/lit/ - Literature

>>14937319
>science aligns with Buddhism
Okay I guess Buddhism is incorrect then.

Guenon(pbuh) wins again.

>>14937319
Just because there is a quantum foam or waves instead of particles doesn't mean they are somehow empty of existence, it's not like something isn't real or doesn't have existence unless it's an object with mass and form. Typical Buddhist moving the goal-posts. Sunyata is nonsense, emptiness cannot be the cause of anything else, including samsara. Illusions cannot have emptiness as their basis but only arise where there is an existing basis for them in which they can inhere. Illusions and emptiness are not self-aware like we are. Our self-evident existence as conscious entities disproves the fallacious thesis of everything being empty of inherent existence.

>>14937370
>Just because there is a quantum foam or waves instead of particles doesn't mean they are somehow empty of existence, it's not like something isn't real or doesn't have existence unless it's an object with mass and form.

Yes, it certainly does mean that.

>>14937387
So is gravity not real because it's not a physical object? what about light? This is so stupid

>>14937441
Light particles have form.

>>14937451
okay then please explain how gravity or the numerous other laws of physics can affect things despite not existing as objects with form if only things which have form are real

>>14937486
bumping so the Buddhist who keeps posting these threads can answer this question

not that anon but explain how everything partakes of oneness, is conditioned by it yet we cannot see 1 itself

>>14937486
yeah these idiots think that things seen are conditioned by things seen eternally

>>14937370
yeah as if waves didn't carry (non-physical) information

>>14937387
Stop trying to turn Buddhism into mere materialism. Gravity is a perfect example of what emptiness is capable of explaining. And it is clearly without any physicality.

>>14937319
Wow this post is emmbarassing and really fucking stupid

>>14938272
Can you rephrase the question to be more specific and make it more clear as to who you are addressing

No

>>14937363
kek

>>14937319
too much big words. read MahaPrajnaParamita-Sastra by Nagarjuna

>>14937319
>ancient nihilistic relativism converges with modern nihilistic relativism
>these faulty presuppositions end up reinforcing themselves! they must be right!
Hard pass on this shit.

>>14937319
nirvana is an unchanging, eternal, absolutely transcendent reality that has no scientifically empirical basis or dimension of empirical inquiry, unless you believe meditative intuition and subjective navel gazing are good control frames.

>>14939725
>NNOOOOO WHAT ABOUT WHAT SAM HARRIS AND THE DALAI LAMA SAID??!!! R/BUDDHISM TOLD BE THAT BUDDHISM IS COMPLETELY SUPPORTED BY SCIENCE AND IS COMPATIBLE WITH PHYSICALISM!!!

>>14938412
Wow, you must really know more than the Dalai Lama himself. Please teach me your intellectual ways.

>>14940078
>Please teach me your intellectual ways.
You must have read my mind friend, part of the reason I'm so intelligent and erudite is because I read through the bibliography of the saint and polymath, Rene Guenon (pbuh) in your picture

>when the nature of these particles is further examined, we find that ultimately their very existence as objects is called into question
that's not the kind of emptiness the buddha was talking about nor is this really true from the scientific point of view

For the Hindus, people have the knowledge that they have a true nature, but people are misguided on what they take as their true nature. This is why the Hindus say that people are already enlightened, they just do not know about it... The true nature of people is not the 5 senses or their objects, it is the mind, the cosmos, or later their deification of this, ie their Brahma or their Buddha, and when people realize this they are enlightened. The way to realize this is by relying on material objects which purify their minds, like sounds, logic, mantras, little beads, amulets.

Then people ask the usual question ''why the cosmos produce things which do not know that they are the cosmos?'' ie ''why are people not born directly enlightened? instead of being born unenlightened which produces lots of suffering?''
So far the Hindus have no answer to this ''question of evil''. The Hindus keep replying ''people do not know their true nature'' and that's their answer...

in Buddhism, people do not have a true nature, people are not the cosmos, people are not Brahma, people are not Buddha, people are not their mind, people are not born already enlightened. In Buddhism there is only craving for pretty things and pretty ideas [ie the idea of having ''a true nature''] and lack of craving for pretty things and pretty ideas. People get enlightened when they stop craving for those. The way to get enlightened is to purify the mind, however not with objects like the Hindus do, but with the mind itself, ie all the time checking [with the mind] the behavior of the mind and then viewing the mind as it really is, which is anicca, dukkha , anatta, which triggers dispassion, which triggers liberation which triggers knowledge that dukkha is ended.

>>14940386
You know more than the Dalai Lama himself? What are your credentials again?

>>14937319
>Dude Buddhism is correct because it's proven by science
As a Buddhist this is cringe

>>14940416
If the Dalai Lama wrote the passage quoted by OP than he is stupider than I had thought

>>14940752
most young people are indoctrinated to believe that if science can't prove it they can't believe it.

>>14937319
You're a quack.

>>14941671
Yes, he did. On the contrary, it's more proof of the Dunning-Kreuger around here that you can quote actual intellectuals and experts in their fields and get people deriding it and acting as if they know better.

>>14940091
His face looks like a horse's.

>>14940752
Science backing it up is only more proof for it, especially for the materialist crowd on this board.

>>14937370
>Just because there is a quantum foam or waves instead of particles doesn't mean they are somehow empty of existence,
They are though. They are composite and their appearance depends on settings and type of measuring apparatus.
> it's not like something isn't real or doesn't have existence unless it's an object with mass and form.
Things exist conventionally, but there is no substance that makes them self-existing.
>emptiness cannot be the cause of anything else, including samsara. Illusions cannot have emptiness as their basis but only arise where there is an existing basis for them in which they can inhere.
Emptiness is not a thing, but an all encompassing principle. There is no hierarchy where Sunyata bestows apparent existence to all phenomena. That's just silly idealistic meme.
>Illusions and emptiness are not self-aware like we are.
They are. Rigpa is processing of information itself. But you have to stop being a pseud and meditate to understand this. When you pull your putthujhana self-clinging head out of you putthujhana ass, you'll stop being putthujhana in that moment.
>>14937486
You're confusing map with the territory, and you don't even know which laws are emergent.
>>14938303
You need at lest two other things to create just one piece of information. Information is small part of Emptiness itself.
>>14939725
Nirvana is not a state, thing nor place. I bet you think you can know noumena directly.
>>14941756
This.

>>14941774
there is no proof in science though

>>14937319
>There is nothing more futile than to consciously look for something to save you. But consciousness makes this fact seem otherwise. Consciousness makes it seem as if (1) there is something to do; (2) there is somewhere to go; (3) there is something to be; (4) there is someone to know. This is what makes consciousness the parent of all horrors, the thing that makes us try to do something, go somewhere, be something, and know someone, such as ourselves, so that we can escape our MALIGNANTLY USELESS being and think that being alive is all right rather than that which should not be.
~ Thomas Ligotti, btfoing Buddhism

>>14937370
Most of what we call matter is empty space

>>14941844
>You need at lest two other things to create just one piece of information. Information is small part of Emptiness itself.
ok now you explain this to me

>>14941844
how is emptiness not constrained by fullness? if emptiness is in itself emptiness it is empty of emptiness and becomes fullness

>>14942344
>>14942458
>>14942594
This completely misses any useful point.
>If we must think, it should only be done in circles, outside of which lies the unthinkable

Full excerpt:
>More provocative than it is astonishing, Zapffe’s thought is perhaps the most elementary in the history of philosophical pessimism. As penetrable as it is cheerless, it rests on taboo commonplaces and outlawed truisms while eschewing the recondite brain-twisters of his forerunners, all of whom engaged in the kind of convoluted cerebration that for thousands of years has been philosophy’s stock in trade. For example, The World as Will and Representation (two volumes, 1819 and 1844) by the German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer lays out one of the most absorbingly intricate metaphysical systems ever contrived—a quasi-mystical elaboration of a “Will-to-live” as the hypostasis of reality, a mindless and untiring master of all being, a directionless force that makes everything do what it does, an imbecilic puppeteer that sustains the ruckus of our world. But Schopenhauer’s Will-to-live, commendable as it may seem as a hypothesis, is too overwrought in the proving to be anything more than another intellectual labyrinth for specialists in perplexity. Comparatively, Zapffe’s principles are non-technical and could never arouse the passion of professors or practitioners of philosophy, who typically circle around the minutiae of theories and not the gross facts of our lives. If we must think, it should be done only in circles, outside of which lies the unthinkable. Evidence: While commentators on Schopenhauer’s thought have seized upon it as a philosophical system ripe for academic analysis, they do not emphasize that its ideal endpoint—the denial of the Will-to-live—is a construct for the end of human existence. But even Schopenhauer himself did not push this aspect of his philosophy to its ideal endpoint, which has kept him in fair repute as a philosopher.
(Ligotti, ibid >>14942337 )

>>14942668
i just asked you to explain what
>You need at lest two other things to create just one piece of information. Information is small part of Emptiness itself.
means, can you make this nonsense clearer?

>>14942668
>if i can think about something it can be what lies outside any thought

>>14942685
You didn't ask me. You asked that other guy, who is full of shit.
Read my excerpt and understand how MALIGNANTLY USELESS consciousness is, which btfo's any claim of something vs nothing or other useless metaphysics.

>>14942737
Your excerpt proves nothing. It's just a claim by the author about how he thinks things be useless and shieeet. It has zero explanatory power and you only think it does because you already believed what he wrote before you read it.
>There is nothing more futile than to consciously look for something to save you. But consciousness makes this fact seem otherwise. Consciousness makes it seem as if (1) there is something to do; (2) there is somewhere to go; (3) there is something to be; (4) there is someone to know. This is what makes consciousness the parent of all horrors, the thing that makes us try to do something, go somewhere, be something, and know someone, such as ourselves, so that we can escape our MALIGNANTLY USELESS being and think that being alive is all right rather than that which should not be.
No.

Your move.

>>14942737
metaphysics is not attached consciousness, it is not attributing value to its extensions; metaphysics is apophasis, it is the inscription in human language of the mystery of faith

>>14942337
>>14942737
lmao this is pure sentimentalism

>>14941844
>I can't give any examples whatsoever supporting the notion that illusions and emptiness can be self-aware because it's a nonsensical proposition which contradicts basic logic and common sense and so I'll just claim that if you only meditated you'd see that I'm actually right
kek, just as the copypasta predicted

>>14942337
Are there actual conscious beings who think like this? How much of a sadsack do you have to be for this to be your response to existing?

>>14943707
Smoothbrain take.
Read Abolishing Freedom by Ruda and get emancipated from the illusion of free will

Emptiness? Emptiness of what? Emptiness is conceptual, it does not exist. Something is empty of something.

Brainlet.

>>14943728
How do I will myself into reading it though? ;^( trying but can't

>>14944097
Git gud
Also read Conspiracy Against The Human Race first, it's more accessible, though more blackpill about it.
Abolishing Freedom is indeed a bitch to get hold of, but I promise if you apply yourself you'll get a lot out of it

>>14944149
Sorry still can't.
>tfw no free will

>>14944549
Hahaha.

He does cover that particular bullshit argument as well, ofc

>>14944780
free will lies between providence and fate, indulging oneself in corporeal nature it falls in fate, soaring to the divine it is guided by providence

>>14942594
Damn, really meks you think....

>>14945022
Worshipping Maya-Shakti is fine too.
Jai Maa Durga Devi

>>14944008
Emptiness in a grand metaphysical sense.

>>14939725
I have achieved spiritual enlightenment and my brainwaves were noticeably different on an EEG.

>>14946014
No you haven't.
No they weren't.

>>14946039
Why? Just because I'm a 24 year old Jew from Detroit and not some tibetan basedboi in a crimson robe I can't have achieved enlightenment?

It's easier than you think. You just need to think outside the box and boom, done.

>>14946014
>I have achieved enlightenment
>my brainwaves
technically no, specially if you still identify with the body and it's operations

>different EEG
I sneezed once and it started raining.

>>14946242
Bruh, what do you think happens when you achieve enlightenment? You just start identifying as an immaterial ghost whose biological functions no longer matter or influence you in any way? You stop enjoying delicious food? You stop being horny? You become a cuck?

No, you cut the Gordian Knot of your co-dependent, acculturated neuroses, and are finally able to innately *know* that you are one with god. Your thoughts and experience of existence become singular in praising god, free of buzzing thoughts akin to an ingrown nail.

In other words, you achieve inner peace.

>>14946311
(CONT)

The only anxiety that remains is the fact you still can't predict the future, and, in my case, threw my life off course in 2017 (the year I achieved gnosis), because I thought the world was ending due to conspiracy theories and /x/ posts about the solar eclipse being the harbinger of the apocalypse and that I was foisted into the role of Moshiach Ben Yoseph.

>>14946311
>>14946336
That's all cool but bodies themselves don't become enlightened.
That which attains to enlightened isn't measurable by an "EEG" or observable by the eye.

>>14946370
Tooth fairy bullshit

>>14946418
what do you mean? spirit is not material.

>>14946370
Nigga, all you're saying is shit you've you've read in a book by secondary sources at best.

Attain enlightenment, and you will know what I mean

>>14946370
>spirit
>what we perceive as spirit is in the brain
>changes in the spirit don't affect brain signals

You're stupid

>>14947020
>>14946370
>Attain enlightenment, and you will know what I mean

But you can't because you're a fucking pleb haha

But you will once we can induce it through science

>>14947063
>>what we perceive as spirit is in the brain
Spirit is not perceived, it is the perceiver and much more.

>>14947020
Enlightenment happens in the nuos not the brain.

>>14947105
Holy shit you're a fucking pleb.

Yes, enlightenment happens by focusing the spirit in your LIVER

>>14947115
Sorry if you're not informed but... Nous (noetic faculty) is the eye of the soul. Just as the soul of man, is created by God, man's soul is intelligent and noetic. Saint Thalassios wrote that God created beings "with a capacity to receive the Spirit and to attain knowledge of Himself; He has brought into existence the senses and sensory perception to serve such beings."

If we understand enlightenment to be a type of "theosis" or union with God, then it's accurate to say it occurs through the noetic faculty. If anything happens to the brain or body afterwards it would be secondary and probably just a correlation.

>>14947105
Can you show me on the human body where the nuos is? Is it some other perceptual organ that combines our senses to make sense of the world?

What you call the "nuos" is just a subcompartment of the mind (itself a construction of the brain) and if you can't see that then you're going to suffer like a motherfucker because you think the only road to redemption is without yourself, so you will work and work to find this thing that was within you the entire time.

> Jesus said, "If the flesh came into being because of spirit, it is a wonder. But if spirit came into being because of the body, it is a wonder of wonders. Indeed, I am amazed at how this great wealth has made its home in this poverty."

>>14937363
based...... science is bugman and refuted....

>>14941844
>I bet you think you can know noumena directly.
Yes.

You dudes need to read this

>Rethinking Consciousness: A Scientific Theory of Subjective Experience
http://libgen.is/book/index.php?md5=4A21D7EAFAEBF07271E6520153E4639F

bump