Books/Arguments against buddhism

[Anonymous No.22558654]

I currently identify as a secular buddhist. Is it as retarded as it sounds?

[Anonymous No.22558670]

Why follow the therapy/self improvement program of a man born 2500 years ago?

[Anonymous No.22558688]

>>22558654
Read Nagarjuna and realize that Buddhism is irrefutable

[Anonymous No.22558712]

>>22558654
Concerning secular buddhism, without the supernatural elements, especially existence and karma extending beyond death, buddhism becomes rather trivial applied psychology.

As far as buddhism in general is concerned, its followers historically were no better than followers of any other religion - hypocritical, power-hungry, lustful, greedy, cruel. This proves that even people who dedicated their whole lives to this religion and followed most of its rules and practices did not really become better human beings.

[Anonymous No.22558751]

>>22558712
It's not trivial, it's still better than a lot other things (eg CBT)
Buddhism has a pretty elaborate theory of mind that still applies if you reject rebirth

[Anonymous No.22558761]

>>22558751
Why staple yourself to the Buddhist theory of mind instead of just synthesising all the available information we have now?

[Anonymous No.22558763]

>>22558654
Arguments against Buddhism:
1. Dali lama is a pedo
2 (if it applies). You have no connection to Buddhism.

[Anonymous No.22558794]

>>22558761
Synthesis is hard. I don't really know what you could add to buddhist theory of mind to improve it as a therapeutic tool. Alternatives to buddhism from a purely secular/therapeutic perspective are unironically things like CBT (buddhism lite) and psychoanalysis (itself a religion, comparable to Vajrayana in some ways, but appeals to a very different personality type)

[Anonymous No.22558834]

>>22558670
With buddhism have 2000 years worth of teachings and tradition you can lean into. A therapist and some self-help books might substitute it but there is still something comforting about following a religion that is hard to replicate with therapy.

[Anonymous No.22558844]

>>22558712
With buddhism you have 2000 years worth of teachings and tradition you can lean into. A therapist and some self-help books might substitute it but there is still something comforting about following a religion that is hard to replicate with therapy.

[Anonymous No.22558858]

>secular buddhist

You are wearing the skinsuit of Buddhism because you like the aesthetics.

There is no room in Buddhism for so-called "secularism". Secular Buddhism is an oxymoron.

Buddhism is not a tool for therapy, and it's not comparable with psychiatry or support groups. It is Dharma teaching, a great vehicle for spiritual liberation.

Rejecting the spiritual aspects of Buddhism is just like taking the engine out of your car. You can still sit in it and pretend you are going somewhere, but really you are just wasting your time and could just take a walk instead.

People don't really get how therapeutic just walking can be. It's guaranteed to be more therapeutic than whatever headcanon bullshit you've gotten yourself wrapped up in.

Some people think too much, they qthink Buddhism is some kind of intellectual exercise. It is very much not that.

[Anonymous No.22558863]

What the hell even is secular Buddhism? If you don't believe in rebirth and kamma, then what's left? The entire 4noble Truths and 8 fold path are based on both of them.

If you accept the 1st noble truth but no rebirth, then just kys. What's the reason for Buddhism? Jhana meditation? Thays stupid when it takes great effort and is concerned primarily with dissolving kamma. Just take heroin if you want to feel good.

[Anonymous No.22558929]

Tibetan Buddhism was a fucked up death cult and the Chinese did the tight thing in wrecking the clerical class.

[Anonymous No.22558947]

>>22558863
The goal of vipassana is to see reality without distortion. That's what gets you enlightened.
This seems like a valid goal even if you believe life ends with death. Since we are here, might as well figure out how this thing works.

[Anonymous No.22559043]

>>22558863
is that what the bpd roastie in sopranos was going for

[Anonymous No.22559055]

SUCK MY TONGUE YOU DIRTY LITTLE BRAT OUUHHHHHHH

[Anonymous No.22559094]

>>22558654
>secular buddhist
your problem is you did not start with the 'jeets... you must do the needful

[Anonymous No.22559140]

Would meditating on Adderall help one achieve calm and insight meditation insights a lot faster?

[Anonymous No.22559158]

>>22558654
Got an internet fight to win?

>>22559140
The trick you're missing is slamming codeine after the adderall to take the edge off, then you can pranayama optimally and get max productivity from your meditation session. We all have busy lives after all

[Anonymous No.22559179]

>>22558863
Presumably a sort of Epicureanism without the implicit self-improvement and transhumanism. But even that's pretty shitty as the existence of the divine is a pretty important part of actual Epicureanism.

[Anonymous No.22560378]

>>22558947
"Enlightenment" is a westerner corruption of the dhamma. Buddha taught samsara, kamma, and it's end - nibbana.

All these gay westerners are thinking enlightenment is like some type of instant thing that completely changes your mental state permanently and you become like this spiritual guru or some shit. Like in MIB when he has that laser light that mind blanks people.

In reality there is nibbana - then ending of greed hatred and delusion which means the arahants life is his final one. No more rebirth. That's what parinibbana is. Basically what an modern day materialist thinks happens when he dies. Lights out. In nibbana of the still living arahant there is still dukkha - bodily pain, sickness and death. There are even cases of arahants committing suicide.

This secular Buddhism shit is just absurd to me. It can only exist because people don't AT ALL read the EBT's. Just a cursory reading shows rebirth, kamma, supernatural abilities of monks, fantastical realms and retarded shit like wind gods, mount meru, and torture realms are all very real to these dumb street shitters and the entire buddhist project is centered around escaping from the endless cycle of rebirth.

Without rebirth what's the fucking point? It would be like a Christian praying to a God he doesn't believe in to get to a heaven he thinks isn't real. You are not a Christian you're just fucking dumb. Same with these invariably white new age buddhist faggots who get their knowledge of the religion from the self help section and Sam Harris types.

[Anonymous No.22560549]

>>22558654
yes
>I currently identify as an atheistic religious person

[Anonymous No.22560584]

>>22560549
Buddhism is literally an atheistic religion

[Anonymous No.22560622]

>>22558858
Based and bodhicitta-pilled

[Anonymous No.22560625]

>>22560378
> Following the Dharma for a purpose
NGMI

[Anonymous No.22560711]

Karma and reincarnation are the trivial conclusions you end up with when you apply conservation laws to the naive spiritual models of self and death. That is to say, if you believe that nothing is wasted, but also believe in the self and death, you inevitably arrive at the ideas of karma and reincarnation.

Buddhism is already kind of an ideology of skepticism towards these things, considering its conclusions about them, but it nonetheless entertains them for the purpose of effective practice. The best refutation of Buddhism, is Buddhism.

[Anonymous No.22560727]

>>22558654
All religions which prohibit heterosexual relationships for their male clergy (they also tend to not admit women into clergy) are just fronts for pederasty.
Don't misunderstand me believing in skydaddy(s) are retarded in the first place, but if someone wants to waste their time and money, their life doing it is not my problem. But when their goal of religion is peserasty then it is a problem.

[Anonymous No.22560732]

>>22558858
>People don't really get how therapeutic just walking can be.
I think you're making a great point here. I've been trying meditation (the lite-version one) now and then, but I do not want to embrace the deeper elements of Buddhism. I want to keep my desires, and I don't give a shit about most sentient beings (which makes me bound for some lesser realm in the next life from the Buddhist perspective, I know). And so this sort of meditation usually brings me some clarity for a while, but then it starts to actually increase anxiety and becomes almost painful. While just walking and being in nature, as well as working out, does wonders for me.

[Anonymous No.22560737]

Look into the origins of the word secularism

[Anonymous No.22560918]

>>22558654
Regular Buddhism: You believe life is unfulfilling and full of suffering. But you're trapped in an endless cycle of rebirth, how to escape it? Follow Buddha's teachings.

Secular Buddhism: You believe life is unfulfilling and full of suffering. But there is no rebirth, so how to escape it? Way easier to kill yourself than to follow Buddha.

[Anonymous No.22560938]

Look buddhism cannot be defeated. Hindus and Jains and Mahayana followers all have tried for thousands of years and contrary to what those clowns keep saying, they all failed.

[Anonymous No.22560945]

>>22560938
Are you ignoring the fact that Muslims and Hindus managed to almost totally drive Buddhism out of the subcontinent on which it was conceived?

[Anonymous No.22560994]

>>22560945
would you live in india? they weren't driven out, they just left

[Anonymous No.22561017]

>>22558858
every religion ever
>you can do that! this religion is founded on blah blah blah all the shit I believe
every denomination ever
>okay so im making a different one and taking the shit I like
> YOU CANT DO THAT EVEN THOUGH I JUST OUTLINED HOW YOU HAD TO DO THAT NOOOOOOO

[Anonymous No.22561021]

>>22560994
They didn't leave, there were mass conversions. From Lars Fogelin's An Archaeological History of Indian Buddhism:
"While some small Buddhist centers still persisted in South and West India in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, for the most part, both monastic and lay Buddhism had been eclipsed and replaced by Hinduism and Jainism by the end of the first millennium CE."

[Anonymous No.22561024]

>>22561017
>ok so im making a new christian denomination but we don't believe in God, we just sit in churches praying because someone said praying is good for your mental health

[Anonymous No.22561029]

>>22561021
Buddhism lives rent free in Hindu theology

[Anonymous No.22561040]

>>22561029
Maybe in parts, but that's like saying the European native religions live rent free in Christianity because of the appropriation of their holy days like Christmas and Easter - it's a hollow victory

[Anonymous No.22561044]

>>22561024
Abhidharma is literally psychology, meditation is in no way comparable to prayer

[Anonymous No.22561045]

>>22561021
the buddhists were reborn on a different country

[Anonymous No.22561048]

>>22561040
I wouldn't say it's the same, I mean the poos accuse each other of being crypto-Buddhists

[Anonymous No.22561049]

>>22561044
>Abhidharma is literally psychology
It's theology.
>meditation is in no way comparable to prayer
Meditation is concerned primarily with dissolving kamma, much as prayer is concerned primarily with communion to God. You think, due to being a retarded westoid cretin, that it's a psychological practice. Read.

[Anonymous No.22561050]

>>22561045
kek

[Anonymous No.22561054]

>>22559043
Which BPD roastie are you talking about, Tony's Ukrainian mistress? She had nothing to do with heroin or Buddhism. Christopher is not a roastie but is a heroin user. Adrianna wasn't into Buddhism and only dabbled with heroin.

[Anonymous No.22561060]

>>22558654
If you don't believe in dharma and the wheel of samsara then what is even the point of being a buddhist?

[Anonymous No.22561063]

>>22561024
There is nothing wrong with doing that, the wrong part is calling it Christian. The same way, if all you want is to do some mental exercises and practices, why call it Buddhism?

[Anonymous No.22561066]

>>22558863
I just really like the vibes of buddhism. I feel buddhists often come as much deeper and more spiritual than people involved in western religions, which are all about the ego, but I can't bring myself to believe in things like reincarnation. They just don't make sense to me. So I identify myself as a secular buddhist. Makes sense?

[Anonymous No.22561067]

>>22558654
Yes

[Anonymous No.22561070]

>>22561066
>I just really like the vibes of buddhism. I feel buddhists often come as much deeper and more spiritual than people involved in western religions, which are all about the ego, but I can't bring myself to believe in things like reincarnation. They just don't make sense to me. So I identify myself as a secular buddhist. Makes sense?

[Anonymous No.22561082]

>>22561066
This is either bait or you truly don't belong here liberal scum

[Anonymous No.22561083]

>>22561066
No. You like the fact that they're spiritual, but you don't believe spiritual stuff? You think they're deeper, but most of their thought and practice is dedicated to escaping rebirth, which you don't believe exists.

[Anonymous No.22561093]

>>22561024
That fine as long as you collect donations

[Anonymous No.22561148]

>>22558654
There are the satirical traveling books by Christian Y. Schmidt who worked for a german satirical magazin (Titanic) for quite a while. And his traveling journals are in the same vein. He's writing about all kinds of interesting and weird things going on in china but also his brushes with buddhism and what he thinks about the Dalai Lama (not very much). Well his thoughts (and most of the writers of the left leaning "New Frankfurt School") are mostly very negative and very often (IMO a bit too much and to naively) china-apologetic when talking about buddhism and the neo-feudal Tibetan clique around the Dalai Lama.

One of the promo images used to promote his book "Alone Among 1.3 Billion" is even used around here as banner.

[Anonymous No.22561236]

>>22558654
>I currently identify as a secular buddhist
Why? First answer that question in detail. If you can't do that, then why are insistent on calling yourself one? Move from there.

[Anonymous No.22561244]

>>22561066
>I just really like the vibes of buddhism. I feel buddhists often come as much deeper and more spiritual than people involved in western religions, which are all about the ego, but I can't bring myself to believe in things like reincarnation. They just don't make sense to me. So I identify myself as a secular buddhist. Makes sense?

[Anonymous No.22561469]

>>22561049
>It's theology.
It's entirely concerned with the mind
>Meditation is concerned primarily with dissolving kamma
You don't dissolve karma through meditation, you have to experience it's effects. Angulimala became an arhat, but he was still stoned to death because of his negative karma. All meditation practices can be divided into shamatha and vipashyana. Shamatha is calming the mind through single pointed focus on an object. Vipashyana is cultivating wisdom by meditating on the impermanent and dependent nature of phenomena. These can obviously be beneficial to anyone regardless of whether or not they accept rebirth. There's no religious dogma you have to accept to apply meditative practices and see their benefit for yourself. The Buddha never asserted otherwise.

[Anonymous No.22561477]

yeah dissolving karma is a jain and hindu and mahayana idea. In buddhism you don't need to purify karma to get fully enlightened

[Anonymous No.22561485]

>>22558654
No. Reincarnation is dumb as shit, no reason to think it's true. I've started to explore buddhism and a lot of wisdom is in there - your desires are what cause your suffering, happiness is to exist without fear, etc.
I wouldn't even call Buddhism a religion - it doesn't really worship a god, and the sects of Buddhism that basically turn Buddha into a god don't seem what the Buddha himself taught.

Explore it deeply, take what's useful, and ditch the retarded ideas it has, like the self not existing, reincarnation, etc.

[Anonymous No.22561527]

>>22561485
>ditch the retarded ideas it has, like the self not existing
Anatman or nairatmya is inseparable from the doctrine of all dharmas or elements of experience as being momentary—hence they are identityless. This is in the nikayas and is picked up with greater emphasis by Mahayanists, who are going to attack the reification of these dharmas by the Sarvastivadins, just as if they were as soluble as the skandhas/aggregates, and the exegetical method they use (sunyata) later evolves into its own formal school. So across both the earlier Buddhist schools and into the Mahayana, anatman remains the defining characteristic of Buddhism, and that which serves to consistently distinguish it from its many sectarian and non-Buddhist dialectical partners in India over the centuries.

[Anonymous No.22561529]

>>22558688
>>22558654
Here OP, this anon is correct, Buddhism is irrefutable because it breaks from logic. No point in arguing, it is literally a matter of belief. As such, i will argue that most buddhist countries are absolute shitholes and invite you to do christianity instead (if you are set on being retarded, at least be the productive kind of retard)
Or alternatively, you can do daoism, its the same but doesnt seek to end life or escape/ avoid suffering like a hedonist retard(its part of the core living experience)

[Anonymous No.22561544]

>>22561529
yeah Japan is way worse than Nigeria

[Anonymous No.22561549]

>>22561544
Japan is not buddhist

[Anonymous No.22561567]

>>22561485
>Reincarnation is dumb as shit, no reason to think it's true.
>I've started to explore buddhism and a lot of wisdom is in there
The whole point of the religion is that life lacks satisfaction and is full of suffering/unease. You want to escape all that but you can't because you're stuck in a cycle of rebirth. Which is why they develop all that wisdom you like, to stop reincarnation. If you think rebirth is dumb, but you still see wisdom in what they say about escaping suffering, isn't it way easier to just kill yourself? Why do practices that only serve the purpose of ending reincarnation if you don't believe in reincarnation?

[Anonymous No.22561584]

>>22561549
And the United States, Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, France, Germany, Scandinavia, aren't Christian, so which "religion" is actually the most productive? Chinese communism? Trannitarianism?

[Anonymous No.22561616]

>>22561567
>The whole point of the religion is that life lacks satisfaction and is full of suffering/unease. You want to escape all that but you can't because you're stuck in a cycle of rebirth.
No, you're not stuck in a cycle of rebirth, you just lack wisdom about the causes of suffering. "Life is suffering" doesn't have the same connotations from a Buddhist that it would have in the west. It doesn't mean "Life is necessarily suffering" or "Life is exceptionlessly miserable," it means until you learn what causes you to suffer and avoid it, you won't enjoy peace of mind and tranquility of heart. You are bound by your own desires and attachments and need help to break free of them.

None of that very useful information requires the cycle of rebirth.
>Why do practices that only serve the purpose of ending reincarnation
I have a very different read on those practices and their purpose: it is not to end reincarnation, but to avoid suffering.

[Anonymous No.22561635]

>>22561616
>avoid suffering
it's not buddhism anymore without soteriology, this is the problem with doing a wikipedia level reading of the material, you merely butcher it for parts and wave around a chunk of meat proclaiming it is the entire animal

[Anonymous No.22561648]

>>22561584
Most productive is not having a brain virus that makes one believe in skydaddy or other retarded fairy tales.

[Anonymous No.22561651]

>>22561616
Again, the best way of avoiding suffering is killing yourself. The reasons Buddhists don't do that are many, since you would get negative karma, would set back your own spiritual development, would mean nothing anyway since you would suffer in the next life and so on. But if you just want to avoid suffering then suicide is the best option. I assume the reason you don't think so is because you want to live, you probably want to enjoy life but without the suffering part of it, you don't want to escape anything. The problem is, at that point it's not even resembling Buddhism anymore. General life wisdom you will find in every religion but for some reason you never hear of secular Hinduism, secular Daoism or secular Jainism even though they also have meditation practices and feel good philosophy you could use if you cut away the supernatural parts.

[Anonymous No.22561676]

Suicide is OK for arhats only.

[Anonymous No.22561680]

>>22561066
Based retard

[Anonymous No.22561682]

>>22561648
Non-attachment and not-self is highly compatible with liberal capitalism and the associated circulation of money goods and labor. It was also highly compatible with tenant farming in Asia, Silk Road merchants, and Japanese militarism. You might even say it is empty of any characteristics we would seek to assign it.

[Anonymous No.22561687]

>>22561616
>it means until you learn what causes you to suffer and avoid it
You're wrong. For buddhists everything is suffering, including happiness, because everything is impermanent and impermanence is suffering. That's the whole point of buddhism. You're turning it into some sort of self-help philosophy to enjoy live, which is not what buddhism is at all.

[Anonymous No.22561731]

>>22560378
You are trying to approach Buddhism from a tradlarp perspective and discovering that you don't like it. The subject of this thread is secular Buddhism which is obviously not trad. But you reject non-trad perspectives outright so you can't see any value in it. Your criticisms are very basic, it seems like you've read some Pali canon but not any actual secular buddhist stuff. It's a pretty deep and self-consistent system, especially with the momentary interpretations of rebirth and the realms.

>It can only exist because people don't AT ALL read the EBT's
Completely wrong, the EBTs are very popular.

>"Enlightenment a westerner corruption
First, enlightenment is all over the Pali canon.
Second, no shit, we are discussing secular buddhism, of course the end result would be a westerner corruption, why is this a problem?

>Without rebirth what's the fucking point?
Buddhist meditation is widely accepted as having real-world effects. A bunch of studies show its therapeutic value.

>le why not just kill yourself?
Because that isn't compassionate.

>le arahants still suffer
a lot less (second arrow parable)

[Anonymous No.22561771]

>>22560378
>In nibbana of the still living arahant there is still dukkha - bodily pain, sickness and death
Buddha could perform miracles and he only allowed his body to suffer pain and sickness because not doing so would have been a counterproductive example to his disciples, as they would start focusing in getting wacky powers instead of reaching nibbana. The nibbana you're talking about sounds closer to the zen take on it, which ironically is already a secularized form of buddhism.

[Anonymous No.22561797]

>>22561771
>Zen Buddhism
yeah this is kind of what I meant by buddhism with less of the retarded shit, though I think a lot of them still hold on to reincarnation.

[Anonymous No.22561812]

>>22561771
Wow so buhhda was a retard?

>>22561797
What if I do not want to reincarnate, what I mean is I want to live forever and never die, that way I won't have to reincarnate

[Anonymous No.22561820]

>>22561731
Not him but:

>Buddhist meditation is widely accepted as having real-world effects.

That is not "Buddhist" meditation. It's just meditation. I don't get why you people cling on to the Buddhist label after throwing away almost the entire thing for things that you also get from other religions that also have meditation practices.

>>22561812
Then you want Daoism. They also meditate.

[Anonymous No.22561839]

>>22561820
I don't know much about Daoism, but I assume they are followers of the Tao, right? They do have cool vibes too to be honest. I'll check them out. Thanks.

[Anonymous No.22561842]

>>22561731
You, on the other hand, have approached Buddhism from the perspective of an arrogant westerner who thinks to throw away over 2000 years of tradition and thought in order to practice the 'real' way (as a facile self-help corruption) - because to you, it's just a fun little game you can play. Hylic cretin.

[Anonymous No.22561844]

>>22561812
>Wow so buhhda was a retard?
if you meet the buddha on the road, frogpost with him

[Anonymous No.22561856]

Is there any reason to think that reincarnation is real? It seems like complete nonsense to me.

[Anonymous No.22561861]

>>22561839
Yes. Their whole thing is becoming an immortal. Buddhists on the other hand want the extreme opposite and all their teaching is geared towards it. To a Buddhist it's impossible to be immortal because everything changes (oversimplification here) so you will eventually stop being one and will have to endure the consequences of all the karma you accumulated during your long life.

[Anonymous No.22561866]

>>22561812
>Wow so buhhda was a retard?
When you have the crystal clear memories of thousand of lives of suffering, then having a bit of back pain probably doesn't seem that big of a deal, and he was really committed to help people to reach nibbana, so he was more than willing to take a bit of pain.

[Anonymous No.22561874]

>>22561856
Chinese novels seem to think it's real.

[Anonymous No.22561879]

>>22561856
Buddhism is a religion. I don't think Buddha ever gives a good, compelling reason for you to believe in reincarnation other than things like his own testimony where he tells of his own past lives. It's up to faith then whether you believe him or not.

[Anonymous No.22561880]

>>22561856
The theory of the rebirths is not super hard to come up with it in the first place
-at death you either die forever
-or you go to some place but dont come back
- or what dies is recycled into what will be alive again

it's not like there are many possibilities lol. Rebirth is not the monopoly of buddhism. buddhists claim that the 5 aggregates are anatta, that's all they say in their niche.

[Anonymous No.22561889]

>>22561820
>That is not "Buddhist" meditation. It's just meditation
Perhaps, but Buddhism has the most well-developed typology and understanding of different kinds of meditation and their effects. It's really quite impressive compared to kindergarten half-intuitive stuff everyone else is doing (as an extreme example, the Orthodox hesychasm)

>>22561842
You're just tradlarping, you could tell the same thing to a faithful post-Vatican2 Catholic. But unlike Catholic larpers you don't even claim to believe in the religion you are defending. This is kinda atavistic.
Buddhism is not fixed, it's developing like any religion. In the past 200 years "western corruption" came to exert significant influence in the East. You think someone is making a clean break with tradition to create a new secular Buddhism but that's not what's happening.

[Anonymous No.22561902]

>>22561771
There are “miracles” (siddhis or miraculous abilities, as well as even tales of legendarily immortal Bodhisattvas like Manjushri) in Ch’an/Zen, seeing as this school is fundamentally rooted in Mahāyāna Buddhism. From the Chinese Taoist influences, there are even overlapping tales of Taoist immortals interacting with Ch’an in Ch’an Buddhism (one tale has a Taoist immortal who has attained extreme longevity from Taoist life-lengthening practices, but still didn’t have true enlightenment, which he had to receive from Ch’an).

In fairness, the part that could be called “secularized” is that a fundamental teaching of Ch’an and Zen would be, “Don’t even bother your silly little head about miracles and magic.”

Anyway, posters on /lit/ are tremendously petty. You can criticize OP in however many ways you want, perhaps some of these criticisms are valid, but who’s to say he’s not getting at least some insight and benefit from it? At least he’s making some effort to better himself or gain benefit from spiritual-psychological teachings, instead of just entirely rotting in apathy and worldliness. Out of all the world’s major spiritual teachings and religions, Buddhism is indeed one of them that it makes sense to psychologize and secularize, taking insights out of it that help you, in a similar manner as one could do with Stoicism (which has pantheistic views of an all-pervading Logos or God-like Universal Reason, which can be disregarded by one who is still learning from and applying other Stoic teachings to their life), or with Taoism (which also has some supernatural aspects and teachings).

[Anonymous No.22561918]

>>22561820
>>22561861
Where do I start with Daoism? I always thought that it is just a strong belief in ones way? Like finding your own way and there really isn't any established system?

>>22561866
So, he had these powers yet instead chose to suffers and suicide, frankly it feels like there are some based concepts there but it also feels like someone has tampered with the whole buddhist belief (for nefarious purposes?) and with just few minor changes and additions it went from based all the way to pozzed.

[Anonymous No.22561950]

>>22558688
> You must let your guru fuck your partner for good boy points.
> You can't die earlier than your parents because of negative good boy points.
> Many ascetic oaths that are only for monks need to be taken by lay people.

Totally retarded and absolved in a few minutes of critical thinking outside of Buddhist society.

[Anonymous No.22561956]

>>22561918
>I always thought that it is just a strong belief in ones way?
No, it's an actual religion. But it's very local to China, it's hard to find good material in the west. I don't actually believe Buddhism or Daoism. I just think that people are misguided in looking at Buddhism for things that it doesn't actually promise and some times preach against and I don't understand why. Like you looking for immortality in a religion that is all about escaping rebirth. I guess people are looking for different, exoteric stuff and Buddhism is just what they know that is most easily accessible?

[Anonymous No.22561959]

>>22561918
>So, he had these powers yet instead chose to suffers and suicide
Yeah, basically. It's more nuanced than that, but there's a reason why westerners usually see buddhism as a suicidal religion. Buddhism is inherently not life affirming. What a buddhist would tell you though is that the term suicide doesn't really apply here, because suicide is a concept that exists within the duality of existing and not existing. An arahant after dying his last life neither exists nor doesn't-exists. He's beyond the duality of existing and not existing.

[Anonymous No.22561960]

>>22558654
The assumptions of karma and reincarnation are hard pills to sallow.
Also look up the desire paradox.

[Anonymous No.22561967]

>>22561960
>>The assumptions of karma and reincarnation are hard pills to sallow.
not really , see >>22561880

[Anonymous No.22561973]

>>22561682
>Non-attachment and not-self is highly compatible with liberal capitalism and the associated circulation of money goods and labor
>This is a good thing
lol, lmao even

[Anonymous No.22561983]

>>22558654
Research Buddist extremism/terrorist groups. Start from there to see how it can translate to nihilism in the real world.

[Anonymous No.22561990]

>>22558654
It’s like praying without believing in god.
it’s retarded and you shouldn’t tell anyone about this because it’s embarrassing

[Anonymous No.22562025]

>>22561529
>it breaks from logic
No, all ontological positions other than emptiness free from extremes are entirely illogical, as Nagarjuna proves

[Anonymous No.22562050]

>>22561990
Lots of Christians do exactly that.

[Anonymous No.22562071]

>>22560584
atheistic means not believing in Gods or gods, buddhism doesn't have a God but has a lot of gods

[Anonymous No.22562082]

>>22561967
They literally believe that your consciousness survives. The rebirth in the form of smaller nutrients and food for worms is pretty atheistic.

[Anonymous No.22562087]

>>22558654
>I currently identify as a secular buddhist. Is it as retarded as it sounds?
Yes.

[Anonymous No.22562254]

>>22561918
The foundational text of Daoism is the Dao de Jing. A lot of it will be incomprehensible the first time around, but reading secondary literature of even a Wikipedia page will help you start to make sense of it. Then, read Zhuangzi. Those are the two principal texts.

[Anonymous No.22562359]

>>22562254
I tried reading Zhuangzi. Frankly it's nonsense, if Daoism is like Zhuangzi then it's hopeless.

[Anonymous No.22562574]

>>22558654
Most buddhists are secular, there has always been a big distinction between monks and laypeople.
How did you become a buddhist without knowing about this? Are you a white woman?

[Anonymous No.22562733]

>>22562359
The Tao te Ching is actually a little less weird than Zhuangzi, and reading Zhuangzi makes more sense after Lao Tzu

[Anonymous No.22562802]

>>22562574
he means secular in a contemporary sense, which is a bit ironic since lay buddhists traditionally have more "spiritual" beliefs and superstitions than monks do... in this case secular means you are just doing psychotherapy with Buddhist vocabulary, you don't actually believe in anything religiously or soteriologically Buddhist

[Anonymous No.22562854]

>>22561648
You're right. God dwells within

[Anonymous No.22562910]

>>22561048
Like 90% of Christian theological discussion is just accusing other denominations of not sucking off Rabbis enough.

>>22561918
Daoism is essentially early Chinese science in as much as it is an attempt to describe the world and create intellectual systems (theories) to understand it. It is the result of plugging dozens of lesser schools of thought into a broader metaphysical framework circa 600BC. There are thus two Daoisms: 道教, dao4jiao4, lit. Way teaching, and 道家dao4jia1, lit. Way house. 道教 is concerned with the worship of deities and maintenance of ancestral relationships, 到家 is concerned with alchemy, meditation, feng xui, etc. In China it's not really practiced on its own and is almost always accompanied by Confucianism and Chinese Folk Religion (the individual ethnic religion of a given group of people in China). This is sort of intentional as the Chinese do not conceptualize religion as a set of practices that you pick at random and then cheerlead for but rather a set of practices that are used to some sort of end.

Thus, one "does" Taoism to maximize efficiency of various processes, like economics or war, and then when you want to "do" something else, like stabilize society and set write families for the purposes of social harmony, you "do" Confucianism. Most day-to-day performance of Taoism is consultation with experts who provide technical advice on various matters, such as longevity, martial arts, interior design, fortune telling, baby naming, and so on.

[Anonymous No.22562957]

>>22562910
>Most day-to-day performance of Taoism is consultation with experts who provide technical advice on various matters, such as longevity, martial arts, interior design, fortune telling, baby naming, and so on.
the Romans had this, shame we lost it it sounds kino

[Anonymous No.22563170]

>>22560732
I think it's important to keep in mind that westerners tend to approach Buddhism from an almost purely monastic standpoint. But the vast, vast, VAST majority of all Buddhists who have ever lived were/are laypeople and are "lapsed" in a way that is very similar to a lot of Catholics. Americans are romanced by the idea of monks meditating for hours a day and becoming "enlightened" and think that's what Buddhism is; but that's like visiting a convent or a monastery and believing all Catholics are celibate.

[Anonymous No.22563246]

>>22561956
Nirvana is described as the deathless

[Anonymous No.22563252]

>>22563170
In Tibetan Buddhism there is strong tradition of serious lay practitioners, in addition to the kind you describe

[Anonymous No.22563273]

>>22562025
>Everyone does it so it must be correct!!!
retard, im not attributing truth value, im saying its illogical (wich you agree it is) hence no logical argument has any worth. Its a matter of faith

[Anonymous No.22563279]

>>22563273
Nagarjuna's position is completely logical

[Anonymous No.22563294]

>>22563279
>All things (dharma) exist: affirmation of being, negation of non-being
>All things (dharma) do not exist: affirmation of non-being, negation of being
>All things (dharma) both exist and do not exist: both affirmation and negation
>All things (dharma) neither exist nor do not exist: neither affirmation nor negation
Oh yes. logic

[Anonymous No.22563304]

>>22561066
Kinda retarded. and feels like it shows no real respect for the religion. It’s like the 70s hipsters that know nothing about eastern religions but get into them because they’re at least different then the Christian ones and appeal to them on a superficial level

[Anonymous No.22563310]

>>22563294
You see a chair, but it's really just wood and screws, so where's the chair? (1) It's there when you sit on it. (2) It's gone when you are studying it. (3) So it is both here and not here, but that can't really be quite right either, so you could also say (4) it is neither here nor not here. What else might we say about a chair then?

[Anonymous No.22563338]

>>22563310
>You see a thing
> It is composed of other things
>Somehow this means it isn't a thing
This is the first logical mistake
>We can keep dividing the thing forever and we can never reach the end so that means there is nothing at the end
Another jump in logic, infinite recursion is a possibility, so is an actual hard end, wich we havent found yet, emptiness is a god of the gaps.
>I have found a contradiction, it means the opposite statement must be true
another leap of logic, it could be that your process is wrong (much like i showed above already) or your propositions are wrong (they are too, saying nothing is real because everything cannot be real doesnt account for "not everything is real") Or because you are studying the situation from a mistaken scientific method (ontology of words as opposed to metaphysics "chair" is a distinctly human concept based on utility, for example)
Point is not to show a truth value, but a leap of logic. You could be right, its just retarded to take his arguments as a logical explanation of existance. Its faith based

[Anonymous No.22563389]

>>22563338
>>Somehow this means it isn't a thing
it isn't a thing beyond it parts

[Anonymous No.22563394]

>>22563389
why?

[Anonymous No.22563405]

>>22563338
>"chair" is a distinctly human concept based on utility, for example
as are all objects of discursive thought or speech, i can do this all day give us something more "ontological" instead there tommy aquino

[Anonymous No.22563411]

>>22563405
indeed, do molecules instead, the analogy is the same but it becomes harder since we dont classify molecules because of their utility but because its an arragement/group of something (atoms)

[Anonymous No.22563439]

>>22563411
even a molecule has sides i.e. parts, this example is in Nagarjuna's MMK iirc, so for instance a north side, an east side, and so on but again we are just taking molecule as a useful way to describe the smallest part... there's a footnote in Whitehead about how we keep drilling further down as we classify things, like we had elements then atoms then electrons... and i think now science has some other wave particle thing it is trying decide on but has to settle for "probability"—that is to say useful data for human calculation, utility!

[Anonymous No.22563443]

>>22563411
Things are classified by convention, not utility

[Anonymous No.22563451]

>>22558763
The Dali Lama is only important in Tibetan Buddhism. There are many more sects out there.

[Anonymous No.22563464]

>>22563451
>The Dali Lama is only important...
not anymore

[Anonymous No.22563467]

>>22563443
convention is almost always a question of utility, but by all means when you go get your morning coffee tomorrow, roll back your eyes and tell the cashier in a guttural tone "dhdjahrj djejeaoen fneoejden ghrnednsjej" and see how your coffee comes out

[Anonymous No.22563470]

>>22563464
he has never been more of a spiritual leader to the celibate community

[Anonymous No.22563471]

>>22561549
It used to be.

[Anonymous No.22563480]

>>22563471
the roots are very deep, the Japanese have texts that have since been lost in China the way Tibet and Nepal have copies of otherwise lost Indian material, that said Buddhism was a major casuality of the Meiji revolution and even before then had declined considerably

[Anonymous No.22563481]

Well they're not "secular" but Shankaracharya refuted Buddhism so hard it basically disappeared on the Indian subcontinent so you could just read Advaita literature

[Anonymous No.22563493]

>>22563467
>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

[Anonymous No.22563508]

>>22563439
you asked me for a better concept and i gave it to you, you then drilled down until you reached utility wich btw is you misinterpreting explanatory power AKA provable knowledge.Thats not my fault, and it suggests utility in the behind of everything, not emptyness lmao.
My point was again not to give you a truth value, but to prove there are logical jumps: we keep dividing and finiding new things, there could be infinite recursion, or a hard bottom but we do not know so, and so emptyness is a possibility, not a certainty, so it comes down to faith.
You have yet to engage with that, cling to your example (instance instead of the argument) , and as such i accept your concession

[Anonymous No.22563531]

>>22563508
>suggests utility in the behind of everything, not emptyness
utility behind every constructed object of discursive thought or speech, yes
>emptyness is a possibility, not a certainty, so it comes down to faith.
I'll let you know once we're reborn as slum dwellers in a flooded city a hundred years from now if anything's changed or if all experience is still momentary and without an own self-nature

[Anonymous No.22563540]

>>22563508
Or, a bottom that we must operate for the purpose of survival, only, but the cooperative element of humans makes some of these drives remnants of primitive pasts, thus creating the need to sublimate these energies (like anxieties) into other things.

For example, there is a narrowing down and categorization, but with stillness, there is also an expanding and necessity to recognize the interconnectedness that our ignorant ancestors have poorly labeled in the past, which now is in need of new epistemological approaches.

Just spit balling here

[Anonymous No.22563560]

>>22563540
indeed, point is more possibilities than mere emptyness.
>>22563531
>WE WILL DIE AND THEN THINGS BAD
oh a christian, sorry i dont listen to you guys

[Anonymous No.22563566]

>>22563480
Japanese Shintoism seems like a sensible option, it's fairly straightforward and easy to get into, it has discarded much of nonsensical nature that is common in eastern religions while at the same time preserving the essence.

[Anonymous No.22563580]

>>22558688
Doesn’t Kant refute this sort of scepticism?

[Anonymous No.22563584]

>>22563560
nah you're already living through bad things that happen after you die, the point is you are calling emptiness a faith-based concept as if I find that objectionable. The entire purpose of Buddhism is the soteriology, not philosophical speculation, which while important to explicating the teachings and correcting endlessly evolving errors, is not by itself of any value. So if you have faith in something else we should be able to test that next lifetime. Either you won't be able to find me in Space Jesus Disney World or I won't be able to find you in Miami.

[Anonymous No.22563601]

>>22563566
Do you know the history of Shinto at all? It is basically a step-child of Japanese Buddhism, there was a bad divorce and a bunch of stuff was made up by government bureaucrats trying to break the power of monasteries. It's got elements of the old Japanese polytheism and generic pre-axial religion but the skeleton is plastered over medieval Buddhism.

[Anonymous No.22563609]

>>22563580
explain where I can find out whether he does

[Anonymous No.22563627]

>>22563584
>the point is you are calling emptiness a faith-based concept as if I find that objectionable
if you are the same guy that said:
>>22563279
i hope you have experienced some kind of mental issue to reach this level of dissonance or i may have to qualify you as dishonest and a snake.
Then again the middle path loves lies and contradictions so it would not be surprising

[Anonymous No.22563640]

>>22563601
Not just that, but how the fuck are you going to take part in Japanese ancestor worship and ethnocentric rituals calling back to Izanagi and Izanami's creation of Japan through the 4,223 droplets of a spear dipped in ocean waters and thrust back up into the sky which formed the islands of the archipelago ALL without being of Japanese descent yourself? It's stupid to even consider becoming Shinto when you aren't Japanese, but I'm sure there plenty of retards out there who would call that "folkism" and therefore racist.

[Anonymous No.22563653]

>>22563627
that's not me, but if you are using a form of faith-based logic yourself that presupposes god/substance/essence/etc behind things then madhyamaka is not compatible

[Anonymous No.22563658]

>>22563653
im not, im doing what OP asked for: presenting an argument against buddhism: my argument is that its as retarded as any other religion, and since its up to faith, it really does not matter what you believe in, all of them require a jump of logic filled by faith

[Anonymous No.22563663]

>>22563640
maybe he watches too much anime and finds the kami/youkai stuff appealing, it definitely has similarity to native american and even ancient roman attitudes of viewing even the inanimate as animate and that sort of thing is kind of ripe for a comeback in an increasingly ecologically concerned world, but yeah the ethnic component isn't all that transferrable

[Anonymous No.22563671]

>>22563609
The entire concept of a priori synthetic judgements, without whom the path to scepticism would be direct. It’s only in the respect that we are able to take the manifold of sensuous intuitions, the Humean bundle of things which converges to the organs of sense and produces in us sensation, that appearances take place; and these appearances come to represent our mode of sensibility. The pure intuitions, space and time, must be there a priori for us to be receptive to events in the external world as rationally proven by sensibility. When these sensuous intuitions are partitioned properly under the pure categories, whatever those might be, there is understanding. It’s only by way of pure categories that we are able to think things, what renders objects thinkable so to speak. It is true that Kant throws his hands up at the question of what guides these principles and keeps them constant, but this in itself is neither enough ground to regress to primitive theology nor to outmoded scepticism as per Nagarjuna’s assertion that all dharmas are empty. And after all, if they were, understanding would not be possible and knowledge of his own system would be worthless in itself. In the end we must live based on what we know and to abandon this course inevitably leads to evil and negligence.

[Anonymous No.22563676]

>>22563658
buddhism seems to have least amount of egregious nonsense on a doctrinal level but yes it is still a faith

[Anonymous No.22563688]

>>22563584
Emptiness is common sense

[Anonymous No.22563695]

>>22563676
maybe, i like daoism better tho, less life denying

[Anonymous No.22563698]

>>22563688
You mean its axiomatic (it is not)
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Appeal_to_common_sense

[Anonymous No.22563732]

Om ye dharmā hetuprabhavā hetuṃ teṣāṃ tathāgato hyavadat teṣāṃ ca yo nirodha evaṃ vādī mahāśramaṇaḥ svaha

[Anonymous No.22563748]

>>22563695
depends on the sect, but nirvana being not other than samsara would seem to counter that on an intellectual level at least

[Anonymous No.22563753]

>>22563748
ehh thats whats tricky about dissecting budhism on its merits as a belief: there is always a sect for basically any permutation needed.

[Anonymous No.22563761]

>>22563753
The inseparabity of samsara and nirvana is standard mahayana

[Anonymous No.22563764]

>>22563761
indeed, mahayana is only one of many traditions tho

[Anonymous No.22563765]

>>22563753
>there is always a sect for basically any permutation needed.
unironically a good thing

[Anonymous No.22563802]

>>22563765
sure, for the survivability of the idea and the inertia of the believer, as well as the ease of the idea-seller

[Anonymous No.22563808]

>>22563764
Actually one of only two

[Anonymous No.22563818]

>>22563808
uhh i dont wanna say you are lying cos clearly a buddhist would know better, but can u provide a source? google says there are a lot

[Anonymous No.22563828]

>>22563663
I watched some japanese Shinto prayers/blessings on yt and they really resonated with me

[Anonymous No.22563841]

>>22563818
All Buddhist traditions other than Theravada are Mahayana. They all accept the inseparabity of Samsara and Nirvana.

[Anonymous No.22563890]

>still no response to the kantposter
buddhasisters... did we get too cocky?

[Anonymous No.22563962]

>>22563671
>>22563890
there are architectonic kantian style autistic buddhist philosophers such as dharmakirti and dignaga and many Tibetan commentators if that is what you really find edifying, but what is the actual point here in deploying Kant? So everything unfolds in space and time, what is the consequence here upon treating that "everything" as empty of a self-nature? These entities we are sensing and plotting out in time and space... what has changed here about them? Is there a principle of chair-ness now that we've agreed chairs appear within space and time?

[Anonymous No.22563974]

>>22563671
Space and time are mere comventions

[Anonymous No.22564014]

>>22563890
Kant is moronic atheist addicted to his own brain farts desperate to make humanism the norm. And he was wrong with everything about space and time because like any atheist, he ''fucking loves science'' while not understand maths nor physics.

[Anonymous No.22564070]

https://himalaya.socanth.cam.ac.uk/collections/journals/ret/pdf/ret_22_05.pdf

[Anonymous No.22564098]

>>22558751
>mindfulness etc
Why not just go all the way and lobotomize yourself. Go to one of those plastic surgery clinics in Ecuador and pay someone 10k to scramble your prefrontal. There's no need for all that wasted effort daily for hours. Just cut out the Buddhism, the middle man. Abandon contemplation and the higher soul. Become entirely material.

[Anonymous No.22564118]

https://studybuddhism.com/en/advanced-studies/lam-rim/vipashyana/the-5-great-madhyamaka-lines-of-reasoning-for-emptiness

[Anonymous No.22564214]

>>22560918
Literally this.

[Anonymous No.22564220]

>>22563962
What's changed is that instead of renunciating the world as Buddhist annihilationists do, we can now identify an objective deontology towards the absolute good. Also yes, science bitch.
>>22564014
>he was wrong with everything about space and time because like any atheist, he ''fucking loves science'' while not understand maths nor physics.
Not an argument ESL-kun. Either provide one or I accept your concession.

[THIS IS HOW RETARDED YOU SOUND No.22564233]

I identify as a secular Christian.

I'm a Christian but I deny the reality of God or Jesus, I just can't get behind an all powerful God? But I still pray and I get benefits from it. No I don't tithe to the church or do anything religious other than follow the commandments, well mostly I mean there is no afterlife so what does it matter?

But yeah I'm still Christian.

[Anonymous No.22564279]

>>22563828
How so? If you don't mind me asking.

[Anonymous No.22564284]

>>22558654
Afaik non-messianic religions separate man from the heavens so if you’re willing to spend your life and eternity searching for meaning in vain that’s up to you.

[Anonymous No.22564289]

>>22561648
Enjoy hell, faggot.