/lit/ - Literature

>>18050193
It looks really perfect at first. I don't want to blackpill you but if you really like it and find no issues you should not care about being stereotyped as the Westerner Buddhist, just embrace it. If you do feel at any point that something's wrong, then just dig deeper. The Buddha himself invites you to question what he says, and so you should look at the religion (whatever branch you choose) and its institutional framework with a critical eye.

>>18050193
Yes, but don't worry about the esoteric aspects, they fit for easterns. Focus in the epistemological at first, then search the school that fits best for you. Read the sanskrit and the pali canons, then Nagarjuna, Vasubandhu, Dignaga, Dharmakirti.

>>18050193
>Is this the answer
One of them, yes.

>>18050269
>>18050294
Thanks. I was raised Catholic, like I'm sure a good many here were, and ended up studying theology and philosophy in undergrad. I've since gotten away from philosophy (the more I read, the more I question) and so this phenomenon may happen with Buddhism as well, but I'll dig some more. I guess the Buddha would agree: all this philosophical questioning does more harm than good for the soul.

>>18050294
>Yes, but don't worry about the esoteric aspects, they fit for easterns.
This is just stupid. The whole point of Buddhism is escaping Samsara which is based on the idea that you will be born again and again, that Karma exists, and all that jazz. If you only look at the philosophy of Buddhism you'll kill yourself or go insane because it tells you to relinquish everything, and without a strong supporting motive to do so like escaping Samsara this makes absolutely no sense. OK nothing means anything to me, there is no "I", I am defined by nothing, I am nothing. What now? Can I just die? This is the reason why the monks and the bad Karma generating lays are inexorably tied together, the monks exist as a service to the lays.

>>18050193
Buddhism won't fill that void because it is false.
Only God will provide a perfect solution

>>18050193
I'd start meditating, short sessions daily.
Seek to become more familiar with The Four Noble Truths and The Nobel Eightfold Path.
I would recommended In the Buddha's Words: An Anthology of Discourses from the Pali Canon if you are yet to study the Pali Canon.
Study is important but walking a true course along the path is so much more, reflect on the lessons and use them in your interactions with existence.
I don't consider myself a Buddhist by any stretch, but the teachings of The Buddha are invaluable and some Buddhist promoted practices and writings have significant life altering potential.

>>18050193
Yes start with meditation.
I also recommend Understand Our Minds by Thich Nhat Hanh and The New Earth by Eckhart Tolle.
I also recommend lsd

>>18050193
Yes but only Zen, the Indian autism of Buddhism is moderated by the chill aspect of Chinese civilization (Taoism).

>>18050193
yeah, go meditate and stop bothering people around with stupid questions. take meds.

>>18051213
What does this even mean? Isn't Zen Japanese? What does Taoism have to do with anything?

>>18051425
Zen first coalesced in China around AD 500 as Chan Buddhism, and it's generally accepted that there was mutual influence with Taoism, although it seems like 20th century scholars emphasize this more than 21st century ones. It came to Japan in the 12th century through the efforts of Eisai and Dogen, who established the Rinzai and Soto schools.

>>18050193
>Is this the answer?


BUDDHISM IS THE ANSWER TO NOTHING.

>>18051599
Both yes and no.

>>18050193
Try the Bhagavad-Gita instead, lest you be sucked into the black pit of nihilistic, soul-denying, crypto-materialist, pseudo-spiritual teachings known as B*ddhism

>>18051599
Yes, it is the answer to nothing (sunyata).

>>18050399
its not stupid it's schopenhauer

>>18050193
I like Buddhism. Best little book I ever read was a worn out old copy of The Dhammapada. Found it in a pile of old books, never really thought about what Buddhism was and then in one sitting, one afternoon, reading that one script changed my life. I remember sitting and reading it until the sun was almost down. Looking at the disc of sun burning and feeling peace for the first time since I was a child. When I stood up from where I had sat reading I felt like every weight of my soul was gone. I felt like I was floating. My feet could hardly feel the ground. I started walking through town and every person I encountered I felt this intense physical and mental connection to them. For the first time ever I was conscious of other people's suffering. The intensity of that experience was more than I can describe. I felt free if every horrible thought and doubt I had carried with me. I kept walking until I arrived home almost as the sun began to rise. I sat on the ground in front of my house and felt like a fire had burnt away decades, centuries of accumulated pain passed to me in every painful word and sorrowful look that had been passed down to me to from my ancestors. With my eyes closed I could see the sun rise before it passed the horizon. I could feel it's fire and warmth passing through me though it was hidden. I fell asleep there and woke some hours later.

This is my awakening experience and I am sure it will be mocked or doubted but it is true. That one experience was enough to permanently alter everything I think and feel. Every day is another step closer to that place.

>>18052484
Thank you for sharing.

>>18051773
Woah.
Never heard about this B*ddhism, but it sounds pretty Monotheistic.

>>18051213
>mixing wrong view with right is again right view bro!!111

the state of bugmen

>>18050702
>>I also recommend Understand Our Minds by Thich Nhat Hanh and The New Earth by Eckhart Tolle.
>I also recommend lsd
Ok this is a terrible advise for neo yuppies who delude themselves that living in the present moment is being enlightened. Also meditation is built on 7 previous things, you can't just go into samadhi without the condition triggering samadhi

>>18050702
>>I also recommend Understand Our Minds by Thich Nhat Hanh and The New Earth by Eckhart Tolle.
>I also recommend lsd
Ok this is a terrible advise by and for neo yuppies who delude themselves that living in the present moment is being enlightened. Also meditation is built on 7 previous things, you can't just go into samadhi without the condition triggering samadhi

>>18052858
DO i even fucking need to meditate? I seriously can't stand it. I understand that a lot of people find it very useful, but it just isnt for me. I tried meditating several times for several weeks, and I noticed absolutely no difference in my state of mind. Anyway, recommend books

>>18050269
>I don't want to blackpill you
Blackpill about what?

>>18050193
>Is this the answer?
No.
t. got into it for a year

>>18053156
>DO i even fucking need to meditate
In Buddhism, meditation fulfills the same function that moral busybodying plays in Anglo Protestantism, that’s why they treat it like a kind of moral or mental hygiene regime which they try to pressure and shame people into doing more

>>18053476
meditation comes after morality you retard

>>18050410
And that God is Brahma. Take the Buddhist polytheist focused pill.

>>18050193
>Is this the answer?
Western Buddhism?
No.
Far Eastern Buddhism?
Maybe, but mostly because of influences from Tao and Shinto.
Indian Buddhism?
LOL NO DON'T BOTHER WHAT A JOKE

karma, impermanence, the nature of suffering and its source, non-attachment, these are nice and helpful ideas. but threads on this topic will always be spoiled by indians.

>>18053674
do you assume that they are Indian because Buddhism was refuted by Hindu philosophers, and hence that anyone repeating those same refutations and arguments on /lit/ must be Indian too? That’s a small-minded view, many non-Indians enjoy studying the subject too

>>18052484
nice. good for you

>>18053606
God is Sunyata

>>18053647
>Muh fucking Buddhism from the Far East
You mean the place where people skin/eat/chop up animals alive?

Strip away all the metphysical content from buddhism and you're kind of left with a fairly benign self-help/mindfulness programme.

Buy into all the metaphysical stuff, basically because you happen to like the idea of it, and you end up like one of those pseudo-west-coast hippies and r/buddhism type people (pic related)

Are there any buddhist books that address this problem? Stephen batchelor?

>>18054361
You do realize that the whole "Chinese eat dogs" meme is based off a single cultural festival in a province of China that even the Chinese consider backwater. It's dying out now too, the last festival to occur only had a few hundred people.

>>18054622
Are you retarded? Stripping away the metaphysical is how you end up some drugged out hippie retard who mediates once a week and calls themselves a buddhist

>>18054622
Don't seek to do as the Masters did. Seek what the Masters sought. This is the way to buddha-nature.

>>18054622
>and you end up like one of those psuedo-west coast hippies
Hippies usually don't fully adhere to the Dharma, and usually add a bunch of New Age material into their Buddhism. I don't think that just because you believe in Buddhist cosmology that you're instantly turned into some stoner dude. There are plenty of white converts that properly adhere to the Dharma, like those at Fo Guang Shan or Dharma Drum.

>>18054682
Yikes. I've hit a nerve there. Lol.

As I said, how do you base your belief in the metaphysical aspects on anything other than happening to like the idea of it?
Have you read any books that explicitly deal with this?
I'm genuinely interested

>>18054622
Buddhism doesn't really make sense without all the metaphysical stuff. Otherwise why would you let go of attachments to the world? The Buddhist answer is that attachments lock you in a cycle of rebirth and often it isn't that pleasant. The only way to escape is to attain nirvana. The only reason to attain nirvana is so you aren't reincarnated as a chicken or in hell or something.

>>18054721
Yes. But how do you suspend disbelief and choose to authentically believe in these things?

>>18054712
>yikes
go back.
I base metaphysical belief on what aligns with what feels right. Is there are deep meaning to what feels right? Fucked if I know.

>>18054741
You don't have to just suspend disbelief. You can just see the logic in certain things and believe in them based on your own investigations. The Buddha stated that one has to search for the validity in his teachings through experience. It implies that even the metaphysical aspects such as rebirth and karma are revealed as true when one reaches a higher state of realization.

>>18054712
>how do you base your belief in the metaphysical aspects on anything other than happening to like the idea of it?

It's like they say in AA meetings "fake it till you make it"
Or probably more accurately, as pascal said, "kneel down and you will believe" The belief comes from practice, not before it.

>>18052484
woah

>>18052484
That was the Phantom City. Now that you had the opportunity to rest there, you should make your way to the Dharma Treasure at the end of the road.

>>18053156
Dhyana is excellent for your mental health. Eknath Easwaran breaks down the four levels of Dhyana in his translation of the Dhammapada, which is worth reading for his lengthy introduction alone. Dhyana is quite the delight once you have practiced and can do it right, and has a multitude of destressing benefits, improves sleep, lowers blood pressure, improves your mindfulness, your receptivity, your patience, and resistance to emotional overreaction.

>>18053674
Impermanence makes one wonder: if you compressed a person's life in one moment, could you still see impermanence?
I believe it is a temporal perspective.

Consider the existence of "Higher Entities" and some of them could exist forever.
Would our reality really look impermanent for those entities or just another blink in the eye?

>>18050193
I wish Western Buddhism wasn't 99% boomer hippie professors and new age women. I'd probably become a monk but the ppl involved are annoying af

>>18055150
We're in the latter age of the Law where the Buddha's Dharma degenerates in this world, since after his passing, those who can correctly uphold, understand, and pass it on number fewer and fewer each generation.

It's only going to get worse.

Why are so many "buddhists" on the internet distinctly nasty and unbuddha like?

They need to find some chill and compassion for their fellow man.

>>18055163
Looks like I'm facing down hermit style Buddhism then

>>18055150
>I wish [thing in the West] wasn't just experiencing the same rot deriving from the death of Christianity that literally everything else in the West is experiencing
You and me both, brother.

>>18054361
No, he's talking about the place where the Buddhist clergy have been working to end meat eating and abortion centuries.
>are you seriously implying that the chinese aren't perfectly moral according to their own standards?!
John 8:7.

>>18050193
Read Red Pine's Heart Sutra. From there, look into Theravada vs Zen vs Tibetan Buddhism vs "general Mahayana". Find one that works for you. No matter what, however, start meditating. Every day, sit down, and for a few minutes, just focus on your breath. Watch how it makes you feel. Watch what arises; let it fall away; watch what falls; let it fall away. Don't struggle to keep the mind empty, just recognize when your attention drifts away from the breath and let your attention fall back to the breath.

>>18055150
when the west collapses, go to thailand be a bikkhu

read this

Can I still be a buddhist and an adherent of far-right politics?

>>18055469
This is your brain on idpol

>>18055469
according to atheist yes, but buddhism doesnt value society so any care for this is the wrong path.

is there anything a buddhist can't do

>>18055469
Yes Buddhism being some hippie shit is western degeneracy
also don't listen to the atheist above he doesn't know what he's talking about

>>18054622
>>18054712
>how do you base your belief in the metaphysical aspects on anything other than happening to like the idea of it?
In Buddhism, the higher levels of meditation are intended as a tool, not an end goal. However, without the metaphysical framework, there's no point in using them as such. Advanced meditation is pleasurable to the extent that there are occasional warnings in the suttas about the danger of getting stuck on those stages and being content with just staying there rather than continuing to work toward awakening, or even of confusing those states with awakening. But if the metaphysical isn't there - if there's no rebirth, no karma, etc - then this isn't really a concern and you might as well just spend your time in deep meditation until you die. Everything you're doing in Buddhist practice is supposed to be done with the specific goal of addressing metaphysical concerns. You can do the practice without belief, but at a certain point you need the belief in the metaphysical in order to have the motivation to keep progressing. Otherwise, you'll just reach a point where you're content, calm, and happy all the time and will have no real reason to keep rocking the boat rather than just enjoying it.

Rebirth in particular is central to Buddhist practice and off the top of my head I can recommend the following
>The Truth of Rebirth: And Why It Matters for Buddhist Practice, by Ṭhānissaro Bhikkhu
>https://www.dhammatalks.org/books/TruthOfRebirth/Section0001.html
>The theme of rebirth is woven inextricably throughout the Buddha’s teachings. And freedom from rebirth has been a central feature of the Buddhist goal from the very beginning of the tradition. All of the various Buddhist religions that later developed in Asia, despite their other differences, were unanimous in teaching rebirth. Even those that didn't aim at putting an end to rebirth still taught rebirth as a fact.
>Yet as these Buddhist religions have come to the West, they have run into a barrier from modern Western culture: Of all the Buddha's teachings, rebirth has been one of the hardest for modern Westerners to accept. Part of this resistance comes from the fact that none of the dominant world-views of Western culture, religious or materialistic, contain anything corresponding to the idea of repeated rebirth. Plato taught it, but-aside from an esoteric fringe-few in the modern West have treated this side of his teaching as anything more than a myth.
which is a good read, if you have a serious interest in the subject.

>>18055469
>Can I still be a buddhist and an adherent of far-right politics?

Depends what you mean by "far right politics" but probably not.

>>18050193
Read Hinduism and Buddhism by Ananda Coomaraswamy, then the Gospel of Matthew and the Psalms

>>18055469
How does "Limitless compassion for all beings in the entire universe" mesh with "punish the poor for being poor enough to be poor"? Rhetorical question, not a Zen koan.

>>18055179
>look into Theravada vs Zen vs Tibetan Buddhism vs "general Mahayana"
where you reckon I should be goin about doin that?

>>18056061
here
>>18055199

Buddhism has cool practice but its theoretical, metaphysical foundations are incoherent and dualist.

>>18050193
Its analysis of dukkha is very convincing, and I appreciate its yogic practice, but metaphysically I find the theistic and vedantic arguments for the Atman-Brahman more convincing. The vedantic understanding of consciousness is also more coherent. Ideally, I would need a vedantic Buddhism.

>>18056089
gonna need something more specific

>>18050193
>something is definitely missing and I just can't put my finger on it.
nothing is missing, you're just a fucking faggot who can't appreciate what you have.

>>18056198
Not him, I would say that the difference between the three branches is that the main goal of most Theravadan monastics and some laymen is to become an arahant or at least at least achieve stream-entry, and if not that, then rebirth in another time when a Buddha is around.
Mahayanists believe that one should strive for Bodhisattva-hood, and thus eventually become a Buddha. The methods for doing this vary, like the Theravadans. I could break down the schools I'm familiar with, if you want.
Then there's Vajrayana, which is the more esoteric teachings of the Buddha that is found in Tibetan Mahayana (Which is composed of Mahayana and Esoteric teachings), Huiyuan, and Shingon. Vajrayana teachings are about becoming a Buddha in this life through specialized rites (mantras, mandalas, mudras, visualizations, sacraments). Which goal do you perceive to be best to your current status?

>>18056419
what about zen tho? basically I just wanna gtfo

>>18056461
I like zen but like Klonopin more, some ppl say zen has nothing to do with feeling good, but it does start out as trying to feel good, at least things like equanimity, lack of attachment and desire. I started losing desire to do school and the nun teaching me suggested maybe than meant I should quit school, I didn't and regret it lol

>>18054622
Literally the opposite.

I don't believe in any major denomination of Buddhism, but I use a Gautama statue in my house shrine to pray. My views on god and theism don't really lend themselves to the abrahamic or even hinduistic framework, so a more agnostic framework like Buddhism fits my aesthetic of god as an object of worship. I also like the mystic/mythological conception of Buddha as man who has transcended even god(s) very much. The only other major (debatable I guess) religion I'm aware of that directly practices this cycle of God -> Man -> God, is Mormonism and that's honestly a bit too culty for me. The zen tradition also lends itself to my thinking, mostly because it echews spirituality in many ways and I'm not even a tiny bit spiritual despite my belief in a god. It's also very compatible with my political capitalist leanings, Zizek has some nice thoughts on the relevance of Buddhism there, though probably filtered by a western perspective of the religion which may not actually be there in the original. Tl;dr: I'm a post-modernist theist of the worst kind and I really loooooove appropriating other cultures.

>>18056102
Based

>>18056198
theravada relies on buddhist sutras

mahayana and vajrayana created their own sutras because they hate the buddhist sutras because their views are not found in them. Their views is that there is a true reality and that's the self and it was always there and the self will always be there.

Vajrayana is a subset of mahayana, saying mahayana is too slow. So Vajrayana invented their own sutras too.

Mahayana fails to explain how the true self generated ignorance and delusion and so suffering, since the true self is always free of suffering and has always been there in the first place.

>>18056461
Chan/Zen/Seon/Ti'en is basically a sect of Mahayana Buddhism that is focused on the Bodhisattva Path, meditation, and some pure land teachings. It teaches that one can awaken in this lifetime through cultivating awareness and compassion. It isn't about getting out, it's about helping others and yourself through practice, faith, and vows. If you want to look more into Zen, you can read books from Thich Nhat Hahn, Master Sheng Yen, books from Fo Guang Shan English Translation Society, or City of 10,000 Buddhas. My favorites are the Platform Sutra, the Diamond Sutra, the Ksitigarbha Sutra, and the Pure Land Sutras. It is also good to look for commentaries on the sutras when you can find them.

>>18056617
Mahayana doesn't believe in a self. The doctrine of Shunyata states that nothing has an existing self or independent existence. Please stop disparaging the Dharma, friend.

>>18056419
To add onto what anon said here:

The point of Theravada is to achieve nirvana in this life (or after this life's death) OR to accrue enough merit to be reborn in a life where you can achieve nirvana. Buddhism fully accepts that while all beings are ultimately capable of achieving nirvana, there are possibly people IN THEIR CURRENT LIFE who are just fucked IN THIS LIFE and cannot achieve nirvana IN THIS LIFE (easy example, the extremely elderly who are near death and have never even heard of "the Buddha"). If it's not your next life that this happens in, then the one after that, if not that then... etc. The Theravada tradition is a tradition continuing the paths and ways set down by the Buddha, and commenting on the Pali Canon (a literary canon composed of the enormous amount of teachings the Buddha gave, plus very early commentary and explanations by the Buddha's original disciples). It's principally in SEA, including Sri Lanka.

The point of Mahayana is to achieve a state of Bodhisattvahood, which is essentially a cross between a Saint and a God, for the purpose of liberating all sentient beings. A Bodhisattva vows to stave off their own enlightenment until all sentient beings are liberated. Mahayana is the Buddhism of China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and Tibet, and historically was the Buddhism of Central Asia and Gandhara.

"Vajrayana" is, to a Western eye, a poor taxonomic category as there is ENORMOUS internal variation within the Vajrayana tradition, such that while it's part of the Mahayana it's almost better to view it as a third tradition entirely separate from Mahayana. The unifying factor of Vajrayana is Tibet/Tibetan-Influence and a belief that the Buddha and important Buddhists have left secret treasures (physical objects or teachings) that can through Skillful Means be used to achieve special powers and a quicker enlightenment/Bodhisattvahood (while most Mahayana and Theravada would accept such a proposition, they'd argue against the sheer number of secret teachings the Vajrayana proposes, that special powers are currently leaving such treasures for us to find, and that trying to find these treasures as opposed to doing the "hard work" was even a worthwhile venture).

>>18056461
Blue Cliff Record.

>>18056663
He's misunderstanding diamond body shit. He's just gonna come back with BUT MUH DHARMAKAYA MUH DIAMOND SUTRA.

The "true self" in such high-level texts isn't talking about an atman, we know because it says it isn't, the Mahayan traditions that use these texts say that they aren't, there are no atmans because Sunyata, they're getting at something that's essentially constitutional monism (everything is Empty, but what is it made up of?).

>>18056013
Yeah. The compassion part is a sticking point

>>18056617
Mahayana believes in non-self and interbeing or dependant arising or w/e it's called. There is one Thai sect that believes in a true self, but only that one group.

>>18055943
>The truth of rebirth
Good recommendation. Helpful

>>18056698
>>Mahayana believes in non-self
That's not what it says in the mahaparanirvana sutra

>>18056698
>interbeing or dependant arising
and those two are not the same. Dependent origination is a conventional teaching only.

Buddhism is you are unsettled because you want things, so seperate that part of your mind away from the part of your mind that only observes. You start to feel funny and strange the longer you separate the two until maybe you'll go crazy I don't know.

>>18056686
>>The "true self" in such high-level texts isn't talking about an atman, we know because it says it isn't,
It says it is, deal with it.

>>18056686
I think I've seen him in quite a few threads, or someone making the same claims anytime Mahayana is mentioned. It's silly and childish.

>>18056725
>That's not what it says in the mahaparanirvana sutra
Yes it is. That is literally the point of the Mahaparinirvana Sutra. It's literally just doing the
>Emptiness is the rejection of Nihilism, Annihilationism, and Eternalism
bit.

>>18056725
The Mahaparanirvana sutra is an ancient text, and had to be analyzed based on the framework of the adopting schools. Pretty much all of modern Mahayana schools will still state that the "Self" the sutra describes is itself Empty, and thus not an Atman.

It's an annoying and restrictive maze of canons and sects to get into buddhism

>>18056741
Correct, the Mahaparinirvana Sutra supports Anatman.

>>18056781
To further elaborate, the Self of the Mahaparinirvana Sutra is the Buddha nature inherent in all beings that allows for awakening, not an atman.

>>18056781
>>18056762
It is said the buddhanature is eternal and that's called atman.
At least read the Mahayana sutras wtf.

>>18056725
Okay we disagree. I'm following emptiness and non self as I meditate badly

I think the most important zen thing I learned was Shohaku Okumura saying how he went from tryi g to be a good boy to a good Japanese citizen to spending many years trying to be a good Buddhist, and how that was a mistake.

>>18056807
I have. You are going against most established traditions when you say that Buddha nature is atman. Atman relates to a permanent, individual self, while Buddha nature relates to an individuals ability to awaken, and no longer be bound by the cycle of birth and death.

>>18056102
this

Buddha is kind of a dick

The Buddha said to Subhuti, “That is quite right. If someone hears this sutra and is not terrified or afraid, he or she is rare. Why? Subhuti, what the Tathagata calls paramaparamita, the highest transcendence, is not essentially the highest transcendence, and that is why it is called the highest transcendence.

> buddhist chantards

>>18056860
Buddhists, I am sure you will find, are also human. No one is perfect anon.

>>18056807
Correct. And that eternal Buddhanature is Empty.

"Atman" (आत्मन्) is a reflexive pronoun alongside meaning "itself" in addition to its philosophical usage. The Buddha uses it many times to mean "itself" (in the sense of "a cart that pulls itself"). The Mahaparinirvana Sutra continues the Buddha's teaching of the complete nonsense that are Annihilationism, Eternalism, and Nihilism. What is left, then? Dependent Origination, Dependent Co-Arising, Emptiness, Sunyata. Smoke in front of the Buddha, he waves his hand, what is left? All the Mahaparinirvana Sutra is doing is doing exactly what the Buddha did, and Nagarjuna would do, and that is to demonstrate that the only way to make an atman (in the philosophical sense) have any sense at all and not be worthless garbage is to embrace Emptiness. There is a true Self, and that Self is Empty of all Self Nature. This is Sunyata, Emptiness, Dependent Origination, Dependent Co-Arising.

Read What the Buddha Taught, and then read the Heart Sutra. Or, hell, just read the rest of the wikipedia article on the Mahaparinirvana Sutra that you didn't finish, it explains to you exactly what the Sutra is saying.

>>18056741
>It says it is, deal with it.
The truth is that they neither all speak of and fully affirm the Hindu or Upanishadic Atman, nor is it true as the other side (/lit/ buddhists) maintains that they all use it unequivocally in an upaya sense, as a means of communicating sunyata and what have you. The truth is that the various Mahayana sutras are apocryphal, they were composed by many different authors and they all tend to speak of the Atman, Tathagatagarbha, Dharmadhatu etc differently in every text, reflecting the different understanding of the composer of each respective sutra.

what's bad about indian buddhism?

>>18056883
What a cop-out

>>18057093
Chantards are racist towards Indians. They show a distinct lack of compassion towards them.

>>18056850
>Atman relates to a permanent, individual self
Permanent, but not individual, being non-dual is mutually exclusive with being categorized as individual. Jainism and Samkhya teach there are individual selves, the Paramatman taught by the Upanishads and Advaita Vedanta is not individual

>>18056972
>that is to demonstrate that the only way to make an atman (in the philosophical sense) have any sense at all and not be worthless garbage
All the Buddhist arguments against the Upanishadic Atman amount to sophistry and are quite easy to refute

>>18056102
>I would need a vedantic Buddhism.
Check out Dolpopa’s ‘Ocean of Definite Reasoning’, which has been translated by Hopkins as ‘The Mountain Doctrine’

Khentrul Rinpoché Jamphel Lodrö has also expressed his approval of this translation of it which was done more recently

https://read.dzokden.org/5f89c77b5d0c393c5b1b9f34.html

>>18057423
Why

>>18056857
>The Buddha said to Subhuti: "Table soccer is not a real sport"

>>18050193

>>18050299
Vedanta, to be precise.

>>18057590
The Jonang school seems to be the Buddhist school that gets as close as possible to the Advaitic position on the Self/consciousness IMO. There is a whole Shentong/Rangtong debate in Tibetan Buddhism on whether the Absolute is empty of intrinsic existence or whether its just empty of other things and ignorance etc, and the Jonang school of Dolpopa is the main school that unreservedly adopts the Shentong view in a Vedantic-like sense, Dolpopa writes of the True Self, Supreme Self and so on. I dont know if they solve the issue of where does everything originate in a way that would satisfy your theistic view (i.e. not just saying dependent origination causes everything) but it’s probably as close to what you’re looking for as you can get outside of maybe Shingon.

>>18056857
Why is Eastern religion so rife with alphabet soup? Ah yes if I hear the sutra subhuti the Tathagata might paramarapadklsrjwekwjrwekjaslkfwe
Like just say what you mean nigger, holy shit.

>>18050193
Ted Kaczynski's manifesto is the answer

>>18050193
Refuted by Adi Shankaracharya (pbuh)

>>18050294
>Niggerjuna, Vasudindu, Nignaga, Dharmakike
Soundly refuted

>>18053156
Meditation is useful if you know what you're doing and how do actually do samatha and vipassana. I don't recommend it just to be a fun hobby to waste your time. If you're not training to reach the deepest level of calm-abiding then it's not so useful.
>>18054622
>Buy into all the metaphysical stuff...
That's if you don't buy into the metaphysics. If you took Buddhism seriously you'd meditate in the mountains or forests for twenty years or become a monk. The guy in that pic certainly isn't following the Eight-fold Path and living as a serious practitioner of Dharma.
>>18055943
Nice post I'll look into that book.
>>18056617
To use Tibetan Buddhist terminology: when it comes to shentong and rangtong, shentong is the tiny minority view and was often persecuted. Mahayanists view Buddha-nature as empty of self. Buddha-nature is not taken to be a self.
>Mahayana fails to explain how the true self generated...
Mahayana says this self (but not really self) didn't generate anything because it never generates.
"No increasing, no decreasing"

>>18057805
>>18057423
>hus, tathāgatagarbha is not like the self of Indian extremists, because it is empty of the two kinds of selfhood.
https://read.dzokden.org/5f89c77b5d0c393c5b1b9f34.html

>>18056095
practice is all that matters

>>18056013
>punish the poor for being poor
this is your brain on communism
People on the right don't want to punish poor people. They want to leave them to their own devices instead of being forced to support and subsidize their laziness/incompetence/stupidity. After all, encouraging people to be failures by rewarding them with free stuff only makes more failures and perpetuates suffering. This is directly inline with Buddhist teachings.

>>18059674
it's still eternal and called atman

>>18060083
but it is empty and non-self, it has only the name, it's an empty shell
the tibetan buddhists see well that the atman-brahman is necessary but cannot go until the end and become vedantic without denying anatta which is one of the four seals of buddhism

it is one answer op. another answer is magic mushrooms in a forest setting with close friends

>>18055469
Yes, just not a good buddhist.

>>18060987
that's a dead end and only appeal to materialists who keep dreaming that material drugs can change their minds

>>18059674
Are you quoting from that text? For Dolpopa the Tathagatagarbha is the Pure Self and it has intrinsic existence.

>>18057237
the primordial mind of 1 human is hte exactly the same of the primordial >>18057237
>>Permanent, but not individual, being non-dual is mutually exclusive with being categorized as individual.
so you agree that the primordial mind of a 1 buddha is not the primordial mind of another buddha?

>>18057237

>>Permanent, but not individual, being non-dual is mutually exclusive with being categorized as individual.
so you agree that the primordial mind of a 1 buddha is not the primordial mind of another buddha?

>>18051773
Materialism is based.

>>18055469
Obviously. It's about the practice and repetition. It's not a dogmatic religion that relies on some institution that tells you what to believe politically. It's a generative tradition that grows and changes via repetition.

>>18057781
>vedanta
Get that poo poo plato shit outta here.

>>18051599
literally true and buddhapilled

>>18061770
I don’t believe in primordial Buddha mind anyway because I’m not Buddhist so I dont have a reason to affirm or deny such things about it. Huangbo seems to deny that there are multiple of them.

>>18061805
And what exactly in the idea of absolute balance of the everything (the universe and God) repels you?

>>18056857
Tbh the Buddha in Mahayana is not the Buddha of Buddhism. That's because the core of Mahayana is to be smug and self aggrandizing. As soon as they lived separately from the Buddhist monks, they started their narrative how the Buddhists were too stupid to understand Mahayana, so the Buddha told the simpletons the sutras and not Mahayana.

>>18061751
>Are you quoting from that text
Yes

>>18056686
>>18056663
>>18056745

It's a bit stupid to seethe at the truth. Half of Mahayana has zero problem saying there is a true self, like in Yogacara & all the Buddha Nature Sutras. Buddha nature is not empty and it's advocated by long lineages of enlightened beings.

As an actual Buddhist, the best critique of Buddhism on here so far has been Buddha psychically projecting his dick into someone else's mind.

>>18063191
The guy was asking for it.

>>18063171
>Half of Mahayana has zero problem saying there is a true self, like in Yogacara & all the Buddha Nature Sutras
Correct, and as was pointed out up thread, that true self is Empty, as are all things. See >>18056972 and >>18056686.

The problem you're having would have been solved by you reading the rest of the paragraph of that wikipedia article you read. I don't get why you have such a hard time about this. What part of "all things are Empty" do you not understand? Where are you getting tripped up here?

>>18063191
Is it possible to learn this power?

>>18063191
>Buddha psychically projecting his dick into someone else's mind.
What

>>18063341
I don't get why you have such a hard time about acknowledging buddhanature is not empty.
Again, plenty of Mahayana masters are fine teaching this.

>>18063373
Not from a Vedantin.

>>18063341
>that true self is Empty, as are all things
based

>>18061743
every single point u posted is dead wrong. how do u live with yourself?

>>18063383
>he didn’t see the Buddha Shakyamuni’s LINGAM
Meditate harder

>>18052484
thanks for this

>>18063341
>>18057423
Are you suggesting that all the major schools of Tibetan Buddhism, with the exception of the Jonangpa, do not accept the authority of the Mahayana Mahaparinrivana Sutra, the Lankavatara Sutra, the Angulimaliya Sutra and others since they speak of Âtman, positively?

>>18063653
Sush, he probably hasn’t read a single sutra in his life, and only likes Buddhism because for him is atheistic materialism with bells and smells and “is all just empty bro
Wooooooah like, empty your mind bro, don’t even think about it broooo
Like, everything is emptiness broooooooooooo
Wooooooooooooooooooooooooah”

>Buddhism is scientific
>it doesn’t believe in the soul just like muh science
>(I wonder if my hero Neil deGrasse Tyson likes Buddhism too)
>it rejects metaphysics

>>18063722
>>(I wonder if my hero Neil deGrasse Tyson likes Buddhism too)
kek

>>18050193
Buddhists seeting over HINDU CHADS.
>B-b-b-b-buddhism is true and will never die

HONONONONONOHAHHAHAHAHAHAAH


Buddhism's distinctiveness also diminished with the rise of Hindu sects. Though Mahayana writers were quite critical of Hinduism, the devotional cults of Mahayana Buddhism and Hinduism likely seemed quite similar to laity, and the developing Tantrism of both religions were also similar.[49] Also, "the increasingly esoteric nature" of both Hindu and Buddhist tantrism made it "incomprehensible to India's masses", for whom Hindu devotionalism and the worldly power-oriented Nath Siddhas became a far better alternative.[50][51][note 2] Buddhist ideas, and even the Buddha himself,[52] were absorbed and adapted into orthodox Hindu thought,[53][49][54] while the differences between the two systems of thought were emphasized.[55][56][57][58][59][60]

Elements which medieval Hinduism adopted during this time included vegetarianism, a critique of animal sacrifices, a strong tradition of monasticism (founded by figures such as Shankara) and the adoption of the Buddha as an avatar of Vishnu.[61] On the other end of the spectrum, Buddhism slowly became more and more "Brahmanized", initially beginning with the adoption of Sanskrit as a means to defend their interests in royal courts.[62] According to Bronkhorst, this move to the Sanskrit cultural world also brought with it numerous Brahmanical norms which now were adopted by the Sanskrit Buddhist culture (one example is the idea present in some Buddhist texts that the Buddha was a brahmin who knew the Vedas).[63] Bronkhorst notes that with time, even the caste system became widely accepted "by all practical purposes" by Indian Buddhists (this survives among the Newar Buddhists of Nepal).[64] Bronkhorst notes that eventually, a tendency developed to see Buddhism's past as having been dependent on Brahmanism and secondary to it. This idea, according to Bronkhorst, "may have acted like a Trojan horse, weakening this religion from within".[65]

omg how many virgin discoossers are experts in justifying doing nothing

>>18063759
The political realities of the period also led some Buddhists to change their doctrines and practices. For example, some later texts such as the Mahāparinirvāṇa Sūtra and the Sarvadurgatipariśodhana Tantra begin to speak of the importance of protecting Buddhist teachings and that killing is allowed if necessary for this reason. Later Buddhist literature also begins to see kings as bodhisattvas and their actions as being in line with the dharma (Buddhist kings like Devapala and Jayavarman VII also claimed this).[66] Bronkhorst also thinks that the increase in the use of apotropaic rituals (including for the protection of the state and king) and spells (mantras) by 7th century Indian Buddhism is also a response to Brahmanical and Shaiva influence. These included fire sacrifices, which were performed under the rule of Buddhist king Dharmapala (r. c. 775–812).[67] Alexis Sanderson has shown that Tantric Buddhism is filled with imperial imagery reflecting the realities of medieval India, and that in some ways work to sanctify that world.[68] Perhaps because of these changes, Buddhism remained indebted to Brahmanical thought and practice now that it had adopted much of its worldview. Bronkhorst argues that these somewhat drastic changes "took them far from the ideas and practices they had adhered to during the early centuries of their religion, and dangerously close to their much-detested rivals."[69] These changes which brought Buddhism closer to Hinduism, eventually made it much easier for Buddhism to be absorbed into Hinduism.[49]


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decline_of_Buddhism_in_the_Indian_subcontinent#Religious_convergence_and_absorption

>>18063759
>>18063767
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism_and_Theosophy

>Goodrick-Clarke wrote that "educated Indians" were particularly impressed by the Theosophists' defense of their ancient religion and philosophy in the context of the growing self-consciousness of the people, directed against the "values and beliefs of the European colonial powers." Prof. Stuckrad noted the wave of solidarity which covered the Theosophists in India had powerful "political implications." He wrote, citing in Cranston's book, that, according to Prof. Radhakrishnan, the philosopher and President of India, the Theosophists "rendered great service" by defending the Hindu "values and ideas"; the "influence of the Theosophical Movement on general Indian society is incalculable."[57]

>Bevir wrote that in India Theosophy "became an integral part of a wider movement of neo-Hinduism", which gave Indian nationalists a "legitimating ideology, a new-found confidence, and experience of organisation." He stated Blavatsky, like Dayananda Sarasvati, Swami Vivekananda, and Sri Aurobindo, "eulogised the Hindu tradition", however simultaneously calling forth to deliverance from the vestiges of the past. The Theosophical advocacy of Hinduism contributed to an "idealisation of a golden age in Indian history." The Theosophists viewed traditional Indian society as the bearer of an "ideal religion and ethic."[26]

Dr. Shenpen Hookham on the True Self

Dr. Shenpen Hookham is the holder of an Oxford University doctorate in Buddhist studies (specialising in the Tathagatagarbha teachings) and a Tibetan lama of the Nyingma and Kagyu schools. She has her own Sangha and freely gives out teachings on the Dharma to all who are interested. You can sign up for her very insightful and wise answers to her students' questions here: Buddhism Connect http://buddhism-connect.org/what-we-offer/teachings-by-email/

Dr. Shenpen Hookham writes affirmatively on the reality of a True Self within Buddhism. In the book, Buddhism and Animals by Dr. Tony Page (UKAVIS, London, 1999, p. 4), she comments on how various traditions of Tibetan Buddhism have upheld this notion of a real, eternal Self, saying:

'Many venerable saints and scholars have argued for the Self in the past and do so in the present. Great teachers of the Tibetan Nyingma, Kagyu and Sakya schools have and do argue that such a view [i.e. the reality of an essential True Self] is fundamental to the practice of the Buddhist path and the attainment of Enlightenment.'

In her answers to two different students of the Dharma who ask her about non-Self and Self, Dr. Hookham comments (in 2008) on how she has never denied the existence of the Self:

'Do I actually say that the self is non-existent? I didn’t mean to. What the Buddha always taught was that what was impermanent, unsatisfactory and not as we wanted it could not be the self. The self, in this context, is the one who wants happiness. None of the things we grasp at as self provide that happiness so our whole idea of our self causes us suffering.

'Who is the us that discovers that? It is the ungrasped self, the true self, the self that is not impermanent, not suffering, that is as we want it to be. It is the Buddha Nature. When we discover that we realise that this is what we always wanted but we sought for it in the wrong place and in the wrong way. We found aspects of it that we tried to grasp at and own but they just became unsatisfactory as soon as we grasped them. In fact we tried to grasp them only to find we had grasped at thin air, but instead of just ceasing to grasp we got terrified and grasped more and more. Then we became more and more confused and still were left with just thin air. It is only when the fundamental awareness of our being turns towards that thin air and recognises its experience of itself for what it is that it can relax the grasping reaction and let that truth be.

'You could call that the end of ego grasping and the life of the true self - or true nature - the ultimate reality of what we are. It is not something we can know by the grasping mind. It is not something to believe in as a concept. It is reality that discovers itself!

'So it itself is motivated to discover itself ...! '

>>18063892
Dr. Hookham later (on 3 May 2009) has this to say on the Self:

'... the Buddha pointed out that everything conditioned and impermanent in our experience is not our true nature or self. Our true nature or self is something that is not impermanent, not conditioned, and is ungraspable as either self or not self.

'... It would be what the Dzogchen tradition would call the Indestructible Heart Essence. It is the self or true nature that is not graspable as either self or not self. It is not bound by time and space.'

Shenpen's student asks:

'Re change and not-change: We start to awaken (change) and yet our basic Buddha nature is there all the time (no change). Again, could it not be "both/and" rather than "either/or"?'

Lama Shenpen replies:

'More precision is needed beyond simply saying it is both changing and not changing. In what sense can one say that something that is not graspable as being there in the first place can change into something else. There is a huge flaw in the whole idea of change. What cannot be grasped as being there in the first place cannot be said to change.

Yet, as you say, the world manifests, we awaken, there certainly seems to be change. The question has to be approached meditatively with precision and care..................resting in that mysterious place that is aware and yet not grasping anything. '

So the real Self is that Awareness which does not grasp but which dwells in a mysterious realm of Knowing. It is the opposite of the non-Self, which is ignorance itself. - Dr. Tony Page.
In a later question and answer session, Dr Hookham speaks more on the true nature or true Self of us all:
Where Does Motivation Come From?
Summary: If the self is non-existent, what motivates people to do things?

A student writes:

I know you are very busy, but I was very puzzled about no-self as discussed in book 3 of the course (Discovering the Heart of Buddhism).

What I cannot understand is that if the self is non-existent, what motivates people to do things, such as this course?

Lama Shenpen replies:

Do I actually say that the self is non-existent? I didn’t mean to. What the Buddha always taught was that what was impermanent, unsatisfactory and not as we wanted it could not be the self - the self is the one who wants happiness and none of the things we grasp at as self provide that happiness - our whole idea of our self causes us suffering - so who is the us that discovers that? It is the un-grasping self, the true self, the self that is not impermanent, not suffering, that is as we want it to be. It is the Buddha Nature.

>>18063901
When we discover that, we realise that this is what we always wanted but sought in the wrong place in the wrong way. We found aspects of it that we tried to grasp at and own but they just became unsatisfactory as soon as we grasped them -in fact we tried to grasp them only to find we had grasped at thin air - but instead of just ceasing to grasp, we became terrified and grasped more and more - and became more and more confused and still were left with just thin air. It is only when the fundamental awareness of our being turns towards that thin air, and recognises its experience of itself for what it is, that it can relax the grasping reaction and let that truth be.

You could call that the end of ego grasping and the life of the true self - or true nature - the ultimate reality of what we are. It is not something we can know by the grasping mind. It is not something to believe in as a concept – it’s a reality that discovers itself!

So it itself is motivated to discover itself and do this course!

Student:

If it is purely awareness reacting to circumstances, we would not get out of bed.

Lama Shenpen:

Volition is actually an aspect of that fundamental awareness - even our volition that tries to grasp, is an aspect of fundamental awareness - but it is confused awareness. It wants the joy of life to the full, it wants the happiness of all beings, but in its confusion it does not recognise that this is possible and so chooses lesser goals that seem more attainable. Actually none of the lesser goals bring the happiness it longs for - nonetheless the search for happiness drives us on and on from life to life. What will stop that? Realising that happiness is in awareness itself and so giving up searching for it elsewhere. That is what motivates you to follow this course. A part of you - the Buddha nature part - recognises something true about what you are discovering in your direct experience and that is motivating you to look deeper - because it’s true and it brings a feeling of rightness and happiness. Even if it’s painful, it feels alive and true and as if all this is going somewhere meaningful.

And all that is sensed by awareness itself as within itself, not something that it can grasp as an idea but something it can live, it can follow and it can find meaning in.

>>18063912
Student:

Christians put a lot of faith in the soul, which they believe is a separate unchanging entity. Surely, if there was nothing there, one of them would have noticed by now.

Lama Shenpen:

You get all kinds of Christians like you get all kinds of Buddhists. Some have strong conceptual beliefs that they just trot out and say they believe in - they don’t want to think too much about whether their beliefs are true or not. They just want something to cling on to that confirms them in their idea of themselves.

Some Buddhists are like that too.

Other Christians are connecting deeply to their hearts and discovering what is genuine and true in their experience - and they find what anyone finds who does that. So they talk about their experience in much the same terms as we would.

As for soul - well it just depends what one means by it doesn’t it?

https://www.nirvanasutra.net/drhookhamontheself.htm

SHUT UP LOL

>>18050399
The four noble truths don't seem to require a belief in samsara. That part just seems like an excuse to not kill yourself. I do agree that you end up pretty aimless if you accept the truths but reject samsara and reincarnation. It's pretty much where I'm at right now though.

>>18063892
Is the Buddhist true Self one or many? In other words is the philosophy monistic or pluralistic?

>>18050193
No, Buddhism is a death cult spread by a king and his brain damaged ascetic rich atheist of a son who couldn't manage to be a proper yogi nor raise a family

A few statements by Christ already surpass the entirety of Buddhism philosophy

>>18063781
>>18063892
>>18063901
>>18063912
>>18063927
summarize in exactly 44 words

>>18063155
which section and page?

>>18050193
You can't transcend your "self" by sitting alone and not talking. Join a comunity. Buddhism is just a word for a collection of vaguely defined horse shit.

>>18064062
Kinda accurate. The true teaching of the historical Buddha was probably something similar to Epicureanism: everything is atoms and void so don’t worry about it. Then the teaching metamorphosed into many religious traditions and arrived back again at Hinduism with Vajrayana, only they can’t admit it due to tradition.

>>18063892
>In her answers to two different students of the Dharma who ask her about non-Self and Self, Dr. Hookham comments (in 2008) on how she has never denied the existence of the Self:
>'Do I actually say that the self is non-existent? I didn’t mean to. What the Buddha always taught was that what was impermanent, unsatisfactory and not as we wanted it could not be the self. The self, in this context, is the one who wants happiness. None of the things we grasp at as self provide that happiness so our whole idea of our self causes us suffering.
>'Who is the us that discovers that? It is the ungrasped self, the true self, the self that is not impermanent, not suffering, that is as we want it to be. It is the Buddha Nature. When we discover that we realise that this is what we always wanted but we sought for it in the wrong place and in the wrong way.
BASED VEDANTIC TEACHINGS

>>18064479
>BASED VEDANTIC TEACHINGS
In the end all merely man-made philosophies like Buddhism default to Vedanta when they decide to really dig deep.

>>18064261
>Join a comunity.
Yes, that's called taking refuge in the Sangha.

>>18050193
What are the best Buddhist texts? I've read the Diamond Sutra, the Flower Ornament sutra, the Blue Cliff Record.

>>18064696
Oh I forgot to mention The All-Pervading Melodious Drumbeat

The shallow materialism of the Buddha could never have taken hold of spiritual India (despite the best efforts of the low-born anti-traditionalist revolutionary “king” Ashoka). It was necessary for it to drink in the well of Vedantic philosophy and adopt Sanskrit. But then it was excised from northern India by another rootless, universalist proselytizing religion: Islam.

>>18064710
this has been disproven

Try exercising. You know, go for a run and lift weights.

>>18064701
Who wouldn't desire to be free of desire?

>>18064585
Nobody can't compete with the Rishis (pbut)

Buddhism is spiritual suicide.
Pro-tip: you're not a Buddhist and don't know anything about real Buddhism.
Go give away all your stuff and join a monastery if you seriously believe in it.
You won't.

>>18064893
Anyone who has a striving in their soul and is not terrified of the world.

>>18064701
Identity/self is what they mean - not desire. What they see correctly is the composite nature of experience and that there is no discreet well-spring from which self flows. You can say that makes the concept of self an illusion but you could just as easily call it illumination. The former makes people weird, unlikeable faggots and the latter makes people useful, likeable people that engage with the world around them.

>>18050193
Buddhism is irrelevant in a culture with no caste-system.

>>18065006
So identity/self is the cause of suffering? What suttra thought this?

>>18063653
No, I'm saying that all of those schools and those Sutras support Emptiness.

Feel free to read them yourself, if you'd like. You haven't read anything on this topic, however, so I'd recommend that you start with the Heart Sutra.

>>18065022
Ironically it's exactly the opposite, as Buddhism never really took off in India precisely because of the caste system (it completely rejects Brahmanical authority).

>>18065022
>Buddhism is irrelevant in a culture where equality and materialism already prevail
FTFY

>>18065056
Anatta is the core concept of buddhism that sets it apart from Hinduism. The application of non-self to absolutely fucking everything is the entire point of the suttras. Don't get bogged down in scripture.

I'm just getting into Buddhism and currently reading "What the Buddha taught" but I'm having trouble reconciling the fact that there are so many Buddhist traditions with belief in different kind of esoteric practices, particularly tibetan Buddhism. How is it that one can "navigate" spiritual/esoteric realms if there is no "soul" to experience them? Or how is it that one can influence the conditions of their next rebirth through karma if there is nothing that "accounts" for the karma at the moment of rebirth?

>>18065307
the more you get into Buddhism the more effort it will take to pull you out of it.

>>18064976
You got it!
There aren't such spirit things.

>There aren't such spirit things.

>>18065798
except the long list of unfalsifiable Buddhist hocus pocus metaphysical claims found in the Pali Canon involving rebirth, hell realms, superpowers and so on

>>18064262
>The true teaching of the historical Buddha was probably something similar to Epicureanism: everything is atoms and void so don’t worry about it.
Straight out of your ass.

What's the best argument for the existence of karma and rebirth?

>>18065381
translation of picture?

>>18065816
That reader comprehension, good luck in your next life
>>18065901
They are the logical conclusion to buddhist tenets

>>18066253
So they don’t count as “spiritual” if they are supported by other unfalsifiable Buddhist claims in a circular manner? Wow! It’s almost like you’ll jump through any mental gymnastic hoop to make Buddhism into what you want it to be

>>18050193
could you tell me what "Enlightenment" means, anon?

>>18066304
yeah, with the exception of Confucianism, Eastern Thought seems to be inimical to logical laws and truth itself. They sacrifice the truth on the altar of subjective "personal experiences", and "Enlightenment", which is a concept they can (or won't) ever precisely define. This makes it damn near impossible to understand their position.

Daily reminder

Thereafter at the beginning of the Age of Kali He shall appear in Gayâ [Bihar] as the son of [mother] Añjanâ with the name Buddha for the purpose of deluding the ones envious of the theists (SB 1.3.24)

For those who became well informed on the path of education but envious with the divine, roam the worlds and the ether with inventions of Maya [or with modern technology], He will dress up most attractively and [as the Buddha and His representatives] by extensive discourses bewilder their minds with the use of many terms deviating from the tradition. (SB 2.7.37)

At the end of Kali-yuga He [as the Buddha] with speculative arguments will bewilder those who perform their sacrifices apart from Him [or the traditions]. He [as Lord Kalki] will finally put an end to all low-class rulers. (SB 11.4.22)

>>18066430
I have no understanding of what this means. Explain what Enlightenment means or reveal yourself to be little more than someone who sacrifices what is for psychological income.

>>18066422
On the contrary, the truth is beyond out primate brain.

>>18066483
Enlightenment means the realization of the Lord (Bhagavam Shri Krishna) as the Supersoul of the world and the Inner Controller of all beings, and surrendering to the Lotus Feet thereof, consequently freeing oneself, by the grace of the Lord, from the cycle of death and rebirth (Samsara), being reborn in the highest Spiritual Heaven (retaining one’s identity, never merging oneself with the Lord, who is essentially separate from the living beings, never losing oneself in an impersonal Brahman or being annihilated in a Buddhistic void), where there is no suffering or anxiety, and from which there is no return, to render devotional service to the aforementioned Lord.

>>18051599
REPLY TO YOUR THREAD
FAGS WANT A BOOK LIST FROM YOU
>>18059419

>>18066574

cont.

But the Buddhists, atheists and demons, due to their own karma, will be reborn in the hellish realms to suffer torture until their bad karma is extinguished, then they will be reborn as either lower animals or shudras. At the end of the Kali Age, the Lord will incarnate as Kalki and will destroy their physical forms so that can start their karmic cleansing and the world can be rid of false and defective dharmas, thus issuing a new Golden Age (Satya Yuga).

i like buddhism cause it reminds me of that arc in berserk with the cool indian looking bad guy with the big beard

>>18066430
What is SB?

>>18066574
>Enlightenment means the realization of the Lord (Bhagavam Shri Krishna) as the Supersoul of the world and the Inner Controller of all beings, and surrendering to the Lotus Feet thereof, consequently freeing oneself, by the grace of the Lord, from the cycle of death and rebirth (Samsara), being reborn in the highest Spiritual Heaven (retaining one’s identity, never merging oneself with the Lord, who is essentially separate from the living beings, never losing oneself in an impersonal Brahman or being annihilated in a Buddhistic void), where there is no suffering or anxiety, and from which there is no return, to render devotional service to the aforementioned Lord.


Damnnnn, I guess then it's a bad thing then? Because if we take "god" to mean "ultimate being", there can be only one. Also... ironically to believe in reincarnation is to be "ignorant", as it is metaphysically impossible.

>>18066545
If only you read the Scholastics and understood them.

>>18064701
Actually one of the warnings of the Buddha is that you shouldn't desire that either. You shouldn't desire anything, not even Nibbana. That's the whole point, that you have to become nothing, no self, no want, no identity.
BUT YOU CANNOT KILL YOURSELF EVEN THOUGH IT'S THE FASTEST AND GUARANTEED WAY OF ACHIEVING THIS BECAUSE MAGICAL KARMA WILL FUCK YOU IN THE ASS AND YOU'LL BE BORN AS THAT BUNNY RABBIT THAT GETS EATEN ALIVE BY A CROWD OF RAPIST RACCOONS OVER AND OVER FOR FIVE HUNDRED KALPAS
GIVE FOOD TO THE MONKS

>>18066810
suicide is a result of depression, not nirvana.

>>18066712
Shrimad Bhagavatam

>>18066742
t. demon

>>18052484
Whoa, what a fag.

>>18064696
The Lotus Sutra is what Buddha calls foremost among the Sutras

>>18066430
Where'd you read this at?

>>18067467
The text that comes 1000-1400 years after the Buddha?

>>18067689
Look up Shrimad Bhagavatam (alternatively: Bhagavata Purana)

>>18067710
Twice deluded. By Buddhism and Western scholarship.

>>18067765
So basically yes, long after the Buddha and you want to roleplay on /lit/ to feel like you have a valid and privileged perspective and that us fools must be saved.

>>18066081
karma is causality and rebirth is also causality, both apply in a literal sense, if you believe that actions have consequences then it should be fairly obvious

>>18066430
i love the damage control of the poos. And the more they do it, the more it filters the braindead.

>>18065307
>How is it that one can "navigate" spiritual/esoteric realms if there is no "soul" to experience them? Or how is it that one can influence the conditions of their next rebirth through karma if there is nothing that "accounts" for the karma at the moment of rebirth?
yes that's a because esoteric schools are buddhismS in name only. They did not understand buddhism and they prefer to live forever and reject conditionality.

>>18064262
>The true teaching of the historical Buddha was probably something similar to Epicureanism: everything is atoms
Lel materialists can't stop pushing for their moronic views made up by gays.

>>18064027
>>18064027
>>Is the Buddhist true Self one or many?
It is of the same nature, but buddhas and people are indeed different.

explain sunyata to me right now and don't dumb it down into some vague shit

>>18064252
Use ctrl+F

>>18064710
>despite the best efforts of the low-born anti-traditionalist revolutionary “king” Ashok
Seethe harder

>>18066430
>with inventions of Maya
So, vedanta is bad?

>>18067467
Kek that's purana bs
The srutis says that Buddha is Vishnu
Seethe harder

>>18057959
By who?

>>18069397
Adi Shankara and even Feser http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2014/03/dharmakirti-and-maimonides-on-divine.html

>>18069455
>http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2014/03/dharmakirti-and-maimonides-on-divine.html

>I am a writer and philosopher living in Los Angeles.

lol

guys, why does buddha nature creates illusion and suffering in the first place?

guys, why does buddha nature create illusion and suffering in the first place?

>>18069518
What an argument
Braindead retard

>>18069369
>Kek that's purana bs
>The srutis says that Buddha is Vishnu
That’s also a Puranic claim which is not found anywhere in the Sruti texts

>>18069754
Yeah my bad

>>18069535
How does dependent origination create samsara in the first place?

>>18069837
It can't
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/58820065.pdf

>>18069535
Buddha nature doesn't create duhkha. Duhkha is created in the conflict of our existence and reality

>>18069874
There was not beginning there will be no end

>>18069935
what created the conflict of our existence and reality?

>>18069874
>this work looked at the
development of the kalam cosmological argument and provided detailed argumentation as to why a beginning of the universe and first cause is necessary through both philosophical and scientific arguments.

why do rationalists in 2021 still use the fantasy of necessity and contingency? And why do those people still reject empiricism? And why do intellectuals in the atheist academia talk about science, when they never made any science and never proved anything in their life?

hello virgin discoossers. did this discoossion change your life? did you learn anything? did you become better person?

>>18070085
Yes, I learned that you’re a faggot

>>18069963
>And why do those people still reject empiricism?
The claim that dependent origination gives rise to anything is not empiricism, its not an empirical claim reached through empirical observation but is an unfounded and illogical metaphysical claim.

>>18070188
*gives rise to everything

>>18070188
If dependent origination is illogical, then so is original sin.

>>18060581
>>18059674
The two kinds of selfhood that Dolpopa says that the Tathagatagarbha is empty of are the “relative selfhood of individuals and phenomena”, so that’s not actually disagreeing with the Advaita Vedanta Atman which is not a relative self of individuals (being neither relative nor individual) or of phenomena (as it transcends phenomena).

He says right after that:

>to eliminate Indian extremists’ view of a self, beings are made to enter into the pure and true, the absolute self of suchness, sugatagarbha – which is, nevertheless, selfless, in not having the two kinds of relative selfhood of individuals and phenomena. To teach the ground of emptiness of all conceptual, relative phenomena, the unborn ground, free from duality with anything other than its own single nature, [the ground] free from all natures of such things, is to teach the bodhisattvas’ unsurpassable doctrine of suchness.

>Thus, tathāgatagarbha is not like the self of Indian extremists, because it is empty of the two kinds of selfhood. The uncompounded nature of [absolute] phenomena transcends instantaneous [relative] phenomena. It is permanent, stable, and unchanging; yet it is not empty, like space that lacks the qualities, powers, and other [absolute] phenomena of buddhahood. Thus, it is not like the self of a [merely relative] individual that Indian extremists classify as permanent. The complete major and minor marks of tathāgatagarbha are capable of manifesting all the aspects, powers, masteries, and qualities of the [absolute] essence. They are not the same as the major and minor marks of the relative form kāyas.
>“In that way, the tathāgatas lead those attached to the Indian extremists’ affirmation of a self...” shows the purpose of teaching them tathāgatagarbha. However, teaching that purpose does not entail that tathāgatagarbha is of the provisional meaning, because it is really non-existent, like the mother’s promise of laddu to her child,

So, Dolpopa is actually saying that the Tathagatagarbha is permanent, stable, unchanging, pure self, pure suchness and that its not empty or provisional. So, while he says that its different from the view of the “Indian extremists” he ends up arriving at practically the same thing anyway evidently without being aware that he did. That Dolpopa was not fully conversant with the Advaitic Atman and hence not really qualified to say if it is in agreement with his doctrine or not is supported by the fact that he erroneously refers to it being taught as the doer of actions which is denied by Advaita.

>>18070209
That’s neither here nor there, what we are discussing in this thread is Buddhism and how its illogical

>>18070106
buddhist?

>>18070310
really? would you confirm this on your crucifix? any personal responsibility?

>>18070321
There is nothing illogical about it. Also, Buddhism actually asserts the universe had a beginning (with Brahma), so your other link didn't even refute it.

>>18069963
>why do rationalists in 2021 still use the fantasy of necessity and contingency?
Uh, that's basic modal logic... Everyone use it.

>And why do those people still reject empiricism?
http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2020/01/the-rationalistempiricist-false-choice.html
https://www.reasonablefaith.org/media/reasonable-faith-podcast/the-conflict-between-science-and-philosophy/
https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2010/03/1174/

>>18069935
>There was not beginning there will be no end
Have you read the arguments you retard?

>>18070310
Is this shentong?

>>18070310
I'm convinced of advaita vedanta view of consciousness but i'm also convinced of (neo)aristotelian-thomistic metaphysics and idk how to reconcile the two. For example, there are sound arguments for God being personal and good, and for a beginning the univers. How to answers that with vedanta ? I could say yes, every arguments that talks about personality or goodness in god concerns Isvara, the manifest "part" of Brahman, and the other arguments (ipsum esse, prime mover, etc) concerns Brahman. But it doesn't make sense, and seems hypocritical, cuz theses conclusions are equals : being the ipsum esse entails being the prime mover, and vice versa, etc. And where to put Maya in all this? It's as if, in vedanta, potency was higher than actuality, which is totally contrary to aristotelians metaphysics. Anyways, fuck me

Another buddhism thread filled with hindu apologist appropriation. Every fucking time.

this is the OP: I don't feel any closer to an answer than when I posted a few days ago...

>>18070591
Rationalism doesn't lead to truth, but you get a nice career out of it.

>>18050399
This is why buddhism never meant to be teached to westerner. The concept of karma denoting paticca samupada, the dependant origination. It doesnt meant nothing means anything to me, its the art oh being concious at doing our daily life. Siddharta gautama knew that for someone being concious all the time they need to detract themselves from distraction, either mundane or spiritual. So he became ascetic, thats work fine for him. But by understanding the essence of his teaching (brahmavihara, sila, 4 noble truth) , then born the way of other schools, like esoteric buddhist, where ritual serves as crutch of their mental training, or thai tredition of satipatthana, etc. All of them based on these main teaching, other are only addendum. Thats what i observe out of this beautiful tradition

>>18070753
At least read http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2020/01/the-rationalistempiricist-false-choice.html

>>18052484
Jelly

>>18053476
Kys subhuman retard, meditation after morality you nigger. Thats why every paritta chanting beginnwith sila followed by meditation

>>18070310
Based Böl-bo-ba

>>18070310
Based Döl-bo-ba

I love it how Buddhism started as an oddball individualistic, anti-Vedic philosophy, developed into a world religion, then its metaphysics fell right back into the teaching of the Vedanta given enough time.

>>18055990
Kys guenonfag

>>18070823
tbf there's no buddhism when there is no buddha

>>18070837
I mean it’s mainly because of tradition that tathagatagarbha Buddhists and Vedantists don’t come out and say Yeah, outside of petty semantics, we’re talking about pretty similar things here so why don’t we drop the name calling and try to figure it out?

Safe for a few exceptions like this guy:

https://youtu.be/QnGp0WON93I

>>18070873
Or even more to the point:

https://youtu.be/23Pnz_D2904

>>18070591
>Have you read the arguments you retard?
Barely.
Physicist arguments are stupid since as every physicist wil tell you the physics we know are not operative before and during the big bang. So its pure speculation.
Hilbert's paradox of the Grand Hotel is actually a great explanation of infinite. I think he didn't understand well.

>>18070873
>>18070896
https://youtu.be/AbMUGvDfKbg he says it from a buddhist pov

>>18070731
Op, this thread, and 4chan are not going to give you an answer. Buddhism is not an answer. It's an end to the questions that you cannot answer. If you are not ready to try it, and test it in this life then that's ok. You will get more chances. I will try and illustrate how I think we have to approach buddhism as westerners with a story from my real life.

The first time I ever saw a buddhist monk I was 7 or 8. And my family had taken me to Disneyland in California. There just inside the front gate sitting on a bench near some flowerbeds was a group of at least 10-15 monks in flowing red robes, very clearly from Asia. They say there silently, looking about with blank expressions, casually pointing to this thing or that person with a quiet note in whatever language they spoke as they waited for their tour guide or whatever lay persons were to accompany them. There in what could be called the high holy temple of american shallow consumerism sat these Monks. No doubt amused and bewildered by what they could see unfolding around them. I saw them from a dar, and holding my parents hands we happened to pass by them on the way to our first entertainment of the day. As we passed I looked over at these strangely dressed men with both skin and clothes in colors and shapes I had never seen before. As I did one of them looked back and we made eye contact. He smiled and nodes slightly with an expression I still to this day could not describe. But it was like a thunderbolt. I was a shy boy and never looked anyone in the eyes. And here was a man from the other side of the earth who had come all this way, the the holy of holy of meaninglessness called Disney. And that look in his eye. Those robes, that slight smile. I never saw anything like it again I til that one day I happened to find a copy of the Dhammapada, and on its cover was an image of the buddha with everything I had seen years before. The robes, the inexplicable smile. And then I described the rest of that experience above.

But my point is, we,as westerners will never be more in the buddhist world than those monks were in the Disneyland world. We will sit on the bench, just inside the entrance and try and comprehend, be amused, and try our best to get everything we can from the experiences we can in this life. We don't belong, but then we don't belong anywhere, anyway. But if this is where our path led us then that's ok. Don't try and rationalize and understand fully the Buddhist philosophy and get bogged down by intellectualism or any other ism that wants to cause you suffering. Just smile amused and try the teachings. If they work then they work, if not, then like those monks who were never born or destined to live the Disneyland experience in life, just smile and be amused and get what you can from the experience.

Don't look for answers. Look for a place with less questions.

>>18070917
>Barely
So stfu

>>18070591
>believing in scientific realism in current year HONONONONONONOHAHHAHAHAHAHHAA
>What are the metaphysical assumptions of current science?
These are the assumptions:
The problem of induction isn't a problem for some reason.
Empiricism is accurate.
Mathematical realism is true.
Group opinion (peer review) is a legitimate means of discerning reality.
Positivism is accurate.
Repeat apparent occurrences of events means those events are legitimate and real.
Objects maintain identity over time.
Having a doctorate means something of value.
Scientists also reject that value statements are legitimate even though they use them all the time.

>>18070972
Yeah, so?

>>18070621
yes

>>18070685
I’m not sure how to reconcile them either, I also sense that they can be in some way though. I feel like I would have to read through all/most of Shankara, Aristotle, Aquinas and Guenon to do that with any confidence and that would take me a few more years at least. I’m aware of “Christianity and the Doctrine of Non-Dualism” which makes an attempt at doing so but have not read it yet. Perhaps you could start there if you have not read it already.
> It's as if, in vedanta, potency was higher than actuality,
In what way?

>>18069367
>vedanta bad
Advaita vedanta, yes

>>18060987
I don't understand this mentality. Almost all religions tell you to avoid intoxicating substances. But somehow people these days think they can just ignore all that, and skip many generations of tradition, wisdom, and many years of practice with some plants or pills.

>>18070685
>>18070985
The only way would to posit a will in brahman making creation willed like in Christianity. But for advaitins maya is neither real nor unreal, or absolutely not real, so ajativada: no creation, no origination, no ignorance, no enlightenment. Quite nihilistic, yes (and this is just one of the reasons for it to be accused of being crypto-buddhism). If you want some indian nondualism to reconcile with Christianity and even Platonism go with Kashmir Shaivism. Just reminding that will in God is not a lack or a desire as some may think, but God’s own movement toward Himself, it is in this way that He creates: out of Love. God loves himself, God loves Love that He is, and because of it he creates us.

Reminder that if you believe in scientific realism, you literally believe that there is an immaterial symmetry group SU(3)×SU(2)×U(1)× P(1,3)
living outside the universe and yet governing every interaction in the material universe without even being able to explain how immaterial rules act on matter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_Model_(mathematical_formulation)

>>18071063
Yes.

>>18070310
>Thus, tathāgatagarbha is not like the self of Indian extremists, because it is empty of the two kinds of selfhood
so literally what >>18056686 said lmfao

this is why people tell you to actually read books instead of desperately googling, anon.

>>18070827
whoah! not very coompassionate of you my friend

>>18070985
>In what way?
I will soon post a thomistic critique of guenonian metaphysics on lit, wait and see I hope you'll be here

>>18071063
>living outside the universe and yet governing every interaction in the material universe without even being able to explain how immaterial rules act on matter.
No. Aristotelian position is a third way between platonism and anti-realism. See: http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2021/04/what-is-mathematics-about.html

>>18071114
No, that’s wrong since that poster is talking about the Rangtong position and Dolpopa is talking about the Shentong position

>>18070958
What are his arguments? Let's imagine a infinite library. There are red and green books. How many books are? Infinite of them. How many red books are? Infinite too. Wait, are you telling me that a subset have the same valor that all the set?
Yes.
...
An absurd, I just prove the impossibility of the infinite.
look how clever i am
....
....
>roll eyes

I insist, your startpoint is wrong. The total-absolute-whole-reality-of-all-and-everything is not logic.

>>18071167
>>18071063
>without even being able to explain how immaterial rules act on matter.
+ http://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2020/12/the-access-problem-for-mathematical.html

>>18071183
>, I just prove the impossibility of the infinite.
Of an actual****** infinite

>What are his arguments?
You don't even know his works but you criticize them. Stfu retard

>>18070837
except pure land buddhism

>>18070957
fewer*

how can the absolute (brahman) not be good? the thomistic arguments are sound https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/12/4/268/htm

>>18050193
I think anyone who tries to adopt an attitude of scriptural strictness or adherence misses the point of Buddhism and many other world traditions. You're supposed to talk from your own experience first and foremost.

>>18071393
>just follow your conscience lmao
>choose whatever you like from the buffet of religions and make your own religion lmao
>what matters is what is true for you lmao
Textbook West*id

>>18071454
No, there are three things very important to Buddhism as a whole:
1) celibacy
2) solitude within natural scenery
3) some quality reading of sutras and more, just keeping the mind relatively active in a more subtle contemplative / introspective way
#3 is a bit tricky since only someone with contemplative depth can decide what is quality reading, so that's why mentors are typically needed.

>>18071169
if you are getting caught up in rangtong v shentong without even having read stuff like the heart sutra or diamond sutra, you are doing it wrong.

>>18071330
only rationalists claim that their mental circuses make them ''understand God'', but Rationalism is useless in buddhism.

>>18071050
>But for advaitins maya is neither real nor unreal, or absolutely not real,
Wrong, for Advaita maya is unreal, which they distinguish from complete nothingness. Nothingness cannot appear as anything, the unreal falsely appears as the real. Because Advaita uses real in its absolute sense, unreal and unreal-in-absolute-reality are synonymous.

>so ajativada: no creation, no origination, no ignorance, no enlightenment.
Ajativada means that there are none of these in absolute reality except for enlightenment which is Brahman’s nature as its synonymous with being liberated which He always is, ajativada when it denies these things is not denying that they subjectively appear to have real existence
>Quite nihilistic, yes (
only if you are retarded or if you forgot what the meaning of nihilism is (e.g. that nothing exists) Advaita says that Brahman is the only thing that really exists so that it mutually exclusive with nihilism which says nothing exists

> Just reminding that will in God is not a lack or a desire as some may think, but God’s own movement toward Himself
The Infinite is necessarily all-pervasive and an all-pervasive thing cannot move because that would presuppose somewhere where its not located which it could move to

Lord Buddha please let this shit show of a thread die.

>>18071534
That’s not an argument anon, Dolpopa says in his own words that the Tathagatagarbha is only empty of other things but not empty of its own existence. You are just projecting your own views onto him despite him explicitly disagreeing with your view and offering many arguments why it’s wrong

>>18070985
>>18072048

>>18071972
>calling help from Buddha
Stick to Cuckstianity.

>>18072199
Buddhists often ask the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas for help though.

Everyone here is an icchantika except for me.

>>18071959
Oh, the Advaitabot again. I have refuted your incoherent nihilistic dogmas twice or thrice even.

>Because Advaita uses real in its absolute sense, unreal and unreal-in-absolute-reality are synonymous.
And this is exactly what I meant, fucktard.

> being liberated
there is no liberation

>you forgot what the meaning of nihilism is
negation of reality (empirical, relative and still with a degree of reality) is nihilistic, there is nothing but brahman and whatever happens is not real because it is not brahman (yet it is because there is only brahman, see how retarded you need to be to fall for this false doctrine).

>The Infinite is necessarily all-pervasive and an all-pervasive thing cannot move because that would presuppose somewhere where its not located which it could move to
And we are back to eleatic aphasia. See how people like Zeno was refuted, not even your retardations are something new. Plato for example explained all of this, read the Sophist.

>>18071330
>>18071393
>>18071454
"It is proper for you, Kalamas, to doubt, to be uncertain; uncertainty has arisen in you about what is doubtful. Come, Kalamas. Do not go upon what has been acquired by repeated hearing; nor upon tradition; nor upon rumor; nor upon what is in a scripture; nor upon surmise; nor upon an axiom; nor upon specious reasoning; nor upon a bias toward a notion that has been pondered over; nor upon another's seeming ability; nor upon the consideration, 'The monk is our teacher.' Kalamas, when you yourselves know: 'These things are bad; these things are blamable; these things are censured by the wise; undertaken and observed, these things lead to harm and ill,' abandon them.

>>18073371
Reminder that Lord Vishnu incarnated as the Buddha in the Kali Age to delude those of a demonic and materialistic bent and teach them a very crude and bare bones dharma so that they do not cause greater harm. Buddhadharma was a harm reduction policy for the Kali Age, not a positive doctrine, but it’s better that demons believe in and practice it than more harmful doctrines like Marxism.

>>18072564
>And this is exactly what I mean
No, you said “maya is neither real nor unreal, or absolutely not real” which is not what Advaita says
>there is no liberation
Liberation is not an event that occurs in absolute reality, instead Brahman is always eternally free. From the perspective of beings within samsara though the elimination of ignorance and the accompanying dawning of Brahma-vidya is called liberation.
> negation of reality (empirical, relative and still with a degree of reality) is nihilistic,
But the phenomenal world isn’t considered to be reality in Advaita, so you are using a circular argument which relies on your already held presuppositions which themselves have not been established yet or had any arguments offered for them.
>there is nothing but brahman (in absolute reality) and whatever happens (in conventional reality) is not real because it is not brahman
yes
>(yet it is because there is only brahman, see how retarded you need to be to fall for this false doctrine).
wrong
>read the Sophist (my namesake)
not an argument

>>18072564
I think what makes Mahayana Buddhism better than Advaita is the concept of prajnaparamita which can bestow or open a kind of infinity in one's chosen crafts or paths. For example, a poet who writes in a state of absorption is manifesting the infinite dharmakaya in his own way. I believe that's how koans function in breaking down one's ratiocinations while also showing a kind of identity with the Absolute.
Advaita seems to be about inducing a kind of lobotomized uncreative state while one who reads Mahayana sutras carefully see it discourages that.
I don't think any Advaitan poets reach the level of Wang Wei for example.

>>18074037
Or Han Shan or Shiwu*
The Ch'an legacy of poets and painters is pretty impressive.
I think the problem with modern Ch'an/Zen is they no longer see the importance of creativity in their practice. It is a kind of creativity that sprouts from solitude within natural scenery.

>>18072564
>>18074037
>>18074044
What I am getting at is that the One Vehicle can be aligned with certain artistic or other aspirations whereas in the case of Advaita, the pure awareness is treated as a state of no movement, no action.

>>18070957
>we,as westerners will never be more in the buddhist world than those monks were in the Disneyland world
Plenty of Westerners join a Thai Forest temple in the middle of nowhere.

>>18074037
Well said. Advaita and even primitive Buddhism preaches that everything is illusion so why bother with aesthetics? Why admire nature and art? The Pali canon even condemns musicians (!). Reminds one of the austerity of first Protestants. Mahayana seems to have talked their way out of this mindset somehow.

>>18074037
Tf are you talkin about

>>18074037
I have similar sentiments, and in my interpretation the way of how every dharma is inherently the tathagata gharba, and that their natures are sufficient unto themselves, then following their svadharma, their vocation through the world, is their personal buddha way.

I'm particularly fond of Huineng defining Buddha Sakyamuni as the universal dharma of Purification, Amitabha as some other concept, Avalokitesvara as salvation, etc, logically one concludes every dharma, down to folk of our stature as our own defined natural way through the world, our own dharma; I can't find good words to describe my feeling and intuitive thoughts on it. Continuing on that, the way of Buddhism is merely encouraging being aware (awake or in bodhi), of that self nature, as opposed to thoughtlessly disregarding yourself in favor of sense experience. Naturally we find our way into our craft or nature and nurture it, if one is wise they don't become addicted to sense experience in lieu of nurturing their passion, be it writing, woodworking, hiking, playing video games, or whatever have you.

Studying buddhism I came back right to where I started, but aware of it.

>>18056646


I really don't understand pure land Buddhism. With Jesus, at least we're well aware that he was here, and that he was a real person. Scholars like William Lane Craig have even written rigorous papers regarding the evidence of his resurrection. There's been miracles like the Miracle of the Sun, and more.

Of course, it's not as if there's an airtight proof for the Christian god, but reason, faith, and miracles can prove his existence to some degree. Christian apologetics is vast and rigorous, and tries to prove an Abrahamic god through morality, causality, et. But what is there for pure land Buddhism? The people that do believe in it (not metaphorically) just argue that, because the Buddha said Amitabha is real, he must be, and he must grant anyone that chants his name liberation in the pure land, nothing else. What are some works of pure land apologetics (nothing metaphorical). If you're a pure land buddhist, what convinced you to be one, ie what "did it for you"? (Not a christian or looking to find the "better" religion between Christianity and pure land buddhism, just curious about why people believe in the pure land)