/lit/ - Literature

I like your thread.
For example, I think that the ideas of Stirner and Buddha can both be used for our own self-interest and, above all, well-being and some peace of mind without having to adhere completely to their ideals. I think every individual has something to offer and a wise man is open-minded and is always willing to hear others.

>>13386826

Thanks, I wasn't sure if this was the right board for this, but this is the board that taught me about spooks.

>>13386704
>Even if you practice it with ill or selfish intent, just by doing so you will become a better person.
That's a bunch of bullshit, the reason you hear this kind of tripe so often is that many westerners reject Christianity and grab onto Buddhism instead, but in doing so end up repeating all the behaviors that they associate with Christians that drove them away from Christianity in the first place including incessant proselytizing. They come up with all these justifications and canned reaponses to drag more people into it, they function according to a cult-like logic where everything that contradicts Buddhism is bad *but only according to other Buddhist teachings and not because of anything rational*, you can't even say that you've lost interest in it or have moved on to something else without some retarded Buddhist barging in to claim that you didn't understand it enough or that you didn't meditate enough. They are the mormons of eastern religion, right down to the lies and cognitive dissonance with regard to its origins.

>>13386704
I think it's helpful but it depends on reference ass someone could be doing it for, say, a sly act to eventually kill someone.

A, glaring, issue I've found w christianity is their missing meditation as a form to get to yourself or to further your spiritualism. You'd think God wouldn't have missed that considering we're told not to do evil or be perverts. I guess I'm curious, outside community, how to adhere to it

>>13386704
>Even if you practice it with ill or selfish intent, just by doing so you will become a better person.
not with ill-will, but with selfish reason yes. however, you can create good karma with those selfish deeds-intentions, but you cannot get enlightened. THere are more meritorious results from ''being not selfish'' but you still cannot get enlightened with those.

>>13386704
Intent is all there is in Buddhism. Which is why it's not bad to kill something if you didn't intend to or it's not bad to eat meat if you didn't kill it yourself, and the killing itself isn't what is bad about killing but it's the state of mind/intent while performing the kill.

>>13386704
buddhists have considered the fact that not all people who start studying it will start out as bodhisattvas or even as arahants. They recognize that vast majority of practitioners are imperfect Buddhists (similar to how no Christian claims to be a perfect Christian, flaws are just an accepted reality of the ideology).
Buddhism therefore teaches on a number of different levels, entry level, mid level, end level, and all the shades in between.
btw, it's not just Buddhism or Christianity, pretty much any religion or philosophical organization operates under this method, for the same reason education system, sports system, jobs, etc. all operate under this method of graduated teaching, with the end goal of "improving upon X".
there's a taoist teaching (or maybe zen or some other flavor of buddhism) that taught something along the lines of "even if you know you're not following the Way because you're confused about the Path and how to walk it, keep going through the motions and eventually things will begin to make more sense.
It's almost as if an outside Force will see you making an effort, account it as sincere (and will be able to know the difference) and will then begin to divulge more teachings to you.
Sincerity is stressed because the Universe knows the difference, the Self knows the difference (and the universe is a reflection of the Self, and the Self of the Universe).

>>13386704
Anything that does not call for sincerity or intent can only go so far. That continual doubt and questioning of your sincerity is only a sign that you are on the right path, no one said it was going to be easy.
>Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.

>>13387299

I think that's part of why a trend is for people to buy prayer books talking about different types of prayer. Prayer is the closest thing to meditation I can think of in the Christian domain.

>>13386704
Your basing all of this on the presumption that being a Christian or Buddhist inherently makes you a “better” person. What is better? What are you moralizing? Is it good? Is it Natural?

>>13388900

I'm not making any claim myself, but it stands to follow that Christian or Buddhist doctrine would hold that you become a better person by following their teachings.

>>13387734
The killing itself is bad because you cause another to reincarnate and likely negatively affect those dependent on that life such as family. But it's mostly the intent, yeah.

>>13387291
As an ordained monk I half agree.
Westerners can’t into Buddhism.
Buddhism is not a philosophy it is critique of Vedic asceticism.
The most important aspect in Buddhism is the following of dhamma.
There is no inherently purifying things about Buddhism beyond its focus on contemplation introspection and release.
But don’t call Buddhism always cult-like this is the only “religion” that actively encourages challenging and hitting on ya teaching if you believe it will not benefit your path.
Meditation will provide you benefits pretty much always I suppose though.
OP please let me know if you have any questions this man doesn’t seem to know much about Buddhism.

>>13386704
Half of what buddhism is, is compassion and techniques to create a compassionate attitude - Buddhism is very practical in this sense with working with bettering oneself.

>>13390321
Let me just talk about your question OP.
If by the sense he means the noble 8 fold path then yes I argue following that will always lead to a better person. One doesn’t simply follow that with I’ll intentions or selfishness however so I’m unsure of what he’s saying.
I’ve known many Christians who did not buy fully into their faith but still attend church and worship because they either appreciate the feeling of having some form of religion in their life or appreciate the community. I’m sure you know people like this too. But one doesn’t follow the morals of Jesus for ill or selfish reasons, just as one doesn’t follow the noble path for ill or selfish reasons.
Both are followed because we believe these actions (which show many similarities) bring a betterment for mankind and our communities, yes?
The most selfish aspect of these is doing it for the idea of salvation as it is entirely for self, but we both know this is surely not a selfish act as it benefits all living creatures of God.
So I don’t know what this guy is arguing.
The ONLY thing I can think is he is attracted to the perceived supernatural aspects of Buddhist spirituality and hope through cultivating his mind he can gain powers that the average person would not imagine possible (I have seen these before whether you believe me or not). So no, no one truly walks the noble path with ill intentions, it is antithetical to everyone Siddhartha taught.
This said the teachings of Siddhartha are not Buddhism, Buddhism is not a religion of the prophet but one of consistent growth of ideas.
Ask me if you have any questions, I would be happy to recommend you some Buddhist teachings that you would not find clash with your Christian faith

>>13390321
Not the op but any idea on why Buddhism had such a huge decline in India historically?

What are the main Hindu criticism of Buddhism , are they any valid?

>>13390744

advaita vedanta is what you want to criticize some aspects of buddhism, others are in agreement with certain hindu thoughts. modern buddhism is easy to criticize becasuse its basically a retarded non-religion. the lack of belief in the soul/thirst for annihilation makes it fall apart completely

>>13390744
Islam completely destroyed Buddhism in India.

>>13390753
Hi i'm a vaguely New Age faggot who can't stop thirsting for annihilation. I was once a gullible self-help consumer mildly obsessed with Leo Gura's teachings and some of the teachings of Shinzen Young and Jed Mckenna. I'm still a seeker however. How does one stop thirsting for annihilation? All i want is enlightenment. How do i want something else?

>>13390798
How come Hinduism managed to survive so well compared to Buddhism ?

>>13390870
read literature instead of popsci

>>13386704
My words fly up, my thoughts remain below: Words without thoughts never to heaven go.

>>13386704
It depends entirely on what you mean by "practice" and "comply with doctrine" (and I'm surprised that nobody pointed this out already). If by those you mean going to church and taking communion, it won't do shit for you. All you need to do to get proof of that is look around you.

If, on the other hand, you mean living a Christly life, emulating Christ Himself, the apostles, and the doctors of the church, speaking and doing good and eschewing evil, then yes, you will become a better person even if you're just faking all of it. Unless you have some sort of gravely deranging mental disorder, seeing the positive effects of your actions on others and feeling their warmth toward you will humanize you. Hell, even just failing but knowing you did all you could, tried, the best possible, produces peace – even if the pain of failure is predominant in the moment.

>>13390798
Is there anything that Islam can't destroy? It's Abaddon itself.

>>13390744
>Not the op but any idea on why Buddhism had such a huge decline in India historically?
There were a number of different factors that caused it. The Islamic invasions played a role especially in northern India, but there was also a Hindu intellectual 'renaissance' of sorts throughout the first millennium AD that played a major role, different schools of Hindu philosophy like Vedanta, Tantra etc flourishing and many of them heavily criticizing Buddhisms ideas or claiming to improve/supercede on it. The narrative as Indians themselves understand it is that Hindus defeated Buddhism through refutations and debates which caused it to decline in popularity. The mainstream historians and academics generally occupy a middle point and agree that both the Islamic invasions and the Hindu revival played a role.

Sadly, many Buddhists seem to have some sort of resentment towards Hinduism (I see it as sort of akin to a son's resentment towards his father) and strenuously deny that Hinduism ever refuted or defeated Buddhism despite many academics agreeing this happened to a certain degree. You often see people like this poster >>13390798 claiming that it was solely Islam that was responsible despite that this completely fails as an explanation for why Buddhism almost vanished from southern India even though the Muslims never reached or partially-controlled it until fairly late when Buddhism was already basically gone from it; and it fails to explain why only Hinduism survived en masse despite Muslims persecuting both (they didn't uniquely target Buddhists). It's as though they come up with all sorts of explanations to console themselves because they can't bring themselves to accept that someone who understands Buddhism could come to prefer Hindu teachings, it's a sore spot of their history that they don't like to dwell on.
>What are the main Hindu criticism of Buddhism , are they any valid?
Different schools had different criticisms, you'd have to read up on what each Hindu school said. Adi Shankara and his Advaita school criticized it the heaviest, people will just give you a partisan answer corresponding to what they favor when you ask if the criticism is valid, you'd just have to read about it and decide for yourself. Some of the Hindu criticism is more of later Buddhists schools than Buddha's original teachings but there are still some attacks that apply to his core ideas directly.

>>13390941
>t. boomer

>>13390375

OP here, I guess the simplest way is if there's some basic teachings that are meant to show how you comport yourself mentally in day-to-day life. I think that would be the best way to de-alienize, I have plenty of historical knowledge of buddhism, but beyond names, places, and dates I admit I am ignorant.

>>13391243
Thank you I appreciate the effort

>>13390897
Because Buddhism need the Sangha(community of monks) to survive and if you kill off all the monks and destroy the monasteries or just cause enough upheaval so that there are no kings/princes that fund them then Buddhism will collapse. The Buddhist communities existed around the sanghas and the major cities.

Hinduism was more rural and therefore more difficult to destroy. You'd basically have to destroy every little shrine and completely decimate the priest castes like what the Christians did in Europe.

>>13387299
>>13386704

Traditional Catholicism and the Orthodox Church have strong traditions of prayer and meditation. Orthodoxy has theosis, which is "becoming unified with God" and requires a mixture of discipline. meditation, prayer and primarily faith.

Protestantism doesn't value this stuff. Might I recommend exploring Orthodoxy or traditional Catholicism? (Any Church with a latin mass will also have deep spiritual meditation and practice with rosaries and other forms of prayer from christian mystics)

>>13386704
>Is there any doctor of the church or theologian who argues that the bare acts of complying with Christian doctrine will make you a better person?
Lots of stupid proteshits believe that faith alone saves you.
>Have you accepted Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior?
And the ilk. I've found it very common in protestant sects to act like saying a special combination of words is a magical get to heaven card. I abhor it and refuse to partake in their profane blasphemy. Faith without works is an abomination.

>>13392683
traditional catholicism is very niche and hard to find tho, mostly its just small mass and prayer groups you have to drive for 2 hours to get to
orthodoxy doesnt exist outside of eastern europe and cascadia

>>13392708

I'm American Orthodox and there are quite literally millions of us. If you want non-ethnic Orthodoxy, go to the Orthodox Church of America (OCA) which is entirely English speaking and mostly converts from RCC, Anglican, Protestant etc.

Are you euro or American? (Or something else)

>>13392728
central europe
i didnt know orthodoxy was so big with you guys

>>13392733

Yeah it's growing quite steadily here. Central Europe is a bit harder, but I know there is some Orthodox presence if you look hard enough.

I seriously can't recommend it enough if you are looking for more mysticism and deeper practical theology for everyday spiritual growth. The Eastern Fathers of the Church are quite different from the Western Fathers.

>>13392745
growing up as a croatian native i have nothing butcontempt and disgust for orthodoxy, i have learned to associate that religion to savagery and primivism

>>13392748

Well I'm sorry to hear that. Why do you relate it to savagery and primivism?

(Quite odd for me to hear, as my spiritual father/confessor is a pacifist and our Bishop is also quite strict on the "peace" of Christianity)

>>13392757
ive learned of orthodoxy from spiritual and cultural practices of krajina population and as a population in terms of development compared to us they are kinda like mexicans or blacks in usa
so orthodoxy for me is something like a nigger religion if it makes sense
also some weird stuff how they dont call mary mother of god and they dont have filioque and their church authority is a joke with de facto national churches controlled by pootang and company

>>13392773

Ah. Well I think that is a bit unfair, because Catholicism in the US is basically held together by Mexicans and illegal immigrants. My hometown had an English mass when I was a boy and now it's Spanish and Portuguese and 95% immigrant.

I wouldn't base my perception of a Church on the ethnic group or the social class of the attendees. Also, Mary is "Theotokos" which literally means "Mother of God" in Greek. So I'm not sure if you're just confused or what, but she is mother of god to us. I won't get into filioque or Church authority because we will disagree. But just wanted to clear up theotokos and church membership.

>>13392799
honestly it just seems like protestantism lite
if you exclude icons they are as iconoclastic as protestants, they are against authority like protestants, they also dont lack a lot of catholic spiritual traditions
not to mention they allow divorce
ive always thought of it like more aesthetic lutheranism with compromises and natioanlism and stuff i mentioned before

>>13392814

>they are as iconoclastic as protestants

Hmm... now this... I've never heard this used against Orthodox. Most of our Churches are literally 100% covered in icons and images. Protestants have heart attacks when they enter our Churches and we have a stronger tradition of image than the RCC in my humble opinion.

>against authority

This is simply not true. We are simply not in agreement about having one super Bishop above all other bishops. We absolutely believe in "first among equals" and would even give the Roman Pope that title if both our Churches ever reconciled. Consider that we literally call our Bishop's "master" and agree with Athanasius that wherever the Bishop is so is Christ...

>lack a lot of catholic spiritual traditions

Not sure what you mean. We don't have some Western traditions, but we also have kept and safe guarded some very important ones such as the Jesus Prayer and heysechasm.

>they allow divorce

We don't "allow" divorce. The Orthodox Church is against divorce and it is never a standard. A Bishop can grant "economy" (an extreme case of mercy) in a very specific case. Read Jesus in Matthew. Also, if you look at the Orthodox Rite for a second marriage, it is completely penitential with no celebration.

>ive always thought of it like more aesthetic lutheranism with compromises and natioanlism and stuff i mentioned before

I would say we have almost nothing in common with Lutheranism, and that the Novus Ordo looks almost identical to the Lutheran mass and Roman theology has become far more protestant. That being said, our bond is still closest with Rome.

>>13392884
>This is simply not true. We are simply not in agreement about having one super Bishop above all other bishops
how does that even work, do you just all do your own thing and believe in different stuff with no ability to order it?
what happens if russian church says a and greek says b, what happens after many such situations and how is that different than american protestant situation with 1000 dfferent subsects which all believe in radically different doctrines
>Not sure what you mean. We don't have some Western traditions, but we also have kept and safe guarded some very important ones such as the Jesus Prayer and heysechasm
i know that in modern times when it was decided to get rid of catholic traditions in greek catholic churches and make them more eastern they got rid of a thousand different stuff
>We don't "allow" divorce
you literally do
>Read Jesus in Matthew
pretty sure jesus banned divorce which you practice
>second marriage
lmao thats literally impossible, there can be only one marriage
>Novus Ordo looks almost identical to the Lutheran mass
novus ordo is honestly more similar to anglicanism, but yea you are right
>Roman theology has become far more protestant
post 60s roman theology is a joke, they stopped teaching scholastics and became hippies

>>13392994

>how does that even work, do you just all do your own thing and believe in different stuff with no ability to order it?
what happens if russian church says a and greek says b, what happens after many such situations and how is that different than american protestant situation with 1000 dfferent subsects which all believe in radically different doctrines

All Orthodox Churches recognize each other as Orthodox. We all adhere to the same things and worship in the same way. If one Church does something wrong than another Church may accuse it of doing something wrong. This is happening right now with Russia and Constantinople.

Constantinople recognized a Ukrainian Church. Russia believes that action to have been unorthodox, because the Ukrainian Church does not adhere to full Orthodoxy. Russia broke communion with Constantinople and has asked to resolve this issue. Russia and Constantinople are still Orthodox and still recieve each other at functions. There is no question of each church being “unorthodox”, there is a question of discipline. TheologicLly they are still one. But communion breaks until an ecumenical council meets and sorts out the issue. The Orthodox gather, resolve the issue and communion is restored. This has happened historically and we even kicked out an ecumenical patriarch (a first among equals) for abandoning the Orthodox faith and fixed the communion through a council. So basically the supreme force in Orthodoxy are the Bishops garnered together at an ecumenical council.

>you literally do [allow divorce]

We allow MERCY in certain cases of adultery and destruction of the marriage covanent. For example, if a husband is beating his wife to a pulp and she has to run away, and the husband has every intention of beating her again when she returns... a bishop can grant her economy (a mercy divorce) and together they pray for Christ to be merciful on her judgement day. There is no true acceptance of the act, it is penitential.

Celibacy is not always a burden people can handle, and so that woman could remarry in a penitential marriage in order to continue her christian struggle with a supporting and orthodox husband (who hopefully won't beat her to a pulp). I have seen this happen before. I think it is far more in line with Christ's mercy than the Roman view which would bar her from communion for the rest of her life.

Jesus teaching on divorce in Matthew is debated between RCC and Orthodox, I can only reccomend you read our fathers and your fathers debating it as I am just a layman and do not know all the ancient languages like they do.

>post 60s roman theology is a joke, they stopped teaching scholastics and became hippies

lol, well i'm glad we agree on that haha. Peace to you my Roman brother, I have to head out to work. I’ll check back later perhaps

>>13393150
>This has happened historically and we even kicked out an ecumenical patriarch (a first among equals) for abandoning the Orthodox faith and fixed the communion through a council
so basically parliamentarianism
>The Orthodox gather, resolve the issue and communion is restored
so you have to basically pressure and convince churches to accept things (and accept when vladimir decides to make one of the churches his bitch and personal propaganda machine)
until some church decides to do its own thing that is in which case you ahve no authority to stop it
>We allow MERCY
i wouldnt call enabling adultery and heresy mercy
>For example, if a husband is beating his wife to a pulp and she has to run away, and the husband has every intention of beating her again when she returns
then divine law suddenly disappears and jesus' teachings no longer are valid?
>a mercy divorce
sounds like something protestants would say to justify gay marriage
>and together they pray for Christ to be merciful on her judgement day
im pretty sure he wont be merciful for unrepentant sinner and even less merciful for church authorites who led her to be that way
>Celibacy is not always a burden people can handle
except catholic church has handled that burden for centuries without issues
>who hopefully won't beat her to a pulp
why are you so obsessed with domestic violence, its not really a thing in modern times
>I think it is far more in line with Christ's mercy
promoting someone to sin and be an adulterer?
>which would bar her from communion for the rest of her life
so people should take communion udner state of sin?

>>13392994

Not him, but just because RC clergy are celibates doesn't mean that it's easy or often possible for lay people. I work in medicine and so I meet a lot of new faces everyday. I've met a TON of Roman Catholic people who are divorced and haven't recieved communion in decades, despite striving to be faithful catholics and following the Church. This divorce thing comes down to reading the words of Jesus. Orthodoxy has always understood Jesus as having given an allowance for divorce in the case of adultery with no reconilliation. I believe it was the holy father Saint Basil the Great (a saint in the Roman Catholic Church) who actually wrote the divorce rules still used by Orthodoxy. So a Doctor of the Latin church wrote divorce canons which are apparently now bad and sinful?

That begs the question... if the early church allowed divorce and bishops who wrote and used canons to grant economy for divorce were canonized as saints... why is it then that Rome says no to divorce?

Parlamentarianism would also be incorrect, as the Orthodox claim to folllow the exact method of the early Church which actually was centered around the ecumenical council. You have to go farther in history (way past Pope Gregory the Great who condemned supremacy) to find a Pope claiming to be more powerful than all Bishop's gathered at council.

>>13393422

Apologies. By farther I meant way ahead. Papal supremacy is a later development

god christianity is so shit lmao
they'd rape babies if natural law allowed it

>>13393430

The lack of orthogonality in English makes fools of us all