/lit/ - Literature

It's a meme. Evola is making shit up.

>>19729192
Once again a beloved tardlarp author is proven wrong by reading primary texts. You could turn anything into a "warrior religion" by his logic, the only problem is you can't be in a wheelchair and be a warrior. What he is reading in a highly literal sense is the notion of ariya in the Pali, which is not equivalent with being a military bureaucrat, just as brahmacarya is not equivalent with being a literal brahmin priest. In fact if there were one message in Buddhism it would be the overturn of all conventional thinking as an obstacle to liberation.

You can also read The Unfettered Mind, a Rinzai text addressed to warriors. Rinzai being the school of Zen that was associated with and enjoyed the patronage of several Samurai clans.

>>19729253
I understand that the major qualifying attribute for someone having "the buddhist warrior spirit" would be noble or arya in Sanskrit. Much of the doctrine is formulated with that attribute "- Catvari Arya Satyani (Four Noble Truths)" and "- Arya Ashtanga Marga (Noble Eightfold Path)". The problem is just that it does not measure up to its name. Where are all the buddhist warriors, and where are their literary works? I don't see it.

>>19729431
They don't exist. Sutras use the language of might and power (referring to the Buddha as the Conqueror, Manjushri and his sword, etc.) but it's basically just >>19729227 and >>19729253

>>19729431
Because he is wrong. you can be "noble" or sovereign without being a member of the military, who themselves largely just take someone else's orders in any case. Even in his romanticized version of the past where warriors governed society they did so at the behest of their chiefs or to defend the polis or some other such worldly cause. war is work, it is not noble, having a profession is to become a thing

>>19729454
I have not read ebola in a long time but perhaps he confuses the muscular language in Buddhist lit about destroying phenomena and genociding delusion as an endorsement of his larpism, when in fact it is meant as a military metaphor for an audience who lived in violent times and indeed included members of the warrior caste, but from the suttas it is also obvious there were Buddhists of non-warrior-aristocrat background who were dialoged with and became members of the sangha. Like if you really think about this, it's explaining yoga to someone in the army, that's really what it is, "if you sharpen your mind in absorbed meditation it's like when you run down the enemy with your lance. Get it? A liberated mind is able to conquer any foe! And so forth

>>19729192
>Where is this Buddhist warrior spirit
me :)

>>19729192
Evola makes direct references to the Pali Canon and his work Doctrine of Awakening was awarded at the time by the Pali Texts Society of London.

Most people in this thread seems to be very confused about what both Evola, Buddha, and a certain aspect of reality meant with warrior.
A very brief and simplicistic explanation of what Evola meant is:
1)It's absolutely Siddharta was a member of the warrior class, a Kshatriya (of which kings and princes belonged in India at the time, unlike how a very confused poster here says) and the vast majority of his early acolytes were Kshatriyas, too.
Historiographical research shows what kind of life the storical, non-mythical Siddharta lived https://www.historynet.com/buddha-enlightened-warrior.htm however, as you'll see in the next point, even if the particular historical analysis present in the link was not precise, it doesn't change that by class, Siddharta and the majority of his early acolytes belonged to the warrior class (we will discuss why Siddharta accepted members from other castes later)

2) Siddharta describes the ideal start psychological condizion to initiate and and pursuit trainining to reach Awakening/Nibbana as that of a warrior/ Kshatriya , not only through the HUGE amount of military metaphors and figures of speech mentioned in the thread (which were used because the majority of early bhikkus where kshatriyas, if not veterans... it's not random, what Siddharta says to people in his speeches is specifically aimed at the highest and deepest level of understanding for that particular audience) but also, through the use of Indra. Many know Buddhism is not an atheistic religion, deities are simply less relevant that in other religions.
Indra (often called Sakra in buddhism) is the Vedic deity of, among other things, war and warriors. He's the official protector of Buddhism as a religion!
We're not over here.
The Buddha describes 5 faculties (saddha, viriya, sati, samadhi, panna) which are by the man's own words, direct parallels to a set of 5 strength/virtues/powers that belong to the 7 sets of qualities necessary to become enlightened.
Guess what is the name for these faculties? Indriya, which roughly means "liked by Indra/belonging to Indra/according to Indra/similar to Indra".
I'll leave you out on your own to learn what those five indriyas are, I don't want to distort their details in a short post, they deserve their own study. I'll leave you with a fun fact: viriya means energy, vitality, stamina (physical amd mental), vigor, ans guess what? Quite literally "manliness" (as you propabably guessed by the root "vir", same as virile)

3) All of these "warrior mindset/spirituality/life experience/caste" what Siddharta spent pages talking about (and this isn't an intepretation of buddhism, it's all here in the texts and it is present there for a purpose) is A STARTING POINT, without which you can't go anywhere (remember this).

1/2

>>19730788
2/2

The end goal is awakening, which requires amomg other things discarding, detaching from, trascending, superating this previous "warrior spirit". But without having it or developing it in the first place (Buddha talks about practices to grow it, and Buddhists even centuries afterwards wrote even more on this) you can barely begin your journey, and won't go far.
The fun thing is that Evola (one of the authors/thinkers who, like Buddha, tends to create very violent knee jerk reactions among those who haven't even tried to read him with an open mind and then decide on their own if they agree or disagree) agrees with Buddha completely here, and he says so in great details in his books. He even mentions the old story of the finger pointing at the moon!

4) Another proof of the strict connession (historical, situational, cultural, philosophical, psychological, some may say spiritual) between buddhism and warriors is what came afterwards.
Ashoka, the indian emperor who united the subcontinend defeating military the previous 16 states who composed it. Ashoka was a kshatriya too. Ashoka made Buddhism the state religion of the empire (which was mostly followed by the aristocratic, burocratic and military elite, hence why buddhism disappeared rather rapidly from India once his empire fell).
I will barely mention the strict relationship between zen buddhism and the samurai class, since a lot has been already written on the topic.
I'll reccomend instead The Unfettered Mind by Takuan to understand the topic for yourself.
It's only one of the many books descriving the relationship between swordmanship and zen buddhism written by japanese zen buddhism practitioners and swordsmen. There are some I read as a kid written in the 20th century, too.
I'm not a buddhist not an Evola fan btw

>>19729192
the warrior spirit is not present all that much in the theoretical aspect of dharma
if you wanna know the buddhist warrior spirit you should practice esoteric vajrayana, the whole warrior king of the spirit is there

Caution, this book can fuck up your Buddhism if you are not careful. Don't start it unless you are ready. You won't be able to go back. Ignore a nay sayers and cynics.

>>19729192
thin buddhism, the warrior vocabulary is used only to appeal to beta cucks who are obsessed with virility and and warrior crap.
it is only used when talking about defeating the taints

>>19731121
non of the tibetan crap is about buddhism in the first place, it's remains 100% hindu retardation

>>19730901
>buddhism disappeared rather rapidly from India once his empire fell
How can you bother to write so much without even bothering to check anything? This is so obviously not even true or we wouldn't have Buddhism being debated in India for the next 1200 years after Ashoka, being exported to China, Tibet, Japan, etc. Ashoka's missions didn't even go east, they went west to the Hellenistic kingdoms. If Buddhism "disappeared rather rapidly" after him then it couldn't have spread to become a pan-Asian religion. Even if you were correct about anything else, the fact that you are too lazy to do even basic research, let alone common sense reasoning, puts your posts entirely in doubt. Buddhism being a "warrior religion" in origin is entirely a tardlarp value judgment, it being an aristocratic religion is a certainty.

>>19731133
>defeating the taints
A phrase with meaning if there ever was one

>>19731136
>This is so obviously not even true or we wouldn't have Buddhism being debated in India for the next 1200 years after Ashoka,
Obviously meant being widespread and istitutionalized as a religion compared to Induism. Also, note should be taken about the use of words "rather rapidly".
You're quite obviously arguing semantics here.
Saying that Ashoka's mission didn't even go east is also blatantly wrong... for instance, the first Buddhist missions in Thailand were sent there by Ashoka himself. Just because there were more missions and exchanges centuries later, this simple fact doesn't change.
There's no difference between calling it an aristocratic religion or a warrior religion, since the kshatriya class was THE aristocratic class.

>>19731207
I would think in the context of common sense "warrior religion" implies some kind of cult around war or battle gods, or notions of holy war, or even divination and augury before battles, none of which is really Buddhism at all with the notable outlier of (some) versions of Japanese Zen, which is a bit remote in relevance to Buddhism broadly.

>>19731232
>I would think in the context of common sense "warrior religion" implies some kind of cult around war or battle gods, or notions of holy war, or even divination and augury before battles,

In that sense you would be correct, there isn't any of that in Buddhism, if not in the residual form of respect and devotion towards Indra. But it's clear to see the war in Buddhism is internalized. There is a connection between the two on multiple grounds. So while it isn't true in the common sense of the word, it is true historically in a certain sense "qualitatively"

>>19731249
in which case the claims ebola makes are so heavily qualified by his project that you really learn very little about Buddhism and more about his views on aristocracy=warrior-rule=good. He is marginally more accurate as secondary literature than a Californian writer would be, but it's a low bar.

>>19731262
Wrong assumption, because what Evola means by warrior is akin to an ascetic buddhist... which you would have known if you read the book in question, which was praised and reccomended by the pali society

>>19731275
Right he doesn't mean actual war-making warriors who pray to succeed in war and offer up trophies to the war god(s) etc., he means aristocracy in the sense of self-discipline, fatalism, stoicism, etc. So when he says "raaaah it's a warrior religion" it's exactly what I described, which is him fitting "Buddhism" into his usual exegetic dichotomy through which he reads literally everything

>>19731309
That's one of the many criticisms of him. But it's not an unfounded dichotomy: the struggpe between brahmans and kshatriyas was present since the early vedic era and continued until the fall of buddhism in india we were talking about earlier... there are traces of this even in Eurooe. Guelphs, ghibellines, Emperor and Pope. So it's not like he pulled it out of his ass, although he was very fixated on it.
Evola tends to be a very empirical and rational writer

>>19731352
If you want some second opinions on these things absent any tradlarp axe to grind you should look into Karttunen and Stoneman who have each written very similar books on the Greeks in India and on classical Greek knowledge of India, which are effectively the only non-religious textual records we have of India from the period. Karttunen is a philologist and Stoneman is a historian so the approaches are slightly different. But it is worth pointing out regarding caste that the system as dominated by brahmins was in fact weakest in Gandhara, which is significant because 1. it's where the Greeks and Persians enter India and acculturate, 2. it is conquered by Chandragupta, who is Asoka's grandfather and the Mauryans do not adopt the brahminical religion to govern their empire (Chandra becomes a Jain, Asoka a Buddhist), and 3. this is where Buddhism flourishes for centuries such that even Chinese pilgrims went there during the Tang dynasty.

>>19731443
I will read about it, I love greco buddhist history and culture

>>19731232
>>19731249
>>19731262
>>19731275
>>19731309


Evola's warrior caste is his way to incorporate and develop the ideas of his beloved nietzsche, if you didn't read nietzsche you wouldn't understand what Evola means when he's talking about a warrior of the spirit
and yes he's forcing his nietzchean views a little to hard sometimes

I'm having a hard time here believing anyone has read Evola's actual book on Buddhism. There is nothing at all in it about politics except for the start of the book where he speaks briefly about the state of modern society. But then again, this is /lit/ where no one reads.

Did someone know something about japanese martial arts? Yes, buddhism is all over the place.
Many of the them have a solid theoretical foundation on buddhism philosophy.
Zen: Yagyu Shingan Ryu, Mugai Ryu, Shoden Muto Ryu...
Shingon: Katori Shinto Ryu, Tatsumi Ryu...
Basically the historical ninjutsu is 50% war games/ strategy 50% shingon and shugendo mumbo jumbo

More specifically Ellis explains here some of the buddhist contents of his own koryu.
https://kogenbudo.org/esoteric-training-in-classical-japanese-martial-arts/

>>19730788
>>19730901
If you weren't a faggot you knew Buddha's use of military metaphor and terminology was to subvert the elitist and violent ways of the power craving society. Indra and Indriya have brahmanical origins. Attempting to portray Buddhism as an aristocratic and elitistic religion fails even harder when you analize the Sangha created by Buddha to promote the most anti-violent values possible.