activity, but devoid of women
That's impossible anon. I'm an artist. I go to figure drawing classes and draw big booba women. Lately I've been wondering if I can use art to transmute these desires somehow.. art can be quite meditative after all

>>22718540
>meditation can get you at the peak of mundane life. Buddhism is needed to break into nirvana from mundane meditation
Whats the difference between nirvana and mundane meditation? And why is buddhism necessary?

>>22718782
well nirvana is supposed to be unconditioned, and whatever happens in meditation is conditioned. To go from meditation to nirvana you need the usual insights into le suffering, so the usual stuff about the fetters and contact:
https://suttacentral.net/sn41.1/en/sujato
>Suppose there was a black ox and a white ox yoked by a single harness or yoke. Would it be right to say that the black ox is the yoke of the white ox, or the white ox is the yoke of the black ox?”
>“No, householder. The black ox is not the yoke of the white ox, nor is the white ox the yoke of the black ox. The yoke there is the single harness or yoke that they’re yoked by.”
>“In the same way, the eye is not the fetter of sights, nor are sights the fetter of the eye. The fetter there is the desire and greed that arises from the pair of them.
>The ear … nose … tongue … body … mind is not the fetter of ideas, nor are ideas the fetter of the mind. The fetter there is the desire and greed that arises from the pair of them.”

and while you're at it, insights into how the theist narrative of meditation is deprecated in front of the systematic explanation with the jhana factors ie going from one jhana to the other is just dropping factors and that before the jhanas, the condition is mindfulness and before that the condition is restraint and before that it is knowledge that the mind has to be tamed due to being constantly attracted to pretty things and repulsed by ugly things (ie right view, ie the first step of the 8 fold path). As opposed to a theist narrative about making rituals, incantations, mantras, burning wood for Brahman, Vishu and Krishna like brahmins loved to do ever since they created their Vedas.
The complete path:
>When they see a sight with their eyes, they don’t get caught up in the features and details. If the faculty of sight were left unrestrained, bad unskillful qualities of covetousness and displeasure would become overwhelming. For this reason, they practice restraint, protecting the faculty of sight, and achieving restraint over it. When they hear a sound with their ears … When they smell an odor with their nose … When they taste a flavor with their tongue … When they feel a touch with their body … When they know an idea with their mind, they don’t get caught up in the features and details. If the faculty of mind were left unrestrained, bad unskillful qualities of covetousness and displeasure would become overwhelming. For this reason, they practice restraint, protecting the faculty of mind, and achieving its restraint. When they have this noble sense restraint, they experience an unsullied bliss inside themselves.

>They act with situational awareness when going out and coming back; when looking ahead and aside; when bending and extending the limbs; when bearing the outer robe, bowl and robes; when eating, drinking, chewing, and tasting; when urinating and defecating; when walking, standing, sitting, sleeping, waking, speaking, and keeping silent.

>>22718943

>When they have this entire spectrum of noble ethics, this noble sense restraint, and this noble mindfulness and situational awareness, they frequent a secluded lodging—a wilderness, the root of a tree, a hill, a ravine, a mountain cave, a charnel ground, a forest, the open air, a heap of straw. Gone to a wilderness, or to the root of a tree, or to an empty hut, they sit down cross-legged, set their body straight, and establish mindfulness in front of them.

>Giving up covetousness for the world, they meditate with a heart rid of covetousness, cleansing the mind of covetousness. Giving up ill will and malevolence, they meditate with a mind rid of ill will, full of compassion for all living beings, cleansing the mind of ill will. Giving up dullness and drowsiness, they meditate with a mind rid of dullness and drowsiness, perceiving light, mindful and aware, cleansing the mind of dullness and drowsiness. Giving up restlessness and remorse, they meditate without restlessness, their mind peaceful inside, cleansing the mind of restlessness and remorse. Giving up doubt, they meditate having gone beyond doubt, not undecided about skillful qualities, cleansing the mind of doubt.

>They give up these five hindrances, corruptions of the heart that weaken wisdom. Then, quite secluded from sensual pleasures, secluded from unskillful qualities, they enter and remain in the first absorption, which has the rapture and bliss born of seclusion, while placing the mind and keeping it connected. What do you think, Upāli? Isn’t this state better than what they had before?”

>“Yes, sir.”

>“When my disciples see this quality inside themselves they frequent remote lodgings in the wilderness and the forest. But so far they haven’t achieved their own goal.

>Furthermore, as the placing of the mind and keeping it connected are stilled, a mendicant enters and remains in the second absorption, which has the rapture and bliss born of immersion, with internal clarity and mind at one, without placing the mind and keeping it connected. What do you think, Upāli? Isn’t this state better than what they had before?”

>“Yes, sir.”

>“When my disciples see this quality inside themselves they frequent remote lodgings in the wilderness and the forest. But so far they haven’t achieved their own goal.

>Furthermore, with the fading away of rapture, a mendicant enters and remains in the third absorption. They meditate with equanimity, mindful and aware, personally experiencing the bliss of which the noble ones declare, ‘Equanimous and mindful, one meditates in bliss.’ What do you think, Upāli? Isn’t this state better than what they had before?”

>“Yes, sir.”

>“When my disciples see this quality inside themselves they frequent remote lodgings in the wilderness and the forest. But so far they haven’t achieved their own goal.

>>22718945

>Furthermore, giving up pleasure and pain, and ending former happiness and sadness, a mendicant enters and remains in the fourth absorption, without pleasure or pain, with pure equanimity and mindfulness. …” …

>“Furthermore, going totally beyond perceptions of form, with the ending of perceptions of impingement, not focusing on perceptions of diversity, aware that ‘space is infinite’, a mendicant enters and remains in the dimension of infinite space. What do you think, Upāli? Isn’t this state better than what they had before?”

>“Yes, sir.”

>“When my disciples see this quality inside themselves they frequent remote lodgings in the wilderness and the forest. But so far they haven’t achieved their own goal.

>Furthermore, going totally beyond the dimension of infinite space, aware that ‘consciousness is infinite’, a mendicant enters and remains in the dimension of infinite consciousness. …” …

>“Going totally beyond the dimension of infinite consciousness, aware that ‘there is nothing at all’, they enter and remain in the dimension of nothingness. …” …

>“Going totally beyond the dimension of nothingness, aware that ‘this is peaceful, this is sublime’, they enter and remain in the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception. What do you think, Upāli? Isn’t this state better than what they had before?”

>“Yes, sir.”

>“When my disciples see this quality inside themselves they frequent remote lodgings in the wilderness and the forest. But so far they haven’t achieved their own goal.

>Furthermore, going totally beyond the dimension of neither perception nor non-perception, they enter and remain in the cessation of perception and feeling. And, having seen with wisdom, their defilements come to an end. What do you think, Upāli? Isn’t this state better than what they had before?”

>“Yes, sir.”

>“When my disciples see this quality inside themselves they frequent remote lodgings in the wilderness and the forest. And they have achieved their own goal. Come on, Upāli, stay with the Saṅgha. If you stay with the Saṅgha you’ll be comfortable.”

https://suttacentral.net/an10.99/en/sujato

now on the limitation of meditation. It's the usual Rohitassa sutta. ie whatever life realm there is , there is no ending of suffering just by going there...

https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/an/an04/an04.045.than.html
>Then Rohitassa, the son of a deva, in the far extreme of the night, his extreme radiance lighting up the entirety of Jeta's Grove, went to the Blessed One. On arrival, having bowed down to the Blessed One, he stood to one side. As he was standing there he said to the Blessed One: "Is it possible, lord, by traveling, to know or see or reach a far end of the cosmos where one does not take birth, age, die, pass away or reappear?"

[When this was said, the Blessed One responded:] "I tell you, friend, that it is not possible by traveling to know or see or reach a far end of the cosmos where one does not take birth, age, die, pass away, or reappear. But at the same time, I tell you that there is no making an end of suffering & stress without reaching the end of the cosmos. Yet it is just within this fathom-long body, with its perception & intellect, that I declare that there is the cosmos, the origination of the cosmos, the cessation of the cosmos, and the path of practice leading to the cessation of the cosmos."

It's not to be reached by traveling,
the end of the cosmos —
regardless.
And it's not without reaching
the end of the cosmos
that there is release
from suffering & stress.

So, truly, the wise one,
an expert with regard to the cosmos,
a knower of the end of the cosmos,
having fulfilled the holy life,
calmed,
knowing the cosmos' end,
doesn't long for this cosmos
or for any other.

>>22718963
I have read all you wrote or, I adventure, copied and, sincerely, don't understand which advantage Buddhism has over just practice. I mean, one could walk the entire path atheistically or, at least, I consider it possible. Please, tell me why I am wrong, if I am

Should women become nun?
sakyadhita is an association of women pushing for female ordination.

Last year they ordained about 150 women.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1s-mY4P7RixGW5JSeC0Gi9Z4_K7ePhQSB/view
>On June 21, 2022, in Paro, Bhutan, on Bhutan Nuns' Day, these luminous being gathered
around the temple dedicated to Gelongma Palmo, the female practitioner famed for the
Nyungne practice. Many threads were woven together to create the this extraordinary
historic event, one I honestly did not know I would see in my lifetime, yet alone take
part in. The event was historic in enabling female monastics to take full Bhikshuni
(Tibetan: Gelongma) ordination within the Vajrayana lineages, which has been
impossible for many centuries until now.


>From different places throughout Bhutan, India, Ladakh, and myself from England, we
came together – women who had been living by the Getsulma vows for a required
minimum of seven years. Our ages, faces, and languages were different but there was
an extraordinary sense of a particular Sangha arising. Through the course of a total of
five days, 142 nuns came together to help each other, get to know each other, share tents
and food and queries over what we had to do and say and so forth, and together
become Gelongmas in the Himalayas.

>>22716303
reminds me of Sextus Empiricus arguing dogs were more virtuous/better than people

>>22719270
There really isn't such a thing as "Buddhism" to begin with. No one in the suttas talks about being "Buddhist" or believing in "Buddhism". Rather, the emphasis is on views, Right View, the 62 Wrong Views, the attachment to views, etc. There are views that the Buddha promoted (usually presented in a formula "There is mother and father, there is the fully enlightened one, etc.") and other views that he rejected. Whatever labels you apply to yourself or your belief system is irrelevant. What matters are the underlying views you hold and whether they are compatible with the goal: the ending of suffering.

>>22714866
Reposting from another thread, a question from the perspective of someone who is skeptical of any form of rebirth: I've always wondered how Buddhism without belief in the supernatural aspect of rebirth doesn't imply immediate suicide as the most efficient way to dissolve suffering. Atheist Buddhism, then, is either a suicide cult or a contradiction, is it not?
t. Atheist who finds Buddhism interesting but can't get over this seeming conclusion

>>22719981
Yep, that's exactly why rebirth is one of the supported views. Without it, suicide is the most direct path to alleviating suffering.

>There is what is given, what is offered, what is sacrificed. There are fruits and results of good and bad actions. ***There is this world and the next world.*** There is mother and father. There are spontaneously reborn beings; there are priests and contemplatives who, faring rightly and practicing rightly, proclaim this world and the next after having directly known and realized it for themselves

Thanissaro Bhikkhu wrote a very nice book on the subject which covers this argument (among others): https://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/authors/thanissaro/truth_of_rebirth.html

>>22719981
if we accept that (1) existence is predicated upon a physical reality, (2) this reality is one of endless recycling of energy/matter/etc in which nothing observed or construed can come from nothing nor can it be genuinely created or destroyed since (3) the phenomenal entities (e.g. persons, chairs, atoms, concepts, etc.) we have imagined/imposed on this reality are only present in a transient and causal manner in which phenomena cause more phenomena and none are independent, then the doctrine of rebirth need not be literal and can be allegorical, though a "strong" reading of it could be taken on some faith-and-reason basis. Buddhism does not endeavour to provide a rational account of metaphysics anyhow and considers what we might term "philosophy" to be a means and not an end, often prefering a psychological or expressly mystical explanation. Whether rebirth is allegorical or literal, one cannot therefore cut the thread by cutting oneself.

>>22719959
>goal
Aren't you suppose to do good and meditate and all that because it is the right thing? Like it's good for the cosmos or something like that. Having goals is clinging, desiring, and craving, isn't it? Also, it is selfish, isn't it?

Explain why Buddhism doesn't collapse into self-refuting relativism.

>>22720236
explain why it does first

>>22719981
>most efficient way

Why do you have to take the most efficient way? ANd have you thought about the other consequences (in other words the impact that your suicide would have on other people)?

The Buddha was almost certainly an atheist who did not believe in reincarnation. What he offered was salvation where you would not even desire death, because you would be indifferent to life or death. If you are still suffering, then you have probably not followed the Noble Eightfold Path.

>>22720240
Because it denies the existence of transcendental categories of logic due to its philosophy of impermanence. Meaning it can't even talk about itself coherently.
It saws off the branch it was sitting on, ultimately it is circular and self-refuting.

>>22720726
>transcendental categories of logic
that's just shit you made up, so yes once you clear that away things become less obscure

>>22720726
Universal logical categories exist conventionally but not ultimately

Reminder to study abhidharma

zero practice
zero progress
for years
FOR YEARS
lmao have fun debating minutiae when im about to enter second jhana

>>22720159
No, the ultimate goal of meditation is to achieve one's enlightenment, the cessation of suffering and perfect happiness. At its core, it is a completely selfish exercise. Buddha's teaching however also emphasizes how this being the shared goal of all living beings should promote empathy within us, so we may help others achieve enlightenment as well and work to minimize their suffering.

Call me a schizo if you must but I feel like the secret to "enlightenment" is mainly hidden in (what we know of) the Buddhas life itself, for one he travelled across the world, met and redeemed all manner of people from murderers to the virtuous, experienced great wealth and prosperity and then relinquished it all willingly for poverty and ascetic living. What I'm trying to say is, maybe a solitary meditation is only part of it, and you first need to accumulate a great deal of "human experience" beforehand. It also lines up with how The Buddha lived through many lives and reincarnations virtuously before reaching that final one.

The buddha teaching is morality=>meditation=>wisdom

To end suffering, you don't have to travel the world and talk to normies and be a foodie like atheists keep doing in order ''to discover other cultures''

>>22721361
You deliberently went for the most negative intepretation of what I wrote, why be dishonest?

Imagine not being a arahant with no residue left.
§ 44. The Nibbana-element {Iti 2.17; Iti 38}
[Alternate translation: Thanissaro]

This was said by the Lord...

"Bhikkhus, there are these two Nibbana-elements. What are the two? The Nibbana-element with residue left and the Nibbana-element with no residue left.

"What, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant, one whose taints are destroyed, the holy life fulfilled, who has done what had to be done, laid down the burden, attained the goal, destroyed the fetters of being, completely released through final knowledge. However, his five sense faculties remain unimpaired, by which he still experiences what is agreeable and disagreeable and feels pleasure and pain. It is the extinction of attachment, hate, and delusion in him that is called the Nibbana-element with residue left.

"Now what, bhikkhus, is the Nibbana-element with no residue left? Here a bhikkhu is an arahant... completely released through final knowledge. For him, here in this very life, all that is experienced, not being delighted in, will be extinguished. That, bhikkhus, is called the Nibbana-element with no residue left.

"These, bhikkhus, are the two Nibbana-elements."

These two Nibbana-elements were made known
By the Seeing One, stable and unattached:
One is the element seen here and now
With residue, but with the cord of being destroyed;
The other, having no residue for the future,
Is that wherein all modes of being utterly cease.

Having understood the unconditioned state,
Released in mind with the cord of being destroyed,
They have attained to the Dhamma-essence.
Delighting in the destruction (of craving),
Those stable ones have abandoned all being.

>>22721458
>Dhamma-essence
since essence is dangerous word given that all the intellectuals jump on it to turn buddhism into an eternalism, here is a translation without the word:

These two proclaimed
by the one with vision,
Unbinding properties the one independent,
the one who is Such:[3]
one property, here in this life
with fuel remaining
from the destruction
of the guide to becoming,
and that with no fuel remaining,
after this life,
in which all becoming
totally ceases.

Those who know
this state uncompounded,
their minds released
through the destruction
of the guide to becoming,
they, attaining the Teaching's core,
pleased with ending,
have abandoned all becoming:
they, the Such.


The pali word is ''dhammasārādhigamā'' from ''Te dhammasārādhigamā khaye ratā, '' which is really not an essence at all


anyway there is a new website where they retrieve all of Sujato's translation and put it directly wit the pali line by line, which makes it even easier to use than suttacentral
https://theravadan.org/pages/iti0044

LMAO

>Sound Of Tibetan Flute Healing Miraculous Cure • Eliminate Stress And Calm The Mind • Calm The Mind

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l9kAB_ga7YA


Music to relax, meditate, study, read, massage, spa or sleep. This music is perfect for combating anxiety, stress or insomnia as it facilitates relaxation and helps us eliminate bad vibrations. They can also use this music as a background for guided meditation classes or relaxations to sleep.

Welcome to a new direct of relaxing music on the channel of Inner Healing Music. They can leave the video at a low volume and start doing any task such as studying, working, reading... or simply relaxing or sleeping soundly.

If you liked the live and want more relaxing music content, don't forget to like it.
namaste

Read Nagarjuna
Read the Atthakavagga
Meditate daily

Simple as

>>22715337
Abrehamism is ethics, a political tool and not really spirituality. They meditate on how much of a slave to God they are and not much else.

>>22721138
lmao just all as a group ignore me enjoy staying still fools

>>22721979
>Abrehamism
are you too scared to type it out?

>>22714985
An excellent site. I'll go one step further to make it a bit easier and straightforward: https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/index.html

>>22716283
Right View - "I believe this to be true and this to be untrue" and that is, in reality, the case.

Right Resolve - "Doing this I will be benefit and in no way see detriment, so I will do it. Not doing this I will see detriment and in no way see benefit, so I will not do it."

Right Mindfulness - (from google) the development of an accurate and precise awareness of the present moment uncolored by ideas, memories, beliefs, expectations, etc. Pure, unrestricted awareness, seeing reality as it has come to be and as it really is, without defilements of mindfulness which cause the arising, growth or support of delusion (delusion is, I say, a false belief, judgement or view of reality)

>>22718681
A sutta on bondage, hyper relevant to your question: https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/AN/AN7_48.html

And a different sutta which is also a bit relevant: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn05/sn05.002.bodh.html

And then one more for good measure: https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/MN/MN20.html

>>22718782
>Whats the difference between nirvana and mundane meditation?

Are you comparing mundane meditation like this: on one hand, Nirvana, and on another hand, mundane meditation? Or is it some other way?

>>22720726
>Because it denies the existence of transcendental categories of logic due to its philosophy of impermanence.

Please answer: in what way does it deny the existence of transcendental categories of logic? With what as the cause does it do that?

>>22721356
>What I'm trying to say is, maybe a solitary meditation is only part of it, and you first need to accumulate a great deal of "human experience" beforehand.
UNtil you're dispassionate about things that can be objectified, you'll see that viewpoint as reasonable.

>>22722289
Rejection of universals, embrace of nominalism. Everything becomes particular and ephemeral. Not only in is there no truth but it denies the foundational possibility for there even being such a reality. Truth is not possible. The doctrine denies itself, denies the possibility of denial along with the possibility for truth. Spirals into babbling nonsense.
At this point you either have to reconcile that the doctrine is self-refuting in its circularity, or embrace incoherent meaninglessness.

This gets formalized in the "fourfold negation", but giving it a formalization and a name doesn't make it any less incoherent.

>>22722386
You're wrong.

>>22720726
>>Because it denies the existence of transcendental categories of logic due to its philosophy of impermanence.
First you have to establish that
1/ what rationalists call ''reason'' is not mere imagination
2/ that their ''reason'' is a useful tool to produce something else than pure schizo ramblings
3/ that their ''reason'' are relevant for your ''transcendental categories of logic''
4/ that your ''transcendental categories of logic'' are so super important that people can't live without them

>>22722386
>Not only in is there no truth
false
>>22722386
>"fourfold negation"
not even part of buddhism

>>22721356
We've all spent countless aeons in the most blissful heavens and the worst hells, we don't need to experience any more

>>22722386
Universals exist conventionally. The truth is emptiness.

>>22722435
If their "reason" is a useful to tool to produce something else than pure schizo ramblings then whether or not it is mere imagination or not becomes irrelevant.

my Sri Lankan temple in Florence

>>22722435
>you have to establish that
Actually you don't, as all meaning, and the potential for truth, presupposes their existence. You literally can not ask the questions you just asked without relying on them to exist.

It is incumbent, in fact, on Buddhism to demonstrate how truth can exist without universals.And if it then takes the position that truth does not exist, which you claim is false yet is the necessary outcome of denying universals (which you are doing), it then becomes incumbent on your to show how this does not lead to incoherent meaninglessness.

Anyone read the Osamu Tezuka manga?

>>22724421
Universals exist conventionally, but not as transcendent, inherently existing categories. Emptiness doesn't mean you can't talk about abstract principles because they don't inherently exist. You can talk about the abstract concept red even though it doesn't exist outside of any individual red object because it's a useful convention. Buddhism does not deny the conventional truth.
>Vases, canvas, bucklers, armies, forests, garlands, trees houses, chariots, hostelries, and all such things that common people designate dependent on their parts, accept as such. For Buddha did not quarrel with the world!
—— Candrakīrti. MAV 6:166

>>22724421
First yoy're taking for geanted that we can access "truth" second you're taking for gramted that "truth" is a thing on itslef and not a subjective category of our experience
Kant already proven that universals are trascendental and not trascendent, that is they exist "in all things" and not "outside of things" they're the categories of our subjective phenomrnological experience, not a thing on itself that can exist outside of phenomena, so they're fundamentally a product of subjectivity, or as Nagarjuna put it, conventionally existent

>>22714866
oh my budha

>>22724421
>>Actually you don't, as all meaning, and the potential for truth, presupposes their existence. You literally can not ask the questions you just asked without relying on them to exist.
this is all false. you can't even explain how people can live without caring one bit about your ''categories of logic'' lol you're pathetic

also, again, buddhism doesn't care about your ramblings and the buddha never said there was no truth.

>>22718681
Insulin is the king of hormones.
Fasting, napping, and occupation and raised stakes are good tips to crowd out the bad habit. There are physiological rhythms you eventually get used to dampening and skipping.
I have achieved relief from lust on my own with my own walk and journey. I achieved a deep conditioning to it and that conditioning can be undone incrementally and by big ugly chunks of big bad actions. When I see sexy women my libido is dampened not absent. My expectations are not Jesusy or role based. Purely medical redirection and reconditioning. The body rewired is more powerful than some intellectual exercise in directing mere attention via profession of faith. Deeds. Deeds. Deeds!

Your afterlife will be miserable if you live heedlessly

>>22725112
I slept with a butterface woman who had the best moves the best body. But I realized the best part of sex is the ego trip. It is the pride you feel. This is identifying with the bond. The Buddha teaches no self which has many parallels to our western notion of selfless virtue. The Buddha teaches to be not attracted nor averse. The ascetic path of celibacy is one that investigates the senses and dissolves clinging to them as they are empty.
What is deeper than flesh what is active in sex is spirit. This is why the spiritual life requires celibacy. The sexual life is its own spiritual life for the householder. Marriage is important it is that sacrifice you continually return to as its own renunciance as an expression of your conmitnent every time you walk away from disloyal distraction. This is how the householder can relate to the renunciant who has abandoned the fetters for material things. For the renunciant he goes deeper than the householder he is a monastic in the training. He must be immersed in the fruits of the spiritual life. The householder is rewarded with the fruits of the family life. Likewise the renunciant is rewarded with the fruits of the spiritual life. Bliss. Unconditioned. Higher states of consciousness. Joys higher than the joys of flesh and birth and even of the deathless.

What would happen in buddism if immortality is achieved?

>>22725239
Dukkha

>>22725245

Whats dukkha?

>>22722342
I am in a physics class right now and I am realizing how much of a superstitious garbled goober I am

>>22725254
Suffering...in your country

So this is the power of buddhism

woah

Tibetan parasites setting themselves on fire lol
https://tricycle.org/magazine/self-immolation/
>On an April morning in 1998, a 60-year-old man stepped into a public toilet in New Delhi and doused himself in gasoline. Outside, the police had just broken up a six-week-old hunger strike led by members of the Tibetan Youth Congress, an organization calling for Tibetan independence. Setting himself on fire, the man emerged flailing and jumping before bringing his hands together in prayer. Thupten Ngodup, a former monk, had become the first Tibetan to self-immolate in protest of China’s decades-long occupation of Tibet. He died soon after in a Delhi hospital following a personal visit from Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama.

Like so many dramatic but brief moments that take the international stage, Thupten Ngodrup’s self-immolation was soon forgotten outside Tibetan activist circles. It wasn’t until over a decade later, on February 27, 2009, that his deed took on new significance. On that day, a monk named Tapey became the second Tibetan to self-immolate as a form of political protest. This time, however, the radical act triggered a series of self-immolations in the years that followed. At the time of this writing, 121 Tibetans, including Thupten Ngodup, have self-immolated in protest of China’s rule over Tibet.

>>22724675
Is this not just philosophical speculation and pointless, meaningless word-making but with Buddhism rizz?

As opposed to the suttas in the Pali Canon which are "If you do this, heaven and happiness is the result. If you do this, hell and unhappiness is the result. Here is how to do this. Here are the pitfalls, practices and solutions. Now you know everything in particular and in essence."

>>22718681
This is the answer >>22722261

>>22725167
Your current life will be miserable is you live heedlessly. As well.

>>22725228
>The Buddha teaches to be not attracted nor averse.
This is true. The Buddha also teaches not to be deluded. The Buddha teaches these three: non-passion, non-aversion, non-delusion. Delusion means a false belief or judgment about external reality, held despite incontrovertible evidence to the contrary, occurring especially in mental conditions.

>>22725239
There is this thing, which has been mentioned in terms similar to enlightenment: the Deathless Element, the Deathless.

One who is subdued by passion, aversion or delusion suffers, even if they live a very long time and cannot see its ending.

>>22725254
If I were to paraphrase it, which I am going to do here now, dukkha is the suffering, unease, and unhappiness attendant to living in a way that doesn't regard "what is good for me" as "good for me" and "what is bad for me" as "bad for me".

>>22725448
If women marry thinking, this man will have extramarital affairs, and men marry thinking, this woman will have extramarital affairs, isn't the only sin the lies and mistreatment, if they arise?

I'm sure this post will be dismissed for its reference to modern psychotherapy, but one interesting application I've discovered is to use the "cognitive restructuring" technique in CBT based therapy to reframe experiences in terms of the three characteristics.

The technique is ordinarily used to classify experience in terms of cognitive biases and irrational patterns of thoughts (e.g all-or-nothing thinking, overgeneralization, recency bias). But one can replace these categories with those of impermanence, unsatisfying, and not-self. In effect, one is constantly investigating whether one is taking arisen phenomena as permanent, satisfying, or self and whether that is justifiable.

>>22724675
>Universals exist conventionally, but not as transcendent, inherently existing categories.
That isn't a universal then, just some epistemic handwaving laundered under the same name. So the answer to the question is seems to be a "no", the Buddhist position is that universals do not exist.

>>22724844
>First yoy're taking for geanted that we can access "truth" second you're taking for gramted that "truth" is a thing on itslef and not a subjective category of our experience

It is precisely the opposite. Everything you write takes for granted that truth isn't just mere subjective ephemera. If your position is truthless why are you so keen to prove that is true? Even when you attempt to speak meta-epistemically about truth, and suggest that it is merely a product of subjectivity, you advocate for that position as being true, otherwise why would you bother (assuming your are not intentionally setting out to deceive and mislead).

Basically I am saying that Buddhism is close to being an extended form of the liars paradox, "This sentence is false", in that it can't forward an argument for its own validity without negating its core doctrine. Hence it is a self-refuting philosophy.

>>22714866
>genuine and innocent question here
i think i get to what nirvana is. but at the same time i think is just another realm of existence. nor better nor worst nor definitive
>why i feel this way?.

>>22726113
Have you even read Nagarjuna

can someone post a religious\philosophical criticism of Vajrayana? not about bad gurus or abuse or corruption, but critiquing the teachings itself (termas, yidam yoga, dzogchen and 6 yogas of naropas etc).
Before I spend a lot of money on accessing tibetan-buddhist courses online, puja for empowerment etc
Theravada seems clearly laid-out, systematic and "clean and tidy " spiritually but the esoteric pseudo-hinduism of tibet is...enticing.

>>22726831
Maybe try reading some books on the context first
Snellgrove, Indo-Tibetan Buddhism
Davidson, Indian Esoteric Buddhism
from Japanese perspective also of interest
Abe, The Weaving of Mantra

>buddhist chantards
lol. lurking on 4chan contravenes half of the precepts of the noble eightfold path.

>>22726911
i don't know why somebody always posts this, as if they assume all buddhism everywhere consists of monastic austerities

>>22726920
so how does being a buddhist chantard work.... can you go to a temple and pray for forgiveness after spreading hate and vitriol online all week. I'm genuinely curious

>>22726929
who is being prayed to for "forgiveness"?
not every religion is a cut and paste of Judaism

why is Jain Ahimsa more merciful, peaceful and complete than Buddhism ahimsa?
i know buddhists critique jain theology but what about the practical application? it is an empiric fact that jain mendicants cause less suffering to physical beings than buddhist monks.

>>22726920
Chakrasamvara is one of the main yidams of the Gelug school, the most austere and monastic of the four schools of Tibetan Buddhism

>>22727077
well they have no trouble strolling around paintings of wrathful coom demons in between trance sessions, so i think that's pretty unlike what the other anon imagines Buddhism to be

if sila aids in meditation then can meditation aid in sila

>>22726941
so you're allowed to behave like a shit online within buddhism.?

>>22726032

>One who is subdued by passion, aversion or delusion suffers, even if they live a very long time and cannot see its ending.

Can you live a very long time without subduing to passion aversion or delussion?

>>22727326
there's nothing wrong per se with explaining buddhism to people who behave like shit in terms of behaving like shit

>buddhists on 4chin

LOL

>>22726060
You are, I think, unironically doing what is already encouraged by at least one sutta. https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/MN/MN20.html

>>22725970
>but with Buddhism rizz
Nothing ™ > Nothing

2smart4Empty

>>22727326
This school was not ever a big boss as much as a big computer
See>>22725448

>>22727613
Sutta means thread.
/thread

>>22727613
>japanese religion discussed on a pretty much japanese website
Wild

>>22726971
Let me ask my friendly neighborhood mask police about Jainism over vegan slop

>>22726971
The Sanatana Dharma of pretending to be Asian online >22726929
Heres how it works
>hikikomori live with parents
>be an otaku robot loser
>shitpost about anime like an edgy teen with a rock hard erection for controversy
>economic downturn of old people vampirically siphoning the future
Yep I think Im turning Japanese
I THINK IM TURNING JAPANESE
I REALLY THINK SO
[GUITAR SOLO]

>>22726929

>>22726911
Name one and explain in brief or at-length.

>>22726929
>so how does being a buddhist chantard work.... can you go to a temple and pray for forgiveness after spreading hate and vitriol online all week.
A buddhist practicing rightly and abiding in line with the dharma is probably one of the reasonable voices on this site, if they are here. Have you not noticed that some people/anons aren't merely hateful, but use their reason and explain things?

>>22726113
>That isn't a universal then
Tragically, you do not get to define reality.

>Hence it is a self-refuting philosophy.
No, Buddhist philosophers are quite open about the fact that words cannot convey the whole of reality. Finger moon etc. It would only be self refuting if anyone claimed that the linguistic construction of Buddhism is a total and complete description of reality, and no one has ever done that.

>>22726971
Please explain your stance using one or more declarative statements. A declarative statement is a sentence that makes a statement, provides a fact, offers an explanation, or conveys information.

>>22727277
Yes

>>22727353
When thinking about this, I can't help but regard it as some kind of koan. One who is enlightened can be understood in relation to the deathless element. One who has not subdued passion, aversion or delusion is subject to death.

>>22728267
Are you agreeing, disagreeing, or mocking?

>>22728540
>no one has ever done that.
Precision of language is important. I bet someone has done that. I don't think they were speaking rightly and properly though.

>>22724421
>It is incumbent, in fact, on Buddhism to demonstrate how truth can exist without universals
Are you doing this because you're an actual Platonist, or are you just cribbing Jay Dyer on this? Because if it's the latter then I don't see why you're making this argument when Platonic Realism was condemned as an abominable, blasphemous, and unforgiveable polytheistic idolatry by the Church Fathers and implies that "truth" could be found in anything except the jewish tribal deity.

Anyways Buddhists don't need universals for truth and knowledge to exist for the same reason that Platonic Realists don't: you can gain knowledge about the world, which Buddhists believe is real and actually exists, independent of Platonic Universals. Even Plato allows for direct real experience of reality unmediated through language, and you HAVE to allow this otherwise you would never be able to know anything about dirt, mud, feces, or any other thing that lacks a Platonic Form. Because knowledge comes from direct experience with reality a Buddhist doesn't need there to be a Form of Red to see red things, the red just directly interacts with the mind (The Abhidhamma argues that mental-dhammas, such as for color, are found in the mind which is how the red is "conveyed"). The mind knows the red of the object directly without a universal necessary to act as an intermediary.

Like, at a really blunt example, you used the word "don't", you misused "literally". If knowledge can only be conveyed via universals then this contraction and misuses of a word should render your post completely incoherent because you've deviated from the univerals by which anyone could gain knowledge about your post. The fact that people can understand what you're saying and explain to you why you're wrong is a demonstration of the lack of necessity of universals for knowledge.

>>22728579
>Precision of language is important.
Again, you're mistaking the finger pointing at the moon for the moon. Buddhism is a soteriological tool, and nothing more. It doesn't need to perfectly describe reality because it's not trying to, it's just here to get you to the next stage (nirvana). When you cross the river, you don't continue to carry around the raft. Words only need to get you so far.

>>22728613
>Again, you're mistaking the finger pointing at the moon for the moon.
Bullshit. Now you're just being a wanker.

>>22728571
Yes.
Buddhism's rizz is like a data structure pseudocode for real hard thought so while it is empty it is not nothing it is conventionally nothing what it is is smart asian bros society super school with saintly characteristics.
Swami Sarvapriyananda is my favorite teacher but thats me being a spoondeep observer johnny come lately.

>>22728600
Truth, metaphysics is just mental masturbation. I know because I engage in it, all it does it confuse you even more and lead you to suffer. The more you think about le true nature of reality, the more paradoxical and non sensical it gets, the endpoint of all metaphysics is realizing the "ultimate" substrate of reality is not even anything that we can understand by conventional means, which means it completely refutes itself, because thinking there is a "source" or "ground" is conventional. it cannot be logical because logic depends on axioms, so this ultimate reality has to be self-evident, self-causing, the more you think about this the more retarded and illogical it gets. You just explain away these logical inconsistences by making the ultimate substrate be self-explanatory, you reify something that isn't even a "thing", you make a ground of something that isn't even a ground. The more you engage in this sort of the nonsense the more convoluted it gets. Some buddhists sects are even worse because it gets even more non sensical with le buddha-mind, le form = emptiness, and other idiocy, instead of leaving the ineffable at the limits logic can take you. You could engage in this intellectual masturbation, or you can end your very lived and real experience of suffering, which you have no logical reason to perpetuate. There is absolutely zero reason to stay in samsara.

There is a clunky logic to Buddhist texts. It isn't as polished as Aristotle or as vividly theatrical as Plato's dialogues. It is like Ancient India/Nepal HR whoa ain't that a SAFE NOTHING BURGER WOW uh A plus please!
When Buddha has a miracle it is something boring like FLYING STUPA (it does nothing). Or
>Mom said when I was born, lotus petals flourished at her feet and a flying elephant did backflips overhead.
Much of Siddhartha's life seems like a story concocted than a historical event in Chinese Sastras.
The Pali Canon reads like a community college historical event that records every fart and breath and bowel movement of this bald nondescript man in a monastery.

The Diamond Sutta reads like a logic lecture with reverence and Dragon Ball filler.

>>22714866
Would the Buddha judge it's an attachment if he knew I bought a buddha statue?

>>22728861
Nagarjuna's entire point is to show the ineffability of the ultimate, and the fact that it's illogical to reify it as anything at all. That's emptiness free from extremes. The Mulamadhyamakakarika is the definitive explanation of emptiness for all Mahayana schools.

>>22729259
officially the depictions of the buddha are forbidden

>>22729340
And emptiness is a masturbatory gymnastics by intellectuals which has no footing in reality.

>>22729410
who is the official? i should like to meet him on the road

>>22728540
>Tragically, you do not get to define reality.
Good thing I don't have to. But if I did I would make so non responses like yours were impossible.

As to your second point, I am not arguing that Buddhism is incomplete, I am arguing that it is contradictory. It isn't important to the argument being made if Buddhism can or can not describe the whole of reality, what I am saying is that Buddhism as it presents itself is paradoxical, and at best, as you have demonstrated, contains a promissory element that it becomes non-paradoxical at some higher trans-linguistic experiential level that it will never be able to prove and must be taken as a matter of faith.

>>22726723
>Have you even read Nagarjuna
No, I have not. But I assume you, being a convinced student of him, will be able to eloquently explain his position regarding this whole conversation.

>>22728600
>Anyways Buddhists don't need universals for truth and knowledge to exist

It clearly does.
What your post demonstrated was an inability to disentangle sense impression from Truth in a foundational and sense-making mode. This is clear for two reasons, your repeated insistence on direct experience as a subjective entity as some kind of foundation, when this is a large portion of what Buddhism supposedly deconstructs and relegates as empty ephemera. Your implicit argument here being basically "Everything is transitory and contingent, therefor we can arrive at Truth". Completely absurd.
The second example being your inability to disentangle, or maybe just intentional equivocation, drawing an deductive inference from Truth in the sense that we have been discussing.

Does anyone have experience with the six dharmas of naropa in vajrayana, particularly the practice of illusory form?

>>22722918
I don't remember all of it so that doesn't matter.

I used to think Buddhism was the truth but then I realized that the doctrine presupposes the same kinds of conventional truths and assumptions other religions do. It is no less arbitrary than anything else.

>>22727077
Which is the least austere and monastic?

>>22729969
there is no assumption in buddhism, literally none

>>22730096
N8P, 4NT, 3 marks etc
I'm fine with just Tathata

>>22728861
>Truth, metaphysics is just mental masturbation. I know because I engage in it, all it does
You shouldn't construe your experience as the experience of everyone. You shouldn't accept that premise. It's unskillful.
>The more you think about le true nature of reality, the more paradoxical and non sensical it gets
Because you're not meant to try to hammer it out by reason. That's unskillful investigation. You're meant to affirm what is apparent as apparent, what is not apparent as non apparent, and contemplate with discernment, diligence, persistence and mindfulness unmuddled.

>>22729259
There are these words to be found in a sutta(s) in the Pali Canon, about things which are good to recollect. One of them is the Buddha.

“One thing, mendicants, when developed and cultivated, leads solely to disillusionment, dispassion, cessation, peace, insight, awakening, and extinguishment. What one thing? Recollection of the Buddha. This one thing, when developed and cultivated, leads solely to disillusionment, dispassion, cessation, peace, insight, awakening, and extinguishment.”

“One thing, mendicants, when developed and cultivated, leads solely to disillusionment, dispassion, cessation, peace, insight, awakening, and extinguishment. What one thing? Recollection of the teaching … Recollection of the Saṅgha … Recollection of ethical conduct … Recollection of generosity … Recollection of the deities … Mindfulness of breathing … Mindfulness of death … Mindfulness of the body … Recollection of peace. This one thing, when developed and cultivated, leads solely to disillusionment, dispassion, cessation, peace, insight, awakening, and extinguishment.”

https://suttacentral.net/an1.296-305/en/sujato

>>22729410
That's not true. And it's absurd. Absurd means wildly unreasonable, illogical, or inappropriate. I say it's absurd because there is no such monastic rule to my knowledge and I think it is the case that there is no such rule in truth.

>>22729415
I think you may be right. I've not been following this conversation with full attention so I want to ask this (I hope the answer is something like yes): Do you have regard for the suttas of the Pali Canon that includes the notion that they are well-explained and accurate describe a practice that is conducive to benefit in the here-and-now and in the future?

>>22729952
I don't, but I have experience of other things and maybe, if asked a specific question, I can give appropriate guidance. I've got a bit of experience with the esoteric at least.

>>22729969
I think your viewpoint "presupposes" is born of assumption. There are those who assume "Because this other thing came before and this newer thing is a doctrine in line with these doctrines that came before it, it is merely because of what came before that THIS came about." But that's not logical at all. In the same way that a mother might say to a child "There is air. There is light. There is water." so that the child knows the names and how they might be referenced but the mother did not create or contrive "air" or "light" or "water," it is possible (And I say, it IS the case), that contemplative after contemplative arrives at the same viewpoint about reality independent, as it were, of each other. That would be expected, in fact, if contemplation is an able way to see something true about what many people regard as the same thing.

>>22730200
I don't consider myself a Buddhist, or at least I treat it with a certain level of skepticism, but I find some esoteric practices quite interesting in terms of phenomenology, especially illusory form insofar as it seeks to make the "real" world appear dreamlike in order to achieve a certain continuity of conscious experience from waking to dreaming (thus making it easier to recognize the death bardo for what it is, allegedly)
I'm interested in experiencing this, and also in knowing how this state is practically different from a dissociative state.
What is your experience with esoteric Buddhism?

>>22730227
>What is your experience with esoteric Buddhism?
That's not what I meant when I invited you to ask a specific question. I see and hear gods and spirits and have the sovereignty that comes with self-control.

>>22730275
Which kinds of gods and spirits?
Do you lucid dream?

>>22730286
All kinds. Named devas of the buddhist faith (bodhisattvas), unnamed deities native to north america, and other gods/spirits who I'm sure have names but aren't to be found on wikipedia/google.

I am usually pretty lucid when dreaming but I don't seek to become lucid with the thought "I am dream. Now I can...etc." I am aware that my conduct in my dreams has just as much affect on my fate as my conduct outside of dreams.

>>22715337
>figure out what 'the unconditioned is'
>suddenly have no qualms with buddhism
its that easy

>>22719981
It isnt because
a. Annihilation is the CORE wrong view in Buddhism
b. once you are born again you are still unwise after suicide

>>22720058
>if we accept that
if we accept nonsense that cannot be discerned but only theorized about than we can accept anything. If we accept things we can discern, we can discern wisdom.

>>22720726
solved by 2 truths doctrine

Atheist Buddhism is cringe
once you realize you can literally just verbally ask Siddharta Gautama or Nagarjuna for help in understanding and enlightenment, and that it actually works ( it not working would contradict Buddhism and make you get stuck in the stage of doubt, which prevents enlightenment ) you can make strides towards Arhantism

>>22729571
>It clearly does.
It clearly doesn't and you admit so when you concede on knowledge of things like mud, feces, and dirt. If you can gain knowledge about things that lack a universal then you don't need universals to gain knowledge. All Buddhists are doing is saying that this epistemology extends beyond dirt, mud, and feces to everything. You're the one that needs to make an argument for why universals are necessary to gain knowledge of some things (red, chairs, etc) but not others (dirt, mud, feces).

>your repeated insistence on direct experience as a subjective entity as some kind of foundation, when this is a large portion of what Buddhism supposedly deconstructs and relegates as empty ephemera
This isn't the case because Buddhism isn't about deconstructing mental phenomena, it's about deconstructing built up mental structures. The sensory information that you receive, the real direct contact with reality, is real, it actually exists. All of the built up nonsense in your head that you've created that clouds your contact with reality is the stuff that's deconstructed. We don't need some kind of abstract "Truth" that exists separate from actual knowledge and experience to know things: the fact that this abstract "Truth" is separate from actual things that we can know stuff about is a demonstration of that. All you've done is decouple "Truth" from knowledge and things known.

>The second example being your inability to disentangle, or maybe just intentional equivocation, drawing an deductive inference from Truth in the sense that we have been discussing.
This is where you concede btw, because you're not arguing that dirt, mud, and feces DO have universals, OR that they are beyond our knowledge.

>>22730404
>verbally ask Siddharta Gautama or Nagarjuna for help
What?

>>22729517
>I am not arguing that Buddhism is incomplete,
Yes, you are. You're saying that a philosophy can only have any truth content if it's 100% descriptive of reality: that can never be the case because the statement will always be different from reality by virtue of one being a statement and one being reality. You can never have a 100% accurate description of reality in words.

You argue exactly that it must be a 100% complete description of reality when you say
>what I am saying is that Buddhism as it presents itself is paradoxical, and at best, as you have demonstrated, contains a promissory element that it becomes non-paradoxical at some higher trans-linguistic experiential level that it will never be able to prove and must be taken as a matter of faith.
You completely reject the very idea of reality itself by positing that mere words are higher than reality. But, your qualifications are clearly absurd because the same
>paradoxical... promissory element that it becomes non-paradoxical at some higher trans-linguistic experiential level that it will never be able to prove and must be taken as a matter of faith
that is found in Buddhism is found in literally every linguistic statement ever. Abrahamists have to just take it as a matter of faith that there isn't Yahweh^2 beyond Yahweh, and that Yahweh^2 isn't hiding Yahweh^3, and so on ad infinitum. You have to take the lack of actual infinities on faith. Even at a basic level when I tell you that "I saw a dog" you have to take it as a matter of faith that I not only saw a dog but that any of those words actually have any meaning. I could say that I saw a "as;godahs" and you'd just have to take it on faith that a "as;godahs" is something that actually exists.

>but i could use empiricism and reason to find out whether you did in fact see these things by directly accessing reality
Then not only can you use empiricism and reason to verify all claims, obviating the need for universals or an abstract "Truth" separate from actual knowledge and truths, but you can use them to directly access reality to verify the claims that the Buddha makes. In fact the Buddha directly tells you to, and gives a very in-depth guide on how to do just that, and what things will look like if he was correct, and what things will look like if he was wrong. It's called "Buddhism".

>>22730486
In Buddhism it is cannon that enlightened ones are supposed to, and can help people on Earth reach Buddhahood. There's plenty of techniques you can use, such as prayer, verbally asking them in helping you understand things or Tulpas. And it works, they can answer you and even tell you information you previously had no knowledge of, of course because of the anti-spiritual/Christian sentiment and the moral panic of imagined 'schizophrenia' in the west this idea is frowned on by white's.

>>22730096
You have to assume samsara is real otherwise there’s no point

>>22730504
How would you know that you're not getting misled by some other entity?

>>22730553
Critical thinking and discourse, same way you got here in the first place anon. It works out eventually, and the main thing that was preventing me reaching higher stages of enlightenment was
>fears of existential horrors which weren't real and were merely conditioned at worst and posed themselves as fundamentally true when they were fundamentally not fundamental
>fear of the non-existence of storehouse consciousness
>the assumption that one can consider himself a moral actor without ever speaking out about or acting over the small immoral things in day to day life

>>22730535
You can observe samsara though. What you're misunderstanding is the nature of "not needing to assume" with "effortlessly knowing", even Buddha didnt know of Samsara until he left his palace (he was a holy NEET destined to become emperor for decades before Buddhahood, just like 4chan!)

>All is dukkha.
Buddhabros… was buddha just another cringe life denier?

>>22730655
>Buddha

all compounded phenomena are impermanent (anitya)
all contaminated phenomena are without satisfaction (duḥkha)
all phenomena are without self (anātman)
nirvāṇa is peaceful/peace (śānta/śānti)
>Anon
all things are dukkha
therefore anon thinks all things are conditioned

>>22730655
clinging to conditioned life on Earth is like clinging to your PS2 save file of DMC3 in 2045

>>22730572
>existential horrors
Like what?
What do you mean when you say storehouse consciousness?

is buddhism compatible with anti tech revolution

>>22714905
It's similar to activated almonds

>>22730745
>Like what?
simulation theories, materialistic delusions and stuff like "theres-only-one-person/god-who-disassociates to make it seem like theres many people"
>What do you mean when you say storehouse consciousness?
Its a Mahayana concept, and is one I struggled with for a while.
In "essence", all the things you've experienced are 'stored'/remembered no matter what you do, and do so in a "indestructible form that still doesnt limit you but lets you grow", but how you remember them is not guaranteed. The reason most humans struggle to remember their past lives and the reason Buddha is said to easily remember his past life is because our relationship with our storehouse consciousness is one filled with delusion and regret and the kind of delusions we choose to believe and allow to fester in our minds leads to being unable to access it.

In other words, the entirety of the human phenomena (being born, not remembering past lives, wandering) stems from ignorance and delusion we permit and otherwise the actual basis of 'everything' is 'good' that we repress. We already know better than but permit anyway are and that is why we struggle with existential questions, like chasing a petty high but we warp external and internal reality around these feelings (positive or negative).

We aren't "not remembering our past lives", we are simply creating an environment (out of ignorance or deliberately, brick by brick) that makes recalling our past lives difficult, and this world is one that karmically attracts that sort.

>>22730773
alaya-vijñana isn't so much a memory bank as it is a seed bank—memory is recall, seed is proliferation—and seed is the literal term used in the literature e.g. in the Mahayanasamgraha, the idea being that this consciousness is what accumulates consequences/ripenings/retributions/maturations which result from the "seeds," from your actions thoughts volition etc. and these results then become objects for the other seven consciousnesses (which are the five senses plus a mental sense, followed by the "mind") which thus rely upon the "storehouse" consciousness to operate

>>22730773
>simulation theories
Don't some Tibetan schools take the "world is dream" thing as literally as possible
>only-one-person
Yeah basically Hinduism
The way you describe storehouse consciousness sounds a bit like a "self" honestly. Or maybe I am misunderstanding it.

storehouse consciousness is not taught by the buddha to begin with, it's literally just the product of the imagination of a some scholars failing to understand karma

>>22730805
Right, the question I had was in relation to which of that 'information' is 'valid' for being stored and which not. The answer I got was "all of it is 'stored' perfectly but you dont care about most of it so you blur away the parts you dont like or dont want to put in effort for".

>>22730825
The storehouse in mahayana is one of the final layers of realizing non-self, and one way to do this is realizing that anything newly 'added' to the storehouse can completely subvert how the old storehouse contents is viewed entirely, and realizing that clinging to the storehouse is still conditioned, the "actual" storehouse is already unconditioned and in effect on a cosmic scale and thus all clinging to it like ruminating is conditioned and dukkha.

>>22730838
Not really, if there was no storehouses consciousness than liberation would not be liberation for all your unconditioned wisdoms would be worthless in the face of a 'mistake' so to speak, and dharma in the face of dukkha is the whole point of Buddhism. Without the storehouse, Buddhism is reduced to just nihilistic cope, and Buddha explicitly said wrong views about annihilation and eternalism are the most important views to transcend.

>>22730194
The emptiness free from extremes Nagarjuna describes comes from the Pali Canon, he cites this sutta in the Mulamadhyamakakarika
https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/sn/sn12/sn12.015.than.html

>>22730825
Everything is illusory, but there's nothing external that really exists that's generating the illusion

>>22730960
the full saying would be everything is both ILU/NOT ILU or just 1 or neither, the notion can be described as
>"everything that has or has yet to be discerned can be changed just by your relationship with it, no matter how unchanging it may seem right now, and by changing your relationship into one that acknowledges this fundamental truth, you can change them and yourself in such a way to pursue the unconditioned and Nirvana"

>>22730553
>Critical thinking and discourse, same way you got here in the first place anon. It works out eventually, (>>22730572)
Is the right answer. I'd add to that, circumspection. Don't make a cosmic-sized, livelihood-sized change based on smoke and mirrors. Do take good advice when you hear it, even if it seems to be coming from an evil person who doesn't follow it. Hell and heaven and nirvana are real.

>"Buddhist" chantards
give me a break

>>22731015
Buddhism promotes vidya
/v/ loves vidya
/v/ = Buddha

>>22731015
To quote the Lotus Sutra
>when they invent the internete, they'll have these japanese, you know those eastern island guys, japanese inspired spider web-places, and one of them will have an irish four leaf clover as an icon, whatever you do DONT WRITE STATEMENTS ON THAT ONE, otherwise you're not a real Buddhist

>>22730655
>all is dukkha
>Buddhabros… was buddha just another cringe life denier?

No. One reason he wasn't just a cringe life denier is because he didn't say that. What he did say was actually based and true. He said

In life there is allure, drawback and escape. "All is dukkha" is a crude, absurd gloss of what he actually said. In this context, I'm using the word gloss to mean a handy, "boiled-down" phrase that purports to represent what it summarizes but is actually plain wrong. Actually wrong and not connected to what it says it is.

If you google "allure drawback escape" and "sutta" you'll find a lot of suttas where the buddha mentions life and sensual pleasures (and other things) in just the manner, in just that light. Here's an example: https://www.dhammatalks.org/suttas/SN/SN35_17.html

>>22730755
I don't know what that is but I'm inclined to unequivocally say yes. Because buddhism is compatible, first and foremost, with sentient beings looking to escape suffering and find the bliss which cannot be excelled (or, less loftily, what is simply better than what they are experiencing right now).

>>22731025
Finally, the last piece of the puzzle fell into place and i realized that Buddha was talking about not grinding for rare item drops in MMOs all along.

>>22730862
>Not really
First off. Storehouse consciousness, I believe, was not taught by the buddha. Only saying, truthfully, that it WAS taught by the buddha can gainsay that.

> it's literally just the product of the imagination of a some scholars failing to understand karma
I think this might be the case.

>if there was no storehouses consciousness than liberation would not be liberation for all your unconditioned wisdoms would be worthless in the face of a 'mistake' so to speak
Will you explain your line of reasoning using negative and positive examples?

>Buddha explicitly said wrong views about annihilation and eternalism are the most important views to transcend.
Relevant sutra: https://suttacentral.net/sn22.81/en/sujato

>>22730755
>is this nonviolent thing compatible with this violent thing

>>22730871
Is it the case or is it not the case that Nagarjuna takes what is known to be buddhism and has the faith of many, namely "The contents of this sutta", and then construes or explains what is not known and has only him, at that point in time, as guarantor?

>>22731032
Sarcasm is the refuge of a shallow mind is a phrase I heard once. I was inspired by it. It felt relevant to share now, out of compassion for you. But, I think you mean to say that it is blameless to post here as a buddhist, and that to say that it is blameworthy to post here (as a buddhist) is absurd. I agree, more or less, with that sentiment.

>>22731091
Verse from the dhammapada 85. Few are there among men who arrive at the other shore (become Arhats); the other people here run up and down the shore.

Here's a (not very good) parody of that verse: Few are there among men who reach end-game and, having their fill, becoming disenchanted with the race for ever better gear, quite in peace; the other people here run up and down the shore.

>>22731083
dharma just becomes more and more intellectualized as there is space for more surrogate activity for example in buddhas time it was relatively straightforward, they didn't even have writing back then
wonder how free of fluff the buddha dharma of hunter gatherers would be
>>22731102
pretty sure technological society ultimately causes the death of everyone so anti tech revolution is non violent

>>22731097
>>if there was no storehouses consciousness than liberation would not be liberation for all your unconditioned wisdoms would be worthless in the face of a 'mistake' so to speak
>Will you explain your line of reasoning using negative and positive examples?

>Nirvana's main selling point is being eternal, pure, unconditioned
>Buddha said that annihilation and Eternalism were both wrong extremes
if there was no storehouse or storehouse equivalent principle
>Buddha was just lying and Nirvana is either an eternal stillness/basically Brahman or annihilation with a fancy attitude that requires lying your way into achieving it, or Nirvana is temporary and once you accidentally forget some things its back to square one, in other words Nirvana would just be one of the many worlds. This way, Nirvana implies limitation
if there is a storehouse
>the fundamental existence of a storehouse (that one must have the right unclinging view of) means that one's state of enlightenment isn't predicated upon anything that can happen, but rather on whether/how the enlightened one decides to not partake in the conditioned. This way, Nirvana implies liberation

>>22731139
>we have to kill a lot of people now to prevent a lot of people dying later
Do you think buddha would agree with this anon

>>22731186
What is the Buddha's stance on the recursive trolley problem?

>>22731139
>they didn't even have writing back
I'm not sure that's accurate. I think that is inaccurate. Regardless, there were monks who admirable in memory and precise speech. And the dharma has an essence as well as a particular which causes deviations to be noticeable by those who know.

>>22731117
>Sarcasm is the refuge of a shallow mind
>Sarcasm is not the refuge of a shallow mind

>Sarcasm is both the and not the refuge of a shallow mind
>Sarcasm is neither the nor not the refuge of a shallow mind

>>22731178
I think you've fallen into something unskillful akin to is-ought. I think you've fallen into a fallacious point of view akin to this "This dilemma is solved by this thing, and so I will espouse this thing as true." I think that's not beneficial for you. I don't say that that is wholly detrimental for you.

I think there is a storehouse equivalent principle. I don't think it is storehouse consciousness. I don't know, specifically, what storehouse consciousness is but it is clear from the context what is generally meant.

>>22731186
Not that anon but I think the answer is no. There is these verses in the dhammapada which I think is relevant (verse 131 and 132):
He who seeking his own happiness punishes or kills beings who also long for happiness, will not find happiness after death. He who seeking his own happiness does not punish or kill beings who also long for happiness, will find happiness after death.

>>22731218
I get it. I'm enlightened. I am unconditioned. Except you probably shouldn't kill me.

>>22731225
I disagree because I don't think the storehouse is a "thing" on its own but rather a facet of emptiness that still must be discerned. And I think that revealing the nature of the storehouse' influence on our future actions, and the nature of our actions influence on the storehouse is very useful, rather than equating it to an object of consciousness.
>>22731186
Buddhahood implies supernatural powers such as foresight. To the question of "the Buddhas trolley problem" might just be "the Buddha would never end up in the trolley problem"

>>22730010
Bump

>>22731186
more like kill a lot of people now to prevent all of them dying later

>>22714866
anyone have the introduction to Buddhism chart imagine?

>>22730096

Buddhism assumes the entire Hindu cosmology behind it, doesn't it?

>>22726920
Tibetan Buddhism isn't really Buddhism but demon worship

>>22732463
and that's a good thing

>>22714866
the problem with buddhism is that it doesn't incorporate any worldly/confucian virtues or even allow you to practice them properly.

>>22732751
yes buddhism's goal is to escape the world and the conventions made up by normies and intellectuals, because those are inherently flawed

>>22731264
Emptiness and the storehouse consciousness are not even remotely real.
Talking about them is like talking about the sex of the angels or the pink unicorn in the room after a schizo told you there is one.

>>22733553
What do you think emptiness is?

Happy November Uposatha. Remember to celebrate at your local temples.

1. I observe the precept of abstaining from killing beings.
2. I observe the precept of abstaining from stealing.
3. I observe the precept of abstaining from incelibacy.
4. I observe the precept of abstaining from telling lies.
5. I observe the precept of abstaining from taking intoxicating drinks and drugs.
6. I observe the precept of abstaining from eating at improper times.
7. I observe the precept of abstaining from dancing singing music shows wearing garlands and beautifying with cosmetics.
8. I observe the precept of abstaining from using luxurious and comfortable seats and beds.

Imitating great arahants, I follow these precepts for happiness in this life, for rebirth in heaven, and to realize the Four Noble Truths in this Gautama Buddha’s Dispensation.

How do I get into Vajrayana?

>>22734028
Find Vajrayana books on libgen

>>22734028
You must let guru do sex tantra w your wife to receive initiation

>>22721356
There's plenty of videos, movies, and books about the lives of others that you can live vicariously through and understand.

You can watch loads of porn and get the understanding of what it's like to have lots of sex and know that it's not satisfying and you'll never have enough orgasms

You can play tons of games and have so many adventures and still not be content.

You can eat all the tasty food you want - still want more.

Listen to the all of the music that exists - still seek after new sounds.

Do all the drugs.

etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YdrrkKfh3I&list=PLUPMn2PfEqIw9w6zCsn6l0jtG2Ww2prRD

As long as you crave, and give in to cravings, you will suffer.

>>22718681
Don't save pictures like that.
Think about their insides.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patikulamanasikara

Suppose, there were a maiden of the noble caste, fifteen or sixteen years old, neither too tall nor too short, neither too thin nor too plump, neither too dark nor too pale. Is her beauty & charm at that time at its height?

You might see that very same woman when she’s eighty or a hundred years old: aged, roof-rafter crooked, bent-over, supported by a cane, palsied, miserable, broken-toothed, gray-haired, bald, wrinkled, her body all blotchy. What do you think: Has her earlier beauty & charm vanished, and the drawback appeared?

You might see that very same woman sick, in pain, & seriously ill, lying soiled with her own urine & excrement. What do you think: Has her earlier beauty & charm vanished, and the drawback appeared?

You might see her as a corpse cast away in a charnel ground, picked at by crows, vultures, & hawks, by dogs, & hyenas… a skeleton smeared with flesh & blood, connected with tendons… bones scattered in all directions — here a hand bone, there a foot bone, here a shin bone, there a thigh bone, here a hip bone, there a breast bone… What do you think: Has her earlier beauty & charm vanished, and the drawback appeared?

>>22718707
You will desire whatever you give enough attention to.
If you focus on the pleasurable features of the female body, then that will be on you mind.
Focus on the unpleasant aspects of the body to free yourself from lust.

We were “designed” by natural selection to do certain things that helped our ancestors get their genes into the next generation—things like eating, having sex, earning the esteem of other people, and outdoing rivals. So if you ask the question “What kinds of perceptions and thoughts and feelings guide us through life each day?” the answer isn’t “The kinds of thoughts and feelings and perceptions that give us an accurate picture of reality.” At the most basic level the answer is “The kinds of thoughts and feelings and perceptions that helped our ancestors get genes into the next generation.” Our brains are designed to, among other things, delude us.

If you were designing organisms to be good at spreading their genes, how would you get them to pursue the goals that further this cause? At least three basic principles of design would make sense:

1.Achieving these goals should bring pleasure, since animals, including humans, tend to pursue things that bring pleasure.
2.The pleasure shouldn’t last forever. After all, if the pleasure didn’t subside, we’d never seek it again; our first meal would be our last, because hunger would never return. So too with sex: a single act of intercourse, and then a lifetime of lying there basking in the afterglow. That’s no way to get lots of genes into the next generation!
3.The animal’s brain should focus more on (1), the fact that pleasure will accompany the reaching of a goal, than on (2), the fact that the pleasure will dissipate shortly thereafter. After all, if you focus on (1), you’ll pursue things like food and sex and social status with unalloyed gusto, whereas if you focus on (2), you could start feeling ambivalence. You might start asking what the point is of so fiercely pursuing pleasure if the pleasure will wear off shortly after you get it and leave you hungering for more.

As the Buddha said, pleasure is fleeting and this leaves us recurrently dissatisfied. And the reason is that pleasure is designed by natural selection to evaporate so that the ensuing dissatisfaction will get us to pursue more pleasure. Natural selection doesn’t “want” us to be happy, after all; it just “wants” us to be productive, in its narrow sense of productive. And the way to make us productive is to make the anticipation of pleasure very strong but the pleasure itself not very long-lasting.

>>22734787
Scientists can watch this logic play out at the biochemical level by observing dopamine, a neurotransmitter that is correlated with pleasure and the anticipation of pleasure. They took monkeys and monitored dopamine-generating neurons as drops of sweet juice fell onto the monkeys’ tongues. Dopamine was released right after the juice touched the tongue. But then the monkeys were trained to expect drops of juice after a light turned on. As the trials proceeded, more and more of the dopamine came when the light turned on, and less and less came after the juice hit the tongue.

As time passed, there was more in the way of anticipating the pleasure that would come from the sweetness, yet less in the way of pleasure actually coming from the sweetness. If you encounter a new kind of pleasure—if, say, you’ve somehow gone your whole life without eating a powdered-sugar doughnut, and somebody hands you one and suggests you try it—you’ll get a big blast of dopamine after the taste of the doughnut sinks in. But later, once you’re a confirmed powdered-sugar-doughnut eater, the lion’s share of the dopamine spike comes before you actually bite into the doughnut, as you’re staring longingly at it; the amount that comes after the bite is much less than the amount you got after that first, blissful bite into a powdered-sugar doughnut. The pre-bite dopamine blast you’re now getting is the promise of more bliss, and the post-bite drop in dopamine is, in a way, the breaking of the promise—or, at least, it’s a kind of biochemical acknowledgment that there was some overpromising. To the extent that you bought the promise—anticipated greater pleasure than would be delivered by the consumption itself—you have been, if not deluded in the strong sense of that term, at least misled.

Natural selection's job is to build machines that spread genes, and if that means programming some measure of illusion into the machines, then illusion there will be.

the atheist propaganda of this ''we'' through their idea of ''species'' is pathetic and a desperate attempt to fight the individualism they themselves created because they know it is the entrance to nihilism.

>>22734895
Why do you hold this in your mind?

>>22734778
Intestines are hot

>>22732454
The assumption that conformation of what came before it means that there was no direct experience of the same reality is itself baseless I think. I'm 33 years old and can point to sky, earth, air, and water as existing without having to parrot an older source, even though there are writings much older than me that also refer to them.

>>22732751
Yes it does. There are virtues in buddhist sutras applicable to people who in no way wish to become a monk.

>>22734028
What is vajrayana to you? Is it deity worship or is it buddhism without the memorization of suttas? I'm asking earnestly so I can give you an answer, not so I can attack you in any way.

>>22734787
>We were “designed” by natural selection to do certain things that helped our ancestors get their genes into the next generation
I disagree

>>22732751

What do you think the Eightfold Path is exactly?

>>22734778
> fifteen or sixteen years old
> Is her beauty & charm at that time at its height?

begins the roasty seething

>>22734778
>Has her earlier beauty & charm vanished, and the drawback appeared?
umm not really
should i participate in rekt threads to develop this exercise

Why do I always feel like a Garuda? Is this something particularly relevant to Buddhist teaching?

>>22737300
>Garuda
they are part of the hindu folklore and are of no importance in buddhism.

>>22737496
Wrong

>>22714866
When you realize the true nature of the self, you no longer pay homage, you no longer regard vows as anything special, and you no longer are a Buddhist.
If you cannot do this by just breathing, relax harder and shut the fuck up.

>>22737562
wrong

>>22735998
Neither, to me it's a "special" form of praxis and insight-oriented Mahayana that aims to realize liberation in this lifetime through specific practices and texts

>>22737496
>are of no importance in buddhism.
All sentient beings are of importance in buddhism.

From a buddhist sutra:

Thus have I heard:

On one occasion the Blessed One was living near Savatthi, at Jetavana at Anathpindika's monastery. At that time Candima, the moon deity, was seized by Rahu, lord of Asura. Thereupon calling to mind the Blessed One, Candima, the moon deity, recited this stanza:

i. "O Buddha, the Hero, thou art wholly free from all evil. My adoration to thee. I have fallen into distress. Be thou my refuge."

Thereupon the Blessed One addressed a stanza to Rahu, Lord of Asuras, on behalf of Candima, thus:

ii. "O Rahu, Candima has gone for refuge to the Tathagata, the Consummate One. Release Candima. The Buddhas radiate compassion on the world (of beings)."

Thereupon Rahu, Lord of Asuras, released Candima, the deity, and immediately came to the presence of Vepacitta, Lord of Asuras, and stood beside him trembling with fear and with hair standing on end. Then Vepacitta addressed Rahu in this stanza.

iii. "Rahu. Why did you suddenly release Candima? Why have you come trembling, and why are you standing here terrified?"

"I have been spoken to by the Buddha in a stanza (requesting me to release Candima). If I had not released Candima my head would have split into seven pieces. While yet I live, I should have had no happiness. (Therefore I released Candima)."

>>22738051
If that is the parrticulars, what is the essence of vajrayana to you?

>>22738170
I would say pure and direct experience of emptiness

>>22738179
This sutta seems relevant: https://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/ud/ud.1.10.irel.html

bump