Reminder that having read some Buddhist texts and eaten shrooms doesn't make you "enlightened" or even a "bodhisattva". Pic unrelated: pirate ship and other decorations at a recent party thrown by the tenants of the building where some friends live.

File: 1.48 MB, 2448x3264, IMG_20150228_231509_009.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 03:27:51 2015 No.6239630 [Reply] [Original]

Reminder that having read some Buddhist texts and eaten shrooms doesn't make you "enlightened" or even a "bodhisattva".

Pic unrelated: pirate ship and other decorations at a recent party thrown by the tenants of the building where some friends live.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 05:32:52 2015 No.6239820 >>6239630 Anyone that thinks otherwise is a joke and clearly hasn't studied many Buddhist texts. http://webdelprofesor.ula.ve/humanidades/elicap/en/Main/Bb-bm-bh

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 12:04:36 2015 No.6240945

I think there is a tendancy amoung liberal college students and especially one that consume lots of weed and psychedelics to latch onto the idea of Buddhism because they perceive as this cool, edgy and mysterious "other". However frequently they like their idea of Buddhism more then Buddhism itself and instead of really studying it would instead rather read a little about it on Wikipedia and then loudly make simplistic generalizations about it while at parties so they can present themselves as "cool, edgy and mysterious"

It's somewhat inevitable but at the same time there are lots of people who seriously study it but don't shove it in peoples faces. Often the ones that have studied Buddhism the most will never mention it or bring it up unless religion or Buddhism is being talked about already.

The people that are most vocal about Buddhism and always yelling about it drunkenly at parties are not a good representation of most Buddhists or people who study it despite being among the most visible and in-your-face groups of those who have an interest in Buddhism.

That being said this is all elementary knoweledge among people who have seriously read about or studied Buddhism. The people described by OP are just seen as sort of the inevitable fools who gain a surface understanding of something in order to make themselves feel good when they try to talk about it. Nobody who has seriously read about or studied Buddhism would think the people described by OP are enlightened or bodhisattvas or would even give a second thought to those who claimed to be. I suspect OP had an unpleasant encounter with one of these people and wanted to angrily post about it and that OP himself hasn't spent much time studying Buddhism or he would not not let his jimmies get rustled by whoever rustled them and that he would have instead just laughed it off as natural consequence of people attempting to gain a TLDR understanding of a philosophy/religion that is very subtle and one which requires a discerning mind to understand.

9/11 was an inside job

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 14:51:02 2015 No.6241786

>>6240945
OP here. You're almost exactly right. Except its not one bad encounter. Its a roommate and a couple friends that he regularly has over here. They literally will talk about how far along the path to enlightenment they are with a line of K in front of them and then discuss how much so and so "is such an asshole" or how they want to fingerbang some chick from the party last night. Fuckin annoying as shit but I can't find anywhere near as cheap so in stuck here for a couple more months. Also no, I haven't studied Buddhism beyong cursory readings of main texts and one class I took. But I also don't consider myself Buddhist or more awake than the next guy.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 14:51:59 2015 No.6241793 Eh I do some mindfulness meditation every day, is that good enough?

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 14:52:45 2015 No.6241797 >>6240945 Mossad funded it

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 14:54:32 2015 No.6241807 Buy a copy of the Summa Contra Gentiles and refute them on Thomistic terms lel

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 14:57:58 2015 No.6241828 Why are you so concerned with whether other people are as smart as you or not? You must be a very insecure person.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 15:00:32 2015 No.6241851 >>6241828 >Why are you so concerned with whether other people are as smart as you or not? How the hell did you get that out of my post? You must be a very illiterate person

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 15:02:50 2015 No.6241869 >>6241828 Now I read the thread. Seeing >>6241786 it turns out it wasn't just speculation, I was correct.

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 15:05:58 2015 No.6241889 >>6241869 You'd have to be pretty insecure to call someone insecure over the Internet like that. I should know, I'm really insecure.

Anonymous Sun Mar 8 15:21:10 2015 No.6241959

>>6241786

OP if you think its something you might be interested in I would recommend checking out the book "what the buddha taught", its a really good intro book to buddhism written by a monk from Sri Lanka who was the first ordained monk to teach at a western university, he wrote it in english to so its not a translation.

not only will you be able to correct your friends when they saying things about buddhism that are wrong but it should also help you become less frustrated by things that annoy you like that roommate and his friends

its online for free as a PDF, i cant post link because 4chan thinks it spam but if you google the name there are multiple online PDFs on the first page, you want the revised edition

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 15:22:46 2015 No.6241968 >>6241959 book is by Walpola Rahula btw

>>	Anonymous Sun Mar 8 23:22:36 2015 No.6244365 >>6241959 nah, better off reading something like a swift pair of messengers by sujato, Walpola utilizes the commentarial traditions which are later inventions rather than strictly the suttas themselves

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 07:43:22 2015 No.6245640 >>6241786 So you're at least as shallow as them and are criticizing them for failing to be like what you imagine something you barely understand yourself ought to be in your mind? You don't even discuss what these people have actually said.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 08:33:17 2015 No.6245698 I don't understand you op, you know a few dumbass hippies who don't understand Buddhism, so you post a complaint about Buddhism on /lit/? Pretty sure this is one of the few places you'll meet people who actually do it properly.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 08:38:21 2015 No.6245710 >>6245698 >He thinks he'll meet genuine Buddhists on 4chan Are you serious?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 08:54:41 2015 No.6245746 >>6245710 >he assumes things >he makes blanket generalizations about a diverse board of people Are you serious? Really though, stop posting

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 08:56:09 2015 No.6245749 >>6245746 No, you stop posting. OP is right. No one here is a true Buddhist, just like all the Christians here are made only more acutely aware of their sins by browsing this board.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 08:59:50 2015 No.6245754 >>6239630 Ah, but what about doing things AND having a layman's understanding of quantum mechanics AND having done some rock climbing?

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 09:19:25 2015 No.6245785 /r/buddhism is the funniest. "no I r the biggest boodist...... you don't understand pleb. enjoy your downvotes you theistic faggot!!!"

Anonymous Mon Mar 9 09:21:25 2015 No.6245791

>>6245749
>No one here is a true Buddhist
Can you not see how retarded it is to make an assumption like that? Just because no one is a Buddhist monk in some rural village in se Asia that doesn't mean there aren't people largely engaged with the ideals and the texts in their life
Stop posting

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 09:21:45 2015 No.6245792 File: 67 KB, 458x458, Dalai-and-Macbook3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>6245710 >mfw

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 09:23:59 2015 No.6245798 >>6245791 you might get people who think they are a "true buddhist" posting on 4 chin..... but thats about it. this site is like samsara represented in internet form..

Anonymous Mon Mar 9 12:22:16 2015 No.6246202

Just a reminder that Buddha himself said that people could still become enlightened while still engaging in with society but just that it would be way more difficult

>>6245791
This anon is right. Claiming there are no Buddhists on 4chan just because they aren't living in seclusion or a temple or whatever is a dumb meme

Someone could consider themselves to be an absolute Buddhist and believe all of the teachings 100% and still post on 4chan because they have decided that they are not going to live the possessionless ascetic lifestyle or not join a Buddhist monastery until they are in their Middle Ages and after they have experience life some more.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 12:26:34 2015 No.6246210 >>6239630 I don't claim to be. I'm a buddhist in the same way that most people who say they're christian but don't go to church are christian.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 13:04:43 2015 No.6246299 >>6241959 Not op, but I didnt know that book was free on the web. I appreciate it, reading it now

Anonymous Mon Mar 9 13:33:00 2015 No.6246360

lol 'true buddhist'. It isn't a cult. No blood contract. It's a way of accepting/reducing suffering and instilling discipline. I read up on Taiwanese Buddhism, (the dominant religion in Taiwan) lots of people there live traditional family life and sometimes, during moments of intense confusion/existential despair/whatever, they will take small trips to the temples for a few weeks. I'm sure many also keep books around. It's a lot like religion here, but instead of worshiping entities out of fear of revenge from the entities, or infinite suffering, during times of guilt/immediate suffering, they use the religion to bring the context of infinity, history, nature, and selflessness into their lives, instead of relating these themes to their death or time spend outside of life. You don't have to be a 'true buddhist' to follow their teachings, look at Schopenhauer, just like you don't need to be a 'true Christian' to follow their teachings of morality (although without belief in a god-entity, Christianity's morals fall apart)

Anonymous Mon Mar 9 20:40:39 2015 No.6247886

>>6245698
I have been on /lit/ for longer than I care to admit, and I have only seen a small handful of Buddhism threads that seemed to have anyone even remotely knowledgeable about Buddhism in them. The thread where Buddhabro showed up was the best example I can think of, but generally the threads are lacking in Buddhist scholarship.

Anonymous Mon Mar 9 20:42:38 2015 No.6247896

>>6246202
>Just a reminder that Buddha himself said that people could still become enlightened while still engaging in with society but just that it would be way more difficult

I don't recall him specifically saying that. What sutta do you refer? I remember him talking to a householder who spent nearly all her time meditating, but that kind of undercuts your point.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 20:43:41 2015 No.6247906 >>6246360 >You don't have to be a 'true buddhist' to follow their teachings, look at Schopenhauer Schopenhauer isn't a Buddhist in any sense. His view on the Will or whatever is not reconcilable with Buddhism.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 20:44:34 2015 No.6247913 >>6239630 It makes you a bodhisattva, in the way that both are retards

Anonymous Mon Mar 9 20:45:49 2015 No.6247918

>>6246210
The issue with this is, a Christian can still had a solid grasp on the message without going to church, because the message is pretty simple. Buddhism is a pretty complex tradition with very nuanced views which simply are not grasped by someone similarly as lackadaisical in their religious practice/study.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 20:47:03 2015 No.6247924 >>6245798 Buddhabro said that a good Buddhist doesn't even identify as a Buddhist. So if someone thinks they are a 'true Buddhist', apparently they have missed the mark.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 20:48:05 2015 No.6247931 >>6245698 >Pretty sure this is one of the few places you'll meet people who actually do it properly. Why exactly do you think this?

Anonymous Mon Mar 9 21:04:11 2015 No.6248024

>>6245698
>>6245746
Whoa whoa whoa I didn't mean to make any broad generalizations or assumptions about Buddhism itself or all practicing Buddhists, just the typical self-proclaimed 'Buddhists' who inhabit the college town where I live and clearly do not even try to live according to the principles of Buddhism. I am more familiar with the tradition than you probably think based on what I said, I just try not to exaggerate how much I know about anything and sometimes it goes the other way. I actually have great respect for the tradition and, as far as I understand it, do try and live much the same way a practicing Buddhist would. I, like those college types I referred to, fail to practice what I preach quite frequently, but I am sincere and open about those failures, and attempt to correct those failures and make changes where necessary to avoid repeating my mistakes. With that in mind:

>>6245640
You're right insofar as I should not have resorted to making this thread, and I shouldn't let it bother me in the first place. I've been dealing with several extremely difficult issues lately, and have put myself in a difficult situation, and it manifests in missteps such as these. I also never can help being bothered by those (like one of the people I referred to in my original post) who seem to often get people hanging on their every word about something that they really don't know much about and don't live or try to live according to the principles they are preaching.

>inb4 how do you know these people aren't trying?
I refer here specifically to people I've know for an extended period of time and been around a lot. If they're trying, then their efforts are minimal at best.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 21:10:20 2015 No.6248066 >>6247924 Source? I've always thought something like that but didn't know that.

Anonymous Mon Mar 9 21:10:21 2015 No.6248067

>>6248024
Well the Buddha didn't exactly preach a live and let live approach in regards to people saying they were practicing the buddhadhamma but not actually doing so, and instead using it to inflate their own sense of self worth (he would publicly embarrass these people to the point of making them shake/tremble and would call them fools to boot). If they say they are involved in the buddhadharma but seem to be inconsistent, then you are welcome to bring it up and challenge them a bit on it.

Anonymous Mon Mar 9 21:13:19 2015 No.6248084

subscribing to any religous doctrine is truly retarded, but a psychadelic experience is a real, potentially enlightening thing.
While they are not mutually exclusive, by reason of fact that these "buddhists" are clearly retarded, we should at least try to make them that way.
Instead of doing what youre doing which is like retarded soap-boxing.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 21:14:35 2015 No.6248091 >>6247931 Its a board dedicated to reading.

Anonymous Mon Mar 9 21:15:15 2015 No.6248098

>>6248066
I don't have the archive link, but Buddhabro was a real deal practitioner that answered a few dozen questions here a month or two ago, the chap had spent several years in a meditative retreat and was a bona fide expert on Buddhist texts and most of Buddhism in general.

I feel like I had come across other big-wig Buddhists saying this too over the years, but I don't know where to look right off the bat to help you find a source. I mean it makes sense since Buddhism teaches to not really self-identify at all, so self-identifying as a Buddhist seems on its face to be flawed.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 21:17:13 2015 No.6248106 >>6248091 So?

Anonymous Mon Mar 9 22:18:24 2015 No.6248319

>>6248098
Never mind. I thought 'buddhabro' was some 2kewl4me nickname you were using for the Buddha Gautama.

>I mean it makes sense since Buddhism teaches to not really self-identify at all, so self-identifying as a Buddhist seems on its face to be flawed.

This is pretty much my line of thought on the matter.

Anonymous Mon Mar 9 22:31:53 2015 No.6248388

>>6247924
>>6248098
>argument from authority
>a good Buddhist doesn't even identify as a Buddhist

This statement doesn't really mean anything; a good Buddhist may indeed identify as a Buddhist if they feel like it would be for the good of all beings to identify as a Buddhist.

There are various levels of Buddhist, and certainly an arahant would not really identify as Buddhist because he would have eliminated the self view upon which that idea depends.

However a lay practitioner or lesser monk would most certainly identify as Buddhist because it's a skillful intention and aids in the adherence to the precepts.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 22:41:55 2015 No.6248427 sometimes i forget that /lit/ is full of pretentious normies.

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 23:37:46 2015 No.6248614 >>6240945 What an amazing original observation Anon. Nobody's ever made that criticism before!

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 23:40:43 2015 No.6248626 >>6240945 #JetFuelCantMeltSteelBeams

>>	Anonymous Mon Mar 9 23:48:02 2015 No.6248654 >>6248614 What an amazing, original contribution, anon. Nobody's ever made that shitpost before!

Anonymous Tue Mar 10 01:37:52 2015 No.6248981

>>6248388
>implying arguments from authority aren't valid when they come from an actual authority

>a good Buddhist may indeed identify as a Buddhist if they feel like it would be for the good of all beings to identify as a Buddhist

Where in the doctrine do you find support for this? What texts mention this? Why would arbitrary social discrimination be good for all beings? Seems like you have decided to distort upaya.

>There are various levels of Buddhist
No, "buddhist" is a term made up by a british man that wasn't directly translated from anything. It is an extremely late invention in the history of buddhadharma. So no, there are not various levels of Buddhist and in all the doctrinal texts and traditions there is no such concept of "levels of a Buddhist" or that it is skillful to identify as such.

>aids in the adherence to the precepts

No, it could just as easily be considered an obstacle to the precepts. It is fabricating a tendency which could easily be reified and lead to the selfing process that is rejected by the path.

>it's a skillful intention

What does this even mean and do you have any support from the traditions for any of this shit you are saying? What texts specifically? What traditions specifically?

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 10 01:47:51 2015 No.6249004 >>6241786 call them out on their bullshit then

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 10 01:47:51 2015 No.6249005 >>6245749 lifelong christian here. you have no idea what you are talking about

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 10 01:51:40 2015 No.6249018 >>6245698 what are you doing on /lit/ with zero reading comprehension?

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 10 03:36:51 2015 No.6249307 >>6248981 I'm not going to google things for you anon. Just read the Wings to Awakening

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 10 07:05:05 2015 No.6249621 File: 333 KB, 449x637, 1407179171001.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >mfw white people thinking they are capable of being "enlightened" in the first place

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 10 07:14:14 2015 No.6249637 >>6249621 Where is her nose?

Anonymous Tue Mar 10 10:45:09 2015 No.6250061

>>6248084
>subscribing to any religous doctrine is truly retarded, but a psychadelic experience is a real, potentially enlightening thing.
what
as a wannabe buddhist who has spent way more time tripping balls then meditating I can tell you that psychedelics will only take you so far until psychosis starts in.

Anonymous Tue Mar 10 11:40:40 2015 No.6250191

>>6249621
Please don't post unless you have something meaningful to contribute, that was just dumb

>>6250061
I would speak for yourself in these matters, certainly myself and probably other people I know would disagree

Psychedelics certainly won't make you become Enlightened with a capital E in the Buddhist sense of the word but they can definitely be enlightening experiences in the general populations sense of the word. Many people find that a good psychedelic experience especially the first few ones allow them to have insights that help them greatly improve there way of thinking about things and interactions with others. They can also help ones spiritual progress by helping one think about ones own practices of yoga/meditation and helping them see ways in which they can do it better or more often or it can help them overcome a difficulty they are having with it.

Of course if you abuse psychedelics by taking large amounts week after weeks for pure recreation it can cause troubles and it can also be bad if you choose to ignore problems in your life that psychedelics make you aware of but for many people psychedelics have kindled a greater interest in Buddhism and helped them get more into mediation and similar stuff.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 10 11:46:29 2015 No.6250203 >>6247918 >a Christian can still had a solid grasp on the message without going to church, because the message is pretty simple >people actually believe this

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 10 11:49:15 2015 No.6250214 >>6249621 >anime girl thumbnail I acknowledge your existence but not your opinion.

Anonymous Tue Mar 10 11:52:20 2015 No.6250224

>>6250203

Sure there is a lot of stuff of Christianity that you can get into but in terms of the whole idea of heaven/hell, sin, god, being saved and the 10 commandments is pretty simple. It differs between denomination but the Christianity itself is not that subtle and is pretty simple and easy to understand. There isn't anything intellectual or difficult to understand that is part of its main teachings. At least certainly not compared to Buddhism.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 10 12:08:51 2015 No.6250260 >>6250224 Buddhism is equally simple if you oversimplify it like you've oversimplified Christianity. >Existence is suffering so aim to not exist

Anonymous Tue Mar 10 12:22:35 2015 No.6250287

>>6250260

not really, that is describing one portion of buddhism in that what you described is sort of what buddhism teaches about a way to go about life and the reasons for doing so but there is way more then that even in the main teachings

all that is teaches about the mind, the regulation of thought, emotions and behavior, the nonexistence of self/soul, buddhist morals and everything else in the main teachings is actually pretty complicated.

Even most people that arnt Christians or who dont believe in god have a pretty good understanding of what Christianity is about. Nobody can seriously claim that it is mostly only Christians who have a good understanding of the religion.

On the other hand it is mostly Buddhists or people that have an interest in Buddhism who understand it and most people have alot of misconceptions about it even about its main teachings. Alot of them are very subtle ideas that at first glance appear contradictory until further contemplation and studying/learning. Buddhism is more of a philosophy or in some aspects a school of psychology then a religon. Im not trying to disparage Christianity but its pretty simple compared to buddhism.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 10 15:50:56 2015 No.6250900 >>6248098 did he really come back a month ago? you mean the neet buddhizm guy, right? Im always searching around for his threads.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 10 16:18:10 2015 No.6251006 Semitic ideas of religion are different than Dharmic ideas of religion.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 10 20:01:03 2015 No.6251919 >>6250900 No, he has only popped up once that I know of and it is someone other than the neetbro

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 10 20:02:44 2015 No.6251928 >>6250260 >>Existence is suffering so aim to not exist But that is just patently false, while the oversimplified versions of Christianity wouldn't be. "Repent and accept Jesus as your lord and savior and go to heaven".

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 10 20:04:32 2015 No.6251936 >>6250203 >pretending the Christian message isn't absurdly simple that can be boiled down into sound bytes while retaining both accuracy and the essentials kek

Anonymous Tue Mar 10 20:06:03 2015 No.6251944

>>6250287
>Even most people that arnt Christians or who dont believe in god have a pretty good understanding of what Christianity is about. Nobody can seriously claim that it is mostly only Christians who have a good understanding of the religion.

>On the other hand it is mostly Buddhists or people that have an interest in Buddhism who understand it and most people have alot of misconceptions about it even about its main teachings. Alot of them are very subtle ideas that at first glance appear contradictory until further contemplation and studying/learning. Buddhism is more of a philosophy or in some aspects a school of psychology then a religon. Im not trying to disparage Christianity but its pretty simple compared to buddhism.

+1 underrated post

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 10 20:15:45 2015 No.6251996 Okay, Buddhism is too "Complex" and "exotic" for a westerner to understand. Unlike our superior and straightforward religions which appeal to the universal needs of the common man. Got it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Mar 10 20:26:12 2015 No.6252031 >>6250287 i think theres not a too big difference between these two. i mean if you start with know nothing you can go on the plateau in the direction of know as much as there is to know about it so far - in both

Anonymous Tue Mar 10 20:30:19 2015 No.6252037

>>6251996
no, its just that its very subtle and requires more then just reading some posts on 4chan or its Wikipedia article to understand it

>>6252031
i concede that because Christianity has so permeated western culture its naturally easier to understand it without really trying to but at the same time I still think Buddhism requires more effort and thought to truly understand

>>	Anonymous Wed Mar 11 01:33:34 2015 No.6252857 >>6251996 The common man will never reach salvation, just accept it

Anonymous Wed Mar 11 02:07:56 2015 No.6252966
File: 64 KB, 306x475, Orientalism.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6252037
I know, but in general it feels like a lot of criticism of college buddhists seems to be founded on the idea that a westerner can't REALLY understand Buddhism because Buddhism is "exotic" and "oriental" and that he should stick to good old fashioned western thought.

I think the same about most of the things people call "Cultural appropriation." These complaints are often made by people who consider themselves multi-cultural, but in the end it's just echoing 19th century orientalist troupes about how the east is somehow fundamentally mysterious.

Sure brief summaries won't be sufficient, but if somebody is legitimately interested, it's not like they can't find actual reliable information. Buddhism, like any religion, wants to spread.

Anonymous Wed Mar 11 04:23:49 2015 No.6253171

>>6252966
>but in general it feels like a lot of criticism of college buddhists seems to be founded on the idea that a westerner can't REALLY understand Buddhism because Buddhism is "exotic" and "oriental" and that he should stick to good old fashioned western thought.

I completely disagree. I don't know how you concluded this but I have never gotten this impression nor have I ever seen this seriously asserted or even hinted at. College kids "into" buddhism is exactly why they are criticized, because many of them don't seriously study it and wear it as some distinguishing mark of their personal narrative. Since they are currently into it, they think reading a couple of books on it and meditating here and there renders them well versed on the topic, when it takes considerably more work to have anything remotely approaching a solid grasp of.

It has nothing to do with Westerners being intrinsically unable to grasp Buddhism, but that the average person doesn't care enough to put the time in to really understand Buddhism proficiently. Most of the hurdles for Westerners have been overcome (it was extremely difficult for even a well educated Westerner in the 50s for example to really grasp Buddhism for a variety of reasons). So though less than 10% of Tibetan Buddhist texts are available in English, nearly every tradition is accessible to a reasonable degree because Western scholars on Buddhism have basically mastered their understanding. The Madhyamaka movement in American scholarship a great example of this.

Anonymous Wed Mar 11 04:43:47 2015 No.6253201
File: 162 KB, 638x957, peter-harrison-religion-and-the-religions-in-the-english-enlightenment-1990-1-638[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>6251006
Labeling them 'Semitic' and 'Dharmic' ideas is misleading, but it is true that Abrahamic notions of religion do not have an exact equivalent in Asian faiths. Peter Harrison has done good work showing that the modern idea of what 'a religion' consists of is largely a product of the Enlightenment.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature