/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14411791]

Any books/methods on Stream Entry? I want to escape the wheel of becoming.

[Anonymous No.14411827]

>>14411791
Become an upstreamer.

[Anonymous No.14411868]

>>14411791

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCKejmWAt_kNpRMq5gQEGAqw

Dhamma talks from a monk in Sri Lanka. I think he's probably an arahant.

[Anonymous No.14411874]

>>14411868
White people cant become arahants

[Anonymous No.14411891]

>>14411874

"A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away with. What a Tathagata sees is this: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is perception...such are fabrications...such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.' Because of this, I say, a Tathagata — with the ending, fading away, cessation, renunciation, & relinquishment of all construings, all excogitations, all I-making & mine-making & obsessions with conceit — is, through lack of clinging/sustenance, released."

[Anonymous No.14411893]

>>14411874
>

also buddhism is firmly part of the indoeuropean tradition so european religious background is definitely suitable.

[Anonymous No.14411896]

Your better off becoming a twitch streamer. Buddhism has no salvific power and will only lead to nihilism and spiritual malady.

Only Christ can save and guide your soul in the afterlife. Read the Church fathers, John of Damascus, Maximos the Confessor, Basil, Augustine, Symeon the new theologian...etc. also read father Seraphim Rose and of course the bible. Far more wisdom, far more truth and coherency than the dharma and claims about rebirth+no-self+extinguishing desire...

Keep seeking and reading. Stream entry is a Buddhist cope anyway, if you aren't fully enlightened you have no guarantee of a safe rebirth.
Cheers

[Anonymous No.14411897]

>>14411791
Read any Buddhist text and chant the prayers every day.

[Anonymous No.14411903]

>>14411896
In Buddhism, all souls do gain entry though not at once. You may just end up reborn a bit first.

[Anonymous No.14411923]

If there is no permanent soul and buddhism doesnt believe in transmigration of the soul, then what is it that is reborn?

[Anonymous No.14411959]

>>14411923

The Buddha's teachings in the Suttas are phenomenological in nature. And from that point of view, time is just an assumption. So the Buddha's teachings concern the ontological structure of phenomenal experience. This teaching is timeless in the sense that it makes no reference to time. According to this teaching, when ignorance (avijja) is present, existence (bhava) is present. If ignorance isn't removed by death, 'rebirth' will occur.

As to what is reborn, it is the 'sense of self' (bhava, literally translated as being or existence). This is a real phenomenon as such from the first point of view. It arises in dependence on ignorance, craving and the assumption that ownership of phenomena is possilbe (upadana).

[Anonymous No.14411961]

>>14411923
They have no answer to this.
The only thing to be reborn is an impersonal bundle of karmic residue (psychic shit) that falsely believes itself to be an abiding, personal self. So illusion and shit get reborn....

Truly Buddhism is metaphorically bankrupt. But for common folk in Asia it does serve them pragmatically, morally and gives them some hope...at least they aren't atheists.
But westerners adopting Buddhism is really sad and just another symptom of western nihilistic decay.

[Anonymous No.14411978]

>>14411959
So the sense of self is reborn? So if i die without achieving nirvana, then my 'sense of self' reforms somewhere else? Then what is this sense of self, and how can it exist without a conscious entity?

[Anonymous No.14412010]

>>14411874
>>14411893
Buddha condemned magic thinking and being slave to karma replacing it with with law of cause and effeect.
>>14411978
Sense of self is a habit that gets reborn through inertia i.e. karma

[Anonymous No.14412039]

>>14411978

Part of the confusion is that we typically have assumptions about the structure of reality that are denied by the Buddha. You have to think about it purely from the first-person point of view, because the third-person point of view is just an assumption. So there is no 'somewhere else', that's just a concept. All there is are the phenomena of the mind, the natures of such phenomena, and the dependence relations they stand in. What we call a 'conscious entity' just is the collection of phenomena, i.e. consciousness, perceptions, feelings, determinations, and material form. These are the phenomena that the Buddha talks about.

As for bhava, typically we think that before I can take ownership of something, I must exist. But phenomenologically the Buddha claimed the reverse is true. There is only a sense of identity, or a referent for the word 'I' within conscious experience, because we assume that phenomena can be owned. Bhava is just the subjective phenomena of identifying with your experience in someway, which is dependent on assuming that that experience is of the nature that it can be owned or identical with you, which is dependent on ignorance of the nature of such phenomena (that they do not pertain to self).

When a monk attains arahantship, the first thing he thinks upon introspection is "Birth is ended." This is because there is no longer anything within his experience to which the notion of birth applies. If the mind does not identify with anything, there is no 'one' there, just a collection of impersonal phenomena interacting according to impersonal laws.

Hope this makes sense, I'm not an expert.

[Anonymous No.14412065]

>>14412039
Isnt this an inherently anti-materialist or non-materialist view?

[Anonymous No.14412078]

>>14412065

It's a phenomenological point of view, it makes no assumptions whatsoever. Or more precisely, it recognises assumptions as phenomena, and that to 'believe' a phenomena is a category error, because phenomena cannot be true or false, they just exist.

This is why, when questioned, the Buddha would claim not to hold any positions, denying that he asserted a given proposition, its negation, both it and its negation, or neither it or its negation. It's a kind of Humean empiricism where all speculation is denied, not just because there's no way of knowing, but because speculation itself is just another phenomena to be known.

[Anonymous No.14412086]

>>14412065
>>14412078

That's what the Buddha meant by this passage posted above:


"A 'position,' Vaccha, is something that a Tathagata has done away with. What a Tathagata sees is this: 'Such is form, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is feeling, such its origination, such its disappearance; such is perception...such are fabrications...such is consciousness, such its origination, such its disappearance.' Because of this, I say, a Tathagata — with the ending, fading away, cessation, renunciation, & relinquishment of all construings, all excogitations, all I-making & mine-making & obsessions with conceit — is, through lack of clinging/sustenance, released."

[Anonymous No.14412100]

>>14412065
Yes? Of course.

[Anonymous No.14412110]

>>14412100

It's just as much against idealism, or any other metaphysical position.

[Anonymous No.14412457]

>getting trolled this hard by Krishna's incarnation that appeared specifically to troll atheistcucks deeper into their delusion and away from true enlightenment
Why have Buddhacucks still not learned? Krishna is Ultimate Chad, Krishna is LORD, Krishna is God! Hare Krishna! A Self is directly a child of God, meant for eternal joy and bliss in His kingdom! God's transcendent Self is perfect, infinite and eternal! He is more than Brahman. Unconceived, unconceivable! Praise the Lord, all glory be unto Him!

[Anonymous No.14412478]

>>14412457
PRAISE THE LORD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

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

[Anonymous No.14412546]

>>14412457
Based

>In order to defeat the demons (daityas) who had succeeded in obtaining great powers through religious austerities, Visnu came down to earth disguised as an ascetic and began teaching doctrines contrary to the Vedas. First, disguising himself as the founder of the Jaina school, he taught the doctrine of anekāntavāda (perspectivism or “non-one-sidedness”) to the group of demons. Then, moving on to another group, he changed his outfit and, appearing as the Buddha, taught that animal sacrifices are immoral and so forth. By this means, the demons lost all of the powers they had attained, and were summarily massacred by the gods.
>This story is remarkable because it accomplishes two goals simultaneously. First, it manages to subsume Buddhism and Jainism under orthodox Brahmanism, by demonstrating that both Mahāvīra (if that is indeed who is portrayed—he is nameless in the Visnu Purāna ) and the Buddha were incarnations of Visnu. Second, it completely discredits the actual content of the doctrines of these two sects, by suggesting that the teachings of Buddhism and Jainism are intentionally false and nonsensical. The dupes are the Buddhists and Jainas, who do not understand that the source of all of the teachings they defend so vehemently is a divine trick.

[Anonymous No.14413192]

>>14411959
>>14412039
>>14412078
Very based. Could you give me some recommended readings? Should I just read a Pali canon anthology?

[Anonymous No.14413360]

>>14411893
>Euro doing the white power hand sign

[Anonymous No.14414340]

>>14413360
baka

[Anonymous No.14414376]

Phenomenology of Spirit if you want the truth, stick to the Buddhist shit if you want a lie.

[Anonymous No.14414427]

>>14411923
Nothing is reborn. The Universe is one indivisible thing, matter is in constant flux, and as long as there are conscious beings there will be consciousness.

[Anonymous No.14414439]

>>14411874
Only white people can actually.

[Anonymous No.14414808]

>>14414376
Based, but the buddha himself never told a lie.

[Anonymous No.14414832]

>>14414376
If you actually read Hegel you would understand why that's such a retarded comment.

[Anonymous No.14415478]

>>14411923
why are elephants training commandos

[Anonymous No.14415487]

>>14415478
war

[Anonymous No.14415537]

>>14411791

Gautama, Siddhārtha. Dislike him. An insufferable pedant, insipid and foolhardy. A pied piper, pathological narcissist and a cloying moralist. Some of his modern disciples are extraordinarily amusing. Nobody takes his claims about remembering past lives seriously.
Majjhima Nikāya. His best work, though an obvious and shameless imitation of Yājñavalkya's "Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad"
Dīgha Nikāya. Dislike it intensely.
Dhammapada. Dislike it intensely. Ghastly rigmarole.

[Anonymous No.14415578]

>>14414376
Buddhism isn't incoherent gibberish like Hegel is.

[Anonymous No.14415709]

>>14415578
This. Read Schopenhauer instead.

[Anonymous No.14415888]

>>14414427
>The Universe is one indivisible thing
>matter is in constant flux
Funny how you can't see the blatant contradiction here. The absolute hilarity is that Buddhists don't understand change.

[Anonymous No.14416141]

>>14413192
Not that anon, but interpreting Dependent Arising as timeless sequence reminds me of Nanavira Thera.

[Anonymous No.14416149]

>>14415888
>can't see the difference between the world in itself and as a representation

[Anonymous No.14416174]

>>14416149
So now you're incoherently mixing concepts from Western metaphysics with Buddhism, without any clarification or explanation whatsoever?
Sounds typical for the average online Buddhist.

[Anonymous No.14416175]

>>14416149
>world in itself
lmao imagine believing in this

[Anonymous No.14416192]

>>14416174
To clarify, I'm not a Buddhist but in some ways agree with Buddhism. You'd have to realize that Parmenides and Heraclitus were both right. The world as representation is in constant change and flux, but in itself it's a one, unchanging, indivisible thing.

[Anonymous No.14416294]

>>14416192
You proved my point:
>The absolute hilarity is that Buddhists don't understand change.

[Anonymous No.14416351]

>>14416294
And how did I do that?

[Anonymous No.14416391]

>>14416351
Since all is ever changing is a constant unchanging reality, Theravadins reify flux as constant, nirvana in the cycles of phenomenal reality is its own explanation in some panpsychic neutral monism that places the Intelligible forms (misrepresented as mimesis by deconstructivists and linguists) and matter as one physical process that explains itself through flux becomes one with flux ends suffering of the attributes of flux, becoming whole with emptiness. Why bother to educate the puthujjana of a different system, Guenonfag? Let them rot.

[Anonymous No.14416410]

>>14413192

Teachings of Ajahn Nyanamoli:

https://www.hillsidehermitage.org/teachings/writings/

He also has a youtube channel of the same name.

>>14416141

Yes, that's partly where I'm getting this interpretation from. A simultaneous interpretation of dependent origination necessarily follows from the fact that the Dhamma is 'immediately visible' (sanditthika) and 'timeless' (akalika).

[Anonymous No.14416479]

>>14416391
Are you the Guenonposter? I must admit either I've gotten retarded or your post borders on incomprehensible. How does your post differ from what I said and what the Buddhists are saying?

[Anonymous No.14416558]

>>14416479
>Guenonposter
No, I recommend psychedelics https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ISZ59c2UzZ4